AP sales…

[RivShore]

What’s burning my bacon now is the allowance of those newly 3/4 year olds grandfathered in & allowed a new purchase. If they’re capping the number and not releasing any until enough choose not to renew, then this is slowing that release down. And if it’s lawsuit related, they’re adding more potential complainants. Make it make sense.

Have to imagine it is a tiny tiny tiny percentage.

 

[quandrea]

yes. That would be goofy not to. I've said this about 50 times, I'd love the pixie pass.

I’ve been asking for the pixie pass for years. It would be perfect for us.

We are booked for forty nights in Jan/Feb. If I can’t get an ap, I’ll buy the U.K. 14 d ticket. After that, it will be time off from the parks.

 

[cm8]

This can't be true. Is there any data to support that 51%+ of DVC stays do not utilize the parks?

Can you show me where I said anything about 51% of DVC stays not utilizing the parks? I simply stated MOST people who use DVC (that number can be whatever you would like it to be) Maybe you can ask DVC or anyone on this board that tracks DVC usage with and without Park use? I’m not sure of how one would gain access to that information. It’s all speculation at this point. I’m sure if DVC sales were dependent upon Annual Passes being available, they would be cranking out the Passes left and right.

 

[lowlight]

IMHO, they were "taking advantage" using a method, technique etc to cut costs. Taking advantage of something does not equate with "under-handed. There is no negative connotation.
I did not imply it was under-handed by any means. IMHO, saving money is smart, not under-handed. I understand some TAs and CMs even recommended it.

I understand what you are saying, but to "take advantage" of something means to use it in a manner which is not consistent with the intent, and unequal to one party over the other. You say you weren't implying anything negative, but your last line clearly says people doing this were "playing with Disney's profits". I don't believe that to be the case. My point is that bridging two trips into one AP year and then alternating years of AP purchases isn't taking advantage of a system, it's using it exactly the way it's meant and laid out by Disney when they offer it. It's the same as someone using it 300 days a year, they aren't "using the parks as their playground", they are using their AP within the confines of the contract. Bob Chapek is wrong, and at some point he's going to bite off a piece bigger than he can chew. I'm betting AP's are that bite.

What’s burning my bacon now is the allowance of those newly 3/4 year olds grandfathered in & allowed a new purchase. If they’re capping the number and not releasing any until enough choose not to renew, then this is slowing that release down. And if it’s lawsuit related, they’re adding more potential complainants. Make it make sense.

I'm someone who benefited from this. To be honest, I didn't think I'd be able to and was pleasantly surprised when they let me. I do understand how it would tick you off. I'm not sure there's a good way for Disney to have handled that situation without upsetting one side or the other.

 

[coronationday]

After 5 days of reading this thread a couple hours a day I have finally read the last post. What a wild ride, reading your predictions from months ago and knowing what happened was fun. I will add my two cents, I don't think they are going to sell APs again this year. I would imagine they don't want to pack the parks even more during the Christmas season and then we have marathon weekend that is already packing the hotels and parks. So maybe they would see how is the attendance late January to decide if they open the AP sales again. But if they sell new APs they are going to be pricier and with more blackout dates than before, I would imagine.

 

[CraigInPA]

OK. Here's an elephant in this room. How many DVC owners got caught out without an annual pass because they were using the "bridging" technique and it was an "off-year?" Bridging, as I understand it was buying an AP and then squeezing two annual trips into it; one close to the beginning of the current pass year and the other close to the end of the pass year (maybe with some in between. Then, letting the AP lapse and waiting almost a year to buy a new one on their next trip -- in the next calendar year. So when they were in the off year without an annual pass is when the sales of new annual passes shut down.

That bridging technique was obviously playing with Disney's profits on annual passes. I have no idea how many DVC owners were doing that.

I was one of them. I bridged February 2019/January 2020. With Covid's onset (starting in February 2020), we decided not to renew. The resorts closed. When they offered the recovery pass, we didn't qualify because our AP renewal window closed 2 days before DVC shut down due to Covid. When they opened them up for anyone to buy, we didn't have a trip scheduled, so we didn't buy. Then, they shut off new AP purchases entirely. So, no AP for us.

We're going to Universal in 2023 as a protest against Disney's AP (and Genie+ and ILL's) policy.

 

[RivShore]

Can you show me where I said anything about 51% of DVC stays not utilizing the parks? I simply stated MOST people who use DVC (that number can be whatever you would like it to be) Maybe you can ask DVC or anyone on this board that tracks DVC usage with and without Park use? I’m not sure of how one would gain access to that information. It’s all speculation at this point. I’m sure if DVC sales were dependent upon Annual Passes being available, they would be cranking out the Passes left and right.

OK, I'll bite...

I have always taken "most" to mean the largest portion of something.

So with this issue, we have two choices - DVC stays that include Parks and DVC stays that do not. Based on your statement that "most DVC stays do not include parks" it would mean that more than half of the stays do not include parks. So the 51% comes directly from you. Not sure how there is any other way to interpret it? How can "most" mean something less than 51%, when there are only two choices?

 

[Ms Bibbidi]

What’s burning my bacon now is the allowance of those newly 3/4 year olds grandfathered in & allowed a new purchase. If they’re capping the number and not releasing any until enough choose not to renew, then this is slowing that release down. And if it’s lawsuit related, they’re adding more potential complainants. Make it make sense.

Yes. I totally understand. When you find the truth, the details -- even the smallest details -- will fit.

Allowance of the new passes for the newly turned 3 year old is Disney's choice of policy. They don't want to block the whole family because a 3 year old has aged in. I personally don't agree with their policy of "free under three" but it is their policy.

Yes, giving a new pass to a newly minted 3 year old would slow down the replenishment of the renewal inventory from a new sales release. Collateral damage.

Lawsuit related. I am thinking that the strongest effect of the lawsuit is centered on Disneyland. The Court won't issue an opinion on whether or not to certify the class action until about January. That's the latest info I saw.

So, Disney decides that the two bucket system or shorting the passholder bucket isn't the tool they will use because of the litigation. But, they decide to continue the limitation of the number of annual passes instead.

One of the tools McCarthy mentioned was lifting block-out days (for existing passholders.) Chapek talks about turning on a dime with dynamic pricing (sales) and higher discounts. They talk about afternoon entries (freeing up all day morning slots. Another idea floated is a membership like Amazon for discounts. They have a detailed survey pending. Chapek may abandon the single lever of control through shorting a passholder bucket. All he needed to do was hold back some reservations for the family from Denver from all of the online buckets. They keep park reservations in their hip pockets.

With maybe 500,000 outstanding passholders at WDW, they have big numbers to play with. One that appears to be a favorite now is limiting the number of distributed passes.

 

[Ms Bibbidi]

I understand what you are saying, but to "take advantage" of something means to use it in a manner which is not consistent with the intent, and unequal to one party over the other.

We disagree on the definition of "take advantage." I just meant "to use." My use of the term -- my definition -- Merriam Webster 1st definition.

Definition of take advantage of​

​

1: to make good use of (something) : to profit by (something)take advantage of an opportunity. We took advantage of the warm weather and did some yard work.​

2a: to impose on (someone) : to ask for or expect more than is fair or reasonable from (someone)After a while, I began to think she was taking advantage of me. He felt like he'd been taken advantage of.​

b: to use (something or someone) unfairly for personal gain. He took advantage of [=exploited] my lack of experience. It adds that young people in care homes, with learning disabilities, those excluded from school or using drugs or alcohol are particularly vulnerable to being targeted by people who take advantage of them for money, food or drugs.— Stephen Naysmith​

c: to exploit (someone) sexually The star shared her experiences of Hollywood bosses who tried to take advantage of her in the early days of her career.— The Belfast Telegraph Online (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dic...: to make good use,was taking advantage of me.)​

 

[Sandisw]

Seems like a good place to jump in. LoL

I leave you with this: when it comes to Disney, absolutely no one is entitled to anything. Everything they allow us to buy is because someone crunched the numbers and they make money. If it doesn't add to the bottom line we ain't getting it.

Exactly. I do agree with others that no one ever imagined a time when there would be no AP option for tickets, but I also agree that no one should ever assume things can’t change.

The current lack of APs isn’t something DVC is in control of and when we bought in 2009, even though we were doing the ever other year trip on one AP as cash guests, it didn’t enter into our decision to buy.

Now, having it has definitely given me ability to “justify” buying more points but I can’t be angry Id Disney discontinues them. I can be disappointed and frustrated, but not angry in the sense that I was entitled to them.

It just means I have to make some other decisions in how I use my points and how I visit the parks or the rest of my life bucget.

 

[Sandisw]

OK. Here's an elephant in this room. How many DVC owners got caught out without an annual pass because they were using the "bridging" technique and it was an "off-year?" Bridging, as I understand it was buying an AP and then squeezing two annual trips into it; one close to the beginning of the current pass year and the other close to the end of the pass year (maybe with some in between. Then, letting the AP lapse and waiting almost a year to buy a new one on their next trip -- in the next calendar year. So when they were in the off year without an annual pass is when the sales of new annual passes shut down.

That bridging technique was obviously playing with Disney's profits on annual passes. I have no idea how many DVC owners were doing that.

I think many got caught off guard in 2020 for sure and had always waited until the last minutes,

Then, when they came back in 2021, some jumped on them right away and others waited, even though they did announce they could suspend sales at any times in the future.

My initial plan was to buy a few new vouches as back up for DH and one of my DDs as well as myself.l.even though I have one…but had held off because of the one year expiration that was put into place in 2021…and, of course, sale stopped before I could get it.

So, I snoozed and I lost. They don’t have them. I do think it tells anyone that if the go on sale again, you better jump on it…I know I will.

 

[Sandisw]

Assuming they continue to be offered sporadically (big assumption).... You could still plan around this if they offer them, say, in February. You just activate it in August and use like you did before and plan not to be able to renew until some random future date.

I'm assuming my AP is it for my family and there won't be more. So we are going to go big on this pass. And then maybe that's the end.

This can work but the bigger change in 2021 was that new vouchers expire in one year from purchase so it’s not like it used to be where you could get ahead of things

Now, if you don’t activate in that one year, the voucher is only good for its value and not the actual pass.

 

[robinb]

OK. Here's an elephant in this room. How many DVC owners got caught out without an annual pass because they were using the "bridging" technique and it was an "off-year?" Bridging, as I understand it was buying an AP and then squeezing two annual trips into it; one close to the beginning of the current pass year and the other close to the end of the pass year (maybe with some in between. Then, letting the AP lapse and waiting almost a year to buy a new one on their next trip -- in the next calendar year. So when they were in the off year without an annual pass is when the sales of new annual passes shut down.

That bridging technique was obviously playing with Disney's profits on annual passes. I have no idea how many DVC owners were doing that.

We got caught by that in 2020. We let our APs lapse in November 2019 and made plans for October 2020. Disney stopped selling APs the day I put 2 in my cart in June 2020. I went to pay for them and there was an error because they pulled them in the hour it took me to decide how to pay for them. We ended up canceling 10/20 and not going until 5/21 when we bit the bullet and bought a 10-day PH. We bought APs last October 2021 while they were on sale again and are on our 3rd trip right now (sitting out the rain at our resort). We are going to let the APs expire (!) and hope we can pick them up again next year.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

What’s burning my bacon now is the allowance of those newly 3/4 year olds grandfathered in & allowed a new purchase. If they’re capping the number and not releasing any until enough choose not to renew, then this is slowing that release down. And if it’s lawsuit related, they’re adding more potential complainants. Make it make sense.

Would you want to be the one telling those parents, "No."?

 

[WilsonFlyer]

Can you show me where I said anything about 51% of DVC stays not utilizing the parks? I simply stated MOST people who use DVC (that number can be whatever you would like it to be) Maybe you can ask DVC or anyone on this board that tracks DVC usage with and without Park use? I’m not sure of how one would gain access to that information. It’s all speculation at this point. I’m sure if DVC sales were dependent upon Annual Passes being available, they would be cranking out the Passes left and right.

As to your last sentence, I fear you have a grave misconception of which tail wags which dog. DVC is but a tick on a St Bernard when it comes to what parks do. Ironically, that's our problem.

 

[Madame]

Would you want to be the one telling those parents, "No."?

They tell other family members no all the time. There are a couple examples floating around here of all but one family member with an AP and that family member is unable to purchase. I see no difference just bc it was free for your child and now it isn’t.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

With maybe 500,000 outstanding passholders at WDW, they have big numbers to play with. One that appears to be a favorite now is limiting the number of distributed passes.

Source, please?

 

[Maistre Gracey]

If Disney wants to make more money, why offer a renewal rate? There are folks lined up ready to pay the price of a “new” pass.
Seems like that would be a win for both Disney, and folks currently locked out… yet still giving the option for current APers to renew (at new price).

 

[WilsonFlyer]

They tell other family members no all the time. There are a couple examples floating around here of all but one family member with an AP and that family member is unable to purchase. I see no difference just bc it was free for your child and now it isn’t.

They are likely telling families where everybody else doesn't own an AP 'No' to the 3 YOs also. You're trying to twist my point to suit your agenda, yet my point stands on its own.

 

[BeachClub2014]

They tell other family members no all the time. There are a couple examples floating around here of all but one family member with an AP and that family member is unable to purchase. I see no difference just bc it was free for your child and now it isn’t.

You really don't see a difference in those scenarios? I do. In one example, the outlier family member is of the age where a ticket was needed and either had no ticket or chose a different type. In the example of the child "aging" into the need for a ticket, never needed a ticket before so that child should be able to get the same type of ticket as their parents. IMHO, anyways.