Search results

Sorry, I made they assumption that it wasn't at the level of acrophobia.

You made the call for yourself and that's great. But "from your perspective" is the key here. From Disney's perspective (up until now), guests with many types of disabilities were allowed to use DAS. I won't go into all of my son's issues again, but a castmember actually first recommended DAS...

I'm sure I'm missing a consideration or two, but this is why I think the key is to limit the number of people associated with a DAS pass. Perhaps a DAS user can select a "primary" partner on their account. This person can accompany them on all rides, every time. After that, they can choose 2...

This is my fear. They will stop some of the casual cheaters, but the hardcore cheaters will still cheat. Meanwhile, a large chunk of guests who relied on the service will be negatively affected. Some might be taken care of if the "return to queue" system works. But not all.

Yeah, I have no idea how much these changes will affect the number, especially until we see this new plan in action. I just meant from the previous numbers we've seen thrown around in the thread. So if Disney is saying 60ish% of LL users are DAS, what is a "reasonable" number to them? Should it...

Oh yeah, I was just thinking incredibly rough estimates. Based on number of guests (adults, children, elderly) vs. the CDC numbers for people living with disabilities. Plus other guesses (adults with disabilities that either aren’t covered by current DAS or choose not to use the service, etc).

I wonder what their expectation is for this number. I think a single digit number sounds too low, but I suck at math. Didn't someone try to crunch the (estimated) numbers here earlier in the thread? I can't seem to track that comment down.

100%. These are self-inflicted wounds. But they will take operational issues any day of the week if they can keep adding revenue streams and enough people say "oh well, it is what it is." Should we talk about ABBA?

Yeah, this seems pretty definitive. I’m shocked.

You thought disability access was only for guests that were terminal?

Unfortunately, every move like this Disney has made since the original FastPass has not been driven by operations. It's been to increase revenue and show continued growth. Each decision has had a knock-on effect that then needs to be addressed. There was DAS abuse in the past, but I'm sure it's...

Understood. I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

I'm not going to lie, I'm worried about the messaging too. But it just doesn't make sense to me. What does make sense is someone, somewhere in the process said they had to word things in a certain way and that led to unclear messaging and confusion. Companies constantly get in their own way...

You are probably right. I think this was primarily a problem with their messaging of the changes. Hopefully we'll know more soon.

I hear what you are saying but also, is it so bad that someone with a disability gets to experience more attractions during their trip? My son's brain tumor and treatment will affect the rest of his life. I know you are primarily concerned about abusers of the system, but it's very upsetting to...

Leaving the country is a pretty extreme example, since that's such a huge financial upheaval and has many logistics involved. But it will affect habits for some people. For example, as Disney removed certain perks (Magical Express, EMH, etc) and increased their prices, we've gone from making...

Isn’t that what Disney says DAS guests should do while they wait for their return time? I know when we have an hour+ wait, we’ll take the kids to a shorter ride, or get food, or go to the bathroom, or take a breather, or go to a store, etc. Are you suggesting that DAS users should still have to...

We certainly do, but this could have been avoided if Disney just released their comprehensive DAS plans all at once.

It seems that this is an assumption we are all making here. Unless I missed it, the new DAS guidelines don’t say anything like “more to come later” (besides the reference to the “return to queue” system). Additionally, all of the language chosen is very specific. I’m not sure what kind of...

I hope you're right. The messaging makes the policy seem way too narrow.