4 Walt Disney World Resorts to accept dogs

[AEfx]

The number of people who actually want to bring their dog with them to WDW or really any hotel is very small.

I am not sure this is an accurate assumption, given that it is just beginning, the massive publicity this has gotten, and all the justifications for it seem to revolve around how more and more people are choosing to travel with their animals.

 

[englanddg]

Iger thinks he's clever, but we all know this is a slight against Trump!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...first-us-president-130-years-bo-a7604206.html

 

[Tony the Tigger]

Technically this falls under the upcharge category. You are giving a select few guests the ability to pay extra for a benefit that will impact other guests satisfaction. Possibly only a small % will care or be effected, similar to setting aside square footage in the MK for a desert party.

Positives: Some guests can bring their pets and not leave them with friend/family or have to board.
They love their animal and like to take them places.
Disney makes more money.

Negatives: Possible allergy issues that require medical treatment or movement of guest rooms.
Possible damage of resort rooms that cause rate increases, or rooms need to come off inventory
Possible smell issues in resort rooms or in shared spaces(including feces/urine/hair)
People with phobias effected and need room/resort changes and impacting vacation
Possible angry resort customers impacted by barking throughout day or into night
Disney has litigation issues with biting/allergic reactions
Disney has litigation or customer service issues when resort resident forced to take dog out of room for not behaving
Upset customers who did not realize they were in a dog room/resort/wing and want things compted


I think it is short sighted and yes a money grab.

Then everything in business is a "money grab."

The term has a negative connotation, as if you were charging extra for use of the monorail on Thursdays.

But providing a service that so many other hotels provide, no doubt because people like me have asked for it - I wouldn't use the derogatory term "money grab" any more than paying for your room is a money grab.

 

[Andrew C]

I don't think it is so complicated. Disney has decided to cater to a group of travelers who travel with their dogs. They decided the benefits outweighed the negatives. This will make some happy and others (including some of my friends) unhappy. But isn't that the same with any business decision? I think so....

 

[njDizFan]

Then everything in business is a "money grab."

The term has a negative connotation, as if you were charging extra for use of the monorail on Thursdays.

But providing a service that so many other hotels provide, no doubt because people like me have asked for it - I wouldn't use the derogatory term "money grab" any more than paying for your room is a money grab.

Business make decisions that prioritize different outcomes. Short terms gains vs. a long term vision. Creating a quality and safe environment that catered to guest comfort and satisfaction is what ultimately drove Disney's success(like all forward thinking companies). Short terms quarter to quarter thinking is what has bastardized capitalism.

 

[DisneyFreak]

I think it is short sighted and yes a money grab.

Of course it's a money grab and a way to keep more guests from going to the competition. Whether it will be profitable is another story and why it's on a trial basis.

 

[Chernaboggles]

5 more pages…same results. A lot of you people need to take a step back and actually read what you are writing and what other people are saying.

I'm not sure if it's intentional or not, but this post reads like you're trying to have the final say and shut the thread down. That's not how discussion forums work, people are still conversing. Aruging a little, telling anecdotes, making points and counterpoints. In other words...discussing. It doesn't matter if points are repeated or the pages keep piling up, it's not like we're going to run out of internet. If you get tired of reading or get frustrated with the way the thread is going, you can step out whenever you want.

 

[Nemo14]

We just came back to our hotel (the dog friendly one I mentioned several pages back where the full-size poodle knocked the staff member over the other day). As we were waiting for the elevator, 3 dogs came out of the first floor rooms, 2 with one owner, 1 with another, and proceeded to bark, jump, and snap at each other. Just sayin' for those who asked for real-life anecdotes.

 

[englanddg]

We just came back to our hotel (the dog friendly one I mentioned several pages back where the full-size poodle knocked the staff member over the other day). As we were waiting for the elevator, 3 dogs came out of the first floor rooms, 2 with one owner, 1 with another, and proceeded to bark, jump, and snap at each other. Just sayin' for those who asked for real-life anecdotes.

Wait, what? Dogs jumping, barking and snapping at each other?

That...NEVER...happens.

 

[Nubs70]

Wait, what? Dogs jumping, barking and snapping at each other?

That...NEVER...happens.

After a hot muggy day in the park, I have almost done this myself.

 

[21stamps]

Technically this falls under the upcharge category. You are giving a select few guests the ability to pay extra for a benefit that will impact other guests satisfaction. Possibly only a small % will care or be effected, similar to setting aside square footage in the MK for a desert party.

Positives: Some guests can bring their pets and not leave them with friend/family or have to board.
They love their animal and like to take them places.
Disney makes more money.

Negatives: Possible allergy issues that require medical treatment or movement of guest rooms.
Possible damage of resort rooms that cause rate increases, or rooms need to come off inventory
Possible smell issues in resort rooms or in shared spaces(including feces/urine/hair)
People with phobias effected and need room/resort changes and impacting vacation
Possible angry resort customers impacted by barking throughout day or into night
Disney has litigation issues with biting/allergic reactions
Disney has litigation or customer service issues when resort resident forced to take dog out of room for not behaving
Upset customers who did not realize they were in a dog room/resort/wing and want things compted


I think it is short sighted and yes a money grab.

Has anyone here stayed at a Disney resort with a pet the past couple of days?
Every hotel I have stayed at has always had a disclaimer that I am responsible for damages.. @Tony the Tigger I’m assuming you’ve seen this print as well?

Is Disney different? If a big dog breaks a lamp.. is the owner not responsible? Is that why we’re afraid there’s going to be a rate increase to all guests?

 

[Tony the Tigger]

God forbid someone have an opinion different then yours...

*than

Wow!! Thank you for the information. No matter what kind of cleaning mousekeeping does it would get rid of all the hair and dander. I know I sound like a lot of other people but those are 4 resorts I will not be staying at anymore.

A perfectly reasonable solution.

Business make decisions that prioritize different outcomes. Short terms gains vs. a long term vision. Creating a quality and safe environment that catered to guest comfort and satisfaction is what ultimately drove Disney's success(like all forward thinking companies). Short terms quarter to quarter thinking is what has bastardized capitalism.

I agree with you about short term quarter to quarter thinking. I don't see how that applies here. If the "test" works, it is long term planning. It is no longer excluding a percentage of existing clientele from staying onsite.

My guess is the general public is far more reasonable than this board. That's not a pure guess. When we are walking in and out of the halls of other pet friendly hotels, almost every single reaction to our dog has been positive. I can't remember a bad one. (But, I mean, look at her!!)

We just came back to our hotel (the dog friendly one I mentioned several pages back where the full-size poodle knocked the staff member over the other day). As we were waiting for the elevator, 3 dogs came out of the first floor rooms, 2 with one owner, 1 with another, and proceeded to bark, jump, and snap at each other. Just sayin' for those who asked for real-life anecdotes.

yawn emoji.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

Has anyone here stayed at a Disney resort with a pet the past couple of days?
Every hotel I have stayed at has always had a disclaimer that I am responsible for damages.. @Tony the Tigger I’m assuming you’ve seen this print as well?

Is Disney different? If a big dog breaks a lamp.. is the owner not responsible? Is that why we’re afraid there’s going to be a rate increase to all guests?

Gotta read the fine print, but I assume you're already agreeing to fix anything you/your party break during stay.

Is Disney different? So far, their new rules are significantly different than what I see elsewhere. Other hotels don't have uniform standards regarding charges, pet size, etc.; but they do tend to insist you don't leave your pet unattended.

 

[21stamps]

Gotta read the fine print, but I assume you're already agreeing to fix anything you/your party break during stay.

Is Disney different? So far, their new rules are significantly different than what I see elsewhere. Other hotels don't have uniform standards regarding charges, pet size, etc.; but they do tend to insist you don't leave your pet unattended.

I just looked up this from Universal.. wondering if Disney tried to match the fees, but a 1up with the ‘allowing to be unattended for 7 hours’.
I personally think that rule would be the first to disappear before all pets would have to go.
I’ve stayed in hotels that didn’t require constant attendance with your dog, but they are also in very dog friendly areas where your dog will be with you most of the day anyway.. can’t do that at WDW.

 

[Raineman]

Comes back to you not understanding allergies. I am not allergic to any of the things you listed, yet a cat will slay me! Allergic reactions have no rhyme or reason. I have to be careful about dry skin yet I can pull poison ivy out by the roots barehanded and not have a problem. And this is what some posters are not getting or not reading what's being said. I have been following this thread since day 1 and it keeps going through a repeat cycle. I think some are jumping in not knowing they are echoing something already mentioned.

I think you missed the point of my post. I am not doubting that people have allergic reactions, nor am I doubting the impact they have. However, there are the allergens that I mentioned that re already present at WDW, and cannot be controlled, yet people who have varying levels of reactions to these allergens visit WDW, and have found a way to minimise the effect the allergens have on them, otherwise the reactions would be bad enough that they would not visit. People who are allergic to pets should be able to control their reaction to dogs just as other people control their reaction to dust, pollen, mold, etc, especially when interaction with dogs at WDW can be controlled on a much higher level-there will be a much higher chance of breathing in pollen or dust at a WDW resort than getting close enough to a dog to have it affect you.

 

[GoofGoof]

I just looked up this from Universal.. wondering if Disney tried to match the fees, but a 1up with the ‘allowing to be unattended for 7 hours’.
I personally think that rule would be the first to disappear before all pets would have to go.
I’ve stayed in hotels that didn’t require constant attendance with your dog, but they are also in very dog friendly areas where your dog will be with you most of the day anyway.. can’t do that at WDW.

View attachment 239075

This was posted a dozen pages or so back but lost in the argument over who was being selfish.

I agree. The unattended rule is probably the most controversial aspect and also the most likely to cause an issue. I don’t know if it will change or not, but I agree that they will try to tweak the system before completely abandoning the policy altogether.

I also agree that WDW is a whole different animal from a lot of other locations. The vast majority of people’s time visiting WDW is to visit the theme parks, enjoy Resort amenities, go shopping and eat at restaurants and none of those things will allow dogs. There are plenty of other destinations which have a lot more dog friendly activities where people are not as likely to be away from their room for as long periods of time.

 

[GoofGoof]

I think you missed the point of my post. I am not doubting that people have allergic reactions, nor am I doubting the impact they have. However, there are the allergens that I mentioned that re already present at WDW, and cannot be controlled, yet people who have varying levels of reactions to these allergens visit WDW, and have found a way to minimise the effect the allergens have on them, otherwise the reactions would be bad enough that they would not visit. People who are allergic to pets should be able to control their reaction to dogs just as other people control their reaction to dust, pollen, mold, etc, especially when interaction with dogs at WDW can be controlled on a much higher level-there will be a much higher chance of breathing in pollen or dust at a WDW resort than getting close enough to a dog to have it affect you.

This analogy is complexity flawed. The other allergens you are talking about occur naturally. Disney did not create a policy that is allowing those allergens in. This policy allows that. I can’t understand why people are so hung up on that or quite frankly why it matters. People with dog allergies don’t need to justify their dislike of this policy to anyone.

 

[GoofGoof]

I'm not sure if it's intentional or not, but this post reads like you're trying to have the final say and shut the thread down. That's not how discussion forums work, people are still conversing. Aruging a little, telling anecdotes, making points and counterpoints. In other words...discussing. It doesn't matter if points are repeated or the pages keep piling up, it's not like we're going to run out of internet. If you get tired of reading or get frustrated with the way the thread is going, you can step out whenever you want.

It’s a discussion like you said. It’s my opinion. I’m just pointing out the irony of both sides acting selfish while calling each other selfish. Not sure where you got the idea I wanted the thread shut down, but if what I wrote bothers you the ignore button is your friend.

 

[GoofGoof]

I am not sure this is an accurate assumption, given that it is just beginning, the massive publicity this has gotten, and all the justifications for it seem to revolve around how more and more people are choosing to travel with their animals.

Just as a small sampling of anecdotal evidence the majority of people in this thread who are dog owners have said they would likely not bring their dogs to WDW even if they support the policy or don’t see anything wrong with it. In the rest of the country this type of policy is common at hotels but it’s not common to see dogs in a bunch of rooms at one time. I very rarely see any in my travels. I do tend to stay in downtown city hotels a lot which are mostly full of business travelers so maybe not the best sample.

To your point, I don’t know for sure how many people will want to use this service. There must have been some market surveys done and enough demand to roll it out. I don’t foresee it getting out of hand. My only fear is that due to the 7 hour rule some people may see this as an alternative to boarding their dog and then there could be a bigger demand. Then it’s not just the small group who want to vacation with their dog.

 

[Chernaboggles]

It’s a discussion like you said. It’s my opinion. I’m just pointing out the irony of both sides acting selfish while calling each other selfish. Not sure where you got the idea I wanted the thread shut down, but if what I wrote bothers you the ignore button is your friend.

Not bothered. I'm enjoying the discussion. I actually agree with one of the points you've come back to several times: that dogs-alone-in-rooms is likely to be the biggest source of trouble and isn't in line with industry standards. It's a nice option to have if it works for someone's schedule and dog, but by and large I think most people who travel with dogs aren't keen to leave them alone in hotel rooms and would make other arrangements anyway.