New DAS System at Walt Disney World 2024

[photomatt]

? Disney already gave people wait times approximate to the same wait as others. To artificially inflate their wait times as some sort of discouragment of using DAS would be discriminatory.

The advantage of DAS is largely exactly what the accomodation provided.. the escape from the queue. The 'advantage' was that freedom could also be used to double dip. It's not good customer service to try to put customers in a 'time out' where they can't do anything... even if you think it's for some abuse prevention. That's a no-win situation.

I don't think it's discriminatory to adjust wait times for people with DAS in order to lessen wait times for people with paid access to LL. The problem is that Disney is sending DAS guests through the LL, and that increases the wait times for people who paid to be there.

Consider the steps in front of City Hall at the Magic Kingdom in WDW. If I can walk up the steps, I can be at the front entrance in a few seconds. If I can't walk up the steps, I have to use the ramp. The ramp requires more physical effort, requires me to travel a longer distance, and it takes more time, but it's still considered equal access because the ramp gets me inside the building.

There's no law that says Disney can't make people with DAS wait longer than people who paid to use the LL. There's no law that says Disney has to give DAS return times that are equal to the standby wait times. If there is a law, I have not been able to find it.

 

[ConfettiCupcake]

The repeating rides with DAS thing is sticky, because I do think that because DAS is intended to allow people to access attractions, it should be under similar rules to the general guest population, if you want to invest the time you can keep riding the same things over and over. I don’t think it should be prevented nor do I think Disney ever would. However much like the arguments against the virtual queues, those with DAS simply aren’t investing the same kind of wait to do so as someone without DAS. The act of needing to actually be in the line for the full duration of the wait is a big deterrent to looping, even for those who are perfectly capable of doing so.

 

[DisneyHead123]

But then offering genie as a substitute would be wrong then right? Example my kids hyperfixate on certain rides and if genie only allows it once then it would not be an appropriate accommodation.

So I think the argument at this point is that:

1. Assuming that line accommodations are covered under the ADA, they do have to be available at all times. Just like a wheelchairs ramp or braille map have to be available at all times when the park is operating. Telling a DAS user they can ride once is like telling a wheelchair user they can use a ramp once.

2. No one really knows for sure if line accommodations are covered under the ADA. If they aren't, none of that really applies.

There may be a different way of looking at it - Fido made the argument that Disney could say that the average user who is non disabled isn't able to re-ride headliners, presumably because the lines are too unpleasant even for non disabled users to do more than, say, twice on very long lines. That argument I'm not sure about. First, for all I know, some people do ride Rise all day long. Second, I don't have a legal background to say how that argument would play out. It sounds unlikely to me - kind of like saying "Our data shows that only 0.1% of park users actually use the stairs in this area, ergo we don't need a wheelchair ramp to provide equal access." Traditionally the actual use doesn't matter, the access does. But again, without a legal background I can't say with 100% certainty.

 

[DisneyHead123]

Your comment shows the problem with line-skip accommodations at a business where standing in line is fundamental to its nature and there are no ADA regulations.

You park once at a business, then go inside and shop or whatever. If the required number of parking spots is filled, a disabled person is out of luck. They can't go inside and tell the business to create another one for them, nor can they sue the business.

Think of how that applies to Disney where disabled persons (even without abuse) can ask for unlimited line-skips on all the rides. Disney is faced with an aging population and an expanding definition of disability. I can understand why people want to blame either the business or the disabled for a system that doesn’t work for everyone but it doesn’t seem productive.

Is your conclusion that they could hypothetically cap DAS, given that there is a natural cap on some other accommodations on a first come first serve basis?

Asking out of genuine curiosity, again, I don't have a legal background so I have no particular intuitions about the legality of a move like that.

 

[Chi84]

For what it is worth, I agree with you; I think many in this thread do. If the new accommodations are not enough to make someone comfortable, then they will remove themselves from the scenario.

I wouldn’t say it exactly that way, but the more “inappropriate” (or "incompatible") the venue, the greater the accommodation needed to make it accessible. The greater the accommodation, the less likely it will be found reasonably required.

 

[jaklgreen]

Your comment shows the problem with line-skip accommodations at a business where standing in line is fundamental to its nature and there are no ADA regulations.

You park once at a business, then go inside and shop or whatever. If the required number of parking spots is filled, a disabled person is out of luck. They can't go inside and tell the business to create another one for them, nor can they sue the business.

Think of how that applies to Disney where disabled persons (even without abuse) can ask for unlimited line-skips on all the rides. Disney is faced with an aging population and an expanding definition of disability. I can understand why people want to blame either the business or the disabled for a system that doesn’t work for everyone but it doesn’t seem productive.

I still take exception to the term "line skip" because you really are not skipping the line. It is more of a VQ. People are still waiting the standby line time. So it is not like DAS people are getting off of the ride and getting right back into the LL. They are still waiting the posted wait time. I do agree that not letting you get a DAS return time as soon as you scan in is more than fair. But I think that Disney did that because they know that people with legitimate issues are not typically able to spend a full day at the parks.

 

[Chi84]

I still take exception to the term "line skip" because you really are not skipping the line. It is more of a VQ. People are still waiting the standby line time. So it is not like DAS people are getting off of the ride and getting right back into the LL. They are still waiting the posted wait time. I do agree that not letting you get a DAS return time as soon as you scan in is more than fair. But I think that Disney did that because they know that people with legitimate issues are not typically able to spend a full day at the parks.

I think people are using line skip to mean not having to stand in a physical line. As opposed to a ”wait skip” where you skip the wait and get immediate access. No one here is confused.

 

[JD80]

I mean being able to do other things while virtually waiting in line is an additional benefit. It's why the system had such a high level of abuse. It's why line skip is being used.

I am hungry and I want to go on Space Mountain. Use DAS, get some lunch, walk on to Space Mountain - I skipped the line.

 

[ConfettiCupcake]

I still take exception to the term "line skip" because you really are not skipping the line. It is more of a VQ. People are still waiting the standby line time. So it is not like DAS people are getting off of the ride and getting right back into the LL. They are still waiting the posted wait time. I do agree that not letting you get a DAS return time as soon as you scan in is more than fair. But I think that Disney did that because they know that people with legitimate issues are not typically able to spend a full day at the parks.

I disagree that any of this is because they “know” that people with legitimate issues are not typically spending a full day. I have actually seen people who do qualify for DAS take issue with this kind of assumption, because there truly is a wide range of abilities when it comes to people who qualify and they felt it was painting them in an incorrect light.

I think for Disney it’s simply the easiest way to grant these people access to attractions on an attraction by attraction basis. They’re not compensating for less time spent in the parks. This is a slippery slope anyways, whenever it’s mentioned it always has me thinking about people who may be able to afford 1 day if that at a Disney park during a visit, and how little they experience compared to others. Disney isn’t out here trying to make sure everybody gets to experience some baseline of attractions during a trip or during a day.

 

[Chi84]

So I think the argument at this point is that:

1. Assuming that line accommodations are covered under the ADA, they do have to be available at all times. Just like a wheelchairs ramp or braille map have to be available at all times when the park is operating. Telling a DAS user they can ride once is like telling a wheelchair user they can use a ramp once.

2. No one really knows for sure if line accommodations are covered under the ADA. If they aren't, none of that really applies.

There may be a different way of looking at it - Fido made the argument that Disney could say that the average user who is non disabled isn't able to re-ride headliners, presumably because the lines are too unpleasant even for non disabled users to do more than, say, twice on very long lines. That argument I'm not sure about. First, for all I know, some people do ride Rise all day long. Second, I don't have a legal background to say how that argument would play out. It sounds unlikely to me - kind of like saying "Our data shows that only 0.1% of park users actually use the stairs in this area, ergo we don't need a wheelchair ramp to provide equal access." Traditionally the actual use doesn't matter, the access does. But again, without a legal background I can't say with 100% certainty.

Before physical modifications were required by the ADA, impact studies were done to determine how much of a burden those modifications would place on businesses. These are published.

You're only looking at the issue of whether the accommodation is reasonable and necessary for the disabled person and not at the second part of the equation - whether the accommodation would require a fundamental alteration to the service the business provides to the public.

I don't think there is any question that many people, because of a disability, cannot stand in physical lines. The legal issue is going to be whether Disney is required to allow them to skip standing in line given its business model and the impact of the service it provides to others.

 

[DisneyHead123]

Before physical modifications were required by the ADA, impact studies were done to determine how much of a burden those modifications would place on businesses. These are published.

You're only looking at the issue of whether the accommodation is reasonable and necessary for the disabled person and not at the second part of the equation - whether the accommodation would require a fundamental alteration to the service the business provides to the public.

I don't think there is any question that many people, because of a disability, cannot stand in physical lines. The legal issue is going to be whether Disney is required to allow them to skip standing in line given its business model and the impact of the service it provides to others.

I think deciding whether lines are a "fundamental part of the service Disney provides" or a "way to access the service that Disney provides" is a prime example of a semantic argument. I lean towards it being "a way to access the service that Disney provides" as clearly no one goes to Disney World specifically for the lines. The lines are something that everyone has to "get through" in order to experience what they actually came there for (rides, characters, restaurants, etc.)

 

[Club Cooloholic]

I still take exception to the term "line skip" because you really are not skipping the line. It is more of a VQ. People are still waiting the standby line time. So it is not like DAS people are getting off of the ride and getting right back into the LL. They are still waiting the posted wait time. I do agree that not letting you get a DAS return time as soon as you scan in is more than fair. But I think that Disney did that because they know that people with legitimate issues are not typically able to spend a full day at the parks.

If there were a room, at each major attraction to sit in and wait out the return time, say you went to a attraction and they said head to this room it's air conditioned, there are only 15 people in there at a time, tvs for kids chairs to sit in, for for the next 90 minutes and then when that's over you can go on the ride, I think all these arguments would be over. I also think there would be less people abusing the system. As it is, you can go get lunch, shop, ride the tea cups whatever and come back and do the ride, it's time you can spend not standing looking at the back of some guys shirt. I am not saying it's my view, but to those waiting in that 90 minute line, yes ,you do seem to be skipping it, and this people feel it's not equitable, and saying it's not is just frustrating people further.
Nobody is talking about the severely challenged, we are talking about the people that have ADHD situation and games the system to yes...skip lines.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I don't think it's discriminatory to adjust wait times for people with DAS in order to lessen wait times for people with paid access to LL. The problem is that Disney is sending DAS guests through the LL, and that increases the wait times for people who paid to be there.

Consider the steps in front of City Hall at the Magic Kingdom in WDW. If I can walk up the steps, I can be at the front entrance in a few seconds. If I can't walk up the steps, I have to use the ramp. The ramp requires more physical effort, requires me to travel a longer distance, and it takes more time, but it's still considered equal access because the ramp gets me inside the building.

There's no law that says Disney can't make people with DAS wait longer than people who paid to use the LL. There's no law that says Disney has to give DAS return times that are equal to the standby wait times. If there is a law, I have not been able to find it.

There are though scoping and accessible route requirements that prevent you from placing the ramp out of the way of the primary circulation path. There may be differences due to the nature of the accommodation but you can’t intentionally make things worse, especially to discourage use of the accommodation.

 

[Chi84]

I think deciding whether lines are a "fundamental part of the service Disney provides" or a "way to access the service that Disney provides" is a prime example of a semantic argument. I lean towards it being "a way to access the service that Disney provides" as clearly no one goes to Disney World specifically for the lines. The lines are something that everyone has to "get through" in order to experience what they actually came there for (rides, characters, restaurants, etc.)

Disney is literally selling people a product/service that allows them to skip standing in lines.

 

[Dranth]

I think deciding whether lines are a "fundamental part of the service Disney provides" or a "way to access the service that Disney provides" is a prime example of a semantic argument. I lean towards it being "a way to access the service that Disney provides" as clearly no one goes to Disney World specifically for the lines. The lines are something that everyone has to "get through" in order to experience what they actually came there for (rides, characters, restaurants, etc.)

That may have been true in the past but DAS is forcing reduced sales of G+ and ILL because they have to artificially limit those to account for excessive DAS use is a direct impact on revenue they can easily show and prove. Even without the money aspect, I don't think it would be hard to argue the operational impacts which is what they did the last round of lawsuits and won every one of those.

So, while the line may not be a fundamental service, it is a fundamental operational aspect of the service.

 

[lazyboy97o]

That may have been true in the past but DAS use forcing reduced sales of G+ and ILL because they have to artificially limit those to account for excessive DAS use is a direct impact on revenue they can easily show and prove. Even without the money aspect, I don't think it would be hard to argue the operational impacts which is what they did the last round of lawsuits and won every one of those.

So, while the line may not be a fundamental service, it is a fundamental operational aspect of the service.

Live venues have made the same argument about wheelchair spaces, particularly in premium areas. It’s even the same where one wheelchair user can easily occupy more space than an ambulatory customer. There are some allowances for last minute conversion of seats, but those spaces generally have to be held.

If a venue changes its admission categories and accessible seats are now in the premium spaces, a portion still have to be offered for sale at the lower prices in line with required ratios.

The accommodation came first, and that is a hurdle to arguments about a premium product being offered and impacted.

 

[pdude81]

They will make more money. The LLs were selling out because a large percentage were being allocated for DAS, now they have more to sell. It's probably one of their arguments with the "reasonable" accomodations. It's impacting their business negatively to have that be the accommodation, coupled with the idea that they are not responsible for making sure a guest doesn't have a melt down.

I know this isn't always talked about, but I am going to use common sense, and I am speaking to this mainly for adults that have these issues, not children, because the kids don't have the autonomy to decide what situations they are in. But adults do. If someone were to have a fear of heights, we aren't doing mountain hikes or bungee jumping. Similarly, if I have issues with claustrophobia, or crowds or heat. I'm sorry but choosing to go to a theme park sounds like hell, short lines or not. Having to fly there, wait in lines at the gates, for food just the crowds on the main Street. If the condition is that bad, I can't see how the payoff of riding peter pan is worth it to my physical and mental health, and I can't see how a business should be responsible for that as well.

I've never seen even a suggestion that LL availability changed due to DAS passes on a given day. Do you have information that they cut down on LL slots due to anticipated DAS stats. My understanding is that DAS usage of the LL caused the physical SB line to move much more slowly since lots of people were waiting outside the queue, but the LL "slots" available to G+ remained consistent.

Now there may be former DAS users who choose to purchase G+ or ILL for rides if they do not like the accommodation offered, but the overall effect of these changes is more likely to cut overall wait times and thus decrease pressure for people to buy Genie plus IMO. I'd assume, at least right now, that the net result is about the same amount of G+/ILL revenue they would have have without making the DAS changes.

Just my two cents

 

[Hockey89]

If there were a room, at each major attraction to sit in and wait out the return time, say you went to a attraction and they said head to this room it's air conditioned, there are only 15 people in there at a time, tvs for kids chairs to sit in, for for the next 90 minutes and then when that's over you can go on the ride, I think all these arguments would be over. I also think there would be less people abusing the system. As it is, you can go get lunch, shop, ride the tea cups whatever and come back and do the ride, it's time you can spend not standing looking at the back of some guys shirt. I am not saying it's my view, but to those waiting in that 90 minute line, yes ,you do seem to be skipping it, and this people feel it's not equitable, and saying it's not will just frustrated them
Nobody is talking about the severely challenged, we are talking about the people that have ADHD situation and games the system to yes...skip lines.

Of course, it is skippoing the line all while not paying for LL/Genie plus. You can bet your &&& they are eating lunch, riding rides and shopping.... People hate when their special treatment goes away.

God knows ADHD was used and abused... My child qualifies but we wouldn't do DAS out of principle....

 

[Figgy1]

If there were a room, at each major attraction to sit in and wait out the return time, say you went to a attraction and they said head to this room it's air conditioned, there are only 15 people in there at a time, tvs for kids chairs to sit in, for for the next 90 minutes and then when that's over you can go on the ride, I think all these arguments would be over. I also think there would be less people abusing the system. As it is, you can go get lunch, shop, ride the tea cups whatever and come back and do the ride, it's time you can spend not standing looking at the back of some guys shirt. I am not saying it's my view, but to those waiting in that 90 minute line, yes ,you do seem to be skipping it, and this people feel it's not equitable, and saying it's not will just frustrated them
Nobody is talking about the severely challenged, we are talking about the people that have ADHD situation and games the system to yes...skip lines.

Back in the days of GAC we were dumped by the dumpsters by a few rides. Totally killed the magic. Without giving a roadmap to cheaters a room like that wouldn't work for my ds. 15 people at a time great, 90 minutes not so great

 

[ConfettiCupcake]

I've never seen even a suggestion that LL availability changed due to DAS passes on a given day. Do you have information that they cut down on LL slots due to anticipated DAS stats. My understanding is that DAS usage of the LL caused the physical SB line to move much more slowly since lots of people were waiting outside the queue, but the LL "slots" available to G+ remained consistent.

Now there may be former DAS users who choose to purchase G+ or ILL for rides if they do not like the accommodation offered, but the overall effect of these changes is more likely to cut overall wait times and thus decrease pressure for people to buy Genie plus IMO. I'd assume, at least right now, that the net result is about the same amount of G+/ILL revenue they would have have without making the DAS changes.

Just my two cents

I think the assumption has been that these DAS changes were necessary in freeing up more LL spaces to sell in order to facilitate the illusive Genie+ changes that allow for pre-booking that are supposed to come. That assumption makes sense to me, I think any positive impacts on standby are incidental and they’re trying to create more paying space in LL while also controlling those returns better.