Trespassing third parties

Chip Chipperson

Well-Known Member
Maybe if these people didn't want to get trespassed, they should have read the conditions of their annual passes. Free ride is over, don't base your business off of things that could come down like a house of cards.
I agree. The argument that they should have been given a warning first is weak and ignores the fact that the warning was included in the terms and conditions of their admission when they purchased their passes. These companies knew they were violating Disney's rules and that's all that matters.
 

tissandtully

Well-Known Member
I agree. The argument that they should have been given a warning first is weak and ignores the fact that the warning was included in the terms and conditions of their admission when they purchased their passes. These companies knew they were violating Disney's rules and that's all that matters.
Seems like easy due diligence to check that you’re not breaking any rules and if you know that you are, you can’t act surprised when those rules are enforced
 

Isamar

Well-Known Member
Seems like easy due diligence to check that you’re not breaking any rules and if you know that you are, you can’t act surprised when those rules are enforced

And it’s interesting that 2 of them mention speaking to Disney “employees” who confirmed they could operate on park property. In other words, at some point they did turn their minds to whether they were allowed to operate in the parks, but then relied on the opinion(s) of unnamed employees? Seems like something you’d confirm with an office that has authority to say your particular commercial activity is ok.
 

lewisc

Well-Known Member
I agree. The argument that they should have been given a warning first is weak and ignores the fact that the warning was included in the terms and conditions of their admission when they purchased their passes. These companies knew they were violating Disney's rules and that's all that matters.

Seems like easy due diligence to check that you’re not breaking any rules and if you know that you are, you can’t act surprised when those rules are enforced
I'm sure Disney was within its rights. One guide has been doing this for 12 years, another since 1996. They were known to CM. They didn't collect money on Disney property. AFAIK Disney didn't say anything. They thought Disney was sort of OK

It was mean spirited waiting until they arrived with customers to serve them.

I can basically agree with Disney but think the situation could have been handled nicer.
 

Fido Chuckwagon

Well-Known Member
Disney itself is abusing the DAS system by forcing DAS users into long lighting lane lines which defeats the benefit for those who really can't handle the lines, maybe another DAS lawsuit can help things along
This is just not true. There is no data whatsoever to back up the assertion that lightning lanes are longer now at WDW then they were using fastpass. Disney won the last lawsuit (and deserved to). ADA requires a reasonable accommodation but when that accommodation makes it so that the park experience is degraded for everyone else, that accommodation is unreasonable.
 

Fido Chuckwagon

Well-Known Member
Yes but TP does their commerce off site, which is a form of free speech. The tour guides are doing their commerce on Disney’s property. It’s like someone walking into Walmart and opening a stand to sell food. TP is out on the street in a public space selling their wares.
"Free Speech" is a restriction on what the government can do. If WDW wanted to they could absolutely trespass Len Testa tomorrow, for any reason they wanted, or no reason at all, including anything that he has said. That said, clearly these private tours interfere with Disney's business (and it seems like a lot of them were cheating the DAS system if you read into that article) in a way that business like touringplans are not.
 

TrainsOfDisney

Well-Known Member
And it’s interesting that 2 of them mention speaking to Disney “employees” who confirmed they could operate on park property. In other words, at some point they did turn their minds to whether they were allowed to operate in the parks, but then relied on the opinion(s) of unnamed employees? Seems like something you’d confirm with an office that has authority to say your particular commercial activity is ok.
That’s why I continue to say this is tricky. It’s not because I lack intelligence or comprehension skills, it’s because it is, in fact, tricky and we don’t have all the facts.
 

TrainsOfDisney

Well-Known Member
Not sure the Treehouse is.😉

Obviously all new queues have to be, but to what extent do they have to retrofit queues to be ADA compliant?
I don’t think they do - in California there is often long line for DAS in fantasyland attractions because the narrow switchbacks can’t accommodate any wheelchairs.
 

Fido Chuckwagon

Well-Known Member
We've been counting the number of guests entering both the standby line and the Lightning Lane, per hour, at key attractions.

We've seen instances where the number of guests entering the LL is:
  • Equal to or greater than the number entering the standby line
  • More than half of the attraction's hourly capacity
For example, at Haunted Mansion we counted roughly 1,750 guests entering the LL line in one hour, and slightly less than that entering the standby line. None of them - zero - appeared to be VIP tours.

We also think that the number of G+ reservations sold by Disney for HM is not more than 300 per hour.

So there's ~1,450 guests that are somehow using the LL line. None of them were VIP tours.

Some of them could reasonably be rider swap. But HM isn't a roller coaster and there's no height limit, so I'd expect that rider swap number to be super low.
Thank you for this analysis. Also, if anyone is interested, the briefs from the 2014 lawsuit contain a huge amount of data analysis if I recall, and Disney's own data was basically that (at the time) DAS was a **huge** proportion of the people using the fastpass lines, likely at an even higher percentage than what Len counted. It's part of the reason they had to abandon the original DAS system of basically unlimited fastpass entry and move to a return time model. The current model appears pretty broken as well.
 

Fido Chuckwagon

Well-Known Member
Thank you for all you do to gather this information. I am curious if you will reveal why you think there are ~300 G+ per hour?

I don't expect to be an extreme number, but don't golden oak and club 33 get any time LL to attractions outside of the G+ system?
There are 300 homes total in Golden Oak. I can't find reliable information on how many Club 33 members there are, but I'm going to bet it's not very many. There's no way they are having any kind noticeable impact on the lightning lanes. It's all DAS.
 

lentesta

Premium Member
Thank you for this analysis. Also, if anyone is interested, the briefs from the 2014 lawsuit contain a huge amount of data analysis if I recall, and Disney's own data was basically that (at the time) DAS was a **huge** proportion of the people using the fastpass lines, likely at an even higher percentage than what Len counted. It's part of the reason they had to abandon the original DAS system of basically unlimited fastpass entry and move to a return time model. The current model appears pretty broken as well.

Ah, great memory! I have the testimony from that trial. Let me see what I can find.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
That’s why I continue to say this is tricky. It’s not because I lack intelligence or comprehension skills, it’s because it is, in fact, tricky and we don’t have all the facts.
The only fact that matters is that they were engaged in unauthorized activity. You keep getting gruff because you keep trying to muddy it and claim that’s not some widely understood issue.
 

Chip Chipperson

Well-Known Member
That’s why I continue to say this is tricky. It’s not because I lack intelligence or comprehension skills, it’s because it is, in fact, tricky and we don’t have all the facts.
It's not tricky. It's spelled out in the terms of admission. That they claim to have spoken with some unspecified WDW employees is irrelevant unless they provide a name and title. The CM working the tapstile at the gate or attraction isn't authorized to grant such exemptions to the rules and many are unlikely to know better so they don't tell them know either out of fear of being wrong and getting in trouble or out of apathy. If they had gone through proper channels then they would have a letter or email verifying that they had been authorized to engage in the prohibited activity. The only reason to ask someone in a low-level position in a situation like this is because you don't want to invite attention from someone high enough to stop you.
 

Chip Chipperson

Well-Known Member
Call or send an e-mail “we are going to begin enforcing this rule, if you arrive with guests other than friends / family you will be trespassed - thank you for your understanding and cooperation.”
So what's to stop them from then claiming, "These are my friends," or "This is family visiting from out of town," when stopped at the gate and then the argument shifts to, "Disney can't prove that they're NOT friends!"

By any chance are you or someone you know involved in giving such tours? If not, I truly don't understand why you seem so upset by this and keep looking for ways to bend logic to make this Disney's fault.
 

lentesta

Premium Member
Ah, great memory! I have the testimony from that trial. Let me see what I can find.

Interesting data from this lawsuit (A.L. v. Walt Disney Parks & Resorts US, Inc.):

3% of guests in the park had Guest Assistance Cards, which were last used in 2013.

They used 30% of a popular ride's capacity.

It *doubled* the wait for non-GAC guests at popular attractions.

So let's do the math:
  • DHS averaged 28,250 people per day in 2013 according to AECOM in 2014.
  • 3% of 28,250 is 848 people in the park throughout the course of a day.
  • Let's say "popular ride" was pre-third track Toy Story Mania, which had a capacity of around 1,000 per hour.
  • And let's say the park was open for 12 hours a day.
  • So TSMM could serve 12,000 guests per day. 30% of that capacity was going to GACs, or 3,600 rides.
So everyone with GACs was either riding TSMM 4x, or each person with a GAC rode with a group of 4. (Disney isn't clear on whether the 3% is the entire group or just the one person in the group who qualified.)

Either way, allocating 30% of a ride's capacity to either 4% or 12% of park guests, is upsetting to the remaining guests.



Screenshot from 2023-11-08 15-07-56.png


and

Screenshot from 2023-11-08 15-07-02.png
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom