2008 DDP discussion, questions, rants and vents

[Nancyg56]

The reason why I say, "overly-generous" is because I saved money even without any appetizers and without any desserts. I can't fathom how getting appetizers and desserts free is anything other than overly-generous. YMMV.

I think that when you see these "value" packages offered you may see them from a business POV. While I also felt that I saved money even my family did not max the package, I do not consider the "extras" free. They were part of a package that has strings attached that I had to agree to in order to make that purchase. The dessert and the appetizer were not "free", they were included". The connotations are very different. Over-generous is not how I would describe the plan because as Lewis has explained, and I don't feel his explanation is nit-picking, in order to take advantage of the plan I had to agree to Disney's provisions, and they offset some of my savings.

While the plan as it was still was a value to me, I did not find the pricing to be overly generous, but priced to be enough of a value to encourage me to keep my family and my vacation dollar all on Disney property.

 

[Lewisc]

Thanks, I think you explained my point better.

Bicker is a DVC member, can purchase the DDP without having to buy anything else and I think he can pay for the package at time of check in. The DDP plan makes sense, for him, even if the expected discount isn't large.

His overly generous comment may apply to DVC members or to guests that maximized the plan (child/adult, sharing via entree sized appetizers etc). It doesn't apply to the way I used the plan.

I think that when you see these "value" packages offered you may see them from a business POV. While I also felt that I saved money even my family did not max the package, I do not consider the "extras" free. They were part of a package that has strings attached that I had to agree to in order to make that purchase. The dessert and the appetizer were not "free", they were included". The connotations are very different. Over-generous is not how I would describe the plan because as Lewis has explained, and I don't feel his explanation is nit-picking, in order to take advantage of the plan I had to agree to Disney's provisions, and they offset some of my savings.

While the plan as it was still was a value to me, I did not find the pricing to be overly generous, but priced to be enough of a value to encourage me to keep my family and my vacation dollar all on Disney property.

 

[Nancyg56]

Thanks, I think you explained my point better.

Bicker is a DVC member, can purchase the DDP without having to buy anything else and I think he can pay for the package at time of check in. The DDP plan makes sense, for him, even if the expected discount isn't large.

His overly generous comment may apply to DVC members or to guests that maximized the plan (child/adult, sharing via entree sized appetizers etc). It doesn't apply to the way I used the plan.

I certainly do agree with you, and I understand Bicker's POV. Words can send strong messages and when there is no face to face contact on a message board they can be misunderstood. We are not sure how the new plans are going to work for us, so I am going to have to do some serious numbers crunching, and there goes one of the plans basic values for me. I really do detest that kind of planning.

 

[Rlbren]

Concerning the DDP, I understand the costs have gone up but they have reduce what you receive by somewhere around 30% (haven't done the math) and have only reduced the price by a dollar. That said, I can actually live with that. If you do TS 3 or 4 meals it's almost paid for itself compared to what we normally do w/o DDP which is all CS. My biggest problem is the inflexiblity of plan. Such as not being able to trade some TS for CS if we don't want to eat in resturants every night we're there. We don't go to Disney strictly for the food and TS takes a lot of time away from the parks. Which is the whole purpose of our trip. It would be nice if they would do just snack and meal credits and not break them down into individual things..ie..TS and CS. That way we can choose how to spend our vacation time. We've been told that you can't use TS for CS. We think that is ridiculous.

What does everyone think? Would most people do TS for every meal credit or would they select to spend more time in the parks and use more CS? Maybe we're in the minority.

Laura

 

[Nancyg56]

Concerning the DDP, I understand the costs have gone up but they have reduce what you receive by somewhere around 30% (haven't done the math) and have only reduced the price by a dollar. That said, I can actually live with that. If you do TS 3 or 4 meals it's almost paid for itself compared to what we normally do w/o DDP which is all CS. My biggest problem is the inflexiblity of plan. Such as not being able to trade some TS for CS if we don't want to eat in resturants every night we're there. We don't go to Disney strictly for the food and TS takes a lot of time away from the parks. Which is the whole purpose of our trip. It would be nice if they would do just snack and meal credits and not break them down into individual things..ie..TS and CS. That way we can choose how to spend our vacation time. We've been told that you can't use TS for CS. We think that is ridiculous.

What does everyone think? Would most people do TS for every meal credit or would they select to spend more time in the parks and use more CS? Maybe we're in the minority.

Laura

For my family the DDP may still be a value, but I would look at the Deluxe vs the regular. We do TS and we are at the point in our lives when the dining is part of our vacation. The problem with the regular plan's minimal decrease in value and price verses the increase in OOP costs is that while there may still be a monetary savings, I am not sure that that savings would be worth purchasing a package for all of us who visit the World together, and then planning all of our meals onsite. FOr us the value must be significant enough to make it worth planning an entire vacation stay around Disney restaurants and enough to spend money on packages that all of us may not want. I have adult children whose interests are not the same as my 5 YO DGD, so there is a balance that we need to find.

I imagine that the inconvenience may outweigh the convenience of the plans for many families once the monetary value decreases the shine of the new plans as they stand. More so than before each family must evaluate the value to them because the savings are not going to be as significant as old version.

 

[thunderbird1]

We've been told that you can't use TS for CS. We think that is ridiculous.

What does everyone think? Would most people do TS for every meal credit or would they select to spend more time in the parks and use more CS? Maybe we're in the minority.

Laura

Note that during the last couple of years during free DDP (September), you have been able to swap a TS meal for a CS meal + 2 snacks or a pin/lanyard. I realize that doesn't help folks going during the other 11 months of the year, and it isn't a guarantee so you couldn't count on that option being available, but it's something.

I'm with you, Laura--I think we probably would utilize this option occasionally if it were available. Certainly during free DDP (to keep the cost closer to "free" by keeping down the number of expensive meals requiring big tips), and especially if our trip overlapped the F&W Festival. I know several people have said they prefer not to get the DDP during F&WF because they prefer less TS/more snacks at that time, and this is a great way to do that.

Another time it would come in handy is for parents using the child care centers for a night out. They're left with extra child TS credits that either go to waste or they have to pay OOP for adult meals to use up the child TS credits. If they could just swap those extra child TS credits for CS credits (child, of course) + a couple of snacks or a pin/lanyard, it would be a win-win for everyone!

 

[tarheelmjfan]

It would be nice if they would do just snack and meal credits and not break them down into individual things..ie..TS and CS. That way we can choose how to spend our vacation time. We've been told that you can't use TS for CS. We think that is ridiculous.

What does everyone think? Would most people do TS for every meal credit or would they select to spend more time in the parks and use more CS? Maybe we're in the minority.

Laura

I don't see that ever happening. Your family probably is in the minority on this issue. I would think a large majority would actually use the credits for 2 TS meals a day.

 

[bicker]

For my family the DDP may still be a value

We can probably come to a consensus that the 2008 Dining Plan provides approximately 23% less value than the 2007 Dining Plan. That's a big difference, from one year to the next. If the 2008 plan is still a value, as you suggest, then that again support my earlier contention that, to me, that the 2007 plan was overly-generous. If X is a good value, then I'd call X + 5% or maybe even 8% "generous" -- anything over 10% I'd call "overly-generous". See what I mean?

If it was just a small change then I'd agree with you, but this is a big change, as so many of the critics of the Dining Plan have been so quick to point out, not a small one. And that's without injecting DVC membership into it. My point is really that folks cannot have it both ways. As long as it is generally agreed-on that this is a big change, worthy of 40 pages of rants and vents, then every bit of that frustration must translate into a measure of just how much better the 2007 plan was over the 2008 plan. It can't just be that the 2008 plan is that much less generous than the 2007 plan -- if that is the case, then it invariably means that the 2007 plan is exactly that much more generous than the 2008 plan, as long as any significant number of guests finds the 2008 plan an acceptable value.

 

[tubtruck]

This is interesting I will have to think long and hard before I make a decision on whether to use the DDP in 2008, I used it for 18 days this year and found it to be very good value. The thing is I just would not have eaten at so many TS restraunts if I had of being paying full price. Not because I couldnt afford it but because I simply would not want to spend that amount of money or time on each meal.
As for the tips I much prefered them to be in the price for the simple reason I am British. Yes we share the same language as folk in the US but tipping is simply not a big thing in the UK, and yes the number of brits who go to florida each year is in seven figures. To be honest I would have thought that the average tip from brits will be significantly less than 18%. At home a tip with a meal is more likely to be only a pound or two per person in the majority of cases, and tipping in a bar is practically non existant. Yes there is exceptions and some people are more generous than others but in a large number of cases its probably more of a token gesture nearer to 3%-5% if anything at all. I have heard that in the US some waiting staff get no salary and are paid only in tips, in the UK this wouldnt be possible as they must be paid at least the national minimum wage which totally excludes tips this is presently £5.35 which at present exchange rates is about $10.70 per hour. Working as waiting staff in our country does not seem to be looked on as highly as in the US and in a great number of cases it is likely to be done part time by kids struggling through college or university. Levels and quality of service of service staff do not tend to be anywhere near as high as they are in the US and looks to be a pretty lucrative job for one which requires few qualifications rather than the stop gap job that it often is at home.

 

[disneyjunkie]

Concerning the DDP, I understand the costs have gone up but they have reduce what you receive by somewhere around 30% (haven't done the math) and have only reduced the price by a dollar. That said, I can actually live with that. If you do TS 3 or 4 meals it's almost paid for itself compared to what we normally do w/o DDP which is all CS. My biggest problem is the inflexiblity of plan. Such as not being able to trade some TS for CS if we don't want to eat in resturants every night we're there. We don't go to Disney strictly for the food and TS takes a lot of time away from the parks. Which is the whole purpose of our trip. It would be nice if they would do just snack and meal credits and not break them down into individual things..ie..TS and CS. That way we can choose how to spend our vacation time. We've been told that you can't use TS for CS. We think that is ridiculous.

What does everyone think? Would most people do TS for every meal credit or would they select to spend more time in the parks and use more CS? Maybe we're in the minority.

Laura

I agree with you.

That may be why I like the deluxe plan. We're free to use the credits that way we see fit. Some of our credits will be used for counter food court breakfast. Some of them will be used for CS meals. This may not be the best use of credits or offer the best value, but I'm fine with that.

 

[Nancyg56]

We can probably come to a consensus that the 2008 Dining Plan provides approximately 13% less value than the 2007 Dining Plan. That's a big difference, from one year to the next. If the 2008 plan is still a value, as you suggest, then that again support my earlier contention that, to me, that the 2007 plan was overly-generous. If X is a good value, then I'd call X + 5% or maybe even 8% "generous" -- anything over 10% I'd call "overly-generous". See what I mean?

If it was just a small change then I'd agree with you, but this is a big change, as so many of the critics of the Dining Plan have been so quick to point out, not a small one. And that's without injecting DVC membership into it. My point is really that folks cannot have it both ways. As long as it is generally agreed-on that this is a big change, worthy of 40 pages of rants and vents, then every bit of that frustration must translate into a measure of just how much better the 2007 plan was over the 2008 plan. It can't just be that the 2008 plan is that much less generous than the 2007 plan -- if that is the case, then it invariably means that the 2007 plan is exactly that much more generous than the 2008 plan, as long as any significant number of guests finds the 2008 plan an acceptable value.

I do agree with you that the 2007 plan was a good value. It was enough of a value to be an incentive to stay on site when we had initially planned to stay off site. I will not consider the regular DDP next year, for me the savings are not enough when I add my gratuity to lock me into Disney restaurants. I will check the DDDP and factor in the meals we would use and then see if there is enough of a savings to be a value for our family. I'm not sure where I will fit into your scale of generous and overly generous, but if I come up with something in the "better than generous" yet "less then overly generous" range I will consider it.

I think that Disney is looking for the magic number that will have their guests drawn to their resorts and paying in advance for packages without including anything more than is necessary. I am not sure that they have come to that point but I believe that they are now willing to experiment because enough people have been exposed to the plan and may continue even with the changes. I honestly think that the test will be when there is enough data to determine if guests fail to tip in order to return the value of he plan to "overly generous".

 

[bicker]

I honestly think that the test will be when there is enough data to determine if guests fail to tip in order to return the value of he plan to "overly generous".

Actually, I think that will drive Disney in a direction different from what a lot of you perhaps would want. (Isn't it always the case?) I believe if guests don't tip appropriately, that will drive Disney to start applying service charges instead of relying on gratuities. Some of the cruise lines have gone pretty far down this path, and I expect to see that tactic employed more and more wherever inadequate tipping behaviors are noted.

So instead of going back to having the tip included, you'll simply see them drive towards an across-the-board "tip" required approach.

 

[Nancyg56]

Actually, I think that will drive Disney in a direction different from what a lot of you perhaps would want. (Isn't it always the case?) I believe if guests don't tip appropriately, that will drive Disney to start applying service charges instead of relying on gratuities. Some of the cruise lines have gone pretty far down this path, and I expect to see that tactic employed more and more wherever inadequate tipping behaviors are noted.

So instead of going back to having the tip included, you'll simply see them drive towards an across-the-board "tip" required approach.

It won't bother me, I spent many years supporting my family waiting tables so tipping generously is part of my dinner budget. I also don't get my bloomers in a bunch if prices change or packages change. I makes purchases based on what makes sense for me and try to stay within the budget I set.

I do believe that there will be a segment of people who begrudged that the tip was included who will really be upset.

 

[thunderbird1]

I do believe that there will be a segment of people who begrudged that the tip was included who will really be upset.

It will be interesting to hear from some of those people. I can't understand being upset about the amount of the tip when it costs you absolutely nothing. For me, the service would have to be unbelievably, abysmally bad for me to want to have the tip (which doesn't cost me a cent) reduced. But then I don't have a problem with people working tough jobs making a living wage.

Now if there were a way to reduce an actor's $10 million salary when his movie stinks, or a singer's $15 million contract when her record is a flop, I'd be all for that!

 

[Nancyg56]

It will be interesting to hear from some of those people. I can't understand being upset about the amount of the tip when it costs you absolutely nothing. For me, the service would have to be unbelievably, abysmally bad for me to want to have the tip (which doesn't cost me a cent) reduced. But then I don't have a problem with people working tough jobs making a living wage.

Now if there were a way to reduce an actor's $10 million salary when his movie stinks, or a singer's $15 million contract when her record is a flop, I'd be all for that!

I felt the same way. We never really had bad service in three trips using the DDP. We did have one waiter who was a bit lackadaisical and one waitress who was not too good, but I honestly did not feel it was becasue we were on th plan, just a rough night. We had a lot of meals so this was not a unexpected for us. While I did not ask that the waitress have her tip reduced, I did ask the manager not to add the 18% onto the OOP expenses we had.

I will be also be interested to see how the new plans work out.

 

[tarheelmjfan]

It will be interesting to hear from some of those people. I can't understand being upset about the amount of the tip when it costs you absolutely nothing. For me, the service would have to be unbelievably, abysmally bad for me to want to have the tip (which doesn't cost me a cent) reduced. But then I don't have a problem with people working tough jobs making a living wage.

I feel the same & was beginning to think I was the only one who did. I'm amazed by the number of people who complained about a gratuity WDW paid the servers. When I was reading all the gratuity complaints, I couldn't help but be puzzled by their complaints. If they brought you (a general you) a drink & meal, they earned more than the patron paid. I wonder if people thought WDW would give them the extra that they didn't feel the server earned. If they did, they obviously don't know Disney very well. As long as I get food & drink, I'm good, if the gratuity isn't coming out of my pocket. I know there will be people who argue they were paying the gratuity, when they purchased the DDP. If they're being honest, they know they got way more than they paid for. That's true, even if you discount the tip. People got what they asked for, & now many are complaining about that. Surely they realized that WDW wouldn't drop the price enough to make up for the gratuity. I can't believe people would rather pay a tip oop, just so they can control the amount of money a server gets. To me, free is free. I'll take what I get, if it's free. Maybe, I'm just frugal.

 

[racefanof88]

Bicker,
I guess what I meant by "effective reduction" was the benefits we will receive under the new plan versus the old plan. The DDP is taking $10 - $15 in food / tips and reducing the price by $1

I agree with you on why they removed the appetizer v. the dessert...and someone else also pointed out that people would probably share the appetizer and dessert...probably what I would end up doing.

I didn't mean to say that they would cancel each other out...however, no matter what someone offers there is a percentage that gains from it and a percentage that loses...they are now making us all pay.

I know the 18% is not because of the DDP...I just don't like it...my opinion.

My point is Disney has taken the value out of the plan for whatever reason...I just don't like that they took so much at one time...regardless if the plan was originally designed to get people to Disney or to stay on property.
Tim

OK, I know I am coming in on this one late but, here goes. I don't see that Disney will lose money by letting my family chose between an appy or a dessert. If they do the same on appys and desserts as they do on snacks, and limit the price, then what does it matter if I get any appy and my husband gets a dessert and we share. My example goes like this, I get a salad appy for say 6.99 and my husband gets a dessert for 6.99 and we share. Is that not the same as us both getting 2 different 6.99 desserts and sharing? I know I am preaching to the choir but that is just my analogy.

My family ate at Applebees last weekend and did just that, there were 4 of us and we ordered one appy, our entrees and 2 desserts and it was more than we could eat. And Applebees had no problem with us sharing, in fact the waitress brought 4 spoons for the dessert and 4 plates for the appy. And, I must say, Applebees is not as expensive as Disney and they were not concerned about losing any money.

OK that is just my observation. Hope everyone has a safe and Happy Labor Day

 

[apostolic4life]

OK, I know I am coming in on this one late but, here goes. I don't see that Disney will lose money by letting my family chose between an appy or a dessert. If they do the same on appys and desserts as they do on snacks, and limit the price, then what does it matter if I get any appy and my husband gets a dessert and we share. My example goes like this, I get a salad appy for say 6.99 and my husband gets a dessert for 6.99 and we share. Is that not the same as us both getting 2 different 6.99 desserts and sharing? I know I am preaching to the choir but that is just my analogy.

My family ate at Applebees last weekend and did just that, there were 4 of us and we ordered one appy, our entrees and 2 desserts and it was more than we could eat. And Applebees had no problem with us sharing, in fact the waitress brought 4 spoons for the dessert and 4 plates for the appy. And, I must say, Applebees is not as expensive as Disney and they were not concerned about losing any money.

OK that is just my observation. Hope everyone has a safe and Happy Labor Day

Generally speaking, desserts are usually the item restaurants make a higher profit margin on. The ingredients in many appetizers have higher food costs than the components of a dessert. Simple salads or soups would probably be the extent of appetizer options that could be offered to match the profit margin of many desserts. Now, I personally love salads and soups but I am sure that would not be a first pick for most people.

As for Applebees's, sure they are going to let you order what ever you want and share it with as many people as you want.....you are paying for every item a' la carte. On the DDP at WDW you have purchased a bundled product and they require you to select an entree, soft drink and dessert which they have figured will be in a certain acceptable range of cost they can bear based on the price paid for the DDP. It's not that they will lose money, it's so they will make more money.

Another point which has been discussed is the fact many would be willing to buy the appetizer OOP if they really wanted one. As long as people are willing do this, the option to choose the appetizer or dessert will never be implemented.

 

[apostolic4life]

Sorry, computer hang-up caused a double post.

 

[bicker]

I don't see that Disney will lose money by letting my family chose between an appy or a dessert.

No one has suggested that Disney would "lose money". The objective isn't to "not lose money" but rather to maximize long-term shareholder value, and generally that includes not leaving behind valid profit potential.

If they do the same on appys and desserts as they do on snacks, and limit the price, then what does it matter if I get any appy and my husband gets a dessert and we share.

Since people are more likely to want an appetizer, they're more likely to pay cash for it, so including the dessert retains a significant amount of the value, while excluding the appetizer enhancements the chances for additional revenue. Also, people are more likely to skip an included dessert when they're "full" (as compared to skipping the entree after having an appetizer) thereby resulting in turning over tables more rapidly.