A few more dining plan questions

[Lewisc]

Thanks for finally agreeing with me.

You seem to have a problem reading, first the Disney rules on MYW Dining and now my post.

A guest with a park hopper ticket that goes to AK in the morning and the MK in the afternoon is taking advantage of the park hopper feature. A guest who goes to the MK in the am, returns to his hotel for a noon day break and then returns to the MK is taking advantage of the free re-entry policy.

A guest who uses a credit paid for at the child rate to purchase an adult meal, to be consumed by an adult, is taking advantage of the flexibility Disney designed with the program.

Those guests aren't immoral nor are they stealing from Disney. You might have a defensible position if you claimed guests that plan to pay OPP for all their kids meals and use 100% of those credits for adult meals are greedy but others might just as well maintain they are educated consumers.

 

[Sammie]

Disney is very aware of the abuses of the dining program and are studying ways to tweak it to prevent this.

And also interestingly enough are very much aware of the Refillable mug situation and are working on that too. So they do care and are aware that the frontline CM is not helping the situation by not enforcing policy.

Part of the problem is that with any new or newly successful program you always have areas that need adjusting after you implement the program and see how the public is going to use or abuse it.

Interestingly the person I spoke with said in developing any program for Disney they try for months prior to release to brainstorm all the possible scenarios where problems might exist; but they are never as creative as those that wish to scam them.

So they develop it, implement it, set back and watch and then make changes if needed. They said due to the vastness of the Disney corportation sometimes those changes are slow in coming, as they have to be made through so many different channels.

And that one of the their greatest challenges since many guests will not follow policy unless forced to; is to come up with ways to do that so that the frontline CM does not have to confront the guest to get them to follow policy.

 

[Lewisc]

Pooling of credits goes back years to the prior plans. The strategy of using you children as a "license to print money" has been promoted on some internet sites for almost a year. I suspect the internet may be increasing the number of guests who overuse a generous provision in the plan.

I used to be very clear on the refill policy, free refills for the lenght of your current stay in the resort. It is reasonable, common sense and the signs were clear.

You'd think the confusion would cause Disney to make the signage even more clear but the opposite is true. Mara has no sign limiting refills to your current stay and the print on the mugs is too small to be read. Pepper Market doesn't have any signs limiting refills to your current stay and the mugs also have no such limitation.

I now realize that Disney doesn't really care about the mug abuse as much as some of the posters. Sorry Sammie, it took me a while for me to come around. All Disney has to do is get rid of self-service drink dispensors, or at least have a CM stationed by the drink station to "educate" guests.

DISNEY doesn't even have the signs right.

Disney is very aware of the abuses of the dining program and are studying ways to tweak it to prevent this.

And also interestingly enough are very much aware of the Refillable mug situation and are working on that too. So they do care and are aware that the frontline CM is not helping the situation by not enforcing policy.

Part of the problem is that with any new or newly successful program you always have areas that need adjusting after you implement the program and see how the public is going to use or abuse it.

Interestingly the person I spoke with said in developing any program for Disney they try for months prior to release to brainstorm all the possible scenarios where problems might exist; but they are never as creative as those that wish to scam them.

So they develop it, implement it, set back and watch and then make changes if needed. They said due to the vastness of the Disney corportation sometimes those changes are slow in coming, as they have to be made through so many different channels.

And that one of the their greatest challenges since many guests will not follow policy unless forced to; is to come up with ways to do that so that the frontline CM does not have to confront the guest to get them to follow policy.

 

[mickman1962]

yes i thought that you felt this way as well. lewisc is saying that those whouse the plan this way are not essentially stealling from disney because disney allows it. I thought that mickman was argueing that this was morally wrong and not disneys intent.

I increased to font size to emphasize that people are "taking advantage" of the DDP not that I agree with Lewis's point of view.

 

[mickman1962]

Pooling of credits goes back years to the prior plans. The strategy of using you children as a "license to print money" has been promoted on some internet sites for almost a year. I suspect the internet may be increasing the number of guests who overuse a generous provision in the plan.

I used to be very clear on the refill policy, free refills for the lenght of your current stay in the resort. It is reasonable, common sense and the signs were clear.

You'd think the confusion would cause Disney to make the signage even more clear but the opposite is true. Mara has no sign limiting refills to your current stay and the print on the mugs is too small to be read. Pepper Market doesn't have any signs limiting refills to your current stay and the mugs also have no such limitation.

I now realize that Disney doesn't really care about the mug abuse as much as some of the posters. Sorry Sammie, it took me a while for me to come around. All Disney has to do is get rid of self-service drink dispensors, or at least have a CM stationed by the drink station to "educate" guests.

DISNEY doesn't even have the signs right.

I suppose then, that when I take the family to the local Pizza Hut and I order the salad bar for myself, I can then have everyone share off my plate, because nowhere in the building/on the salad bar/in the menu does it specifically state that I can't share the salad bar. Business should not have to have a policy/enforce rules, for what is a common sense issue. A small percentage of the people will always take advantage of a situation (give them an inch and they'll take a foot). So yes again I agree with you that Disney is not doing anything about it. People know the way it was intended to be used and to use it in any other way is wrong whether or not you can "get away with it". It's a problem with our society, not a problem with Disney policy.

 

[twinsmamma]

I suppose then, that when I take the family to the local Pizza Hut and I order the salad bar for myself, I can then have everyone share off my plate, because nowhere in the building/on the salad bar/in the menu does it specifically state that I can't share the salad bar. Business should not have to have a policy/enforce rules, for what is a common sense issue. A small percentage of the people will always take advantage of a situation (give them an inch and they'll take a foot). So yes again I agree with you that Disney is not doing anything about it. People know the way it was intended to be used and to use it in any other way is wrong whether or not you can "get away with it". It's a problem with our society, not a problem with Disney policy.

i would again agree with Mickman that even though disney is not adressing the issue it is an issue of using and abusing situations. We as a society tend to do this whenever we can and this is the issue. those that blur the lines of rules are causing problems for others around them. An example could be that in an attempt to twart this issue disney made 9 year old adults to recoup some of the losses from those " bending the rules." also maybe prices will increase. This isall that I am saying, that for some to bend the rules as it were, wheather some thnk they are clever or just following the rules, leads to others being penalized in some other way, whether it be inclreased prices elsewhere. i will give another example: would it be wrong fro someone to not get the right bill at a resturant, the bill being lower than their orriginal bill and pay it and leave? The waitress is then responsible for paying the difference in the bill. is this wrong? of coutrse it is. this is in fact similar to what those who are "using the plan to its full potential" are doing. Granted it is to a big company and not to a single waitress but it is still not right. This is the point I am trying to make is that those who continually bend the rules to their advantage do cause problems fro otherrs. Our society is one that tries to take anythng they can no matter what. this is the issue I have here, not that Disney is allowing it it is that some are taking advantage of a rule that is not laid out with all senarios. disney i am sure did not plan people to use the plan is this manner. Black and white an adult plan feeds an adult, a childs plan should feed a child not an adult, no matter if disny says use the plan in any way you see fit. they still say a childs plan should be used to buy a childs meal.

 

[Lewisc]

I suppose then, that when I take the family to the local Pizza Hut and I order the salad bar for myself, I can then have everyone share off my plate, because nowhere in the building/on the salad bar/in the menu does it specifically state that I can't share the salad bar....

Actually any time I've been to a restaurant with a salad bar or buffet there is a note in the menu and/or a sign on the buffet that either says no sharing or says everyone eating food from the salad bar must pay. Even if there wasn't a sign I'd assume that BUT

In the case of MYW Dining the Disney information explicitly shows how the credits are pooled and can be used by anyone in the party. I used to take the other side in these discussions before I took the time to read the material and read the posts regarding prior plans. I now realize that Disney intended the plan to be this flexible. I'll speculate they intended adults might use extra TS credits at signature meals while their kids were in a club. If Disney was just silent on the issue I might go along with your intended use arguement but they clearly show examples of all the TS credits being aggregated together. It couldn't be that hard to either classify credits as adult/child or simply not aggregate the credits. If the credits weren't pooled then you'd be using a credit from a child's card that could only be used to purchase a child's meal. Disney isn't that stupid, the know what they're doing.

That said I think some guests that spend hours planning on how to use all of their kids credits for adult meals, ordering the most expensive entrées and picking the most expensive restaurants are being greedy. I think those very few guests are greedy and wrong. They are certainly no thieves nor are they really immoral since they are following the rules.

Guests "working" the plan may be responsible for changes. Expensive desserts are being dropped from the menus and lobster was dropped from the menu at Japan.

 

[Dopey420]

You seem to have a problem reading, first the Disney rules on MYW Dining and now my post.

A guest with a park hopper ticket that goes to AK in the morning and the MK in the afternoon is taking advantage of the park hopper feature. A guest who goes to the MK in the am, returns to his hotel for a noon day break and then returns to the MK is taking advantage of the free re-entry policy.

A guest who uses a credit paid for at the child rate to purchase an adult meal, to be consumed by an adult, is taking advantage of the flexibility Disney designed with the program.

Those guests aren't immoral nor are they stealing from Disney. You might have a defensible position if you claimed guests that plan to pay OPP for all their kids meals and use 100% of those credits for adult meals are greedy but others might just as well maintain they are educated consumers.

Totally agree with this post! For some people here, Disney is their religion and Disney Corporate is their lord and savior. They take up holy attitudes towards the Disney tenets. There is nothing holy about Disney. It is simply a way to get your cash. We, the consumer, must understand the rules and use them to our advantage. Disney has thousands of lawyers working for them. They did not just let the adult/child credit usage slip past them.

 

[maria & rossi]

I don't think Disney will be fully out of pocket. My dd is 12yrs old and we've had to pay an adult price for her. We are ok about paying the adult price but I know she won't have an appetiser or an adult meal and will not always have a dessert. This will be the same for my ds who is 8yrs old. He won't have a appetiser. Maybe Disney also know that a lot of kids between the ages of 9hrs and 14yrs will not fully use the plan and maybe it does even out. Also maybe a lot of adults don't over indulge on the plan. Just a thought. maria

 

[Lewisc]

Black and white an adult plan feeds an adult, a child's plan should feed a child not an adult, no matter if Disney says use the plan in any way you see fit. they still say a child's plan should be used to buy a child's meal.

You need new glasses I don't intend to be rude but your statement isn't correct and isn't supported by anything from Disney. There is no such thing as a child's plan or an adult plan. Children who are using the plan must order from the child's menu. If Disney intended to have child and adult credits they would have set the plan up that way. This is not the same as a waitress making a mistake--DISNEY SET UP THE RULES. Those guests aren't even bending the rules, they're following the rules.

Are guests who use all of the credits they paid for at the child rate to purchase adult meals greedy or smart consumers? I certainly wouldn't call them thieves or immoral.

I'll agree guests who plan their entire trip around "maximizing" the plan by paying OPP for all their kids meals, only going to the most expensive restaurants, ordering the most expensive items and demanding dessert that sits at the table because the entire party left to watch Illuminations may cause Disney to cutback the plan in a way that will affect all of us.

 

[Pedler]

I suppose then, that when I take the family to the local Pizza Hut and I order the salad bar for myself, I can then have everyone share off my plate, because nowhere in the building/on the salad bar/in the menu does it specifically state that I can't share the salad bar. Business should not have to have a policy/enforce rules, for what is a common sense issue. A small percentage of the people will always take advantage of a situation (give them an inch and they'll take a foot). So yes again I agree with you that Disney is not doing anything about it. People know the way it was intended to be used and to use it in any other way is wrong whether or not you can "get away with it". It's a problem with our society, not a problem with Disney policy.

Actually most place I think do explicitly state no sharing of salad bars. For those that don't I think that if you were to ask your server or the manager they would then let you know that you could not share the salad bar. In that case the implied policy of not sharing would be confirmed.

In the case of the dinning plan it does not state in writing that you can not share credits and it implies that you can when it states that you can use credits anyway you want. As a previous poster stated that could be considered ambiguous so if we look at what Disney allows and says that you can do we get the answer that credits are pooled, there are not child / adult credits and that you can use them in any manner you want.

I hope that you can see that this is a different case from your salad bar analogy in that the salad bar situation either has the policy of non sharing explicitly documented somewhere on the menu or the salad bar itself or if it doesn't a question to the staff would confirm that the salad bar can not be shared.

What I still don't understand is why you insist on making up a policy that Disney does not have? Everyone on this side of the discussion seems to insist that there is some sort of implied rule but they can not provide any information other than heresay and rumor that the rule exists and to the contrary there are many examples and evidence including explicit communication and examples from Disney that the rule does not exist.

Could you explain what the basis is for your belief that such a policy exists other than that you can't believe that Disney would let people do this?

 

[Lewisc]

I've wondered the same thing. I also wonder if the same posters get upset with the few that take advantage of a buffet and go back 3-4 and even more times. How much food is it appropriate to take with you when you leave the buffet? My opinion is the piece of fruit or cookie you're eating is OK but not much more than that.

What I still don't understand is why you insist on making up a policy that Disney does not have? Everyone on this side of the discussion seems to insist that there is some sort of implied rule but they can not provide any information other than heresay and rumor that the rule exists and to the contrary there are many examples and evidence including explicit communication and examples from Disney that the rule does not exist.

Could you explain what the basis is for your belief that such a policy exists other than that you can't believe that Disney would let people do this?

 

[DCDisney]

I'll agree guests who plan their entire trip around "maximizing" the plan by paying OPP for all their kids meals, only going to the most expensive restaurants, ordering the most expensive items and demanding dessert that sits at the table because the entire party left to watch Illuminations may cause Disney to cutback the plan in a way that will affect all of us.

When we were there a few weeks ago we did pay OOP for our kids a few times BUT we also ate a number more TS meals than on our dining plan so we ended up paying for more than we had figured on. I think they count on making money in this way as well as from people buying more expensive drinks because everythings seems "free." Additionally they succeed in keeping us from renting a car and spending time, $$$, and meals away from Disney. The cost of the actual food can't be that much and they have to pay the same overhead. I think they are also making plenty on older kids paying as adults who order off the kids menu. I'm sure it all balances out in Disney's favor. Though there were definitely people and TS staff who were trying to get every penny out of the plan with smoothies, bottled water, etc. OH yeah, we also got our kids adult CS meals once (Pizzafari) but their cheese pizza with no sides ended up being the same as kids meals essentially and who wants to get PBJ at a pizza place.

Yvonne

 

[mickman1962]

I guess I just don't live in a world where everything is spelled out in black and white. Sometimes I actually use rational thought + reasoning + common sense + morality to come to my own conclusions. I will make one more post when I get my response from Disney, until then goodbye and have a nice life.

 

[Pedler]

LewisC and Pedler, you two have got to be some of the thickest headed people I have ever debated with. Have I ever once said it was strictly against Disney's written policy as you two say NO I HAVE NOT. What I was trying to state in a decent way is that YOU HAVE TO BE AN IDIOT NOT TO UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A 2 TIERED PRICING SYSTEM AND A SINGLE TIERED SYSTEM. If somehow in your minds, you can justify to your conscience that somehow it is okay to be paying for your dinners at a rate of 66% less then 99.9% of every other adult (AGAIN I DON"T CARE THAT DISNEY HAS CHOSEN NOT TO INCLUDE LEGAL INTERPRETATIONS OF EVERY POSSIBLE PERMUTATION THAT SOMEONE CAN DREAM UP) then good to you. Thanks to the two of you I have an even lesser view of society then I once did. Common sense is dead RIP. Goodbye and have a nice life.

mickman,

Sorry to have upset you so. I have not said that you stated it is strictly against Disney's policy. What I have said, and correct me if I am mistaken, is that you feel there is an implied policy against it. What I have tried to say is that I do not think there is even an implied policy against it and there is signifigant evidence to support that opinion. My last post was just to ask why you felt there was an implied policy against it when most if not all the evendence does not support that assumption.

As for common sense being dead there are several changes Disney made last year that if taken in isolation don't make sense but when looked at with regards to the overal financial objectives of the organization make a great deal of sense as demonstrated by thier recent financial reports.

1. Why give away free transportation when people are willing to pay for it.
2. Why did it only cost $4 for an additional days admission on our families park hopper tickets last year? (That was 1$ per day per person for park admission).
3. Why have a plan that pools credits and lets people purchase credits at a lower rate and use them for adult meals?

None of these taken in isollation make sense except when you look at the overall goal of getting you to stay on site, spend more time at Disney and not visit other attractions. Then having free transportation, a flexible dinning plan attached to rack room rates and ticket purchase, and almost free incremental days after a 5 day stay makes sense. It is all designed to capture as much of your vacation dollar as possible. Once again going back to the recent financial reports where per capita spending was up and occupancy was up it all makes sense.

My family is a case in point for this. We had planned to stay off site at the Nick hotel, rent a car, visit the parks for 4 days and see some other stuff as well. The Disney portion of our vacation would have cost aroun $1,000. Instead we stayed on site, did not rent a car, spent 7 nights, did nothing but Disney and spent over $3,000 at WDW. They in essence got every dollar we spent in Florida except for lunch at the Airport on the day we left. Everything they did, the ME, new ticket pricing and dinning plan were part of the decision to stay on site and just do Disney. From their perspective if giving some free transportation and letting people get a deal on meal credits can turn a $1000 customer into a $3000 customer with minimal incremental cost (They already have high fixed costs operating the hotel and parks) then that works out to be a great deal for them.

So summarize this is why I feel the use of pooled credits is not an abuse. This is what Disney encourages and for a good reason. Anything they can do to get you on site and spending more time at WDW is good for the bottom line. I have yet to hear any argument against pooled credits that takes a look at the entire financial picture. Everyone zeros in on the child rate / adult rate thing without thinking about the entire situation. In our case the difference in DP rates between child / adults was aproximately $50 per day. To get that we ended up paying rack rate at a deluxe hotel. Say we ordered on extra adult meal per day and payed OOP for the kids meal and say the cost diferential was $25 between the two. I am confident that Disney would love it if everyone did that and they got the rack rate for the room. They would be laughing all the way to the bank.

So if you could would you explain to me in the context of the entire package, rack room rate and ticket purchase, why the use of pooled credits is not good for Disney and you still feel this is immoral? My guess is that you won't have an answer and won't respond.

I also am still waiting for an answer as to why you feel this is an implied rule regardless of the overall marketing plan when there is nothing from Disney to imply that such a rule exists.

 

[Lewisc]

I guess I just don't live in a world where everything is spelled out in black and white. Sometimes I actually use rational thought + reasoning + common sense + morality to come to my own conclusions. I will make one more post when I get my response from Disney, until then goodbye and have a nice life.

I see you decided to edit your original post.


Common sense tells me Disney gets to set the rules. Rational thought tells me a guest that follows those rules is being moral.

Many of the polices aren't common sense.

1) Should guests be allowed unlimited trips back to the buffet table?

2) Why should guests paying child pricing be allowed to take food off the adult section of the buffet table?

3) Why does Disney offer extra park days for only a few extra dollars?

4) Why are children, who pay a reduced park admission, allowed to ride the same attractions adults are allowed to?

5) Why are some guests able to order food that costs multiples of what the plan cost. Have lunch at the Pepper Market and dinner at Le Celler and a guest can easily order over food that is worth at least $100, when you include tax and tip. Compare that with a guest who uses a "so called child credit" to order an adult breakfast. Compare a guest who orders the rib eye steak in order to get $30 + meal at Pepper Market with the guest who goes to Earl of Sandwich and gets CS meal worth $8.

6) Why did Disney allow guests to enter EPCOT without a ticket to view Illuminations? They stopped that perk several years ago.

I don't see the need to accuse people of being thieves just because they chose to follow Disney's clear rules. The fact that Disney's generosity doesn't make sense to you is of no interest to us. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me but neither does some of the situations I just listed. Disney decides to make some policies for goodwill. They have decided to offer a flexible plan.

The fact that this "loophole" hasn't been closed suggest that not many guests may be following this strategy and that Disney, at least currently, doesn't have a problem with it.

At one time the meal plan was basically a pre-paid discount. You paid something like $20 in exchange for the right to order $25 worth of food. I'm not sure of the exact numbers. The plan wasn't that popular. The current plan is.

 

[Sammie]

I think that part of the problem in discussing anything that involves Disney policy and making statements such as "I think some guests care more about this situation than Disney", is Who is Disney?

In this case is it the VP over Food and Beverage for all WDW, or is it the CM at the food court making minimum wage? Believe me if you think they have the same ideas about policy you are wrong. Disney is so large that the CM at the Food court register probably could not even tell you who the VP of Food and Beverage is. All he or she knows is his or her immediate supervisor.

Now unless you have the opportunity to speak to both; I don't think one can truly say what Disney does or does not care about concerning the Dining plan or other issues.

Also as I stated earlier change is slow in coming to Disney. Executives, legal teams, marketing, resorts, food and beverage, and many other areas have to be involved in each and every change. This takes time. So change might be slow coming. And at times it might not come at all.

If Disney has an idea on how a situation should work such as the dining plan and how they wanted it to work and that is not happening, certainly they are going to weigh many things in determining whether to make changes, and Yes revenue is a huge part.

If the loss of revenue by abuse is less than the cost of change, then they will just accept that. That does not mean they like the abuse, it means they are willing to accept it.

I truly think if Disney had not meant for there to be differences in eating off the dining plan for adults and children, the cost would not have been different. They could have easily have charged a per person charge and not an Adult charge and a Child's charge. There is no way I will believe at $10.99 they wanted kids (or adults using kid credits) eating a $30 steak.

To me it's like buying a newspaper from a newstand. I put in my 75 cents and I am "expected" to get out one USAToday. Yes, I could get all of them, and no one is going to stop me, but I know that is not they way it was meant to be. So I take one paper.

 

[mickman1962]

I think that part of the problem in discussing anything that involves Disney policy and making statements such as "I think some guests care more about this situation than Disney", is Who is Disney?

In this case is it the VP over Food and Beverage for all WDW, or is it the CM at the food court making minimum wage? Believe me if you think they have the same ideas about policy you are wrong. Disney is so large that the CM at the Food court register probably could not even tell you the VP of Food and Beverage is. All he or she knows is his or her immediate supervisor.

Now unless you have the opportunity to speak to both I don't think one can truly say what Disney does or does not care about concerning the Dining plan or other issues.

Also as I stated earlier change is slow coming to Disney. Executives, legal teams, marketing, resorts, food and beverage, and many other areas have to be involved in each and every change. This takes time. So change might slow coming. And at times it might not come at all.

If Disney has an idea on how a situation should work such as the dining plan and how they wanted it to work and that is not happening, certainly they are going to weigh many things in determing whether to make changes, and Yes revenue is a huge part.

If the loss of revenue by abuse is less than the cost of change, then they will just accept that. That does not mean they like the abuse, it means they are willing to accept it.

I truly think if Disney had not meant for there to be differences in eating off the dining plan for adults and children, the cost would not have been different. They could have easily charged a person charge and not an Adult charge and a child's charge. There is no way I will believe at $10.99 they wanted kids (or adults using kid credits) eating a $30 steak.

To me it's like buying a newspaper from a newstand. I put in my 75 cents and I am "expected" to get out one USAToday. Yes I could get all of them, and no one is going to stop me, but I know that is not they way it was meant to be. So I take one paper.

I lied, one more post. Sammie, you nailed it. Thanks for restoring a little of my faith in mankind.

 

[swkmom]

I have just one piece of info to give regarding this debate. On Sunday I called to make my adr's and the cm said the kids on the dining plan are limited to the kids menu unless one is not available. Just a little info having recently made my adr's.

 

[Pedler]

I think that part of the problem in discussing anything that involves Disney policy and making statements such as "I think some guests care more about this situation than Disney", is Who is Disney?

In this case is it the VP over Food and Beverage for all WDW, or is it the CM at the food court making minimum wage? Believe me if you think they have the same ideas about policy you are wrong. Disney is so large that the CM at the Food court register probably could not even tell you who the VP of Food and Beverage is. All he or she knows is his or her immediate supervisor.

....

I truly think if Disney had not meant for there to be differences in eating off the dining plan for adults and children, the cost would not have been different. They could have easily have charged a per person charge and not an Adult charge and a Child's charge. There is no way I will believe at $10.99 they wanted kids (or adults using kid credits) eating a $30 steak.

I think this decision is higher than the VP of food service. The fact that it requires a room stay and ticket purchase puts the decision above that level. That is the same reason why you can not just look at it and say that Disney does not want a kid paying $10.99 a day to order a $30 steak. If you just look at it that way there is almost no way they could make money off the plan alone. The character buffets alone as a TS cost more than that. I think you would have to find the least expensive CS kids meal, TS kids meal and snack and still have a hard time after tax and tip comming in under the $10.99.

As an example we went to the Concourse Steakhouse for dinner one night. A 1 TS credit place. On the kids menu DS9 got the shrimp cocktail, $5.99, a steak, $12.99, they let him get a shake for a drink, 3.79 and painters pallet for desert. $3.99. Aprox total after tax and tip for the kids meal: $33.00. So yes, Disney does intend to allow a kid paying $10.99 to order a $33.00 meal and still have a CS and snack credit left. being conservative on the CS meal and snack it would have been almost $40 worth of food for $10.99. Is that immoral to do? Surely Disney couldn't have intended my child to be able to order almost $40 worth of food for just $10.99?

Even a more mundane example like a character breakfast such as CM would be $12.99 for the buffet. After tax and tip that becomes $16.00. Add in a CS meal and snack and you are up to $23for a 10.99 dinning plan. Is this also immoral? Disney also couldn't have intended my child to consume $23 worth of food for just $10.99

I could go on with the examples but I hope that you are getting the point that by just adding up what you paid for the dinning plan and the food you are getting for is not a basis for decided what is or is not good for Disney. Under both items above the plan is a clear looser for Disney. And I don't think they would make enough off of unused credits or the adults to cover the childrens cost. I actually don't think I could come up with a situation where a child could order a TS, CS and snack and after tax and tip come in under $10.99.

So... if you except that the dinning plan is not just about food but part of much larger program designed to capture much more money from guests it isn't hard to see why Disney doesn't care and encourages the use of pooled credits. As I mentioned in an early post if they have a family of 4 with 2 children rate and 2 adult rate credits paying rack rate for a room I don't think they care if the family maximizes the plan to save $25 or so a day.

Unfortunately for whatever reason you and others can not seem to look at the plan in its entire context. For whatever reason you have decided to narrow the scope of the plan and decided that it is OK for Disney to compel rack rates, provide a strong disincentive against split stays, require a ticket purchase for at least on night for everyone on the reservation, require the plan be purchased for the length of stay for everyone on the reservation to get the plan, all things that greatly benefit Disney financially and that they would most likely not have gotten from as many people without the plan, but it is not OK to maximize the cost benefit of the plan as allowed by Disney to benefit the guest?

Or to summarize it is OK for Disney to use the program to maximze thier overall financial beneit, i.e. take as much money as they can from the guest but it is not OK for the guest to use the plan to thier best financial advantage?