I feel the DDP is Disney's way of keeping you on site and keeping you eating in their restaurants. Its not so that their guests can save money. Sure, some of us do if we know how to maximize the plan. But how many people go to Disney, get the plan and have many credits left?? I think a lot. You hear about it all the time.
If you have the plan, you aren't going to go to Universal and eat at their restaurants and "waste" your prepaid food.
I'm also not sold on the fact that people need to get the DDP to have the "experience" they want and couldn't get that without the plan. DH and I went last August and paid OOP completely. We had table service meals for every meal. We ordered what we wanted and didn't try to just get the cheapest thing. In the end we spent the same amount as the DDP would have cost us. The benefit to us was we weren't restricted by the plan. We didn't have to get a dessert to get the value out of the plan. We didn't have to eat CS because that is what the plan dictated. And what if one of us got sick during the trip? You can't get a refund on the dining plan. At least paying OOP you aren't stuck if someone gets sick.
To the OP, your idea is definitely feasible. Its called paying OOP.
Maggie
On the first bit, I totally agree. The dining plans were create to increase volume at the Disney restaurants. We see the results of this with the ADR stuff that happens. It's certainly working well for Disney, and I certainly can't fault them for that. It's good business to always have your restaurants as full as possible.
I think you misconstrued my point about experience though. I'm not saying that a dining plan is required to have a positive TS dining experience in Disney. Not by any means. I'm saying that for some that desire an experience that is roughly the same as the dining plans are structured, using the appropriate dining plan can give them that experience where they otherwise may not be able to (whether they can't afford the extra, or simply aren't willing to spend any extra). Now, this only works if your ideal experience meshes with one of the plans. If it doesn't, then it's not going to work for you.
Using myself as an example again, my "ideal" dining itinerary on this next trip would have cost me roughly $1200 if I paid OOP. Using a dining plan, it's only costing me roughly $1000 (this is including tax on the OOP stuff, and tips for both). My less than ideal plan, that I would have done had a dining plan not been available, would have been around $650. Using a dining plan allowed me to have my ideal experience at a lesser cost (+$350 instead of +$550). The key here is that the rigidity of the plan (granted, Dx is considerably more flexible) doesn't matter, as it was what I wanted in the first place.
As far as the missing out due to illness, stuff happens. If you're more susceptible to bugs picked up while traveling, then a structured pre-paid plan is likely not the best choice. Otherwise, 9 times out of 10 you can make it up later in the trip. For that 1 other time, it's a risk, and if you're not willing to take that risk, then there are other options available.
I did not deny that some savings are possible if you stick to the plan.
But your example under the ddp would be a loser under holiday season pricing, where I believe the ddp is $47. 30 for ts, 12 for cs, and 3 for snack would be a $2 loser.
But my point was -- to get any savings from the ddp, you need to really use virtually all of your entitlements and really avoid cheap meals.
If you decide to skip 1 ts, and 1 or 2 desserts during a vacation, any savings will be wiped out.
On the dxdp, you can skip a couple credits, skip some snacks and desserts, and still end up ahead.
It's still not as difficult as you're making it out to be. +$2 per night of the DDP means that your TS "target" goes up by $2 to $32 (there's a lot of math behind this that I won't go into here, but it's generally accepted that the cost per CS credit is relatively static). Keep in mind that all (or most at least) of the fixed price meals raise by $4-$5, so doing just one of those will eat up 2 nights worth of DDP holiday pricing.
Your point of "it's more difficult" is different from what you said, which may have been why I didn't understand...
The value for the dxdp is very different than the other 2 plans. It is the only plan that allows savings, with some flexibility.
... or maybe I misunderstood. It's the only plan that allows savings with some flexibility? Or it's the only plan that allow savings and has some flexibility? Two entirely different things, and I read it as the 2nd one while it looks like you have meant the first one.
So with that said, I do agree that the other plans are far more rigid. There's still some flexibility there, and (on a longer stay, 7+ days) leaving 1 TS or 1 CS credit isn't going to kill all the savings, so long as it averages out in the end, but yes, it's more difficult to make them come out ahead.
However, the kicker (as mentioned above) is that most of the time, the rigidity simply doesn't matter (to those who it works for). If my desire is to dine in the same manner than even the most rigid of plans requires, then the fact that it is so rigid doesn't apply. For example, there could be a plan out there that only allows me to eat a burger, fries, Sprite, and a shake. If my goal was to eat a burger, fries, Sprite, and a shake, it wouldn't matter what the limits are. Now if I wanted soup, salad, and water, then it certainly wouldn't be a plan that works for me.
I do get that it doesn't work for everyone, and you will never hear me claim that (in fact, quite the opposite, as it's always my first questions when people ask about the dining plans in general). I also venture to think that it works for far less than people who get it, as they try and shoehorn their desires into the plans and then get annoyed when it doesn't work. There is a sizable segment of the population where the assorted plans do work though, and do offer some benefit. There is no denying that.