DIS Menus Updated - No Lobster at Coral Reef?

[twojo21]

go to fultons at dtd they have fabolous crab & lobster entrees!

 

[bicker]

Are you serious? This is making the DDP less and less worth it.

True, but the Dining Plan was "more than worth it". So now it is just "worth it". Dollar-for-dollar, we're saving over $250 dollars, with the Dining Plan, without making up our own rules, and without getting lobster at 1TS restaurants.

 

[Luv2Roam]

Agree, I think this is fallout from the DDP. And rather than have irrate guests, they probably just removed it.

 

[TinaLala]

I just have to mention that the lobsters we've had in the past are tiny rock lobsters and aren't worth it anyway.

Did I mention I'm from MA, so anything but a local lobster isn't a lobster and a rock lobster is an insult!

 

[mickey mommy]

I just have to mention that the lobsters we've had in the past are tiny rock lobsters and aren't worth it anyway.

Did I mention I'm from MA, so anything but a local lobster isn't a lobster and a rock lobster is an insult!

You are probably right about that! They are probably like the ones you get at Red Lobster..... A LONG time ago, we went to Coral Reef and the lobster seemed huge and was delicious. (Back when Disney had the "Gold Key" deal) I was just a kid, but to me it was great! Since then, I have had your local Lobster when I was in the Boston area and it definitely topped the one I ate at Disney many years ago! Can you tell I don't get to eat lobster much - that I remember specific places where I have had it!

 

[mickey mommy]

We just decided to cancel our Coral Reef ressie. DH is not a big seafood eater, but he does like Lobster. I did get an ADR for Cap'n Jack's. yippee! Hopefuly I'm not disappointed!

 

[Quinn222]

There was no lobster in Dec. 2005. In fact the menu was pretty limited and boring. We won't go back there.

 

[rinkwide]

...I mean, we do the DDP so that we can eat these great meals that would cost us TONS and we wouldn't get if we had to pay for them...

Therein lies our dilemma.

 

[bicker]

Indeed -- they would cost "TONS" for a reason...

 

[Bride2Be0705]

True, but the Dining Plan was "more than worth it". So now it is just "worth it". Dollar-for-dollar, we're saving over $250 dollars, with the Dining Plan, without making up our own rules, and without getting lobster at 1TS restaurants.

True... Plus, it's worth it for the character meals and such.

When was CR a 2TS restaurant? We went in July 2005 (on what used to be the Gold Package) and we ate there (they still had lobster at this point), and it was only a 1TS then too.

 

[jjohnson]

True... Plus, it's worth it for the character meals and such.

When was CR a 2TS restaurant? We went in July 2005 (on what used to be the Gold Package) and we ate there (they still had lobster at this point), and it was only a 1TS then too.

When the new plan started in January 05' CR was a 2 TS.

 

[mimif1]

Actually, last time that we ate there, lobster was still on the menu but we were told that it would be an additional charge if we ordered it with the dining plan (I believe it was something like $15 or $20 more). I thought that was a great way to handle it. I guess the complaints were too many so they removed it completely. Seems a shame though.

 

[tikilyn]

well crap!! I have an ARD for next month. I was planning on ordering a lobster add on (pay oop for it). It's probably too late to change my ards now.

 

[mickey mommy]

I just keep thinking...."How can a seafood restaurant not have lobster?" I guess we'll have to do without!

 

[Gina35]

True, but the Dining Plan was "more than worth it". So now it is just "worth it". Dollar-for-dollar, we're saving over $250 dollars, with the Dining Plan, without making up our own rules, and without getting lobster at 1TS restaurants.

Absolutely. The dining plan is a great option. We're saving money on TS restaurants we may not be able to visit without the plan. We can't expect lobster from a 1-TS restaurant. It IS too bad they don't offer it as an add-on.
But, again, we don't make the rules!!

 

[bicker]

In a way, we do make the rules: If we, as a group, were receptive to add-ons (both the ordering of, and the paying for), then I suspect we'd see more opportunities along those lines.

 

[Peter Pirate 2]

Worth it? Kind of a subjective statement isn't it?

Maybe you guys are qualifying the saving of money as worth it but if the restaurnat choices are paired down to basically the same food prepared the same way every night at each restaurant (filet mignon, seared scallops, salmon, etc.) then your savings become suspect, IMO as you've allowed, agreed to significant sacrifices made by Disney in order to allow to those "savings". There's no free lunch folks and Disney is giving nothing away, just picking your pocket in a less obvious way, again IMO and while it's true that I took "artistic liberties" in comparing the current state of Signature restaurant menu's the fact is they ARE more generic than they used to be and I believe this trend will only continue.

The loss of lobster is the tip of the iceberg.

 

[bicker]

Worth it? Kind of a subjective statement isn't it?

Without a doubt, and any one guest's determination in that regard is irrelevant -- all that matters is how the general public as a whole sees it. As we can clearly see from the feedback throughout this forum and the Dining Plan forum, and from reports about how much harder it is to get ADRs now, clearly many guests are finding it "worth it" -- and some have even made the argument that far too many guests are finding it "worth it".

 

[Lewisc]

Several times I suggested restaurants be allowed to offer one or two "signature" items that would have a surcharge for dining guests. I don't think any of the people posting thought that would be good. People felt the plan would be diluted if dining guests were second class citizens and couldn't order anything off the full menu.

Virtually any restaurant that offers a price fixed menu has some items that are up charged. A restaurant isn't going to be to handle the demand profitably, maybe not all, if they're the only 1 credit restaurant that offers lobster. People seem a lot more willing to see lesser menu offerings then feel cheated having to pay extra for items that otherwise would be off the menu.

The only point I sort of understand is a family on a budget that likes having the opportunity to tell the kids they can order anything off the menu.

Guest don't want exclusions or surcharge so lobster is off the menu. People "complain" about how big the portions are. Instead of limiting sharing or putting on a sharing charge Disney may just cut the portion size.

 

[Gina35]

In a way, we do make the rules: If we, as a group, were receptive to add-ons (both the ordering of, and the paying for), then I suspect we'd see more opportunities along those lines.

Very true. Your other quote as well~about the collective "we"~says it very well. I DO agree that there is merit to having all paid b4hand and being able to tell the kids they can order anything they want. However, if DW were to offer lobster as an add-on, and the "kids" wanted lobster, parents should be willing to pay for it...especially in a 1-TS restaurant. I hope they keep the dining plan, but I would like to see add-ons or signature items offered so that the menus are not so generic.