"Disney doesn't know if it's child or adult credit"

[Pedler]

Pedler, I agree that the number people using the plan this way is small and any loses to Disney sustainable as they must factor in allowences in any predictions they make for profitability.

Thanks!

I do not have a problem with people using the plan how thet see fit but even as well put and structured your opinion is it is still boils down to wether you feel it ok to pay a childs rate for an adults meal.

If the vendor, i.e. Disney, has no problem with it and encourages it then I don't have a problem with it. They set the rules not me. If Disney didn't condone this and it was truly an enforcement issue I would have a different opinion. Its kind of like the other taboo topic, refillalble mugs. In that case it is clearly wrong and against policy to reuse them. It is also clear that Disney does next to nothing to enforce the policy. To me the enforcement isn't the issue. The issue is that Disney has a clear stated policy it doesn't matter if it is enforced or I agree with it. In my mind it is wrong to reuse mugs and it is theft to do so. It clearly fits the definition of theft. Applying the same logic to the Dinning plan the use of credits as discussed is not theft and is not wrong.

This thread as all the others on this topic,will end in name calling.

I agree. There are some folk here on the DIS who can not have a civil conversation and disagreement without engaging in hostile behavior.

 

[Pedler]

What are you talking about, Pedler?

Hi Bicker,

I thought you were implying that you disagree with the analysis I wrote and that maybe there was another way of looking at the use of credits in this manner that would cause Disney to change the plan.

Just curious.

 

[iluvepcot]

Another example of Marketing working:

My DH went to WDW kicking and screaming last year with free dining. Telling me, (the disney nut) that this is the last WDW vacation in a long time. We are to go other places for vacation. I tried to explain that he would enjoy himself this time since we could eat more TS meals it would be more relaxing.

He went down reluctantly... He ended up having such a good time. He even happily went on a shopping trip with the kids and I to dtd. Normally he hates to spend money on gifts. The free dining caused him to spend more money at the shoppes.

Normally he makes fun of all the time I spend on the boards. Not this year, he kept encouraging me to find another deal like free dining. We are now going agian for 10 days. His idea. He told everyone at work about free dining and now 3 more famlies are going that would not have gone. Disney marketing is working on us.

 

[samijam]

I guess you would say I was prepared for reality not to meat my prefferences when I paid 37.99 for a 10 year old who will not eat 37.99 dollars of food in a week never mind evey day (by the way he turns 10 the day before we leave on vaca, so If I went on vacation last month he would only cost me 10.99.

I realize they need a cutoff, but everywhere I go on vacation that cutoff is usually 12. So is it fair to say Disney is taking advantage of those travelers with small kids (Which is an overwhellming majority of vacationers)

 

[bicker]

Just curious.

As I mentioned before, it the exploitation becomes overwhelming then that would constitute the conditions under which your earlier analysis about what Disney may or may not do would change. As many people have noted, the fact that the current program provides incentive for people to "make up" children is clearly a ripe candidate.

Also, it is important to note that economic analysis doesn't have much effect on the question pezpam asked. If I buy credits at the child price, I should use those credits for child meals.

 

[Mermaid4me]

I guess you would say I was prepared for reality not to meat my prefferences when I paid 37.99 for a 10 year old who will not eat 37.99 dollars of food in a week never mind evey day (by the way he turns 10 the day before we leave on vaca, so If I went on vacation last month he would only cost me 10.99.

I realize they need a cutoff, but everywhere I go on vacation that cutoff is usually 12. So is it fair to say Disney is taking advantage of those travelers with small kids (Which is an overwhellming majority of vacationers)

I have to agree. I have 3 DS, one of whom just turned 10. I of course paid for him as an adult. He eats next to nothing. So wish they had a "junior price". The dining plan, I feel is still a good value but I don't think Disney is losing any money on it. Especially for our family. We paid for the plan, are paying almost $400 a night for the Poly and that doesn't count all the other money we will spend. In all honesty, I don't think Disney is really all that concerned with the small percentage of people who use the plan (I guess this would be the nicer way to say it) unconventionally. If they were that concerned they would change it.


Mermaid4me

Poly 06
CR 05
ASMO 01
Offsite 86
CR 79

 

[bicker]

That's really it: As long as only a small percentage of people "use the plan unconventionally," there is no reason to make any changes.

If you think about what you just said -- you're paying $400 per night for a hotel room -- how much do you think dining should cost for your family? Try to price how much your meals would cost if you had to eat lunch and dinner out in your neighborhood, and then call your local hotel and ask them how much a room there is for a typical night. You'll probably find you're paying less EXTRA for dining than you are paying EXTRA for the hotel.

 

[Pedler]

As I mentioned before, it the exploitation becomes overwhelming then that would constitute the conditions under which your earlier analysis about what Disney may or may not do would change. As many people have noted, the fact that the current program provides incentive for people to "make up" children is clearly a ripe candidate.

Also, it is important to note that economic analysis doesn't have much effect on the question pezpam asked. If I buy credits at the child price, I should use those credits for child meals.

I was answering your post

And this is all subject to change, which might happen if too much capitalization of this loophole takes place.

I had hoped to illustrate that with the two scenarios I just don't see a possibility, with the way people are currently using the plan, that it will have a signifigant impact and cause Disney to change the plan. Yes, if everyone walking through the door made up kids then it could cause Disney to change the plan. Part of the way they can easily change that is require people be present at check in.

On the other hand if everyone banked a few credits paid for at the childrens price, the most likely extreme scenario, then I don't see how it would cause Disney to change the plan. And if everyone were to bank a few credits and it doesn't cause Disney to change the plan then I don't see how using credits paid for at a childrens price by an adult, except in an extreme situation by everyone, would cause change in the plan. There really are not that many times you can take advantage of this. There needs to be a signifigant difference between childrens meals and the adult meals to make it work and you need to want to consume more than 1 TS per person per day. The way that works is either Signature places or more than one TS per day. The for most families with kids under 10 I just don't see that happening more than 2-3 times a trip at most. Even then Disney would be out at most $150 or so over the course of the trip. If every family of 4 there for a week on the dinning plan did that I think Disney would not have a problem.

So once again back to the analysis. I really don't think that this happens that much. Adding on to my first scenario you have to reduce the number by even more as the only ones that can use the program this way are those with children under 10. That would drop the numbers even lower.

On the second scenario where everyone does it the numbers still are not that signifigant in the overall marketing program. If letting a family like ours pay OOP for 4 kids meals (2 per kid) for a total of aproximately $35 so we can order a Signature meal of around $90 gets us to spend and additional $1,700 on site Disney would be crazy to make any changes.

If you have a different scenerio with legitimate use that you think would cause Disney to change the plan I would be interested in hearing it. The one concern that people have is that the wide spread legitimate use of the plan in this manner will cause Disney to change the plan and ruin it for everyone. I just haven't seen a specifically defined scenerio that demonstrates that possibility.

I do agree that the dinning plan has caused a change in some places offerings but that has nothing to do with how much is paid for a credit.

 

[Paging Tom Morrow]

Stealing is stealing-you can't justify it.
That's why prices have to go up at Disney-to cover losses from people who take unfair advantage.

As explained to me by a General Manager of a Disney restaurant:

Paraphrasing here: "There are no adult or child credits, however, if a credit is going to be used on a child, he/she must order off the children's menu. Families are free to use their credits however they may wish including paying for select meals out of pocket if that's how they prefer."

Based on that statement, from Disney management, I can't find any reason to believe that using credits anyway the user wants to could ever be considered stealing.

 

[disneyjunkie]

So is it fair to say Disney is taking advantage of those travelers with small kids (Which is an overwhellming majority of vacationers)

I don't think Disney is taking advantage of anyone. You don't HAVE to book the dining plan.

If someone feels that the price is too high or unfair, why would you pay it?

We are free to chose how we want to spend our vacation dollars.

My son (he's 14) and I used the plan last April. The two of us was unable to eat everything that was included with each meal. We just ordered what we knew we would finish. We skipped many desserts and a few appetizers.

We still came out ahead.

I just don't understand why people complain about the cost of WDW, resorts, park passes, meals..., yet they still go. Why do people make the choice to spend money with a company that they feel is taking an advantage of them?

 

[magsmom]

That's really it: As long as only a small percentage of people "use the plan unconventionally," there is no reason to make any changes.

If you think about what you just said -- you're paying $400 per night for a hotel room -- how much do you think dining should cost for your family? Try to price how much your meals would cost if you had to eat lunch and dinner out in your neighborhood, and then call your local hotel and ask them how much a room there is for a typical night. You'll probably find you're paying less EXTRA for dining than you are paying EXTRA for the hotel.

That's absolutely right - and that's why you will not see a AP discount with free dining. They are making it up on the room and everything else you buy. I'm suprised that under the circumstances they are offering a paid plan to DVC members.

 

[crisi]

Its an ROI calculation.

Disney simply takes some time to track - manually even - the number of people doing this and the lost revenue incurred. They already probably know how much it would cost to make the system change that would allow it. When they can get ROI on the system change, they will do it.

Which is another way of agreeing with Bricker, if too many people do it, it will stop. In the meantime, it is a legitimate loophole that you may use if you find such a thing ethical (I don't, but different people have different ethics and I'm not judging anyone who does). Its not relevant how much more money the dining plan is bringing in, because it isn't the loophole in the dining plan that is bringing in people, its the plan itself (and other changes Disney has made to take Universal's market share).

And people have reported running into CMs that won't allow it. If four of you dine, and you have 2A2C on your card, and you try and pay OOP for the two kids, they won't let you. It seems to be an exception that you run into a CM who does this, but as CMs have a lot of leeway in doing their job, who is to say what the exception is - are the CMs who allow it spreading pixie dust or the CMs who don't being overly strict in application.

 

[Pedler]

Its an ROI calculation.

Disney simply takes some time to track - manually even - the number of people doing this and the lost revenue incurred. They already probably know how much it would cost to make the system change that would allow it. When they can get ROI on the system change, they will do it.

I agree its an ROI calculation though I don't think it is based solely on lost revenue from use of the dinning plan in this manner vs. cost to make a system change. I think if they could wave a magic wand right now and make a system change they wouldn't do it. One of the nice things about this plan is the simplicity in which it operates. That helps get people to use the plan and that in turn gets people on site paying rack rates and not leaving WDW to spend money elsewhere. The lost revenue from use of credits vs. the programing costs to make the change I think is insignifigant to the much larger, non dinning, benefits of the plan. Last years park attendence of financial reports demonstrate that.

If you were to evaluate the Magical Express in the same manner, in isolation, you would think Disney is crazy to offer it free. Some people thought that they would start to charge for it once the promotion ended and after they had eliminated a lot of the competition. Instead they have extended the program for several years and will continue to offer it free. On the surface you would ask how can they offer transportation that is worth over $100 for free to a family of 4 with virtually no strings attached? You can get room discounts, be DVC, have an AP and still get the ME. The I suspect is that a high percentage of those that use ME don't get rental cars and spend all of thier time on site. So by providing $100 worth of free transportation they get you spending all of your time and money on site. A great deal for Disney. If they are willing to spend $100 on transportation to get you to stay on site why do you think it is inconceivable that they would let someone use the dinning plan this way in order to get you to pay rack rates for your room? Or for that matter why did they change the ticket pricing to make it so that the extra day we spent at the park last year only cost us $4 for all four of us? In isolation all of these cases don't make business sense but taken together with the goal of capturing every dollar you spend in Florida it makes total sense.

 

[bicker]

One of the nice things about this plan is the simplicity in which it operates.

You must be using the word "simplicity" in a manner which I am unfamiliar with. In my lexicon, something "simple" wouldn't require it's own forum on the DIS for its discussions.

This is what a "simple" dining plan would look like, IMHO: Hotel for up to two adults and two children; admission for the number of nights of your hotel stay plus one; and meals for the number of nights of your hotel stay. No exceptions, no special cases. Simple.

 

[iluvepcot]

Quote from CRISI I]And people have reported running into CMs that won't allow it. If four of you dine, and you have 2A2C on your card, and you try and pay OOP for the two kids, they won't let you. It seems to be an exception that you run into a CM who does this, but as CMs have a lot of leeway in doing their job, who is to say what the exception is - are the CMs who allow it spreading pixie dust or the CMs who don't being overly strict in application.[/I]

Is this true? I have heard the opposite, most CM's allow it and people have run into only a few who do not.

 

[bicker]

That's my understanding as well. Generally, the CMs don't enforce policy. Disney typically relies instead on the integrity of its guests. When enforcement is necessary, they typically apply it via restrictions in the information systems.

 

[Pedler]

You must be using the word "simplicity" in a manner which I am unfamiliar with. In my lexicon, something "simple" wouldn't require it's own forum on the DIS for its discussions.

That is so true!

 

[Mermaid4me]

That's really it: As long as only a small percentage of people "use the plan unconventionally," there is no reason to make any changes.

If you think about what you just said -- you're paying $400 per night for a hotel room -- how much do you think dining should cost for your family? Try to price how much your meals would cost if you had to eat lunch and dinner out in your neighborhood, and then call your local hotel and ask them how much a room there is for a typical night. You'll probably find you're paying less EXTRA for dining than you are paying EXTRA for the hotel.

You're right. As I said that even paying for my oldest son as an adult, I still think for us it is a good value. I have no intention of using child credits as adults, but I do plan on sharing meals and going to more table services. Disney is expensive, but with that said it is worth every penny for us. I don't have an AP or any other type of discount and that's okay. I am getting exactly what I pay for FUN, FUN, FUN. My only point was that if Disney thought they were losing money they would change it.

Mermaid4me


Poly 06
CR 05
ASMO 01
Offsite 86
CR 79

 

[pedro2112]

The one concern that people have is that the wide spread legitimate use of the plan in this manner will cause Disney to change the plan and ruin it for everyone. I just haven't seen a specifically defined scenerio that demonstrates that possibility.

However, this argument is unfounded. With respect to other issues (parking at DTD for free and using the disney transport to parks), yes - it has caused changes to the "detriment" of everyone. However, in this particular case, if Disney feels that they need to change the plan to prevent this, then they will begin to differentiate between child and adult credits. The only "negative" effect of this is that people will be prevented from doing what some people have a problem with... using TS credits for adult meals instead of a child's meal. It will only effect the "negative" behavior.

 

[pedro2112]

And people have reported running into CMs that won't allow it. If four of you dine, and you have 2A2C on your card, and you try and pay OOP for the two kids, they won't let you. It seems to be an exception that you run into a CM who does this, but as CMs have a lot of leeway in doing their job, who is to say what the exception is - are the CMs who allow it spreading pixie dust or the CMs who don't being overly strict in application.

That's my understanding as well. Generally, the CMs don't enforce policy. Disney typically relies instead on the integrity of its guests. When enforcement is necessary, they typically apply it via restrictions in the information systems.

Wow. Bicker that is not an "enforcement" issue unless you mean the CM who wouldn't allow an out of pocket payment is not enforcing the dining plan correctly. Taking the "child credit" issue out of the equation, any CM who does not allow a dining party to pay for a meal out of pocket should be reported to management immediately. Under no circumstances should a CM force anyone to use a credit when they don't want to. Some people do more than one TS a day or do signature dining, which would require the paying out of pocket for some meals.

Actually, I've read many of the posts and trip reports, and I don't recall anyone being denied the ability to pay out of pocket for anyone in their party. Other than what other people have "heard," is there anyone on here with first hand knowledge that a CM wouldn't allow them to pay out of pocket for a meal?