Is Free Dining dumbing down the menus?

[PatriciaH]

Walt Disney World has had dining plans for a long time now though. I did "Food N Fun" in 93, 94 and 96. The food quality was very good then and the restaurants were much more authentic (Chefs de France was so much better!) If I remember in 1993 it was a table service breakfast and a table service dinner with all your recreation (even horseback riding, Breathless/fireworks cruises and pontoon boats included.) In 1994 and 1996 you could do a table service breakfast and dinner OR a table service lunch and dinner plus all recreation. It was only about $35 for adults a night! You could also add the plan on to discounted (AP) rooms! I mean the Breathless fireworks cruise alone at that time was about $85 Great deal. Then in 1997 it was changed to the $50/night for $55 in food credits and I think it tanked

 

[mommyseven]

I don't know if the DDP has affected the quality and choices in the food / menu or not. There's a chance that these things could become this way even without the DDP.

We don't use the DDP because we are AP holders and use the DDE card. The only impact that I saw caused by the DDP was the wait at counterservices mainly. It seemed as if the cashiers everywhere had to explain the package to at least every other person in line. It made lines move very slowly. We stood in line several times and listened as the cashier explained the DDP for a couple minutes to almost everyone in line. It didn't greatly impact the table service but I'm sure it did some. Servers spent time explaining the process to many tables.

This isn't the fault of the DDP. People just aren't educating themselves on what is offered and how to read the markings on menus and signs. It's up to the cashiers and servers to educate them which makes service slower.

 

[PaulaSB12]

While reading this thread, I'm really getting the feeling that alot of people are feeling like if you can't afford a DVC and $100/ per person/ per meal, then you shouldn't be allowed to dine at Disney. I hope I am wrong, but that seems to be the overall jist of this thread. "If you are loaded enough to enjoy it all stay at home" I didn't realize Disney was just for the rich. Do you object to value resorts as well? It's really frustrating to me. I am going to be in WDW in 25 days on my honeymoon, DDP in hand and proud of it. And it's not about saving money to me, it's about the convenience of it all being paid for before we get there. So maybe these very judgemental people on this thread should think about other aspects of the plan instead of "lower class people going in to restaurants ordering the most expensive thing on the menu because it's expensive!"

I agree with most of what you have stated with the exception of WDW being expensive. The introduction of all the "value" properties unfortunately made some of us aware this would be coming as far as dining, we just didn't expect it to be so drastic and one-sided.
It is ashame but business is business and no matter how much a small % complains (including our family and many friends) it is just going to get worse and more disappointing.



You are definatly not the only one who is finding this, in other posts about the dining plan there has been a huge element of whinging that the peasants are invading THEIR resteraunts, see above quote.

 

[bicker]

No, actually I didn't realize that the "internet" goes back that far.

The Internet effectively was established in 1983. By 1986, I was participating in online communities such as net.disney (the forerunner of the rec.arts.disney.parks community that still exists today).

That's why they have been adjusting for decades.

No, they have been adjusting for decades because we've been changing for decades.

 

[gina2000]

Now children, play nice.......

 

[disneynutz]

I keep asking about the percentage of patrons who are on the DDP for a specific reason. If a restaurant's patrons on the DDP are 50%, that means that the other 50% are paying a much higher price for "affordable food". At the DDP price, the food is fairly priced (even considering rack rate hotel prices). At OOP prices, it is not even close with the declining quality/innovation/portion sizes. So in essense, OOP patrons (depending on the percentage frequenting TS restaurants) are a larger profit margin than a DDP patron. I'm just curious as to how the bottom line looks if patronage is broken out that way.

Obviously the DDP is a money maker for Disney. We are at the park right now and on the DDP for the first half of our trip. We are amazed at how many people order the less expensive items from the menu while on the plan. Not us. Steak and lobster here we come.

 

[d-r]

The Internet effectively was established in 1983. By 1986, I was participating in online communities such as net.disney (the forerunner of the rec.arts.disney.parks community that still exists today).

I'm not sure what effectively established means. I remember the r.a.d. split into the subgroups, that was in the early 90s. I don't remember usenet in 1986 though. I remember in the fall of 1986 a girl at the vax terminal next to me was typing in the words to REM lifes rich pagent, and sending it off in to the bitnet somewhere. Maybe bitnet was effectively.

I was thinking about it, and in the spring of 86 I was at grad night. Back then my favorite disney culinary items were the pbj at aunt polly's and the cheese pizza at tomorrowland terrace. And I think they were overpriced for what they were.

But the thing is, I have a little more scratch in my pocket in 2007, and I'd like the chance to CHOOSE to pay a little more and get a filet or strip rather than a sirloin. Etc.

No, they have been adjusting for decades because we've been changing for decades.

Yeah. It is funny how fast "we" change sometimes though, isn't it.

 

[tfc3rid]

And of course, we all know Al Gore invented the internet...

 

[Katiebell]

I understand expressing frustration, but in many cases it seems to be directed at the "unwashed masses", instead of at Disney.

Which would be equally misdirected. Frustration does not need to be "directed". Dining is the way it is. It's not a matter of fault or blame.

If people are frustrated about the state of dining at Disney -- the lack of variety, the disappearance of signature dishes, the scarcity of quality ingredients, the difficulty of getting in to table service restaurants without an ADR made months in advance -- this is not the fault of their fellow guests at Disney. Disney patrons did not invent the dining plan, are not deciding the menus, and are not purchasing ingredients for the restaurants. Disney is making those decisions -- based on what the majority of their customers want, are asking for, and are willing to pay for -- but ultimately it's because those decisions are making more money for Disney. The Disney company came up with and offered the dining plan, and many people feel it's a good deal and buy it. That doesn't mean those people are ruining fine dining at Disney. And I don't believe that Disney is necessarily "ruining" fine dining at Disney either -- but from what everyone has said, the dining experience at Disney has definitely deteriorated over the last few years. The company, not the customers, is responsible for the business decisions and changes that have taken place.

 

[bicker]

I'm not sure what effectively established means. I remember the r.a.d. split into the subgroups, that was in the early 90s.

Yup. I voted yes.

I don't remember usenet in 1986 though.

It was a much nicer place, AFAIC. What happened with the introduction of non-governmental/non-educational institutions was a lawlessness and lack of decorum that makes it the kind of cesspool it is today. That happened just about 1997, and luckily places like DISboards was born, just about then.

I was thinking about it, and in the spring of 86 I was at grad night. Back then my favorite disney culinary items were the pbj at aunt polly's and the cheese pizza at tomorrowland terrace. And I think they were overpriced for what they were.

Indeed -- that's one thing a lot of folks overlook: They've changed as much, if not more, than anything they look at or evaluate.

But the thing is, I have a little more scratch in my pocket in 2007, and I'd like the chance to CHOOSE to pay a little more and get a filet or strip rather than a sirloin. Etc.

And generally, the general public felt the same way through the 1990s. I suspect 2001-2002 damaged that, and even though the economy has recovered, people got a taste for low prices and won't go back to high quality.

 

[bicker]

If people are frustrated about the state of dining at Disney -- the lack of variety, the disappearance of signature dishes, the scarcity of quality ingredients, the difficulty of getting in to table service restaurants without an ADR made months in advance -- this is not the fault of their fellow guests at Disney.

Like I said, there really doesn't need to be any "blame". It is what it is. However, if folks at least want an explanation, that explanation sits at the feet of the general public whose preferences have prompted the changes. There isn't some evil wizard behind a curtain pulling levers and strings to frustrate people.

Disney patrons did not invent the dining plan, are not deciding the menus, and are not purchasing ingredients for the restaurants. Disney is making those decisions -- based on what the majority of their customers want, are asking for, and are willing to pay for -- but ultimately it's because those decisions are making more money for Disney.

... which they have always had a fiduciary responsibility for doing, and are now even obligated by law to do -- laws, incidentally, that We The People have demanded our government put into effect.

The company, not the customers, is responsible for the business decisions and changes that have taken place.

No, the company is responsible for listening to its customers and doing what they want, as demonstrated by what they reward the company for doing. It still comes back to the customers, not the company. If you want to change things, then you must change the customers.

 

[PiperPizzaz]

Nope FREE Dining is not. But, the DDP IS. FDDP is just a sale, it is a few weeks out of the year. To Disney it is no different than a sale on their room rates.

DDP is a change. It is a big change for Disney and it will impact the food there. Change is hard sometimes.

 

[Lewisc]

I suggest "foodies" look at the restaurants that don't particiapte with the dining plan. Il Mulino, Shula's and Bluezoo at S/D all get great reviews. Bistro in EPCOT, V&A in the GF and a few restaurants in DTD are also restaurants to consider.

One "foodie", I don't remember who (I DON'T THINK IT'S THE POSTER I'M QUOTING), said he/she doesn't want to patronize the restaurants at the S/D unless they offer a DDE discount. Guests can't have it both ways. They can't ask for quality ingrediants, signature dishes, lack of variety etc but then complain about the price or the unavailability of discounts.

DDP allocates $50-$60 for a signature meal. We agree some discount, 20-40%, is appropriate since the guest is both pre-paying and commititing to having most of their meals at Disney restaurants. I suspect the restaurants I listed in the first paragraph are sufficient for guests who are willing to pay $75-$100 per head.

If people are frustrated about the state of dining at Disney -- the lack of variety, the disappearance of signature dishes, the scarcity of quality ingredients, the difficulty of getting in to table service restaurants without an ADR made months in advance -- this is not the fault of their fellow guests at Disney. Disney patrons did not invent the dining plan, are not deciding the menus, and are not purchasing ingredients for the restaurants. Disney is making those decisions -- based on what the majority of their customers want, are asking for, and are willing to pay for -- but ultimately it's because those decisions are making more money for Disney. The Disney company came up with and offered the dining plan, and many people feel it's a good deal and buy it. That doesn't mean those people are ruining fine dining at Disney. And I don't believe that Disney is necessarily "ruining" fine dining at Disney either -- but from what everyone has said, the dining experience at Disney has definitely deteriorated over the last few years. The company, not the customers, is responsible for the business decisions and changes that have taken place.

 

[MissionMouse]

I will admit that I have not read all of the 7 plus pages before this post, but Disney oriented itself to make distinguished TS restaurants a part of their parks design. To do this they had to offer high quality food that would get people in the doors time and time again. Thus, TS restaurants developed a reputation over the years based upon their food and service. Now DDP provides the tool to get them in the door allowing Disney and it's contractors the ability to leverage the components of their operations to increase their profits. They will continue to sell DDP, perform statiscal analysis of revenue and expenses of the program and adjust it accordingly, until it transforms or ends. There is less concern about reputation, menu, or quality as long as they offer guest savings and value. People will bicker about what was and what is but the restaurants historical reputation may or may not be accurate or warrented as time passes.

 

[Katiebell]

Like I said, there really doesn't need to be any "blame". It is what it is. However, if folks at least want an explanation, that explanation sits at the feet of the general public whose preferences have prompted the changes. There isn't some evil wizard behind a curtain pulling levers and strings to frustrate people.

... which they have always had a fiduciary responsibility for doing, and are now even obligated by law to do -- laws, incidentally, that We The People have demanded our government put into effect.

No, the company is responsible for listening to its customers and doing what they want, as demonstrated by what they reward the company for doing. It still comes back to the customers, not the company. If you want to change things, then you must change the customers.

Hmmm, interesting. I don't see Disney as an evil wizard behind a curtain pulling levers and strings, either (that was Wizard of Oz, and the wizard wasn't evil, just a big fake).

I say Disney -- or any company for that matter -- is responsible for making business decisions to make their company more financially successful. They create the menus, purchase the food for their restaurants, hire and train the staff, and come up with the offerings -- DDP, free DDP, DDE, ME, and whatever else is next -- to try to encourage their guests to stay on the property and eat at Disney restaurants.

You feel the customers are responsible, because Disney is just doing what the customers want. And Disney is obligated to make lots of money by law, which was forced upon them by...us. And in order to make any changes in Disney Dining, the customers en masse would have to change what they want.

Well, that's definitely an interesting take on it.

 

[pinkerbell]

It's late and I haven't read every post but, I think there is more to look at than just the "food" and more imprtantly the focus on the sit down resturants. What about the number of meals/snacks that don't get used, we had quite a few during our last 12 day stay. Also, with disneys MME, and DDP, people are staying in the park or on property and less likely to get a car, therefore spending more days in the park and buying more items and perhaps more additional meals and snacks. People are also so happy with the money they saved thay probably spend twice as much as I saved, beacuse "I saved".
And what about room discounts, does the quality of the concierge or the room service decrease when someone gets a great deal on a room. I think people get those year round with all the code stuff that flies around the boards.
These are more questions than statements, I don't know if there's an answer, but I can't help but think that if dis want's to make more money ( and they should, thay are a business as much as I want to deny that sometimes )and they can find a way to get a bigger profit and as a result lower the quality, as some have suggested, and make the guest feel it is what they wanted, this would be a good way to do it.
just some thoughts...

 

[Sammie]

Originally Posted by d-r
But the thing is, I have a little more scratch in my pocket in 2007, and I'd like the chance to CHOOSE to pay a little more and get a filet or strip rather than a sirloin. Etc.

I quickly counted 10 restuarants from the menus that offer filet at Disney, I did not even count NY strip, so why are you not able to find it.

 

[bicker]

One "foodie", I don't remember who (I DON'T THINK IT'S THE POSTER I'M QUOTING), said he/she doesn't want to patronize the restaurants at the S/D unless they offer a DDE discount. Guests can't have it both ways. They can't ask for quality ingrediants, signature dishes, lack of variety etc but then complain about the price or the unavailability of discounts.

This is a critical point, one worth highlighting. We're talking about the changes. Some people want to blame the Dining Plan, perhaps because blaming human nature is not gratifying enough for them. However, human nature is all that is going on here. Disney's dining changed because of guests' patronage and purchasing behaviors, including behaviors reflected in "I want the best there is to have, and I what I really want is cheap dining!"-type silliness.

 

[bicker]

I will admit that I have not read all of the 7 plus pages before this post, but Disney oriented itself to make distinguished TS restaurants a part of their parks design.

Indeed, they did this in response to a change in the American general public's attitude towards fine dining in the early 1990s. That was the ascendancy of the foodie.

There was a program on television yesterday that outlined when this trend came to Las Vegas. It started with Wolfgang Puck took a big chance and opened the first trendy fine dining restaurant in Las Vegas. Prior to that, only private dining clubs there offered truly great cuisine, and the masses just ate food so mediocre that it warranted treatment by the stand-up comics of the day. However, Puck's venture was successful, and some of the larger casino-hotels have five or six top-shelf restaurants now, each charging $50-$75 per meal. Even the buffets now run $35, for some really great food.

However, times are changing. Families with more limited resources are now a much more significant force in the economy -- while they don't each have much financial clout, collectively they have more than you can imagine.

Trends with regard to the general public's attitudes change, sometime more in line with what any one individual wants, sometimes contrary to it.

There is less concern about reputation, menu, or quality as long as they offer guest savings and value.

Indeed, and that's a reflection of how important those aspects are to Average Joe.

 

[bicker]

You feel the customers are responsible, ...

... if anyone is...

... because Disney is just doing what the customers want. And Disney is obligated to make lots of money by law, which was forced upon them by...us. And in order to make any changes in Disney Dining, the customers en masse would have to change what they want. Well, that's definitely an interesting take on it.

Well, you know me: It is the realistic take on it. Just keeping it real, dawg. I don't see much benefit in blame to start with, in cases where no one has done anything wrong, and even less benefit in misdirecting blame.