Is Free Dining dumbing down the menus?

[NEVERENOUGHWDW]

I think gas price is nonsense for all the (bad) changes......Bottom line is Disney would rather the restaurants to be filled and people that used to be CS are now TS due to DDPs & free dining.
I have to agree with another poster that the "Golden Age" of Disney food is long over and IMO that isn't a good thing. Part of a WDW vacation used to be paying for good food (hence the days of the Empress Room (sadly gone) Ca Grill, Bistro de Paris & VA's) now they are more interested in the masses.

Chat with the chef in France......yes the dining room is packed but they had to cut delicious items & make the menu more "American". AP has had drastic changes...removing game and specialty items for a simplier palate. I realize the masses win as in this case but people that rather quality food than quantity have really learned that WDW is no longer a dining experience it is more a cattle car.

 

[La2kw]

I've never had an opinion either way about this until we went to Tusker House in AK last week. I've raved about the carrot cake there several times on this board. It was a good-sized, delicious piece of actual cake with a layer of frosting on the top & in the middle. It has now been replaced by a smaller, round, prepackaged item. While this new menu item tasted okay, it was nowhere near the quality of the real carrot cake. Not only that, it was still the same price as the good stuff! For those of you that loved the chocolate cake and cheesecake at TH, these have been replaced with little, round versions as well. These are now the desserts offered for the dining plan. We would never do the DDP because it is too much food for us, but it certainly never bothered me before that it was available to those who could take advantage of it. Sorry this kind of turned into a rant---but we both loved that carrot cake!!!!

Columbia Harbor House used to have slices of real apple pie- and it was pretty good. Now, they only have that prepackaged chocolate cake garbage because it's cheap.

 

[Katiebell]

I sort of got the impression from reading this thread and on others (here and on other boards) regarding the dining plan that some people think that the "dining plan crowd" doesn't belong in certain restaurants, or that the restaurants are cutting the costs by getting "cheaper" items because we po' folk don't appreciate the "good" food I think that is a bit of an extreme attitude to have, and perhaps I totally misconstrued some of the statements (but some were plainly worded though).

Is it that there is a missed sense of "upper end" that folks feel are being "dragged down" to a "lower" level? Or is it really a longing for a shrimp appetizer that may have been taken away? Because as just a simple gal from a small town, reading through some of these discussions, it really comes off at times as though it is a "gourmands" versus "those who don't belong" and how dare Disney let us in

It's not just you, I've felt the same way. I've seen the same sentiments on many, many threads with this exact same topic.

I do not think the FREE DDP has anything to do with it. That is just the form of discount they found most effective for the low season. The year prior to the first free ddp we went on the purchase 4 get 7 deal.

The DDP has increased restaurant attendence and that may effect offerings as it is harder to serve more people.

I really strongly feel that the increased cost of everything has directly effected the restaurants at Disney as well as other places.
Just considering our budget at home, our gas costs are double what they were 3 years ago, our electric is at least 20% more and our food is %10-20 more. The only one of those I can greatly control is what food I buy. I have to pay what the others charge. Yes i can adjust the thermostat and try not to drive more, however if I were a restaurant my patrons may not appreciate being hot or cold or eating in the dark. The ovens still must run. Shipping is more so all my goods are going to cost more, so I can save by buying bulk, lesser quality items, or less specialty items. Here at home we eat more chicken, less steak....more talapia, less salmon. We are foodies at heart but our pocketbooks are not. If my goal is the bottom line, something has got to give and sadly food is one of the easiest bent.

I may be totally off base, but I can't imagine that overhead cost is not effecting what is being offered.

Absolutely, ITA.

Agree. Disney is a business, so profit is a definate motive and their trend continues to impact quality, presentation and service. Disney is transforming itself into a reactive organization, controlling and cutting cost while responding to complaints when they reach a desinated level which appears to start to impact their profit projections. If you did not dine TS prior to all the dining programs, designed to entice more people to eat TS, you won't have an idea of what is being strategically removed. You should also watch how the chefs are leaving and moving around too. Downward price alignments are warrented.

I agree again.

It's clear that there have been changes in the menus at virtually all the restaurants at WDW. I believe it was Sauce Boss who mentioned that restaurant menus change all the time, based on seasonality and availability of ingredients -- Sauce Boss, I've seen you post before here, do you work at a Disney restaurant? But besides the normal menu changes that happen at all restaurants, WDW or not, some of the higher priced ingredients and more elaborate dishes are no longer on the Disney restaurant menus. However, I don't believe at all that the DDP is to blame. Rather, the DDP is indicative of the direction that Disney Dining is taking. It's a symptom, not the cause.

Disney Dining used to cater to just a few guests who came expecting elaborate gourmet meals, and had money to spend. The rest of the guests frequented the CS restaurants, maybe had one character meal during their whole trip, or left the property to find more affordable restaurants at which to eat. Disney saw this was not profitable -- they were making some money from that handful of guests that could afford the TS restaurants, but many of the restaurants were often empty. They came up with the brilliant idea for the Dining Plan and the ME -- enticing all Disney guests to stay on the property, spending all their vacation dollars at Disney. The Dining Plan is profitable to Disney, there is no question about it. Disney isn't losing money and being forced to cut corners to make ends meet. If that was the case, they'd drop the DDP, and they certainly wouldn't keep offering it for free. But not every guest is on the Dining Plan, and many still pay OOP for their meals -- and Disney wants those OOP guests patronizing the TS restaurants, too. Disney simplified menus, standardized them to make ordering and stocking cheaper and simpler, making sure there were dishes that were profitable yet inexpensive enough (ie chicken and pasta) for the OOP guests who were more budget conscious. And by cutting costs across the board, that's more money in Disney's pockets.

So for the folks who miss the good old days when the menus were more upscale, and the restaurants weren't jammed full, and you could walk in without an ADR...it's not likely to head back that direction. Disney is making a lot more money this way, and there's no reason for them to reverse course.

 

[bicker]

Free dining doesn't have a substantial impact on menu choices -- the menu choices are very similar the whole year 'round. The way menus are now are a reflection of guests, these days, wanting affordable dining options, where in the "golden age" of dining at WDW, generally only the more affluent guests had table service meals every day. Now, the meals are affordable, and some of the same restaurants which languished practically empty 10-20 years ago are almost full every night. Disney has listened to its guests -- ALL of us -- and did what a greater portion of us wanted.

Although great logic like this is hard to argue with... I'll give it a shot. I have to disagree. Have to. Maybe the menu choices are pretty similar the whole year round B/C the Free dining and DDP have had a great effect ACROSS the board.

What makes you think that the desire for affordability is not a predominant driving force in this marketplace?

I don't think that the majority of people really DO want the same pasta and chicken dish everywhere.

I don't think that the majority of people want 16 inch wide seats on aircraft either, but that doesn't mean they'd prefer wider seats at higher prices. That's the trouble with asking only half of a question, as you've done here: Of course everyone would rather everything be more deluxe, but ONLY if they didn't have to pay more for it. That's not a rational expectation, though. If you ask the whole question (Do you want better food and to pay more for it?), I bet even you would have to grant that the answer would be a pretty consistent "NO" these days.

 

[bicker]

The hotel bars don't participate with the dining plan. The change in the hotel bars suggests Disney decided to fine tune the menu and pricing of the restaurants to appeal to a greater number of guests.

That's a great example, Lewis. I'm sure there are others -- eateries that have no relationship to the Dining Plan whatsoever, yet still providing more affordable, and therefore less deluxe, dining, than 10-20 years ago.

The dining plan is the result of that change not the cause.

Absolutely. I think what some folks are falling into is the cum hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.

 

[bicker]

I guess I am in the minority, because I like the dining plan.

Don't make that assumption. Things are the way they are because the majority of guests reward Disney for having things that way.

Many of the folks who like the Dining Plan stick to the threads that are cheerleader threads for the Dining Plan.

 

[bicker]

This has been discussed at great length before. The overall consensus is that the DDP has changed the restaurants.

It has been discussed at great length, but, first, there was no overall consensus, and second, even overall consensus doesn't necessarily mean logical accuracy.

The quality of the food and the number of menu items have been reduced. Presentation has also suffered. Several menu items are repeated at multiple restaurants. Food prepared at the commissary has increased.

These are all true, but they reflect a change in what guests want, as I mentioned, more affordability. The Dining Plan is just one more consequence of the drive for more affordable dining at WDW.

 

[bicker]

I sort of got the impression from reading this thread and on others (here and on other boards) regarding the dining plan that some people think that the "dining plan crowd" doesn't belong in certain restaurants, or that the restaurants are cutting the costs by getting "cheaper" items because we po' folk don't appreciate the "good" food I think that is a bit of an extreme attitude to have, and perhaps I totally misconstrued some of the statements (but some were plainly worded though).

I sure hope so. I cannot imagine anyone saying what you've alluded to here. The problem is with the word "appreciate" -- that implies that those folks don't have the capability to grasp the nature, worth, quality, or significance, and that would be a pretty ignorant thing to suggest. Less affluent folks are, in a nutshell, less affluent -- that implies that those folks cannot afford to partake of more expensive things as much those who more affluent. That's all.

Is it that there is a missed sense of "upper end" that folks feel are being "dragged down" to a "lower" level?

This is a good point, I believe, and I've detected it as well. I know that the "upper end" is still available at WDW. Previously, it was available at many more restaurants, and many of those restaurants were substantially emptier than they are today, much of the time, which, as a matter of fact, diners consider a good thing, despite how badly it reflects on the restaurant as a business (since empty restaurant space is a "wasted asset"). Now, those things are still available, but at a number of restaurants more in line with how many people are able to and willing to pay a premium for them. A number of restaurants, reflecting the extent of "wasted assets" WDW had in the past, are now re-purposed, and fans of the whole "wasted asset" approach of the past mourn the demise of the way things were. There is no question that we "foodies" don't have as much run of the restaurants as they used to, but I believe that the number of guests now being satisfied by Disney Dining has increased sharply... it's just a different, larger set of guests.

Am I totally off base here, or COULD they have maintained the same menus and still implemented the DDP? I would think that they would still be making a decent profit if they kept the menus as-is and still had the ddp.

Sorry, but you're totally off-base. The object of a corporation isn't to make "a decent profit" but rather to make all financial decisions in the best long-term financial interest of its owners. It's not only a good idea, but it is now the law.

Think about it this way: Do you really need a raise? Aren't you making a decent salary now? I mean, you have a computer and Internet service -- these are wonderful things, so you really don't need more money. Are you going to make your decisions based on the fact that if you ask for a raise, you're taking more money from the customer of your work-time, i.e., your employer?

 

[bicker]

I realize the masses win as in this case but people that rather quality food than quantity have really learned that WDW is no longer a dining experience it is more a cattle car.

No, they've simply learned that Chefs de France has an upstairs dining room, called Bistro de Paris. That's really the point: The better food is still available, but Disney has simply reallocated its dining room assets based on how many guests there were for each grade of offering. I think they realize, also, that they have more CS space than they need, and still need more and more low-priced TS space. (That may be why we see them making overtures towards converting Tusker House into TS.)

I bet Disney would love to be able to do that with hotels too (convert from deluxe to moderate, for example, when a trend in consumer behaviors advocate that reallocation), but the value of a hotel is so tied up in physical aspects of the venue.

 

[ogreenlee]

I think a lot of folks would probably enjoy more affordable stays at the nicer resorts than have the DDP. I would, anyhow.

And if I narrowed our vacations down to one a year, the DDP (free or not), wouldn't make that much of a difference to me. It's all relative to each family and individual. I know that I'd rather have my "value" vacation be at Disney, b/c even with the value... it's going to be Disney.

Now, has anyone discussed the added sales of alcohol with the DDP? It's not included.. so that's an upsale right there. I know from working as a server for many years that one of our biggest goals was to get more folks drinking. The more folks you can pack into a restaurant means more alcohol sales, pure and simple.

I highly doubt any restaurant is "losing". However, I can see where the attention to detail is lost because of bigger crowds. Although, I live in Atlanta, and some of the nicest restaurants in town book out several weeks in advance. How do they maintain their level of excellence?

 

[bicker]

I think a lot of folks would probably enjoy more affordable stays at the nicer resorts than have the DDP. I would, anyhow.

Maybe I didn't make myself clear. Disney would love to do that, but the value of a resort is tied up mostly in upfront costs: location, construction, amenities, appointments, etc. Perhaps, if they ever got to a point where a hotel needed to be completely refurbished (Disney never lets any of their hotels get to that point, though), they could refurbish it as a lower-grade hotel -- if you're going to replace the furniture, anyway, you can replace it with lower-grade furniture -- but you still cannot move the hotel to a less valuable siting, so it will still be priced higher than a hotel with all other accouterments the same, but with a less desirable location.

So my point was that they can't do with hotel what they can do with restaurants.

Now, has anyone discussed the added sales of alcohol with the DDP? It's not included.. so that's an upsale right there.

It has been discussed. I don't remember exactly, but I think some of the insiders indicated that initial expectations in that regard were not satisfied.

 

[gina2000]

Does anyone have an educated guess as to what percentage of the dining guests are on the DDP? The reason I ask is because at OOP rates, the food isn't worth it. I have to wonder how many people no longer dine at WDW restaurants and whether that impacts the bottom line enough for WDW to look at either expanding the DDP so more people can take advantage of it, or modifying the compensation to restaurants. The OOP diner is making up some of the revenue lost by DDP patrons. I just wonder what the percentage is.

 

[1000thhappyhaunt]

I don't think that the majority of people want 16 inch wide seats on aircraft either, but that doesn't mean they'd prefer wider seats at higher prices. That's the trouble with asking only half of a question, as you've done here: Of course everyone would rather everything be more deluxe, but ONLY if they didn't have to pay more for it. That's not a rational expectation, though. If you ask the whole question (Do you want better food and to pay more for it?), I bet even you would have to grant that the answer would be a pretty consistent "NO" these days.

Ok. I give. You're right. AGAIN. How do you DO that?

I stand corrected.

I only HALF-ASKED my question. Granted. You covered all the bases. A FULL-ON ASK.

Oh.

But... and here comes this lil problem: We're already paying PLENTY OOP for the food. I am, basically, paying more for the food already. And the quality keeps declining. Year after year. Portions decrease. And prices continue to rise. Presentation suffers and still it gets more expensive. I'm just glad we have the DDE card. It does help. Anywho... I'd expect, I think reasonably, that AT THE VERY LEAST... they could maintain the quality. I think we do pay more. It should be for naught? And I think that maybe people WOULD be willing to pay a little more. To make dining more "Magical". We're already spending a ton to be there. It's vacation. AND... I think it used to be a much more exciting part of the trip. Not that there aren't some things that are still great, mind you.

I, personally, don't like this downhill trend. As I see it.

Cheers, M.

P.S. Don't you think it's fun to quibble tho?

 

[bicker]

The reason I ask is because at OOP rates, the food isn't worth it.

AFAIC, that's always been the case. I can dig up message from 1986 and 1987 complaining about how expensive the food is at WDW, and that was before they made everything super-deluxe in the 1990s. Walt Disney deliberately built the MK four miles from the highway so that his company would have more control over the whole experience. That's been parleyed into Disney's ability, since the beginning, to command a hefty premium for its on-site hotels and restaurants.

In several other threads recently, where this was discussed, folks relayed their personal experience at other venues (other theme parks, sports stadiums, concert halls, destination resorts, etc.), where again the "if this was anyplace else" conclusion would also be "the food isn't worth it".

 

[JMLBrats]

Fortunetly there are still some fine dining establishments in WDW that are not on the plan-I just hope THAT doesn't change. I heard someone say the Fulton's might be joining the plan at some point and it made me sad. I hope that's just a rumor...Plus if they did then Portobello prob. would too since they are owned by the same company. Let's hope not.

 

[MissionMouse]

Disney has implemented a rather complex business plan to control and reduce cost by expanding their volume to increase their profits. It also allows them the ability to put their marketing spin on this approach, since their making Disney Vacations more affordable. Stategically, some areas of the business are more profitable than others and will cover the cost associated with other areas, especially if the loss area brings in a volume of guest. This may be acceptable or in time lead to its dimise or a reduce concept. You may see specific areas of the business reduce services, reduce quality, limit offerinngs, outsource staff, accept higher turnover in staff, hire less experienced staff and the list continues. Create more DVC where guest assume a level of cost and liability. Invite non-Disney resorts to build on property...this is all a strategic move by Disney. First time guest to Disney will never notice and will assume this is the way it has always been. For us, we come for the rides, characters, accommodations and a key item, the dining, and we always know we have options to vacation at other domestic and international vacation destinnations with great dining.

 

[gina2000]

In several other threads recently, where this was discussed, folks relayed their personal experience at other venues (other theme parks, sports stadiums, concert halls, destination resorts, etc.), where again the "if this was anyplace else" conclusion would also be "the food isn't worth it".

I totally agree with the assessment of other venues. But WDW has a different spin on vacationing because most venues are a one day experience. I can deal with expensive hot dogs at a stadium, expensive burgers at Great Adventure as well as generally lousy food because they are one day experiences. Once you start packaging a complete vacation on one site, promote Magical Express to keep people onsite, it becomes more difficult to swallow expensive OOP food day after day especially if the quality is less than stellar. I won't eat CS day after day nor will I eat badly prepared, overpriced food everyday. I think you have to compare WDW now to a cruise experience because of the all-inclusiveness of the venue and the amount of time you are tethered to the vacation site (i.e., the cruise ship or WDW). And based on that comparison, WDW food is coming up short IMO. But that's a subjective opinion.

In reading other boards, it seems that WDW is trying to raise the percentage of people staying at WDW hotels by offering discounted dining, a thought that definitely has crossed my mind from the beginning. Whether this plan will work or not is still to be seen.

I noticed you didn't hazard a guess as to the percentage of WDW guests frequenting TS restaurants who might be on the DDP. Any reason?

 

[TDC Nala]

The whole dining plan is. But at least the food isn't terrible and the signature restaurants are doing the two credit thing so they still have some interesting stuff.

It's GREAT for users of the dining plan. But if you're paying OOP and the prices are going up exponentially and the quality is declining, it's frustrating.

There are still a number of good places on property that do not take the dining plan.

 

[DiszyDean]

I think this has been stated before...but...

Disney will always cater to what the majority of their guests perceive as value. With most of the eating establishments at full-capacity for most of the year, this means that the majority of the people are inclined to eat at these establishments at the quality level that they are receiving.

There are, of course, a minority of people that will not eat at Disney because they perceive the quality/price of food not worth it. Disney offers some higher-end dining but in proportion with the people who want to experience it.

Disney is not holding anyone "hostage" when it comes to choices for dining. If you do not like the quality of the food at Disney, you can rent a car or take a cab and go somewhere else in Orlando.

Although, the free dining promotion may come and go, I do not think you will see a time in the near future where the DDP as a package offering will be taken off the table.

 

[TDC Nala]

Sorry, but I just don't think it'll happen. The masses far outway the foodies I think. However, I do think it'll go back someday due to the fact that good chef's will cease to flock to Disney like they used to and the complaints from the inside will eventually force disney to re-think the whole DDP thing. (at least I hope so....)

Probably not. Then they don't have to pay good chefs which will help the bottom line. And the masses are still happy, because if they are using the DDP they are getting value.