More menu items excluded from Dining plan?!

[Mycroft]

Don't they still sell an all inclusive package? It costs about twice as much as the MYW package but it was still available when I got my planning DVD.

They do. The new all-inclusive is equivalent to what was called the grand plan at the time. I had the Deluxe Magic plan which was the most inexpensive meal plan at the time.

But it really isn't about the particular package you are on. I think the point is that no matter what plan you are on, you were never nickled and dimed. They did what it took to make you feel special.

 

[OllieDannyandMe]

They do. The new all-inclusive is equivalent to what was called the grand plan at the time. I had the Deluxe Magic plan which was the most inexpensive meal plan at the time.

But it really isn't about the particular package you are on. I think the point is that no matter what plan you are on, you were never nickled and dimed. They did what it took to make you feel special.

Yes, that's the point! We were never nickled and dimed. And we were never on the Grand Plan...we always dreamed about going with that plan, but we couldn't afford it. We were on the more economical plan that Disney offered.

There were restrictions (i.e. no room service, no Victoria & Albert's...those things were only included with the Grand Plan), but a Disney CM offered us the opportunity to dine there.

Victoria & Alberts had an opening for dinner that night, and the CM must have wanted us to feel special. Disney made us feel like rock stars!

 

[DeirdreTours]

By ordering the item anyway even after being informed of the upcharge, one has legally and morally agreed to the upcharge. If one does not agree to the upcharge, one works out the pricing dispute before ordering the item.

Actually, it looks like just agreeing at the restaurant and then working out the matter at the hotel front desk has been the most effective strategy for several posters. I certainly wouldn't tell the waiter that I was willing to pay, I think what I would say is something to the effect of "I disagree with how you are interpreting the plan, but charge it however you think is best and I will take the matter up at the hotel".

My position is that I have already purchased the meal months in advance, Disney has no legal right to "inform" me that the Chicken Kiev is now an additional charge. Period. I have already purchased the described product. I cannot reasonably change my dining options once I am at the restaurant at the reservation time. I cannot reasonably evaluate the product on arrival-- I am already there and have already paid the entire package price. The only legally reasonable course is for Disney to stand by the product they sold me (AND are still selling people right this minute--if you call WDTC right this minute they will tell you there are "no menu restrictions" except at the two DTD restaurants mentioned).

Betsy and other posters seem to believe that Disney can put anything in the brochure fine print and that would become legally binding. Ain't so. Contract law is clear and direct on this point. At the point that a contract is legally binding on one party, it is legally binding on both. My package is legally binding on at 45 days out-- if I want to make changes after that point I will be heavily penalized.

Lewis seems determined to paint all who want the range of choice they were expressly promised at booking as some sort of thieves and chiselers who will ruin the dining plan for the upstanding citizens like himself. The interpretation that Disney can select a single appetizer, entree and dessert from the menu and call that the Dining Plan is fine for him-- but it won't work for me.

I think there is a very good chance that my family will have no issues at all with the dining plan. As long as we can choose from the printed menu and are provided with the meals described in the brochure.

To the poster who plans to write a letter after returning home--I would not expect ANY response beyond a "we regret that you felt inconvienced" sort of thing. If there is one thing I have learned about Disney it is that you are always better off solving the issue before you check out.

 

[DeirdreTours]

This is a portion of the email that a dis member received from Disney (her inquiry wasn't about the side item point, but was included in Disney's response to her question)

ONE (1) COUNTER SERVICE meal per night of your stay, which includes:
One (1) Entrée with side
One (1) Dessert
One (1) single serving Non alcoholic beverage
Or
Complete combo meal with dessert and non-alcoholic beverage


The full email can be found in the "Just back from Disney on dining plan, had some problems" thread, page 13. Apparantly the "side" item is officially included.

 

[CJK]

Very interesting thread! My concern with the recent rumoured changes to the dining plan is the inconsistency. I'm going to be on vacation. I don't want to have to worry and wonder for every meal or snack what is and is not included. I want to sit down with my family and order an appetizer, non-alcoholic drink, entree and dessert. Period. Obviously I wouldn't expect add-ons or children ordering off the adult menu, etc... Part of the appeal of the dining plan was to be able to eat at restaurants we previously could not afford. My family was thrilled to think we could do some character meals, sitdown meals that we've never tried before without fear of breaking the bank. I just wish there could be a clear, concise "rule' of what is allowed, and what is not. For example, for CS meals, dh usually buys our food while I sit with the family at our table. If they're changing the rule so that we each need to pay with our own card, do we all now have to wait in line together, or will dh have to use all of our cards to pay?? It's the inconsistencies that can drive one crazy!!!

 

[heatherfeather24]

My position is that I have already purchased the meal months in advance, Disney has no legal right to "inform" me that the Chicken Kiev is now an additional charge.
QUOTE]


Sure they do. Although I haven't reviewed the brochure, what you are paying for is one counter service, one table service, and one snack per day. What Disney chooses to include or exclude from this plan is up to them. So long as they have provided you with a table service meal, they've lived up to their part of the bargain.

Which leads me to something that's been brewing inside me for awhile, but is bound to be unpopular:

This dining plan seems to be little more than Disney's attempt to appeal to those who enjoy all-inclusive resorts, but can't afford their true all-inclusive plan. At every AI that I've ever been to (Sandals and Club Med), there are restrictions on what is included, upcharges for certain items, and ever-changing policies. Morever, you're usually stuck with one mediocre buffet and a couple of so-called specialty restaurants on each property. Seems to me that Disney's dining plan is far and away better than that. Go into it knowing that you will have some restrictions, policies will change, and decide whether or not you want to purchase it, but a lot of the angst seen in this thread and others would be avoided if everyone was a little more realistic (or cynical if you prefer) in outlook about the plan.

OK, I'm off my soapbox now.

 

[WDWBetsy]

My position is that I have already purchased the meal months in advance, Disney has no legal right to "inform" me that the Chicken Kiev is now an additional charge.
QUOTE]


Sure they do. Although I haven't reviewed the brochure, what you are paying for is one counter service, one table service, and one snack per day. What Disney chooses to include or exclude from this plan is up to them. So long as they have provided you with a table service meal, they've lived up to their part of the bargain.

Which leads me to something that's been brewing inside me for awhile, but is bound to be unpopular:

This dining plan seems to be little more than Disney's attempt to appeal to those who enjoy all-inclusive resorts, but can't afford their true all-inclusive plan. At every AI that I've ever been to (Sandals and Club Med), there are restrictions on what is included, upcharges for certain items, and ever-changing policies. Morever, you're usually stuck with one mediocre buffet and a couple of so-called specialty restaurants on each property. Seems to me that Disney's dining plan is far and away better than that. Go into it knowing that you will have some restrictions, policies will change, and decide whether or not you want to purchase it, but a lot of the angst seen in this thread and others would be avoided if everyone was a little more realistic (or cynical if you prefer) in outlook about the plan.

OK, I'm off my soapbox now.

I completely agree.

 

[DeirdreTours]

So Heather, you haven't actually read the brochure, you haven't asked Disney via telephone what is included and you are basing your interpretation on.......telepathy? the wisdom of Lewis??? your married it Iger???? Think whatever you want. I did read the brochure and then I called and asked the questions that concerned me before booking. So that's the info I am going with.

 

[vatmark]

Sure they do. Although I haven't reviewed the brochure, what you are paying for is one counter service, one table service, and one snack per day. What Disney chooses to include or exclude from this plan is up to them. So long as they have provided you with a table service meal, they've lived up to their part of the bargain.]



Heather...are you for real? Seriously. If I went to a signature resturant and used 2 table service credits for me and they served me a hot dog, french fries, a diet coke and a mickey bar that that would be okay because Disney is living up to their end of the bargain-I got my entree, appetizer, drink and dessert right?

If this is what the dining plan is all about then Disney should market it as such. If menus will have items on it that are not allowed to be ordered on the dining plan then market the plan as such. No where on there does it state about not being able to get certain items. It only states that there is a surcharge at 2 places. That is it.

Annie

 

[CBear]

I agree completely. I don't think there were any restrictions when the original plan was introduced, and I was certainly told more than once that yes, I coud order any appetizer, any entree, any dessert off the menu at participating restaurants.

And with one minor exception (the now infamous Baclava incident at Tangerine) that's exactly what happened during our 5 day stay in late May, and the plan added immensely to our WDW experience. AND, we spent more on souvenirs that we would have because we felt we were saving so much (that was our perception, not necessarily reality )

When new restaurants were added in May, they entered the program with a few restrictions. Fair enough. Anyone who had booked up to that point was not expecting to be able to go to Wolgang Puck's, so it would not be a disappointment to anyone to find out their favourite item wasn't part of the plan.

But, to use what I hope is an outlandish example to make my point: If I pay for the plan today, which currently has very few printed menu restrictions, and then, get to WDW in December to be told, "Oh, we changed the plan, and now you just get cereal for breakfast, a hamburger, Coke and cooke for lunch, and a slice of pizza, cookie and Coke for dessert" I will feel very cheated and angry.

Would it be legal for Disney to make such a radical change to the Dining Plan? Perhaps. Would it be an ethical way to conduct business? I don't think so - not when the plan has been marketed to most of us as a great opportunity to try new restaurants without restrictions (other than the stated inclusions - one appetizer, etc.) I don't really believe Disney would do this, but others on this thread seem to be suggesting that they would have every right to do so, and as long as we still get fed something we should be happy!

 

[2d_star_to_the_right]

We are not using the Dining Plan when we travel in 2 weeks. We chose not to do it because it was simply confusing to weed through what was, was not included, how to move credits around and so on. We bring a fair amount of food with us so things like breakfast and lunch and a snack weren't terribly important to us.

However- the thing that bothers me most about this plan is choosing a restaurant and then finding out when you get there that nothing is available without a "surcharge" that you like. Sometimes you don't want an appetizer or dessert- can you take credits for that?

Mostly though I worry about the menu choice being limiting for adults- kids universally like what is on the kids menu, but adults have far more discriminating palettes and may not like the choices reserved for them- that in my opinion makes the dining experience a waste of money if you are paying surcharges on the things you really want to eat or experience.

And since I don't like to run into "confrontations" over what is or is not included- the Dining Plan was something we passed.

just thoughts

 

[ChrisLei]

In all honesty I think that Disney is pretty clear in what is covered and not covered in thier brochure. I don't know about many other's but getting an adult appetizer for a child is a bit overboard. We are paying $10 for the child's meal plan. Not to mention most kids can't even finish the child portion entree they are presented. Most of the places give a dessert so I don't think that is a problem. But come on, you are getting a a counter service, a table service, and a snack per day, for free no less at the time you are going! I am going after the free dining plan is over and am PAYING for mine, and I still think it is a great deal. Heck, we could spend the $35 per adult, $10 per child in just one sit down dinner. That isnt including the counter service and snacks.
I have been sitting here looking at people complaining of not getting an adult entree with a child's meal and thinking: Is this kid REALLY under 9 years old??? Does this kid really eat that much??? And then I get the thought, maybe the parent wants to eat from a different appetizer that will go in name of the child (hmmmm).
I've read oh, they arent including the Signature dessert at Le CEllier (A dessert that is MEANT to be shared) for one person.
Another.. "that isnt fair they are charging extra for a lobster meal that is on the menu" Think about it... That lobster entree alone (not including the appetizer, dessert, and drink) cost more than $35 if you go to any restaurant. Would you think it'd be fair for someone to give it to you at a loss of money?
I think thier brochure is very precise in telling you what is included and what isn't. The restuarants that have an upcharge they tell you in the brochure. If you don't want to pay extra, then you don't go to those restaurants(which is what we are doing).

As a previous poster stated, this plan is designed to allow those individuals who like the feel of an all inclusive. That is what sold us on the plan. Great, we don't have to worry about dining money. It also allows us to eat at places we probably wouldn't have been able to afford to eat at. And if you are getting it for free?!?! I wouldn't complain. Heck if there is something you want to eat that is one that is upcharged for, then pay for it. The plan didn't cost you a pretty penny. Go on your vacation and have a blast. They offer so many great selections for dining on the plan, just go with it. You are saving a great deal of money anyway.

Jumping off the soap box

 

[ChrisLei]

I agree completely. I don't think there were any restrictions when the original plan was introduced, and I was certainly told more than once that yes, I coud order any appetizer, any entree, any dessert off the menu at participating restaurants.

And with one minor exception (the now infamous Baclava incident at Tangerine) that's exactly what happened during our 5 day stay in late May, and the plan added immensely to our WDW experience. AND, we spent more on souvenirs that we would have because we felt we were saving so much (that was our perception, not necessarily reality )

When new restaurants were added in May, they entered the program with a few restrictions. Fair enough. Anyone who had booked up to that point was not expecting to be able to go to Wolgang Puck's, so it would not be a disappointment to anyone to find out their favourite item wasn't part of the plan.

But, to use what I hope is an outlandish example to make my point: If I pay for the plan today, which currently has very few printed menu restrictions, and then, get to WDW in December to be told, "Oh, we changed the plan, and now you just get cereal for breakfast, a hamburger, Coke and cooke for lunch, and a slice of pizza, cookie and Coke for dessert" I will feel very cheated and angry.

Would it be legal for Disney to make such a radical change to the Dining Plan? Perhaps. Would it be an ethical way to conduct business? I don't think so - not when the plan has been marketed to most of us as a great opportunity to try new restaurants without restrictions (other than the stated inclusions - one appetizer, etc.) I don't really believe Disney would do this, but others on this thread seem to be suggesting that they would have every right to do so, and as long as we still get fed something we should be happy!

I don't think Disney would do that. I think it is an exaggeration by some. I think thier menus are pretty versatile. There is something to appease everyone. Andif it is a restuarant that doesnt have something you like then you can see the menu beforehand and decide not to go there.

I personally can't wait to use it! LOL

 

[Lewisc]

YOU SEEM TO BE DO AS POOR A JOB READING SOME OF THE POSTS AS YOU'RE DOING READING DISNEY'S BROCHURE.

I never called anyone a thief or chiseler. I never implied anyone is a thief, except for the poster who was considering making up additional children to get extra credits.

I have no problem with people who chose to use loophole in the plan to bank child credits so they can be used by adults later in the trip.

Where I differ from you is I respect Disney's right to enforce plan provisions as they were intended and even to use the language in the brochure allowing them to modify the terms and components of the plan without prior notice to adjust the plan. In previous posts you saw fit to omit most of that paragraph in the brochure I certainly expected that Disney would be putting a stop to guests using $10 child credit to purchase a $50 TS meal and still use the CS and snack. It's still not clear if and when this change will be put into effect.

Most of us would not be happy if Disney literally limited us to one appetizer, one entrée and one dessert. None of us think Disney would even consider doing that. The brochure does not in any way say or even imply that MYW Dining customers are guaranteed to have the opportunity to order every single item on the menu. That may be the way you want the plan to work, we'd all like that, but it's not what the brochure says. I've never seen a price fixed menu that didn't have surcharges for some items. I certainly would rather a WS restaurant add a surcharge for the most expensive entrée as opposed to just dropping the item from the menu. I don't think we've read a single post from anyone who had a problem at a Disney owned restaurant.

It seems likely that children will either have to settle for an appetizer from the child's' menu or do without. The plan always said children must order from the child's menu. It seems likely that at some time in the future guests will no longer be allowed to use child credits for adult meals. A few, mainly non-Disney owned restaurants, are not allowing MYW Dining guests to order a few of the more expensive items. I guess they could make you happy if they just dropped those items from their menu altogether. These are restaurants that were added late to the dining program. Most of us would rather have those WS and CSR restaurants on the plan with those restrictions rather than not having them on the plan at all.

You've already said you had a better time at Universal. You're really setting yourself up for a major disappointment the first time a CM doesn't agree with your interpretation.

Lewis seems determined to paint all who want the range of choice they were expressly promised at booking as some sort of thieves and chiselers who will ruin the dining plan for the upstanding citizens like himself. The interpretation that Disney can select a single appetizer, entree and dessert from the menu and call that the Dining Plan is fine for him-- but it won't work for me.

I think there is a very good chance that my family will have no issues at all with the dining plan. As long as we can choose from the printed menu and are provided with the meals described in the brochure.

To the poster who plans to write a letter after returning home--I would not expect ANY response beyond a "we regret that you felt inconvienced" sort of thing. If there is one thing I have learned about Disney it is that you are always better off solving the issue before you check out.

 

[vatmark]

The lobster meals that I have seen are at signature resturants which you have to use 2 TS credits for. So if I want lobster at a signature resturant and I am using 2 TS credits I should be able to get it- no? Isn't that why they are charging you 2 TS credits when you go to a signature resturant?

I don't think anything is clear in the Dining plan brochure. It is all very vague so disney can do what it feels like doing at the time.

I wouldn't expect to use childrens credits on adult meals. I don't expect my child to get an adult appetizer or an appetizer at all. I see where it says there is a surcharge for 2 resturants and that is fine. I just hope when it comes time for me to go to Disney and if I go to a resturant that did not say anything about surcharges on the brochure that indeed there are not surcharges on the menu for certain items.


And yes, I am paying for mine as well.

Annie

 

[ChrisLei]

No, Lewis, I am not in the least concerned that the "most expensive" dessert may be eliminated. My concern is that the dessert I want from that menu at that moment (whether it is .50 or $50) might be elimintated. Or the one my husband wants (which is more likely, he is a far pickier consumer than I). I was concerned enough about that possibility to inquire at the time of booking and to read the promotional materials carefully for exclusions. I am concerned enough now that I will certainly speak to someone a little higher up in the food chain that the reservations CM before we make the bulk payment on the package- and cancel if we can't get a clear, unequivical answer (meaning a list of exclusions that do not negatively affect our plans).

Cancelling doesn't mean we will never go to Disney again, but that the package no longer offers enough of a real savings for us to go in a hot, potentially rainy month several months earlier than we had planned.

And yes, we radically changed the timing of our trip to take advantage of this package pricing. But as I have said repeatedly, the package is only a real "value" to me if we can use it the way we intended and were told was fully allowed at the time of booking.

You have to keep in mind that most restaurants change thier menu items. Nothing to do with the dining plan. Mostly to do with seasonal, and what is selling and what isn't. I remember once I went to ChiChi's wanting a particular entree that they had for 3 years. Then when I went POOF it was gone from the menu! I was sooooo upset. But I can't do anything about it. They have every right to change it. What I would do in your situation is have a backup plan in place. Just in case there is a drastic change to thier menu and nothing appeases you and hubby.

 

[honeymo78]

Is lobster in general not included (even if on the menu) or just as the add on to your entree? I'm not on the MYW Dining but the Premium and no where in that brochure is there any restriction placed on what you can order. Can someone direct me to where the no lobster policy is if in fact it is for on menu lobster entrees.

 

[Lewisc]

The plan is priced assuming that not every guest will be getting an appetizer and dessert with every meal. You can still get value if you skip an occassional dessert or appetizer. I agree the plan doesn't make as much sense if you tend to skip appetizers and desserts more often than not.

From this thread you'd think guests are being denied menu items on a regular basis. So far we have guests being told children must order off the children's menu. No adult appetizers. We have guests being told the pineapple dessert is included with no substitutions at Ohana. If you want an additional dessert you pay for it. Finally we have Tangerine which is limiting you to a house dessert.

This entire thread is about a few posters that are concerned that a (probably non-Disney owned) restaurant might decide that a menu item that's designed to be shared must be ordered by the appropriate number of guests or that a CS restaurant my limit your choices to the type of items that the Disney owned CS restaurants serve.

From this some guests are concerned they'll be told a bag of chips is your meal. Give me a break.

The only hint of a confrontation is the poster who said she'll refuse to pay if the restaurant tries to charge for something that she thinks should be included.

I'm easy, if I want the most expensive item on the menu, and there is a surcharge, I'll either pay it or order something else. I don't expect that a non Disney restaurant should have to drop the dessert from the menu just to keep me happy.

However- the thing that bothers me most about this plan is choosing a restaurant and then finding out when you get there that nothing is available without a "surcharge" that you like. Sometimes you don't want an appetizer or dessert- can you take credits for that?

Mostly though I worry about the menu choice being limiting for adults- kids universally like what is on the kids menu, but adults have far more discriminating palettes and may not like the choices reserved for them- that in my opinion makes the dining experience a waste of money if you are paying surcharges on the things you really want to eat or experience.

And since I don't like to run into "confrontations" over what is or is not included- the Dining Plan was something we passed.

just thoughts

 

[vatmark]

Lewis...I don't have a problem with Disney putting surcharges on certain items but state that on the plan brochure. Simple as that.

There are 2 resturants on there that have surcharges. That's fine. But I think anyone has the right to be annoyed if they go to a resturant and a lot of the items are surcharged when it was never stated as so. The brochure doesn't have to spell out that this item and that item are surcharged just that at this resturant there are surcharges on certain items.

I am mostly worried about the unknown here. Maybe surcharges aren't going to be put on things at every resturant excpet the ones mentioned in the brochure. I don't know that but from what I am hearing about Disney and changing things however they like...it makes me nervous.

Annie

 

[DeirdreTours]

I did not say I had a better time at Universal. I said we had a great time there and now more or less alternate.

As I have told you repeatedly, I did not simply rely on my "interpretation" of the brochure. I called WDTC and relied on what they told me. If you call them right now, they will tell you the same thing. And yes, you have repeatedly posted remarks to the effect of "everyone is happy with this except for a few folks trying to exploit the plan unfairly"-- Not those exact words, but absolutely that sentiment.

Now that I have really thought if through I am pretty sure that we will be fine--As I said, we don't have a problem at all with the product we bought.