New credit card guarantees. Restaurant list, policy & common questions in 1st post

[kaytieeldr]

But I'm a disappointed customer and I'm going to share it. As someone pointed out earlier - doesn't Disney read these boards?

Would somebody please be so kind as to let Snurk71 know that while Disney does, indeed, have people who monitor popular Internet forums... direct contact is the most efficient and effective way to let one's feelings and suggestions be known? Thanks.

IMO, that communication is really important - especially since right now there's a poll on this board asking if DISers are for or against the new policy...and 'for' was beating 'against' by more than 2:1 a few minutes ago.

 

[mello]

That's just it, it would not be just $10 for most families. It would have been $40 ($50 next trip since youngest DD is going) for the one ADR we called to cancel.

I too must have also missed the partial party fee being waived because that is not how it was presented in the beginning and that is not how it works now with cc hold meals. So I'll wait and see if that really happens.

I thought our odds of someone in our family getting sick while on vacation were pretty slim too...that was until DS spiked a fever of 103 on our first full day there.

The odds of getting sick while on vacation is actually higher than getting sick at home. First, airplanes are notorious germ-breeders because of the recycled air in tight quarters for many hours with many people. Then once at Disney, there is the heat and humidity, the walking that many aren't accustomed to, the excitement and extra adrenaline being pumped into little bodies, late hours, extra food treats, often people don't stay adequately hydrated, and of course the germs everywhere - turnstiles, railings, ride restraints & handles, doorknobs, people coughing and sneezing in lines, etc. etc.

I think some people who seem incredulous that anyone would get sick on vacation might be very surprised at just how many sick kids a day there actually are at WDW.

Actually, that's the only reason I'm hesitant about this policy. On the whole, I'm in favor of any policy that would make reservations and/or walk-ups easier to get, by causing people to think twice before booking more ADRs than they need, and by encouraging people to actually call to cancel their reservations. And I think this may work toward that to some extent.

However, the "hoarders" will still be able to hoard, up to the 24 hour mark, or whatever the cutoff actually is. And once inside the 24 hour mark, it will be only those who really did intend to keep their ADRs that are penalized when they can't because of the aforementioned sickness or child meltdown issues. Those are the things beyond a parent's control, and so I feel for them. I'm frankly surprised at the number of unfeeling remarks about sick kids here on this board! Simply deciding that you don't want to go to dinner because you'd rather do something else is a decision you make, and I have no problem with a penalty for that. But to have a child with a fever and upset tummy, who's also likely quite disappointed at having to miss dinner with the characters, and to lose the use of those points on the dining plan, is penalty enough, without getting slammed with an additional $40-$60 fee for nothing (it isn't just $10 for a family).

When I analyze it like that, even though in theory I like the idea, it's enough to really cause me to reconsider doing the dining plan. We don't ever get free dining, since we use DVC, and since I have 3 kids, and usually somebody at least gets the sniffles on any given trip, I would consider it too risky to be out both the meal I've prepaid for, and a $50 fee. The dining plan sort of "forces" the need for ADR's, whereas without it, things are more flexible. I might still make a few ADR's, but likely not as many. Everyone has to choose how they're going to deal with this.

Perhaps Disney is, after all, trying to sabotage the dining plan?

 

[maxiesmom]

I love the "it is not up to Disney to see to kids and their needs". So the time has come - change the slogan from "the Happiest Place on Earth" - to "hey we're trying to make a buck here!"

They had the year of a Million Dreams" and "What will you celebrate?" - they next one is "Eat Your dinner or Else!"

And those pumpkins you see leaving Magic Kingdom change them from "See You Real Soon" to "See you When You Can Pony up More Bucks"

It is up to the parent to see to their kids health and well being, not Disney. It is called being a responsible parent. Holding Disney accountable becasue they supposedly force you into taking your sick child into a restaurnt is a cop-out, and and a pretty lame exucse for poor parenting.

As much as some people try to ignore it, the fact is that Disney is a business, and everything they do is to make money. And apparently counting on people to do the right thing and cancel ADRs they don't want isn't working and is costing Disney money. Does anyone really think they should shrug their collective shoulders and go "Oh well, it is only money."?

 

[mom2rtk]

I love the "it is not up to Disney to see to kids and their needs". So the time has come - change the slogan from "the Happiest Place on Earth" - to "hey we're trying to make a buck here!"

They had the year of a Million Dreams" and "What will you celebrate?" - they next one is "Eat Your dinner or Else!"

And those pumpkins you see leaving Magic Kingdom change them from "See You Real Soon" to "See you When You Can Pony up More Bucks"

We stayed at the Grand Canyon lodge right after a stop in Disney in 2010. That evening the kids found a mouse in their room, complete with mouse hole in the corner of the room.

My oldest son (17 at the time) was convinced Mickey found out we left the park with a couple dollars in our wallets and had come to claim it!

 

[Colleen27]

Actually, that's the only reason I'm hesitant about this policy. On the whole, I'm in favor of any policy that would make reservations and/or walk-ups easier to get, by causing people to think twice before booking more ADRs than they need, and by encouraging people to actually call to cancel their reservations. And I think this may work toward that to some extent.

Same here. If we knew for sure that there would be an exception in place for illness, even, I'd be more positive about the change. But as others have pointed out if there is such an exception it will certainly be misused and likely won't last long.

I don't know that Disney is trying to sabotage the dining plan exactly, but it has crossed my mind that this is a way to push DDP and DxDDP guests away from maximizing the plan by loading the itinerary with character meals (about the best bang for the buck on the basic plan) or signature meals (arguably the best use of the DxDDP). Now there's a concrete reason to make ADRs for the less desirable places around Disney rather than loading the itinerary with popular meals, and that frees up tables at the character/signature venues for cash guests who would skip the TS rather than booking those less desirable options when their top choices are booked solid.

 

[mom2rtk]

Same here. If we knew for sure that there would be an exception in place for illness, even, I'd be more positive about the change. But as others have pointed out if there is such an exception it will certainly be misused and likely won't last long.

I don't know that Disney is trying to sabotage the dining plan exactly, but it has crossed my mind that this is a way to push DDP and DxDDP guests away from maximizing the plan by loading the itinerary with character meals (about the best bang for the buck on the basic plan) or signature meals (arguably the best use of the DxDDP). Now there's a concrete reason to make ADRs for the less desirable places around Disney rather than loading the itinerary with popular meals, and that frees up tables at the character/signature venues for cash guests who would skip the TS rather than booking those less desirable options when their top choices are booked solid.

I don't think for a moment that Disney is trying to discourage or sabatoge the dining plan. I think it has been instrumental in accomplishing their goal of packing the parks year round.

But I do think it might be a side effect they didn't anticipate. Between that and the ever growing cost of upgrading free dining at a value resort ($15-$16 next year) they are getting very close to my jumping off point.

NLD..... I'm with you on feeling like once I miss the deadline and know I'll be charged I won't bother to cancel (whereas before I would). Once they start to play hardball, I'm sure I'll return the same consideration they gave me.

 

[MSLRAC]

Same here. If we knew for sure that there would be an exception in place for illness, even, I'd be more positive about the change. But as others have pointed out if there is such an exception it will certainly be misused and likely won't last long.

I agree, if Disney had said here is what we are going to do but there will be exceptions for documented illness or injury then I would be all for it. But they aren't and as their rules stand now for cc hold ADRs, they are not a bit flexible or understanding.

I don't think for a moment that Disney is trying to discourage or sabatoge the dining plan. I think it has been instrumental in accomplishing their goal of packing the parks year round.

But I do think it might be a side effect they didn't anticipate. Between that and the ever growing cost of upgrading free dining at a value resort ($15-$16 next year) they are getting very close to my jumping off point.

NLD..... I'm with you on feeling like once I miss the deadline and know I'll be charged I won't bother to cancel (whereas before I would). Once they start to play hardball, I'm sure I'll return the same consideration they gave me.

I too am wondering what effect this is going to have on the sale of the DDP, especially the DxDP. I suspect a negative one simply because with a family, the DxDP could end up being way to risky for some folks. I know for us that this has been our jumping off point.

 

[dismommom]

We stayed at the Grand Canyon lodge right after a stop in Disney in 2010. That evening the kids found a mouse in their room, complete with mouse hole in the corner of the room.

My oldest son (17 at the time) was convinced Mickey found out we left the park with a couple dollars in our wallets and had come to claim it!

Thanks For giving me a great laugh. I guess if I just do counter service I'll have more to spend on Christmas decorations

 

[MELSMICE]

As far as caring about the customers' vacation experiences... I still have yet to see an explanation of how this policy enhances anyone's vacation experience.

This isn't really an explanation, but for me and people that vacation like me, it will potentially enhance my experience. Like I said, many times we'll be at the pool & decide to call for an ADR for that evening. If having to cancel an unused ADR the night prior this can free up space for my family.

I don't like the day before (it's not 24 hours) policy and ask the question what's day before get Disney over a 3 hour policy? All the responses I seem to get are - cause it's Disney's restaurant and they said so. Outside of the one case where the ADR will be available first thing in the morning (which I question what value that is over the hard feelings the day before policy may cause), that's not really a supportive answer.

See above response. For families that vacation like we do, this is an opportunity for us to get ADR's at those popular restaurants.

 

[SmallWorld71]

You know, this thread has gotten me thinking about ADR hoarders and ADR skippers and I've realized that I don't really care about them at all. Really, they don't impact my vacation. If someone wants to make 65 reservations over a week, and skip all of them, that is there prerogative, it does not really impact the enjoyment I derive from my vacation.

Let me explain it this way, my mom and I decided last month to take a WDW vacation in Dec. I took a look at what dining was available and I wasn't able to get an ADR at CP or Chef Mickey's, both which I think DS would have enjoyed. Am I upset at hoarders, or am I going to get angry at people who have those reservations and don't use them, no! I know that I should have planned in advance and I didn't, so I get what available. I believe that the people who planned ahead have the right to make whatever ADRs they want.

Now here is the crux of the matter- do I wish that there was some availability at Crystal Place or Chef Mickeys- sure I do! However, I do not want the reservation bad enough to make it worth putting up with this policy. I'd rather not get the reservation this time around, then have to worry about penalties when I DO manage to secure those coveted ADRs.

I'm guessing that those who don't like the policy don't think that the trade off is worth it, but those that do like the policy think that it is.

I don't worry about what other people do or do not do on their vacations, I concentrate on enjoying my own. This policy will put a damper on my enjoyment by causing me to worry about dining penalties.

 

[Euphoria027]

And those of you that are in favor of this policy and refuse to acknowledge that there is another side to this debate are getting just as frustrating!

I think most of us that are against it can see why Disney is doing it, we just don't like the time frame. But those of you in favor of it seem to think that there is never, ever a valid reason to miss an ADR whether you call and cancel or not. You seem to think those of us against it are "rule breaker" that "hoard" ADRs just for kicks. That is not the case for the majority of people here.

I think this is a situation that we are just going to have to agree to disagree about but in doing so, you can't just dismiss the other side's valid arguments as rubbish because they go against your valid arguments.

I meant that specific poster and that specific comment, not the countless other arguments. I don't expect to change anyone's mind.

 

[Cafeen]

Would somebody please be so kind as to let Snurk71 know that while Disney does, indeed, have people who monitor popular Internet forums... direct contact is the most efficient and effective way to let one's feelings and suggestions be known? Thanks.

IMO, that communication is really important - especially since right now there's a poll on this board asking if DISers are for or against the new policy...and 'for' was beating 'against' by more than 2:1 a few minutes ago.

Just because the numbers are 2:1, doesn't mean those 2 are right (besides, I don't vote in the polls, as I did not want to start another debate thread).

Most of us against the policy are coming here with rational, thought out case scenarios where the policy will have the (hopefully) unintended consequence of negatively affecting honest vacationers' trips more than those intending to abuse the system. We're using current issues with the current system to highlight potential issues with the upcoming system. That sort of discussion would get that thread locked.

I'd also suspect (well, actually, I know from talking to Guest Services last week on a letter I wrote them regarding my latest trip) that they're more concerned with the actual responses than just the numbers. Responses like "I like it!" and "I just don't like it and think it's bad" do NOT help them in any way whatsoever. She actually discussed this with me last week. They rely on solid reasoning behind either stance to get a better idea of guest feedback.

The fact that the biggest, loudest argument for the policy is "Well, it's Disney's policy to they can do whatever they want!" falls short of addressing potential benefits of it as it is currently designed. We were asked for ways that we would change it, those methods were given, the biggest of which would be reducing the window to 3 hours. We've rallied around that mark, though it is not the only issue that some of us have.

All we ask is to return the same favor that we gave, as to explaining why the policy, as it's currently designed, is more appropriate for not only you personally, but Disney as a whole and your average vacationing family. It's already nearly a given that a shorter window would give Disney ample time to accept a walk-up or late ADR for that time slot, so why is it better as it sits today?

 

[Mkrop]

Would somebody please be so kind as to let Snurk71 know that while Disney does, indeed, have people who monitor popular Internet forums... direct contact is the most efficient and effective way to let one's feelings and suggestions be known? Thanks.

IMO, that communication is really important - especially since right now there's a poll on this board asking if DISers are for or against the new policy...and 'for' was beating 'against' by more than 2:1 a few minutes ago.

Where is this poll? I need to vote agaisnt it

I think too many are not thinking this through and only thinking about the hoarders, they are not thinking about the actual $40, $50 etc that will be leaving their pocket when Johhny gets sick, or when they get to MK and the touring plan was wrong and the place is packed and they would like to hop elsewhere and now cant bc they need to come back for a CP dinner, or when it is 30 degree or raining or way too hot for them and realizing that AK is not the best choice of park for that particular day yet they have Tusker House. for a late lunch.

I think once this is put into practice people are going to realize how much they liked the flexibilty of their plans before. I know personally I am not willing to gamble $40 that something may not come up so I guess I am glad my kids are outgrowing character meals. Although I still have one scheduled for me coming up!

Plus someone mentioned that when you have La Nouba or a party etc scheduled, you might tour differently so you make the event and not have to cancel, go slower, go back for a nap etc. That is fine if it is one day of your vacation, but I dont want every meal to be like that bc of the risk of having to pay if we cant make it.

Like I said in the other thread not being able to cancel the CP Package bc of record low temps put quite the damper on our evening. We went and dealt with it bc we could not reschedule, but it wasnt fun and to me that is the whole point of vacation. So whether it is bc it is too cold, or bc your kids are drenched and you dont want to sit in an air conditioned restaurant in wet attire, you should NOT be penalized but under this new policy you will. That stinks plain and simple and when the general public gets out there and starts getting charged I think they are NOT going to be happy campers.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Just because the numbers are 2:1, doesn't mean those 2 are righ

I didn't say they were, or that they're wrong; I don't vote in polls that don't have an 'other' option .

I'd also suspect (well, actually, I know from talking to Guest Services last week on a letter I wrote them regarding my latest trip) that they're more concerned with the actual responses than just the numbers. Responses like "I like it!" and "I just don't like it and think it's bad" do NOT help them in any way whatsoever. She actually discussed this with me last week. They rely on solid reasoning behind either stance to get a better idea of guest feedback.

I agree. Which is why I will again recommend that everyone upset with the change contact WDW Guest Communications directly. Don't just sit back and wait for the employees who monitor Internet forums to sift through this thread, make notes, pass them on to the appropriate department, and hope your voices are heard.

Where is this poll? I need to vote against it

Nope. If you're voting against it, you'll have to find it yourself Seriously, it should be right on the first page of this (restaurant reservations) board.

 

[Snurk71]

Just because the numbers are 2:1, doesn't mean those 2 are right (besides, I don't vote in the polls, as I did not want to start another debate thread).

Most of us against the policy are coming here with rational, thought out case scenarios where the policy will have the (hopefully) unintended consequence of negatively affecting honest vacationers' trips more than those intending to abuse the system. We're using current issues with the current system to highlight potential issues with the upcoming system. That sort of discussion would get that thread locked.

I'd also suspect (well, actually, I know from talking to Guest Services last week on a letter I wrote them regarding my latest trip) that they're more concerned with the actual responses than just the numbers. Responses like "I like it!" and "I just don't like it and think it's bad" do NOT help them in any way whatsoever. She actually discussed this with me last week. They rely on solid reasoning behind either stance to get a better idea of guest feedback.

The fact that the biggest, loudest argument for the policy is "Well, it's Disney's policy to they can do whatever they want!" falls short of addressing potential benefits of it as it is currently designed. We were asked for ways that we would change it, those methods were given, the biggest of which would be reducing the window to 3 hours. We've rallied around that mark, though it is not the only issue that some of us have.

All we ask is to return the same favor that we gave, as to explaining why the policy, as it's currently designed, is more appropriate for not only you personally, but Disney as a whole and your average vacationing family. It's already nearly a given that a shorter window would give Disney ample time to accept a walk-up or late ADR for that time slot, so why is it better as it sits today?

That is a far too well thought out and rational post, sir.

 

[Cafeen]

I didn't say they were, or that they're wrong; I don't vote in polls that don't have an 'other' option .

I agree. Which is why I will again recommend that everyone upset with the change contact WDW Guest Communications directly. Don't just sit back and wait for the employees who monitor Internet forums to sift through this thread, make notes, pass them on to the appropriate department, and hope your voices are heard.

Well, point taken for the first part .

For the second, I do plan to (and furthermore, other than the four words preceding this statement, how do you know I haven't , I mean, other than the fact that I just told you I haven't... um... this should go before that point, but that's too much work to copy and paste it). However, not until a) I've wrapped my head around BOTH sides of the debate, and b) I fully decide how I feel about it for my personal trips. Which is part of what this thread is helping me do.

Levity is never a bad thing!

That is a far too well thought out and rational post, sir.

I have a bad habit of doing that.

At least I occasionally follow it up with an inane, irrational, sometimes snarky post (Not in this case though, well, except part of it may be rather inane)

 

[kaytieeldr]

Yeah, I'm not concerned about you, Cafeen. I just think if all the passion in this thread was sent to WDW instead, with lucid, unemotional explanations explaining why a shorter cancellation time frame would be [as] effective, the powers that be could reconsider.

Instead, this thread contains a lot of "it's not fair to me!" and "it inconveniences me!" and "if this..." and "if that...".

 

[Cafeen]

Instead, this thread contains a lot of "it's not fair to me!" and "it inconveniences me!" and "if this..." and "if that...".

To be fair, this occurs on both sides of the fence (which I'm sure you're aware of, but just to clarify it some more).

 

[kaytieeldr]

It does - but the people who are neutral about it arent going to contact Disney at all, and the people who are happy about it may shoot off a "thank you" or "it's about time" e-mail - but none will likely have any suggestions about how to make it even better, or tweaking the times...

 

[trainingupmy4princes]

Just want to mention - skip ice in your drinks. That Florida water almost ruined two vacations before we realized we had to cut out ALL Florida water.

Thank you I never thoought of the ice.