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

[Marthasor]

Thanks for the link. I read the story and wasn't impressed with the loose/general terminology thrown around compared to the very exact and precise cases I called Dining with. So I continued my experiment this morning with more calls to Dining...

First CM I spoke with was adamant that "day before" meant 24 hours. I asked if she was sure about that - that I thought it had changed. She wasn't really interested in punching in any exact/precise situations and didn't look anything up. So my takeaway was that was that CM's belief/understanding.

So I dial back for another CM and go through both the one day and two day cancellation policies. This CM actually takes the time to look up the actual policy, as well as punch in different situations for me. This CM comes back with my previous finding that a one day cancellation restaurant (all these new ones) will receive a cancelation fee if they are cancelled the same day as the reservation, but will not have a fee if canceled any time before that day. We plugged in CRT (it is currently a one day cancellation restaurant) and the CM confirmed that if I had an 8:00 AM ADR on Wednesday that I could call and cancel that ADR at 9:00 PM Tuesday and not receive a penalty (less than 24 hours).

We went through an example with a 2 day policy restaurant too - you will receive the fee if canceled either the day of or the day prior to the ADR (not 48 hours).

I'll continue my CM experiment as the day goes along to see who will actually look things up or ask a supervisor for clarification. With my experience/knowledge of the dining system and the CMs, I'm still leaning towards that the cancellation policy is not 24 or 48 hours - but determined by the calendar day instead. Not that Disney's systems are great, but think about the logistics of determining fees based on 24 hours instead of calendar days. Yes it can be programatically done, but it would be wrought with potential problems (measuring all of the times on the 5 minute increment - way easier administratively to do it by the calendar day).

Thanks for this!! I just called Disney Dining, too, to get clarification and the CM I spoke to was not really sure about the policy. I agree that the wording is REALLY ambiguous and points to "day before" as the policy and not 24 hours. The wording I got from an official Disney source is, "will be charged $10 per person if a cancellation to this reservation isn’t made at least one day in advance." I, too, asked her if I had an 8 am CP reservation on, say, Oct. 29, could I call at 5 pm on Oct. 28 to cancel without being charged a fee as that is "one day in advance"? She was really unsure and kept switching back and forth telling me to assume 24 hours and then one full day in advance (meaning we needed to call on Oct. 27 to cancel the Oct. 29 ADR without penalty), although she could not confirm any specific timeframe. Basically, she had no idea how this was going to actually be implemented She said Disney changes things on them all the time and until Oct. 26 she felt she really couldn't confirm what "one day in advance" really meant. Disney REALLY needs to clarify this not only for their guests but for the CM's who are going to have to deal with the questions and cancellations!! I understand why they want a policy in place, but they HAVE to be more specific!!!!

 

[TDC Nala]

I think the official policy reads as "day prior". I spoke with a CM on the phone and a supervisor, both said the new policy will mirror the current "2 days prior" policy in that they measure the cancelation according to when the dining line closes at 10:00 PM EST (for a call) or 11:59 pm EST for online. I gave both specific restaurants and meal times to check. Both put me on hold to check/verify and came back with the same answer.

You can still wait for an official policy. But I believe the official policy is going to state "day prior" which isn't as definitive as the timing I've offered.

The official policy, as it was released to cast members and posted here by a cast member, is in the first post and it says "at least one day in advance." So there can now be a discussion on what exactly "one day" means.

A Disney Dining receptionist explained that a full day’s notice must be given to avoid the cancellation fee. She said that, for example, a reservation made for Oct. 30 must be canceled on Oct. 28 to avoid the fee. Guests will be required to provide a credit card with reservations made on or after Oct. 26.

Even though this was in the Orlando Sentinel, they are using the same source as everyone else - "a Disney Dining receptionist" - and we are all aware of how often they give conflicting information. I don't think anyone will really know until they actually try to do it. And even then someone else may be told something else.

 

[mom2rtk]

Bite your tongue! ! ! !

If they ban all photography on all rides PLUS I have this fee-worry for all character and signature meals, it will have reached a tipping point for me.

I'll be right there with you!

 

[Tricia1972]

I'll be right there with you!

With your blue goblet in your hand

 

[maxiesmom]

Yes, and it was a dumb idea to start hard ticketed party season expecting to close the parks with no monorail. Even big smart companies do dumb things.

Maybe they tried to get by with the minimum possible staff and got caught with their pants down. Maybe there was a stomach flu going around the staff and a bunch of people were sick with no backups. Lots of possible maybes.

On multiple trips over a few years? You really are reaching to conclude the empty tables over multiple trips over the years are from people being sick.

You compairson of the monorail being closed on is not a fair one. They shut the monorail down totally, which meant they had no there to pay to run it. They still do have to pay people to be in the restaurants with the empty tables, as they are still open for business. They may make mistakes, but they are not know for being stupid for years at a time, which is what you are saying.

 

[Colleen27]

I have a real hard time believing empty tables are a result of staffing issues. They know months in advanced that a restaurant is (over)booked to capacity. Why would they not have enough CMs scheduled to be working? I believe 100% it has to do with no-shows.

Conversely, if they know they have full staffing and are seeing tables sitting empty due to no-shows, why would they still be turning people away at the podium? Neither explanation really makes sense because either way they're throwing away revenue. But something is going on - there are a LOT of reports, particularly over the last year or so, of half-empty high-demand restaurants turning away walk ups.

Personally I do think they're having some staffing issues. We've never had such clearly over-loaded servers in the past as we did on our last trip. Our server at Kona must have had 8 or 10 tables and was running most of the food and clearing away previous courses herself, where in the past a food runner would handle dropping off and clearing plates. I'd have chalked it up to a call-in or something if we didn't have similar experiences elsewhere during the week. It really felt like the only restaurants that had enough staff to give good service were the signatures and some of the non-Disney-owned venues. Now whether or not that's to blame for the no-walk-ups policy when the restaurant clearly has empty tables is another question and one we can only speculate about, but Disney is clearly expecting their servers to do more than they have in the past at the expense of the guest experience.

 

[Cafeen]

Yeah, but they are not totally stupid. When they decide they don't want to pay people to be in costume, they just stop doing character meals. The Liberty Tree Tavern and lunch in the Land pavillion being examples of that. They wouldn't just limit the number of guests they want to serve. Having to pay one or two more servers is a pittance compared to what they make filling the tables. They already have everyone still there--hostess, characters, bus people. Cutting just a couple of people off of wait staff wouldn't save them much at all.

Cutting one person off of staff entirely would save much more money than adding 2 or 3 families per night. There are many other costs to consider regarding an employee well beyond the hourly rate.

I have a real hard time believing empty tables are a result of staffing issues. They know months in advanced that a restaurant is (over)booked to capacity. Why would they not have enough CMs scheduled to be working? I believe 100% it has to do with no-shows.

You also don't know that the ADR limit when it was booked is the actual capacity of the restaurant running full. They very well can state that they have 80% of their tables open to the system. Even if everyone showed up, there'd still be empty tables sitting there.

On multiple trips over a few years? You really are reaching to conclude the empty tables over multiple trips over the years are from people being sick.

You compairson of the monorail being closed on is not a fair one. They shut the monorail down totally, which meant they had no there to pay to run it. They still do have to pay people to be in the restaurants with the empty tables, as they are still open for business. They may make mistakes, but they are not know for being stupid for years at a time, which is what you are saying.

There are many reasons for empty tables, sick staff (which would cause them to back up and have empty tables), no shows (yes, they are a reason for some), staff shortage, staff training (if they have new staff members, those staff may not be able to handle the table count of veteran staff), and cut schedules (as described above).

My personal opinion is that it's a mixture of all the above, most of which can, and does go on for years. The root of it is that a restaurant's capacity isn't only dictated by fire codes and the number of tables, that there is much else that can go into it, giving the impression that tables are just sitting idle.

Now, taken in a vacuum, the schedule vs no show is difficult to determine. However, combining that with longer waits for ADRs in some cases and recent reports (and experiences) of slow and poor service leads me to side more on the scheduling issues than no show issues. After all, if those tables were no shows, that means the server is short a table or two and therefore should be able to perform better for the tables they do have.

The more and more thought I put into this, and the more connections that I make between other issues that have been cropping up, is starting to convince me that this is coming from a cost-cutting on staff origin than a guest experience one (which you already know is how they're going to spin it).

 

[Lewisc]

The explanation we got was that we had been slated to sit at a PARTICULAR table, and those guests had not vacated.

But what I still can't get past is how mucked up their system is.

There are restaurant computer systems/programs which do just that. Guests are assigned to a specific table. Those guests will have a long wait if the group already seated decides to linger over coffee and dessert.

Do we know if that's the system Disney uses for all their restaurants? All table sizes? I could see an issue if some guests are waiting for other guests to leave while "no show" guests were assigned to a table which is now empty.

I thought Disney's system was to put guests on the next available table (for their size group).

How many guests carry a phone which accepts text messages? It shouldn't be very hard to let guests know about restaurant availability.

 

[mom2rtk]

With your blue goblet in your hand

LOL! The camera's probably the only thing I'd hold on to tighter than that goblet!

 

[SmallWorld71]

Thanks for the link. I read the story and wasn't impressed with the loose/general terminology thrown around compared to the very exact and precise cases I called Dining with. So I continued my experiment this morning with more calls to Dining...

First CM I spoke with was adamant that "day before" meant 24 hours. I asked if she was sure about that - that I thought it had changed. She wasn't really interested in punching in any exact/precise situations and didn't look anything up. So my takeaway was that was that CM's belief/understanding.

So I dial back for another CM and go through both the one day and two day cancellation policies. This CM actually takes the time to look up the actual policy, as well as punch in different situations for me. This CM comes back with my previous finding that a one day cancellation restaurant (all these new ones) will receive a cancelation fee if they are cancelled the same day as the reservation, but will not have a fee if canceled any time before that day. We plugged in CRT (it is currently a one day cancellation restaurant) and the CM confirmed that if I had an 8:00 AM ADR on Wednesday that I could call and cancel that ADR at 9:00 PM Tuesday and not receive a penalty (less than 24 hours).

We went through an example with a 2 day policy restaurant too - you will receive the fee if canceled either the day of or the day prior to the ADR (not 48 hours).

I'll continue my CM experiment as the day goes along to see who will actually look things up or ask a supervisor for clarification. With my experience/knowledge of the dining system and the CMs, I'm still leaning towards that the cancellation policy is not 24 or 48 hours - but determined by the calendar day instead. Not that Disney's systems are great, but think about the logistics of determining fees based on 24 hours instead of calendar days. Yes it can be programatically done, but it would be wrought with potential problems (measuring all of the times on the 5 minute increment - way easier administratively to do it by the calendar day).

Thanks for taking the time to do this. Having the most accurate info. available will help everyone, no matter what your stance is on the policy.

 

[mcd2745]

Conversely, if they know they have full staffing and are seeing tables sitting empty due to no-shows, why would they still be turning people away at the podium? Neither explanation really makes sense because either way they're throwing away revenue. But something is going on - there are a LOT of reports, particularly over the last year or so, of half-empty high-demand restaurants turning away walk ups.

Personally I do think they're having some staffing issues. We've never had such clearly over-loaded servers in the past as we did on our last trip. Our server at Kona must have had 8 or 10 tables and was running most of the food and clearing away previous courses herself, where in the past a food runner would handle dropping off and clearing plates. I'd have chalked it up to a call-in or something if we didn't have similar experiences elsewhere during the week. It really felt like the only restaurants that had enough staff to give good service were the signatures and some of the non-Disney-owned venues. Now whether or not that's to blame for the no-walk-ups policy when the restaurant clearly has empty tables is another question and one we can only speculate about, but Disney is clearly expecting their servers to do more than they have in the past at the expense of the guest experience.

Cutting one person off of staff entirely would save much more money than adding 2 or 3 families per night. There are many other costs to consider regarding an employee well beyond the hourly rate.


You also don't know that the ADR limit when it was booked is the actual capacity of the restaurant running full. They very well can state that they have 80% of their tables open to the system. Even if everyone showed up, there'd still be empty tables sitting there.


There are many reasons for empty tables, sick staff (which would cause them to back up and have empty tables), no shows (yes, they are a reason for some), staff shortage, staff training (if they have new staff members, those staff may not be able to handle the table count of veteran staff), and cut schedules (as described above).

My personal opinion is that it's a mixture of all the above, most of which can, and does go on for years. The root of it is that a restaurant's capacity isn't only dictated by fire codes and the number of tables, that there is much else that can go into it, giving the impression that tables are just sitting idle.

Now, taken in a vacuum, the schedule vs no show is difficult to determine. However, combining that with longer waits for ADRs in some cases and recent reports (and experiences) of slow and poor service leads me to side more on the scheduling issues than no show issues. After all, if those tables were no shows, that means the server is short a table or two and therefore should be able to perform better for the tables they do have.

The more and more thought I put into this, and the more connections that I make between other issues that have been cropping up, is starting to convince me that this is coming from a cost-cutting on staff origin than a guest experience one (which you already know is how they're going to spin it).

Anyone who thinks there is any bigger reason for empty tables other than no-shows is kidding themselves. Probably because acknowledging that no-shows are the biggest reason for empty tables hurts their arguements against this new policy - whose main purpose is reducing the no-show rate.

There is no way they are only accepting ADRs for just 80% of a restaurant's total capacity. They would be accepting walk-ups then. I'm sure they accept more than 100% of total capacity for every restaurant. They're turning away walk-ups because they are assuming guests who made reservations will show up, even if their ADR time has just passed.

As for staffing....it's possible they may be asking servers to cover more tables than before. But it doesn't make a lot of sense when you consider how small a salary the servers get. Cutting a couple of servers saves them very little while leading to potential backups and potentially slower table turnover - which will likely cost them more than they saved. And now...(as we already learned in this thread) not only is every other child in WDW getting sick, a very high percentage of restaurant servers are too!

 

[Snurk71]

Anyone who thinks there is any bigger reason for empty tables other than no-shows is kidding themselves. Probably because acknowledging that no-shows are the biggest reason for empty tables hurts their arguements against this new policy - whose main purpose is reducing the no-show rate.

I'm not kidding myself that I remember reading that Disney was actually having trouble filling staff a year or two ago, even with unemployment as high as it is. The staffing trouble is due to the type of position they're trying to fill - not a lot of people want it. Think about the service positions - part-time, small salary hoping for tips, no benefits, likely very high turnover. So yes, I do believe limited staff has played a large role in these random reports of restaurants with empty tables.

I say that last line because I've been to Disney every year and I don't recall eating in restaurants (I eat in a lot of the popular ones) with half the tables sitting open. I've been in restaurants that were half empty at opening, but that is by design to set the customer flow.

There is no way they are only accepting ADRs for just 80% of a restaurant's total capacity. They would be accepting walk-ups then. I'm sure they accept more than 100% of total capacity for every restaurant. They're turning away walk-ups because they are assuming guests who made reservations will show up, even if their ADR time has just passed.

I've shown up late (over 30 minutes) to an ADR a few times over the years and they weren't assuming I was still coming. They had moved on and were seating away!! They had to scroll back several screens to find me, then had to work to get me in. Again, that has been my experience - yours may vary.

 

[Lewisc]

Anyone who thinks there is any bigger reason for empty tables other than no-shows is kidding themselves. Probably because acknowledging that no-shows are the biggest reason for empty tables hurts their arguements against this new policy - whose main purpose is reducing the no-show rate.

Restaurants will sometimes intentionally keep some tables empty as a result of staffing. It can happen if servers call in sick. It can also happen if the kitchen is short of help. It can also happen if too many diners show up before the expected start of dinner. A restaurant staffs dinner for 6p but a lot of guests show up at 5p. I've been in many restaurants that delayed seating for any of those reasons. That might be a reason for empty tables and wallkups not being accepted near the end of lunch but before "normal" dinner time.

Disney should be able to predict "no shows" and overbook. Not possible? Then offering real reservations for this kind of dining should be reviewed. Change the system so reservations aren't being held for "no shows" and so walkups are utilized. I'm against the policy. I think people have a variety of legitimate reasons for cancelling a casual dinner meal with little notice. I think Disney either needs to overbook or reduce the number of ADRs enough so guests have a reason to consider walk up.

How about this policy. Cancel within and hour (or two) of your ADR or all your ADRs for the rest of your trip will be cancelled.

 

[tarheelmjfan]

I think the official policy reads as "day prior". I spoke with a CM on the phone and a supervisor, both said the new policy will mirror the current "2 days prior" policy in that they measure the cancelation according to when the dining line closes at 10:00 PM EST (for a call) or 11:59 pm EST for online. I gave both specific restaurants and meal times to check. Both put me on hold to check/verify and came back with the same answer.

So far, 2 calls have been placed and they have different responses. Snurk was told that they could cancel by 11:59pm for the next day. The author of the articles when this first came out were told that they'd have to cancel Tuesday for Thursday.

The 2nd scenario seems more likely to me. As Nala said, I think we'll have to wait until someone deals with it personally to see what the policy actually is. CMs are notorious for being inaccurate.

Do you though? The amount of ADRs available between 180 and 1 day will be roughly the same. We don't know yet what the restaurants plan to do when they receive the cancellations a "full day" out. (There have been two different interpretations of this "full day"). They could very well adjust scheduling gearing toward the remaining reservations, making it more difficult to get a walk up or late ADR.

From everything I've read, I think this policy will only help those who have more flexible schedules. It appears to me that it will help secure same day ADRs, because people will be more likely to cancel. I also think many people will eventually start to book less ADRs leaving more options for booking closer to dining time. As it is now, it's very difficult to get into desired restaurants, if you don't book ADRs months in advance. Most locals don't book that far out for a weekend getaway. That said, I don't automatically get upset & look for the worst in things, so I haven't spent a considerable amount of time thinking up reasons/excuses why this won't work for me. I won't know for sure, until the policy is implemented. I'm certainly not going to get upset over speculation, regardless of what actually happens.

In another thread (I think the community boards one) CF had posted further information about the policies.

Originally Posted by Cheshire Figment View Post
1. It seems that the list is all "signature" restaurants and all with character meals. Note that Akershus is the only World Showcase restaurant included, butr that is the only one with Characters.

2. The internal notice said exceptions (refunds) can be made in exceptional circumstances. This would be Guest Recovery and go on your permanent record.

Thanks for posting that info here. It sounds to me like this is a policy to establish habitual offenders not the family who has to cancel due to an illness. If you cancel an entire trip last minute, only 1 or 2 ADRs would be affected at the most. The others would be outside the window. If a family has someone get seriously ill at WDW, the canceled ADRs would be consecutive. Again, only a few would be effected. It's easy for the powers that be to see this was unpreventable. Those who book 10+ ADRs & routinely cancel last minute or only show up for 7 or 8 of them throughout the trip will be the ones affected by this policy. (This is just an example.) These are the people causing the problems, so it makes sense that they would want to be able to identify habitual offenders. The simple solution to all of this is not to book so many ADRs.

PS: I know you were only kindly answering my question & didn't post the information I was responding to.


Bottom line, as was stated earlier in the thread, we can debate all we want. Those who are against the policy will continue to think those who are for it are just taking WDW's side & not considering the individual guest. Those who are for it will continue to think what some see as well thought out replies are just more excuses &/or grasping for straws. No one is going to change their mind.

 

[tarheelmjfan]

Anyone who thinks there is any bigger reason for empty tables other than no-shows is kidding themselves. Probably because acknowledging that no-shows are the biggest reason for empty tables hurts their arguements against this new policy - whose main purpose is reducing the no-show rate.

There is no way they are only accepting ADRs for just 80% of a restaurant's total capacity. They would be accepting walk-ups then. I'm sure they accept more than 100% of total capacity for every restaurant. They're turning away walk-ups because they are assuming guests who made reservations will show up, even if their ADR time has just passed.

As for staffing....it's possible they may be asking servers to cover more tables than before. But it doesn't make a lot of sense when you consider how small a salary the servers get. Cutting a couple of servers saves them very little while leading to potential backups and potentially slower table turnover - which will likely cost them more than they saved. And now...(as we already learned in this thread) not only is every other child in WDW getting sick, a very high percentage of restaurant servers are too!

I happen to agree with you, but I'm not looking for excuses that this policy won't work. I suspect this is another one of those arguments the for/against sides will never agree on.

 

[Snurk71]

I just did another test - called the dining line.

Got a nice/polite CM and asked specifically about CRT, since it is a one-day cancellation policy restaurant already in production. I gave her the same scenario I've asked the others - if I have an 8:00 AM CRT ADR on Friday, when do I need to cancel by in order to avoid a penalty. The CM said 24 hours before - so before 8:00 AM on Thursday. I pressed her, asking if she could double-check that because I thought I had heard I could cancel any time prior. So she checked with her supervisor and came back with...

I can cancel any time Thursday as long as I cancel the day before. So another vote for the day prior, another vote against the 24 hour (even though that is what the CM initially thought).

I wonder if I should get a bonus of some kind for helping train these CMs on the cancelation policy.

 

[mcd2745]

I'm not kidding myself that I remember reading that Disney was actually having trouble filling staff a year or two ago, even with unemployment as high as it is. The staffing trouble is due to the type of position they're trying to fill - not a lot of people want it. Think about the service positions - part-time, small salary hoping for tips, no benefits, likely very high turnover. So yes, I do believe limited staff has played a large role in these random reports of restaurants with empty tables.

I say that last line because I've been to Disney every year and I don't recall eating in restaurants (I eat in a lot of the popular ones) with half the tables sitting open. I've been in restaurants that were half empty at opening, but that is by design to set the customer flow..

I've seen lots of empty tables in a number of popular restaurants that were completely booked for that meal, including places like Chef Mickey's, Cape May Cafe, Coral Reef and Crystal Palace (maybe it's a problem with restaurants starting with the letter C!).

I've shown up late (over 30 minutes) to an ADR a few times over the years and they weren't assuming I was still coming. They had moved on and were seating away!! They had to scroll back several screens to find me, then had to work to get me in. Again, that has been my experience - yours may vary.

But you were still in the system - so to some degree, yes they assumed you were still coming. And they sat you. They're not going to completely stop seating people until you show up.

 

[CandleontheWater]

Anyone who thinks there is any bigger reason for empty tables other than no-shows is kidding themselves. Probably because acknowledging that no-shows are the biggest reason for empty tables hurts their arguements against this new policy - whose main purpose is reducing the no-show rate.

There is no way they are only accepting ADRs for just 80% of a restaurant's total capacity. They would be accepting walk-ups then. I'm sure they accept more than 100% of total capacity for every restaurant. They're turning away walk-ups because they are assuming guests who made reservations will show up, even if their ADR time has just passed.

As for staffing....it's possible they may be asking servers to cover more tables than before. But it doesn't make a lot of sense when you consider how small a salary the servers get. Cutting a couple of servers saves them very little while leading to potential backups and potentially slower table turnover - which will likely cost them more than they saved. And now...(as we already learned in this thread) not only is every other child in WDW getting sick, a very high percentage of restaurant servers are too!

I guess I don't understand why they couldn't accept ADRs for only 80% of the capacity of the restaurant. Surely you don't think that they plan for 100% capacity every night? Of course they are going to have less staff and therefore less tables open for diner in the slow season vs. Christmas week. It is not an all or nothing equation.

Disney can use models (based on things like hotel bookings or last years attendance figures), to determine what is the best number of tables available, balancing guest wants with staffing realities. Those number of tables are put into the declared inventory, and are available to book 180 days out.

Disney does this with hotel rooms all the time. You can call and try and book Pop, and it will come up as no availability. This does not mean that EVERY room is full, it just means that every room they have the staffing to cover is full. Just because you want to stay there, does not mean that Disney will call in more people and open the room to you.

Really you also have to look at the big picture when it comes to employees, their sum worth to a company is more than just the hourly wage. Disney has to pay taxes on each server, and also pay into workmans comp and figure in the cost of training, and benefits. Cutting a couple of servers can really save you money in the long run.

Let me give you an example from my company. I made the same hourly wage as another employee, but because I got insurance through my husband, and I wanted to have the luxury of a flexible schedule, I declined becoming a full time salaried employee and officially worked as "contractor". Because they didn't have to pay my benefits or match my 401K along with other perks, my billing rate was much lower than my colleague, who technically had the same take home pay.

What you cost a company is so much more than just your take home pay, and in this economy, cutting staff can be a good way to improve your bottom line. It happens all the time.

 

[CandleontheWater]

Another thing I was thinking about is that if the main issue is Disney loosing money because of no shows, why haven't they instituted policies that would promote the availability of walk up seating? In reality, I feel that Disney discourages guests from even attempting to get walk up seating, which would be contrary to what they are supposedly trying to accomplish.

I am sure I'm not the only one who has seen the board outside of City Hall on Main Street that announces that all sit down restaurants are booked for the evening and the only dining available is at at CS.

If they are experiencing so many no-shows, you think that they would say that all dining reservations are booked, but that there may be seats available on a walk up basis based on cancellations and no shows, and to check at the restaurant podium. This would encourage people to check back, and fill those supposedly empty tables.

Also I have called Disney dining looking for a last minute reservation and I have been told there is nothing in all of Epcot. I was pretty bummed, but just for kicks I decided to walk up to Biergarten and just ask. Low and behold they could seat me! Maybe I was seated in one of the no-show tables, but why on earth did the CM I talk to at Disney dining not say "There is no availability for reservations, but seats may be available at certain restaurants on a walk up basis, please check at the restaurant podium".

It would seem to me that instituting a policy of encouraging walk ups, would manage to fill some of these "half empty" restaurants, and go a long way to making up any lost revenue.

 

[mcd2745]

Another thing I was thinking about is that if the main issue is Disney loosing money because of no shows, why haven't they instituted policies that would promote the availability of walk up seating?

Thye just did.