I was actually going to post that there is a lot of "sarcastic speculation" about what "might" happen.
Yes, and I am sure that I have been guilty as well without meaning to be. So I do apologize for past and future ones.
I think the worse thing Disney can do is start making an exceptions.
I agree with this because look at other threads, such as the hard ticket parties. It starts at 7PM but people wanted the ability to shop, and to be fair-Disney did want that extra money-so they let people arrive at 4PM. Well, now many people that have arrived at 4 PM don't think it is fair that the non-ticket guests have snuck into the lines for character pics and other "party-only" things, or that they have to wait until 7PM to do the party-only things. It also works that way with the FPs- what was begun as a courtesy has now become a requirement for those in the know and policies and rules were changed and boy, are people hot to think they will have to change how they vacation to accommodate a potential policy change.
I understand all of that. I've never been one to fuss about how Disney needs to give me free wi-fi. But when they require a CC hold for all the popular TS restaurants, then provide terrible phone and computer systerms, THEY put me in a bad spot if I DO need to cancel. I'm just saying that if they are going to require the CC hold, they need to AT LEAST do what is within their control to make it as easy as possible. That is, unless their goal really IS to maximize the $10 fees they collect.
And honestly. If my only complaint is the $10 a day fee for wi-fi........ why would I upgrade to a $200 a night hotel from my $100 a night value? Not very good math.
I didn't say to upgrade to a $200 hotel...my statement was that if you stayed at a $200 off-site, or in another city, you would still pay for the wi-fi regardless of Disney or not. I would love free wi-fi as well, but as someone in the business (my property offers free wi-fi), I can see why they would charge for it, especially in a "resort" environment. And people pay for it. Why, I don't know, but hey, some do.
Wi-fi is a huge thing for me, so I do wish they would offer it- it would be a big complaint for me, so I am not insulting you at all. I try not to work on vacation, but sometimes, being able to check my email without jumoing through hoops or paying for roaming and all that jazz would be nice.
But, I will say that they do not put you in a bad spot- technically, you put yourself there. Not saying YOU (when I say you, I mean the collective you) do it but an example based on what a PP said early in the thread...my family is at the pool and they want to stay longer, so I decide to cancel my ADR, 1 hour prior to arrival. (Now, adding in what you posted)...since Disney didn't provide free internet, and with a hold for 15 minutes on the dining line with my personal phone, it is automatically Disney's fault that I did not get up and go to the front desk to cancel my ADR because of the $10 spotty wi-fi that I would not pay for and the fact that my decision to stay at the pool is more important than my responsibility to cancel an ADR that denies someone else the table as well as the opportunity to make money for Disney's bean-counters.
I bit of wild speculation here....but speaking for myself - I HAVE done both on and offsite many times. I know quite well what I'm getting in both cases. Implying otherwise is a bit insulting.
I always go where I find the best deal, and the best policies. I never book a vacation that I don't plan to take, but I've always considered a generous cancellation policy - to be a VERY important factor. I rarely choose non-refundable resort room rates over ones that allow me to cancel up to 24 hours.
I've never been any restaurant that has required a CC guarentee.
It's about getting the best deal for my money. There are great places to EAT offsite. I think this new policy is going to tip the tables even further for us to eat at the outstanding offsite places we ALREADY ENJOY, over the mediocre onsite places. If we are eating offsite, then it makes little sense to stay onsite.
Along that same note, how DO the other 1,000 hotels in the WDW area manage to stay afloat? They don't have anywhere near the data that WDW has, and they manage to handle no shows just fine. I'm sure every offsite restaurant in Orlando has to deal with no shows. But they don't have crazy fees to force guests to keep those ADR's.
If DIsney has a major problem with no shows - then THEY have done something absurdly wrong. Penalizing the customer further makes little sense.
Then again, I've seen no proof that Disney DOES have a big problem with no shows - only speculation. Show me the numbers!
I never mean to be insulting, but a lot of people on this thread have stated they paid a lot of money for the convenience, or the experience, or the ambviance. You are a smart shopper, much like myself. I know what I am getting into, but a lot of people feel that Disney is not providing what they should but it works both ways. As a hotelier myself, I can pretty much guarantee you that in the peak and potential peak seasons, other hotels are getting a no-show fee and then getting a last-minute reservation from someone else as well. In slow seasons, they are running cut-throat specials to stay afloat and not providing the same thing that Disney has to provide year-round, all the time. Each hotel, even if it is the same brand, can get waivers to do different things that save them money or allow them the freedom to variate. As far as restaurants, even in the slow seasons, they aren't relying just on WDW for business. There are conferences, there are corporations, and there are plenty of people living in the area- and their overhead isn't nearly what Disney's is and always will be. Disney has to stick to a precise menu, all the time. When I owned a restaurant, I could deviate from the menu, run specials, and do other things to increase my profit when it was slow. But Orlando is a big town. There are still many that fail- it is generally not the chains, as most people gravitate to those.
The numbers have been posted in this thread, coming courtesy of Touring Plans. The no-show rates average between 10%-33%, depending on the month (10% is in July and 33% in January). Some have questioned those figures. But I have a hard time thinking that they would publish those figures in their book (The Unoffical Guide) and on their website unless they knew they were accurate. 10% is a very high rate, 33% is absurdly high. Then there is the question of variance. All we can do is speculate, but if the avergage for the month of January is 33%, then that must mean there are many days where the number is actually higher (possibly much higher). I think that constitues a HUGE problem for Disney - and would for any business.
I would say it is so high in Jan. due to the weather being a factor- it is already unpredictable year-round....but yes, even 10% is high. Think about a 100 seat TS place. 10% is 10 tables. On the average, 10 tables with 4 people- that's 40 people. Even with eating the bare minimum, it probably means a loss of $12 per person. So 40 x $12= $480.00. But, when the goal is a turnover ration of 4 times per night, this is $1920. Then, times that by 2 for lunch time= $3840. Now, with an average of 5 TS restaurants in the park, that's $19,200 per day x 4 parks=$76,800 x 365 days= $28M and some change per year. That is a huge hit, and a lot of wasted/spoiled food as well as not including the potential loss of that amount times 2 if they cannot fill the seats, meaning that they will have to increase the cost even more. meaning less customers overall. Yes, it is a little far-fetched but it brings a little more light to the subject.
.
)).
