nEW DINING PLAN CHANGES ARE LOUSY!

[DVC Grammy]

Jim--Disney's option is to open more buffet restaurants. They did this last using the taco restaurant and will be doing this year, setting up a buffet restaurant in tomorowland. I'm sure Disney could do the same in EPCOT. Odyssey, the building that was used for the celebration and even the WoL pavilion are all locations that might be available. Disney could even convert a CS restaurant to a TS buffet. A generic buffet isn't what most of us buy the plan for.

It won't be popular but the room service option is way for Disney to get guests to burn credits and get fed.

The non-Disney restaurants have a third option. They have to make money with whatever reimbursement rate Disney gives them. That might include trying to surcharge some items such as what Teppanyaki did or just getting rid of every expensive menu item. Even consider changing the restaurant to a buffet.

IIRC, many years ago, the Odyssey was a cafeteria-type restaurant. We never ate there, so I can't say what type of food was served. I would guess that it would be fairly easy to re-configure it back into a restaurant.

 

[mickey2000]

Bicker--The WS restaurants came into the plan in 2005. I'll agree with those posters who speculate the original contract was probably for around 18 months, through 12/31/2006.

The major change on 1/1/2006 was Coral Reef going from 2 credits to 1 credit and CRT going from 1 credit to 2 credits. I'm not sure when that was announced but it really wasn't worth a lot of posts. CR was a positive and CRT was a given when the new pricing structure for cash guests was announced.

The 2007 changes are the first major changes that weren't improvements.

I'll speculate that at least some restaurants found more MYW Dining guests than anticipated (particularly with Disney offering free dining), found guests were more creative with sharing than anticipated and some restaurants found guests were cherry picking restaurants based on lobster. Teppanyaki found they couldn't afford to be one of the only 1 credit restaurants that serve lobster. Pepper Market may be questioning why they're giving a $30 rib eye steak dinner for under $10. The compromise was allowing PM to restrict the dessert but now even that concession is gone.

Pepper Market is run by an outside company from California. It is not a Disney operation. I got this info from a manager that I know.

 

[Sammie]

Nothing is final concerning the WS restuarants and CSR at this time and I truly feel before the end of the year you will see additional restaurants added.

 

[Sammie]

I don't think there's any doubt about that -- you can't get into Le Cellier as it is now! It will be VERY difficult next year, if the lineup holds as it is now.

I also think you're going to see a backlash against DDP from the free dining folks this year. I don't know how much of it we'll see here, because hopefully all of our members are savvy enough to know to make ADRs. But I'm sure a lot of WDW newbies are going on the free plan and will be in for a shock when they commando the parks all day and then "drop by" for their TS dinner!

We were at WDW in May, during pretty low visitation, and saw days where there was no TS availability all day at MK when it opened in the morning. We also saw a number of irate visitors who could not get into restaurants. I wouldn't want to be a host/hostess at a WDW restaurant the next six weeks!

We made ADRs many months in advance of our trip this week and after arriving found that our schedule had changed. We were able to rebook on short notice of one day or even same day, Captain Jack's, Cape May, Turf Club, Concourse Steakhouse and Yachtsman and added LeCellier.

I think there is availability for same day or next day ADRs if needed. I also know they are experimenting with a new program where when a guest books their trip and gets the DDP they are encouraging the guest to book ADRs and even contacting them back later to remind them.

 

[Sammie]

I figured it would take allot less than three days for you to blame all the changes on this. Do you have any hard evidence of this? These restaurants were making more margin on the people who were paying OOP for their kids meals than what they were receiving from Disney. As for Disney, what they are doing to these restaurants pales in comparison to a family maximizing DDP pooled credits. Millions have been invested by these restaurants to open on Disney property and Disney is playing a game of legal blackmail with them. Take a chance on having many empty tables, or accept what we are willing to pay you to provide meals for our guests, even though this amount does not give you the profit margin that you need to operate. These restaurants may have been filled to capacity with DDP, but that does not mean they are making money. Same can be said of the Disney restaurants, but Disney is reaping the other benefits that DDP brings. If these restaurants do not participate it will be because of Disney greed, not families using the pooled credits to their advantage.

Do you have any hard evidence of your accusations that Disney is playing a game of legal blackmail with them.

The WS restuarant's participation is still under negotiation. Using a child's entitlement to purchase adult meals was a huge headache to all involved including the WS restuarants. We are here now and everyone from managers at these restaurants to servers are complaining about it.

Changes to the system will prevent that and possibly that is what the WS restaurants are waiting on.

 

[Lewisc]

I'm not the poster, and I agree "legal blackmail" is overstating the point.

You are missing the point of the poster. A greedy guest pays out of pocket for the kids meal instead of using credits. Chefs charges $7 for a kids meal, plus tax and tip. Compare that with the estimated $5-$6 Disney pays the restaurant. It's possible the restaurant comes out ahead if the guest pays out of pocket for kids meals. That assumes the "banked credits" aren't used at the same restaurant for additional guests or an additional meal. Disney loses if guest cheat but I'm not sure if the restaurant loses.

The WS restaurants are really forced to accept Disney's terms. Even if that means reduced profits or having to gut their menus. CRT and Brown Derby are both signature restaurants. There isn't any logical reason why Le Cellier and Coral Reef shouldn't also be 2 credit restaurants. That would allow Chefs to also be a signature restaurant.

Do you have any hard evidence of your accusations that Disney is playing a game of legal blackmail with them.

The WS restuarant's participation is still under negotiation. Using a child's entitlement to purchase adult meals was a huge headache to all involved including the WS restuarants. We are here now and everyone from managers at these restaurants to servers are complaining about it.

Changes to the system will prevent that and possibly that is what the WS restaurants are waiting on.

 

[Brian Noble]

Well, I can think of a reason. At DS and MK, HBD and CRT don't have any non-Disney competition. At EP, LC and CR do. Disney can afford to take a loss on those two restaurants as long as the plan balances out elsewhere---why not use that as an opportunity to put the squeeze on the outside vendors?

I don't know that I believe that reason, though. If itr is, the entire premise is really in conflict with the situation at AK, where Disney owns NO sit-down restaurants, and the only new one being built is ALSO an outside contractor. You'd think that if WDW were really trying to play hardball with the outside vendors at Epcot, they would not have simultaneously signed with Landry's on the new AK place.

 

[Lewisc]

The non-Disney restaurants are really partners more than competitors. Disney has decided to have outside companies, almost exclusively, run the restaurants at DTD, AK and CSR. I'm sure the non-Disney restaurants pay Disney rent, possibly a % of sales.

I wouldn't use the term "legal blackmail" but what is the point of allowing outside vendors but then try to squeeze them out? Disney is putting more outside restaurants into DTD and AK.

My guess is Disney and the restaurants are trying to gage the effect of policies such as separating the credits.

Well, I can think of a reason. At DS and MK, HBD and CRT don't have any non-Disney competition. At EP, LC and CR do. Disney can afford to take a loss on those two restaurants as long as the plan balances out elsewhere---why not use that as an opportunity to put the squeeze on the outside vendors?

I don't know that I believe that reason, though. If itr is, the entire premise is really in conflict with the situation at AK, where Disney owns NO sit-down restaurants, and the only new one being built is ALSO an outside contractor. You'd think that if WDW were really trying to play hardball with the outside vendors at Epcot, they would not have simultaneously signed with Landry's on the new AK place.

 

[Pedler]

The WS restaurants are really forced to accept Disney's terms. Even if that means reduced profits or having to gut their menus. CRT and Brown Derby are both signature restaurants. There isn't any logical reason why Le Cellier and Coral Reef shouldn't also be 2 credit restaurants. That would allow Chefs to also be a signature restaurant.

The problem that Le Cellier and Coral Reef and all the WS places have is that in Epcot there is a lot more competition for Ts places. Coral Reef was 2 TS and it changed to 1. My guess is that the volume wasn't sustaining it as a 2 TS place.

At the Magic Kingdom the non buffet / family / all inclusive style places are pretty much limited to 2 places. In Epcot there is a lot more most of which are non Disney owned places It becomes hard for just one or two of them to become signature places. The in essence double the cost to DDP patrons and would probably take a big hit in business. If they don't take the plan they end up taking a big hit in business because there are two places that do take the plan and DDP may just plan their days to not eat at Epcot. If they do take the plan then they in essence loose some control over their menus as they have to have items that allow them to make a profit on Disney's terms.

I don't see this getting any better in the future for them either. Iger was recently quoted in a conference call to analyst about the parks as saying the intent was to get people to stay on site longer and spend more time on property. The dinning plan, ME and MYW ticket pricing are all a part of that. With MYW Ticket pricing your cost per day drops significantly after the 4th day. They seem to be running DDP promos more than I would have thought. I don't see Disney letting up on pushing the plan to people so my guess is that the WS places will have to suck it up and take the plan. They will just have to accept watering down the menus so the pricing makes it work for them.

 

[bicker]

Yes, Pedler is exactly right: This is what the guests, in general, want, and so the restaurants just have to accept that.

 

[JimMIA]

It's possible the restaurant comes out ahead if the guest pays out of pocket for kids meals. That assumes the "banked credits" aren't used at the same restaurant for additional guests or an additional meal. Disney loses if guest cheat but I'm not sure if the restaurant loses.

Yeah...but only if you take that one meal and examine it in a vacuum.

However, if that unused child's credit gets used for an adult meal, somebody is going to get $5 instead of $22 or whatever they get. When you are in a marketplace like WS, you know that those discrepancies are eventually going to get somewhat evened out. So Chefs may not lose on what that family did, but over the longer term somebody else will nail them.

And, if you are Chefs, or Le Cellier, or Coral Reef, you are probably take a lot more of those child-credit-for-adult-meal hits than Alfredo's.

You also have to get over with 8-9 of those OOP kids meals for each one of the child-for-adult hits you take to break even on the process, because you're making $2 on one transaction and losing $17 on the back end.

 

[Pedler]

Yeah...but only if you take that one meal and examine it in a vacuum.

However, if that unused child's credit gets used for an adult meal, somebody is going to get $5 instead of $22 or whatever they get. When you are in a marketplace like WS, you know that those discrepancies are eventually going to get somewhat evened out. So Chefs may not lose on what that family did, but over the longer term somebody else will nail them.

And, if you are Chefs, or Le Cellier, or Coral Reef, you are probably take a lot more of those child-credit-for-adult-meal hits than Alfredo's.

You also have to get over with 8-9 of those OOP kids meals for each one of the child-for-adult hits you take to break even on the process, because you're making $2 on one transaction and losing $17 on the back end.

Jim,

At this point as they don't separate child / adult credits I would speculate that they restaurant gets compensated for the type of meal ordered and not the type of credit used. For example if someone went all out and used every "child" credit for adult meals at the WS the WS places would probably get compensated at the adult rate. There just isn't any way to tell and it would create a huge problem if they tried to force them to take the child rate as compensation for an adult meal when it is Disney's problem that they are not separated. I think this is a case were Disney takes the hit.

One thing to consider is that it is possible that DDP patrons average entree cost are higher than people paying OOP. That could also go for deserts and appetizers as well. It may very well be that when determining the rate of compensation for the plan they looked at average entree cost pre DDP and based it off of that. DDP patrons have essentially no price elasticity to demand because there is no cost difference to them. They can order what they want without considering the cost. Couple that with some DDP patrons may not normally frequent the TS places at Disney or at least not as much so they may be more likely to base their decision on getting something they normally wouldn't get if they were paying OOP for it. For example someone may order the most expensive steak on the plan because at otherwise they wouldn't order it due to the cost. There are numerous postings / questions about how to maximize the plan. All of this could skew the average entree cost higher than the OOP guest and exacerbate the compensation problem.

 

[JimMIA]

Jim,

At this point as they don't separate child / adult credits I would speculate that they restaurant gets compensated for the type of meal ordered and not the type of credit used. For example if someone went all out and used every "child" credit for adult meals at the WS the WS places would probably get compensated at the adult rate. There just isn't any way to tell and it would create a huge problem if they tried to force them to take the child rate as compensation for an adult meal when it is Disney's problem that they are not separated. I think this is a case were Disney takes the hit.

You're right. I didn't think of it that way, but the child/adult credit thing IS Disney's problem, not the restaurant's.

As I said before -- not sure whether here or another thread -- I guess the restaurants' problem with DDP is the success of the plan. I'm sure they assumed a certain mix of low-margin DDP meals and regular-margin OOP meals, and they've actually gotten a lot more of the former than they expected.

 

[Pedler]

You're right. I didn't think of it that way, but the child/adult credit thing IS Disney's problem, not the restaurant's.

As I said before -- not sure whether here or another thread -- I guess the restaurants' problem with DDP is the success of the plan. I'm sure they assumed a certain mix of low-margin DDP meals and regular-margin OOP meals, and they've actually gotten a lot more of the former than they expected.

That is entirely correct. And its even worse when Disney offers it for free. That means an even higher percentange of guests are going to have the plan.

Yep, it stinks to be a non Disney owned restaurant at the world these days.

 

[eliza61]

I have a quick question for folks, but first let me say I don't use the DDP so I'm asking this as an outsider looking in.

If these changes stick or are the final choices for next year would people all of a sudden stop using the free dining or would we basically just deal with it and go to Disney anyway?

The reason I ask is because from reading these forums on the DDP it seems like a lot of extra stress. (Remember I am an outside totally just browsing other forums) There is always forums on "how to cheat the system" "how to maximize the credits with the efficiency of Patton" and now folks getting upset about the changes a full 4 months before they even occur. Am I reading this wrong? My family and I pretty much just pick a restaurant that we think we would like, make the ADR and call it a day.

 

[Pedler]

I have a quick question for folks, but first let me say I don't use the DDP so I'm asking this as an outsider looking in.

If these changes stick or are the final choices for next year would people all of a sudden stop using the free dining or would we basically just deal with it and go to Disney anyway?

The reason I ask is because from reading these forums on the DDP it seems like a lot of extra stress. (Remember I am an outside totally just browsing other forums) There is always forums on "how to cheat the system" "how to maximize the credits with the efficiency of Patton" and now folks getting upset about the changes a full 4 months before they even occur. Am I reading this wrong? My family and I pretty much just pick a restaurant that we think we would like, make the ADR and call it a day.

Remember that your typical DIS person is most definitely not your typical WDW visitor. I sometimes think that folk, myself included at times, make things more stressful than they need to be. For what its worth I think the DDP should be used just the way you stated it. Pick out where you want to eat and make your Adrs and don't worry about if you are getting the maximize financial return on it. I have never understood the concept of ordering the most expensive items not because you wanted them but because they were the most expensive items.

For us the DDP was a stress reliever. We didn't have to think about how much each place cost and if we wanted to spend the money there or not. We just made ADR's for the places we wanted to eat at without thinking about the cost at all. It made for a much lower stress level vacation.

 

[bicker]

At this point as they don't separate child / adult credits I would speculate that they restaurant gets compensated for the type of meal ordered and not the type of credit used.

I don't believe that that would be a reasonable assumption.

 

[bicker]

The reason I ask is because from reading these forums on the DDP it seems like a lot of extra stress.

I believe that online discussions magnify the appearance of stress, both within each individual who experiences it, and with respect to how representative that might be in the context of the general public.

 

[JimMIA]

If these changes stick or are the final choices for next year would people all of a sudden stop using the free dining or would we basically just deal with it and go to Disney anyway?

I think the FREE DDP, which is only for six weeks, is probably a non-issue for most people who are questioning the lineup so far. Those questions are being asked by those of us who pay for DDP. FREE DDPers would just go anyway, but that's only a small % of those who use DDP.

Personally, we live nearby (relatively nearby - 4 hour drive), and we go twice a year. I don't think the DDP would change our visitation pattern, but if we don't use it, we have more options of things to see and do. So instead of using APs and DDP like we do now, if we don't like the plan, we might switch to some other ticket, enjoy other Orlando attractions, and eat mostly offsite. That, of course, is exactly the opposite of what Disney is trying to accomplish with DDP.

The reason I ask is because from reading these forums on the DDP it seems like a lot of extra stress. ... Am I reading this wrong? My family and I pretty much just pick a restaurant that we think we would like, make the ADR and call it a day.

No, I don't think you're reading it wrong. DDP can be more or less stress, depending on how you use it. If you let it rule your vacation - and people do - I think it can add a lot of extra stress.

 

[Mom of Sleepy Bashful and BabyDoc]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedler
"At this point as they don't separate child / adult credits I would speculate that they restaurant gets compensated for the type of meal ordered and not the type of credit used. "

Qutoe: Bicker
"I don't believe that that would be a reasonable assumption."
__________________

If they make you order a child's meal for every child, they won't have any problems. But let's say, for discussion sake, that a family of 4 comes in, 3A and 1C, and they order 3A meals to share(I'm sure this happened a lot in the past). Those 3A meals will be submitted to Disney and the restaurant will get reimbursed for 3A meals, right?

Now, let's say that same family comes to the end of their trip with 4C meals left, but because they don't separate credits, Disney doesn't KNOW that they are child's meal credits and not adult meal credits(and neither does the restaurant). So they order 4A meals.............are you saying that the restaurant will only get reimbursed 4 child's meals and not adult meals?? I would think Disney would have to honor the restaurant for adult meals because it was not the restaurant's fault.........it is Disney that keeps track of the credits, not the restaurant.

Ofcourse, this is all speculation on my part. I would think is was Disney that is losing out and that that is why Disney is trying to make it harder to "abuse" the system.

added: Moderators, I am in no way saying do this to "work" the plan ( I don't think this will be able to happen now anyway) but only giving an example of how I thought the restaurants get paid. Hope this is ok.