No Longer Affordable JMHO

[bicker]

I am not sure that Disney compares well to the "real world" equivalent.

Movie Theaters and Sports Stadiums are both short visits. You may eat one expensive meal there, or you can easily choose to eat prior to the event.

Comparisons are never exact. If they were, they'd be tautologies, instead. Comparisons are often useful in understanding an implication: What you're pointing out is that at WDW you are even more remote from alternatives. That supports the direction of WDW being even more expensive than movie theaters and sports stadiums, not less, as you seemed to have been implying.

I don't care if it's Disney, Universal, Sea World, I don't care what city, what country it is, it's utterly ridiculous to consider a child of 10 an adult both for meal and or ticket purposes!

If that were true, reasonable people wouldn't patronize venues that arrange pricing that way. And millions upon millions of reasonable people do. While each person decides for themselves what they personally are willing to spend and for what, I don't see merit in characterizing the decisions of others as "ridiculous" because it isn't the decision you would make.

From a strictly business point of view, the fact that there are people complaining that they can't get reservations at a restaurant 180 days away means that they aren't charging enough at some restaurants.

This is a wildly sound and important point. Disney is, effectively, underselling itself, in many cases. It's not just how tight some ADRs are, but also how the parks sometimes sell-out. They do need to undersell themselves a bit, to preclude predatory critics from gaining traction, but the overall effect is that Disney does seem to be, in many cases, charging significantly less than what they're offering is worth.

Why does it bother some people so much if some posters find some of the restaurants not worth the price?

Is that's what's happening? I'm sorry, but it sure seems like some folks who find that restaurants aren't worth the price are actually saying that there is something wrong with the pricing, itself, and/or raising questions about the soundness of deciding that restaurants are worth the price. There is a difference between saying something doesn't meet one's personal criteria versus categorically labeling it as "ridiculous". I suspect that that is what at least some folks in this thread are replying to.

 

[Tricia1972]

Comparisons are never exact. If they were, they'd be tautologies, instead. Comparisons are often useful in understanding an implication: What you're pointing out is that at WDW you are even more remote from alternatives. That supports the direction of WDW being even more expensive than movie theaters and sports stadiums, not less, as you seemed to have been implying.

Not my intention at all. I was trying to convey that you can't use a sports stadium or a movie theater as a fair comparison for a per meal cost unless you are a captive audience there for a week. I also said later in that same quoted post that ski resort could be a much more accurate comparison. That's because you are a captive audience there for a long period of time. (like Disney).

Though I guess you are right with what you inferred from what you thought I was trying to imply. It certainly would cost more for the average family to dine for a week at Disney than it would for them to have one meal at the ballgame.

 

[bicker]

What I meant, though, was that the comparisons are helpful because we can project one thing from another: When you go into a local restaurant, you're not "captive" at all: You can even look over the menu and walk out, and eat at the restaurant next-door. When you are at a movie theater, you're captive for a couple of hours, and so the prices are consequently higher. At a sports venue, it's perhaps three or four hours, and that increment is reflected in the prices. And so on. KWIM?

 

[5boyz]

I am really thankful for this thread. I received a ton of good information on places to eat, how to spend (or not spend) money and what to expect.

Just wanted to say thank you!!

You must be so excited!!! Have a great time!!!

 

[Tricia1972]

What I meant, though, was that the comparisons are helpful because we can project one thing from another: When you go into a local restaurant, you're not "captive" at all: You can even look over the menu and walk out, and eat at the restaurant next-door. When you are at a movie theater, you're captive for a couple of hours, and so the prices are consequently higher. At a sports venue, it's perhaps three or four hours, and that increment is reflected in the prices. And so on. KWIM?

Not only do I KWYM, it's my point exactly. You're "captive" at Disney for a longer period of time. When you're at a restaurant in town, sports venue, movie, etc, you can choose to eat there or not. There are more options for a consumer at locations like this versus a ski resort or Disney.

 

[JimmyV]

I've really got to disagree with you on this one. I've vacationed in every city you've mentioned and can eat fabulous food at the same price or cheaper than WDW sit down restaurants. AND the food is consistantly higher quality and better prepared. Most large cities have large immigrant populations - and ethnic restaurants provide inexpensive, delicious food that isn't dumbed down to suit unadventurous palates. Top steak houses and gourmet restaurants can be more expensive in most large cities as compared to WDW - however the quality of the food and the service is superior in metropolitan cities.

With regard to the second half of your post, I don't think anyone here will argue the point that the food at WDW is not as good as it is in major cities. We're all on board.

As to the first part of your post, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I am not comparing Le Cellier (cost-wise) to a family run Thai place in Washington DC. Of course you can eat cheaper at small, ethnic places. I am comparing restaurants of "like style and atmosphere". The bolded portion of the quote above is my point, and you agree. It really is empirically true, and not just an opinion. For example, California Grill, as the the name suggests, was very much patterned after Spago or Postrio when it opened. So I compare CG to places like that. Not to a noodle joint in Pacific Heights. You cannot dine at Postrio for any less than you can at CG. Can you dine in San Francisco for less? Yes. But not at an upscale restaurant.

My food costs in Paris, Rome, London, Aspen, NYC, Los Angeles and San Francisco have all been about even (higher in Paris in London) with WDW. Bottom line: $12 appetizers; $35 entrees and $8 desserts are NOT high or shocking numbers when eating in restaurants in major cities that are of the quality and style that Disney is trying to portray. Indeed, $40+ entrees are shamefully becoming the norm. You have to compare Le Cellier, Bistro de Paris, California Grill, Citricos, Flying Fish and Yachtsman to "like" places or the discussion has no meaning. But if you want to rely of the fact that major cities offer cheap ethnic food, well, to a degree, so does WDW. Grab a slice of pizza or a turkey leg. And the Orange Beef with an egg roll at Y&Y will set you back around $12. Tempura Shrimp Udon at Yakatori House is under ten bucks. More expensive than major cities with competition, I grant you that. But still AFFORDABLE, which is the jumping off point of this thread. It is about AFFORDABILITY, not EXPENSE.

 

[Lionqueen2]

I've really got to disagree with you on this one. I've vacationed in every city you've mentioned and can eat fabulous food at the same price or cheaper than WDW sit down restaurants. AND the food is consistantly higher quality and better prepared. Most large cities have large immigrant populations - and ethnic restaurants provide inexpensive, delicious food that isn't dumbed down to suit unadventurous palates. Top steak houses and gourmet restaurants can be more expensive in most large cities as compared to WDW - however the quality of the food and the service is superior in metropolitan cities.

I don't mind picking up the tab if the food is imaginative and well prepared. Unfortunately, WDW restaurants are producing inconsistant results at top prices. Very few restaurants in the real world would survive if they were as inconsistant as WDW restaurants are.[/QUOTE]

Exactly! I don't think of most of Disney restaurants as 'fine' dining. For me, they fall more in line with cruise ship dining. That's not necessarily bad. It is what it is and should be appreciated as such.

Also, when I sit down to enjoy a meal, I like to order a drink and have a chance to enjoy that for a while before continuing on to order apps and a meal. After dessert, I like to linger a bit over coffee and don't mind higher priced food for this total experience. Disney seems to have diners on a time schedule for you to eat and leave so they can turn that table over quickly. In places like Rome and Paris, eating is an experience. You get a chance to savor your food. If you are paying a bit more, you are getting quality food and service and enjoying a relaxing experience unlike Disney where restaurants are crowded and noisy.

That said, I do eat at Disney. The food is fine, but I don't pretend that the restaurants are something they are not.

 

[BEASLYBOO]

If that were true, reasonable people wouldn't patronize venues that arrange pricing that way. And millions upon millions of reasonable people do. While each person decides for themselves what they personally are willing to spend and for what, I don't see merit in characterizing the decisions of others as "ridiculous" because it isn't the decision you would make.

I gave my opinion as to what those chains charge for a 10 year old, my post in no way questions the reasoning of those who are willing or not willing to pay for those charges, so please don't quote my words to put your negative spin on this topic.

It's your characterization not mine, so if you have something negative to say on the topic, please stand on your merit.

 

[JimmyV]

I don't think of most of Disney restaurants as 'fine' dining. For me, they fall more in line with cruise ship dining. That's not necessarily bad. It is what it is and should be appreciated as such.

Also, when I sit down to enjoy a meal, I like to order a drink and have a chance to enjoy that for a while before continuing on to order apps and a meal. After dessert, I like to linger a bit over coffee and don't mind higher priced food for this total experience. Disney seems to have diners on a time schedule for you to eat and leave so they can turn that table over quickly. In places like Rome and Paris, eating is an experience. You get a chance to savor your food. If you are paying a bit more, you are getting quality food and service and enjoying a relaxing experience unlike Disney where restaurants are crowded and noisy.

That said, I do eat at Disney. The food is fine, but I don't pretend that the restaurants are something they are not.

All true. But a different topic altogether. You are making the point that "fine dining" at WDW does not provide you the experience, both culinarily or atmospherically, that other fine dining venues do. No argument from anyone on that point. But is fine dining at Disney affordable? That is the question posed. It is one thing to say that you choose not to spend your money that way at WDW because the experience is lacking. It is quite another thing to say that the fine dining cost at WDW is out of line with the rest of the touristed world. I think the point you make is that if you had $100 on you and could choose to spend it on fine dining, WDW is not where you would go, as you would not get the bang for your buck that you seek. 100% agree witht that.

 

[Disney Dad Canada]

Affordable and overpriced are not the same thing. Are the prices of any given restaurant higher than an equivalent restaurant elsewhere? Yes. But if the restaurants are full, they are NOT overpriced. They may be for some, but until there are enough empty tables that Disney has to change it's policy, the prices are acceptable.

 

[angelmav]

I've really got to disagree with you on this one. I've vacationed in every city you've mentioned and can eat fabulous food at the same price or cheaper than WDW sit down restaurants. AND the food is consistantly higher quality and better prepared. Most large cities have large immigrant populations - and ethnic restaurants provide inexpensive, delicious food that isn't dumbed down to suit unadventurous palates. Top steak houses and gourmet restaurants can be more expensive in most large cities as compared to WDW - however the quality of the food and the service is superior in metropolitan cities.

I don't mind picking up the tab if the food is imaginative and well prepared. Unfortunately, WDW restaurants are producing inconsistant results at top prices. Very few restaurants in the real world would survive if they were as inconsistant as WDW restaurants are.

This^^

Not only do I usually get breakfast included at Hotels in these cities (heck you can even get breakfast included at Paris Disney), but I can get much better deals on rooms as well. Two weeks ago we had a sit down meal around the block from the Coliseum in Rome for 5 of us that ran 60 euro (about 85 bucks) that was tasty if not geared for tourists (something Disney is just as guilty of).

I am not even complaining about Disney, I understand why they charge what they do (answer: because they can), but the logic used to justify it is where it starts to grate on my nerves. I just wish they would get back to offering more/better quality for what they charge so I can continue to justify it instead of taking my vacation dollars elsewhere because I love Disney.

 

[Disney Dad Canada]

I just wish they would get back to offering more/better quality for what they charge so I can continue to justify it instead of taking my vacation dollars elsewhere because I love Disney.

Why should they? Enough people choose to pay for what they are getting now, so why should they change? You can choose to eat elsewhere if you like, but Disney charges what they do because people are willing to pay.

 

[eliza61]

My food costs in Paris, Rome, London, Aspen, NYC, Los Angeles and San Francisco have all been about even (higher in Paris in London) with WDW. Bottom line: $12 appetizers; $35 entrees and $8 desserts are NOT high or shocking numbers when eating in restaurants in major cities that are of the quality and style that Disney is trying to portray. Indeed, $40+ entrees are shamefully becoming the norm. You have to compare Le Cellier, Bistro de Paris, California Grill, Citricos, Flying Fish and Yachtsman to "like" places or the discussion has no meaning. But if you want to rely of the fact that major cities offer cheap ethnic food, well, to a degree, so does WDW. Grab a slice of pizza or a turkey leg. And the Orange Beef with an egg roll at Y&Y will set you back around $12. Tempura Shrimp Udon at Yakatori House is under ten bucks. More expensive than major cities with competition, I grant you that. But still AFFORDABLE, which is the jumping off point of this thread. It is about AFFORDABILITY, not EXPENSE.

Really? That surprises me. I just got back from Paris (5/23-6/7) and my dinners were routinely cheaper (and that was including alcohol) and they were always better.
I was in Rome last Easter (OT hint: never ever go to rome during high holidays, LOL) and once again my tab may have been the same but it always included adult drinks (rarely does it do so in wdw) and a lot of the find dining houses had "Plat du jour" where they price included many "courses". We routinely got appertizers, cheese plates, main dish, dessert.
Never been to London although we are going next year for the Olympics.

Le Cellier is simply ridiculous. Sorry no where in major cities that I've been to would the steak offerings at Le Cellier be acceptable at a fine steak house. Like I always say, there is a problem when the best part of the menu is the cheddar soup.
In my mind it's about value. I can afford just about any thing in disney but I hate "wasting" money and when I'm charged top dollar for mediocre quality, that's what I object to.

 

[JimmyV]

Why should they? Enough people choose to pay for what they are getting now, so why should they change? You can choose to eat elsewhere if you like, but Disney charges what they do because people are willing to pay.

Some folks are just never going to get this point.

In the "real world", restaurants fail all the time. Probably the highest failure rate of any major business. Why do they go out of business? Many reasons. But probably the biggest one is the fact that people simply stop going. Maybe the food quality went down. Maybe the prices went up. Maybe the "hip" factor disappered. Whatever the reason, the business simply was no longer viable. Disney is not immune to these factors and it has to react just like the real world. But when you have to set you alarm for 5:45 so that you can log on to grab an ADR at 6:00 a.m. over 6 months in advance of your trip, then it is simply impossible to argue that the restaurant in question is unaffordable. Enough people are paying the cost to make you jump through hoops to get a table. When Disney marketing tracks this behavior, how could they ever reach the conclusion that their business model is no longer sound. When they start to hear crickets in the dining room, then they (and we) can conclude that the price/quality ration is no longer sustainable. But until then.....

 

[Stinky_Pete]

I think it's funny how posters are now comparing fine dining in major metropolitan areas to dining at Disney. The OP was talking about the pricing at CP buffet...hardly "fine dining". LOL

 

[angelmav]

Why should they? Enough people choose to pay for what they are getting now, so why should they change? You can choose to eat elsewhere if you like, but Disney charges what they do because people are willing to pay.

Gee, if you had bothered to include the rest of my post you quoted you would see I posted the same thing, because they can! Doesnt mean that even people who love disney dont see a tipping point both in quality and affordability.

JimmyV makes some good points, but again, I see justifications about expensive cities comparing to Disney on here all the time, places I am in frequently mind you, that just dont hold up. I routinely pay less and get more/better for my money.

I simply dont want Disney to kill the golden cow because I like spending my money there, they are just getting more difficult to justify both in terms of quality and value.

 

[JimmyV]

Really? That surprises me. I just got back from Paris (5/23-6/7) and my dinners were routinely cheaper

In what level restaurants? We never ate at Michellin starred restaurants and confined ourselves to casual bistros. Most had three course prix fixe menu options that hovered around EUR40. That converts to about $57 per dinner. Not expensive to my way of thinking. But the equivalent of the app/entree/dessert cost I outlined above, $12/$35/$8. Again, I cannot compare Yachtsman or California Grill, style-wise, to any lesser cafe, which, of course, could be cheaper. Ignore the quality issue. Paris has better food. Not an earth shattering development. But a restaurant of the style level of Citricos in Paris is more expensive (and better).

I was in Rome last Easter and once again my tab may have been the same but it always included adult drinks

Then why disagree with me. Your experience shows that the prices are comparable. The fact that the trattoria threw in a glass of house wine doesn't really move the money meter. It's not like they were giving you a $10 glass of wine for free. They probably pay $6 for the bottle and pour it 6 ways for a buck a glass. Wine is simply treated differently in Europe than here.

Le Cellier is simply ridiculous. Sorry no where in major cities that I've been to would the steak offerings at Le Cellier be acceptable at a fine steak house.

Again, this is an argument about relative quality, not relative cost. So what you are saying is that, even up, given the choice of LC or a different steakhouse in a major city, you would choose the steakhouse in the major city. No argument. 100% agree. The question is, will you pay more or less than what your bill comes to at Le Cellier? All you have to do is walk 5 minutes from Le Cellier to Shula's to answer that question. Shula's is better, and it is significantly more expensive. And before anyone says, "but that is Disney pricing too", really, it is not. Shula's has fairly flat pricing. What you pay at the Dolphin is what you would pay in Miami or NYC.

I really don't think we disagree at all. We both agree that what Disney calls "fine dining" is not as fine as they think it is. We both agree that you can eat better, and more cheaply almost anywhere else in the world. But anywhere else in the world where you step into a "fine dining" establishment, you are going to pay at least what Disney charges, if not more. If the point is simply, "yes, but the fine dining will be better elsewhere", there is no point debating that. This topic is about affordability, and quite simply, when comparing like-style, (not necessarily quality), restaurants, dining at WDW compares to major cities. DINING in general may be cheaper elsewhere. And the fine dining elsewhere will be of higher quality. But even up, a restaurant of the ilk of Citricos or Flying Fish in any major city is going to cost at least as much if not more.

 

[JimmyV]

I think it's funny how posters are now comparing fine dining in major metropolitan areas to dining at Disney. The OP was talking about the pricing at CP buffet...hardly "fine dining". LOL

Because those are the easiest apple-to-apples comparison. What CP offers, (characters) is not available in the real world. So price comparisons become impossible. But ask yourself this. If Disney decided to branch out and open up character buffets in major cities, what do you think it would charge in New York or Chicago? More or less than at WDW?

 

[Lionqueen2]

Some folks are just never going to get this point.

In the "real world", restaurants fail all the time. Probably the highest failure rate of any major business. Why do they go out of business? Many reasons. But probably the biggest one is the fact that people simply stop going. Maybe the food quality went down. Maybe the prices went up. Maybe the "hip" factor disappered. Whatever the reason, the business simply was no longer viable. Disney is not immune to these factors and it has to react just like the real world. But when you have to set you alarm for 5:45 so that you can log on to grab an ADR at 6:00 a.m. over 6 months in advance of your trip, then it is simply impossible to argue that the restaurant in question is unaffordable. Enough people are paying the cost to make you jump through hoops to get a table. When Disney marketing tracks this behavior, how could they ever reach the conclusion that their business model is no longer sound. When they start to hear crickets in the dining room, then they (and we) can conclude that the price/quality ration is no longer sustainable. But until then.....

I'm not sure I agree. Disney isn't the 'real world'. It has a captive group of guests that need to eat and its onsite restaurants are more convenient than seeking out meals away from Disney property.
One has to wonder if it would be necessary to get up at 6 a.m. to make an ADR if there was no 'free' dining or DDPs and folks had to pay OOP for their meals.

 

[maxiesmom]

One has to wonder if it would be necessary to get up at 6 a.m. to make an ADR if there was no 'free' dining or DDPs and folks had to pay OOP for their meals.

Before they offered Free Dining as often as they do now, you still have to get up at the crack of dawn if you wanted to get certain ADRs. And out of my more than a dozen trip to the world, we have used the Dining Plan twice. And we almost always make at least 2 ADRs.