Palo Dress Code Changes?

[PrincessShmoo]

Are you talking about the brunch being $15 in 2013? I don't think the dinner would have been that cheap. I know brunch was $10 in the beginning, then $15 and I think it is $20. Dinner may have been $15 in 2000, but I don't ever remember it being that cheap in the last 5 years or more.

Our Palo dinner in 2008 was $15 per person.

 

[RedSox68]

Our Palo dinner in 2008 was $15 per person.

We haven't done a dinner since about 2004, and I thought it was $15 then. So maybe it hasn't risen as much as others have expressed on other threads in the past. We usually just do brunch now.

Maybe the giant jump from $15 to $30 in the past there years was to make up for not raising it more earlier. That really is quite the jump.

What is brunch going for now?

ETA: your avatar, btw, is my husband's favorite cartoon character.

 

[Flossbolna]

Are you talking about the brunch being $15 in 2013? I don't think the dinner would have been that cheap. I know brunch was $10 in the beginning, then $15 and I think it is now $25? Dinner may have been $15 in 2000, but I don't ever remember it being that cheap in the last 5 years or more.

When we went in 2014, I was surprised how much the brunch prices had gone up!

Sorry, I checked and it was $20 for both brunch and dinner in 2013. However, since my math was incorrect, it is still a 50% increase. 15 to 30 would have been a 100% increase...

In October 2013 they raised it to $25: http://disneycruiselineblog.com/201...-to-increase-the-price-of-palo-dinner-brunch/

 

[FigmentSpark]

While allowing children in Palo would eliminate the 'adult' feel of it, they could certainly allow teens, maybe 16 and up, and still maintain the adult feel. I've seen threads here about children turning 18 in a couple of weeks and not being allowed in Palo. That just seems really picky to me. I know there has to be some cut off, but if the person mostly looks like an adult, then they should be allowed. It's not for the sake of the drinking age, as that's 21, if I'm not mistaken.

 

[JW9DVC]

I'll wage that kids in palo are next.

I don't see why not. They have no gourmet options for kids. Many have finer palletes than most adults.

 

[wilkeliza]

While allowing children in Palo would eliminate the 'adult' feel of it, they could certainly allow teens, maybe 16 and up, and still maintain the adult feel. I've seen threads here about children turning 18 in a couple of weeks and not being allowed in Palo. That just seems really picky to me. I know there has to be some cut off, but if the person mostly looks like an adult, then they should be allowed. It's not for the sake of the drinking age, as that's 21, if I'm not mistaken.

It is just the principle of the adults only area. You aren't an adult until you are 18 so until you are an adult you can't enjoy the adults only areas.

 

[PrincessShmoo]

While allowing children in Palo would eliminate the 'adult' feel of it, they could certainly allow teens, maybe 16 and up, and still maintain the adult feel. I've seen threads here about children turning 18 in a couple of weeks and not being allowed in Palo. That just seems really picky to me. I know there has to be some cut off, but if the person mostly looks like an adult, then they should be allowed. It's not for the sake of the drinking age, as that's 21, if I'm not mistaken.

OK, so say they allow 16 year olds. What about that mature "almost" 16 year old that mom wants to bring into Palo also? I've seem some pretty mature-looking 12 year olds. Would they be allowed?

Like the slippery slope of "easing" up on the dress code over time, lowering the age would result in the same process.

 

[DISNEY FANTASY]

In the end the decision is DCLs and not posters with strong opinions here.

On RCCL there Palo equivalent allowed 14> 18 year old in,mew did it, it was no problem at all. The rules were they must go with adults and they were allowed to book from 6 pm, to 7.30pm, not later.

My children went and enjoyed it and no cruisers there had any problem with it at all. It didn't lower the tone, it was not any slippery slope. If adults wanted to be adults only then, they could book post 7.30 pm.

On DCL my son is 17 and three weeks off 18 he cant go to Palo that's the rules I respect that, but he want to the adults restaurant on RCCL 4 years ago. They were respectful enjoyed it, and no one had any problem with it.

As said, it's DCL rules, smart jeans can be very smart, I have no issue with it, it's their sandpit, their rules, some should remember that. DCL is run by its management, and contrary to belief, not an Internet forum.

 

[Jennifer777]

I can deal with dress code policy, that won't bother me at all but one of the benefits of adult only dining is that it's adult only dining. If you take a look around the MDRs you're likely to observe little ones laying in on the floor, running around unsupervised or crying because they are tired and hungry. While some of you may have very well behaved children, there are plenty of people who don't. I would reconsider Palo if they started allowing children to dine there because the quiet, romantic adult only atmosphere is a big part of why we choose to dine there.

As for the suggestion that this dress code change may be related to money, don't they limit the number of reservations you can make for adult dining when your booking window opens up? If so, wouldn't this be the first thing to change if they were having trouble filling seats? I personally think it had more to do with the complaints from people who would show up in violation of the dress code. It can't be comfortable for staff to turn people away and I imagine it throws off the schedule when they are sending people all the way back to their rooms to change or when people cancel because they don't have the appropriate attire and refuse to borrow the loaners from Palo. People will always push boundaries so DCL will still be battling the, "but why can't I wear my flip flops, they have fancy jewels on them so they aren't really flip flops." no matter how dressed down their policy becomes.

 

[Hundredacre]

...and I'd have 0 issue with this. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy having a nice dinner out just me and my wife, but if kids were allowed we would just end up booking palo twice per cruise so we could also have a nice dinner out with my DD8 as well. We have been taking her to place far fancier than palo for years now, but we instilled an understanding of how to act when at a "nice" resturant.
As for the jeans, all for it. I wear nice dress pants and dress shirts to work every day... I have dress jeans that when paired with a nice dress shirt, sport coat, and dress shoes are far dressier than just normal slacks and a collared shirt. I for one am looking forward to being able to go to palo and be more fashionable than just dress pants and a dress shirt. Hit up a few nice resturants in the NY, Chicago, DC area and you will see that jean can be dressed up and look much dressier than slacks(dockers, etc).

Also, couldn't care less what the person next me is wearing. I dress up because it makes me feel good. If someone else feels good with a tank and shorts, go for it - afterall its everyone's vacation!

You're child may be an angel, but I have a little "devil" you probably wouldn't want eating next to you at Palo. And believe me we've tried "parenting." He is just not Palo ready.

 

[Hundredacre]

In the end the decision is DCLs and not posters with strong opinions here.

On RCCL there Palo equivalent allowed 14> 18 year old in,mew did it, it was no problem at all. The rules were they must go with adults and they were allowed to book from 6 pm, to 7.30pm, not later.

My children went and enjoyed it and no cruisers there had any problem with it at all. It didn't lower the tone, it was not any slippery slope. If adults wanted to be adults only then, they could book post 7.30 pm.

On DCL my son is 17 and three weeks off 18 he cant go to Palo that's the rules I respect that, but he want to the adults restaurant on RCCL 4 years ago. They were respectful enjoyed it, and no one had any problem with it.

As said, it's DCL rules, smart jeans can be very smart, I have no issue with it, it's their sandpit, their rules, some should remember that. DCL is run by its management, and contrary to belief, not an Internet forum.

I had no idea! And all this time I thought we were consulting for the executive team!!
(Sorry, couldn't resist...)

 

[P'colaBeachBum]

I can deal with dress code policy, that won't bother me at all but one of the benefits of adult only dining is that it's adult only dining. If you take a look around the MDRs you're likely to observe little ones laying in on the floor, running around unsupervised or crying because they are tired and hungry. While some of you may have very well behaved children, there are plenty of people who don't. I would reconsider Palo if they started allowing children to dine there because the quiet, romantic adult only atmosphere is a big part of why we choose to dine there.

As for the suggestion that this dress code change may be related to money, don't they limit the number of reservations you can make for adult dining when your booking window opens up? If so, wouldn't this be the first thing to change if they were having trouble filling seats? I personally think it had more to do with the complaints from people who would show up in violation of the dress code. It can't be comfortable for staff to turn people away and I imagine it throws off the schedule when they are sending people all the way back to their rooms to change or when people cancel because they don't have the appropriate attire and refuse to borrow the loaners from Palo. People will always push boundaries so DCL will still be battling the, "but why can't I wear my flip flops, they have fancy jewels on them so they aren't really flip flops." no matter how dressed down their policy becomes.

We are 2 adults that enjoy cruising DCL because of the adult areas on the ship...including Palo. Also, the fact there are no casinos and limit smokers to certain areas on the ship we can avoid. I will not put money into brunch or dinner if there are "mature" kids that are allowed in the future.

 

[Jennifer777]

You're child may be an angel, but I have a little "devil" you probably wouldn't want eating next to you at Palo. And believe me we've tried "parenting." He is just not Palo ready.

My kids, in spite of parenting the snot out of them, can have horns too, especially in a confined space without distractions. It's only so long before kid 1 will kick kid 2 under the table and kid 2 will have kid 1 in tears by telling her Justin Bieber (whom she plans to marry) is going to die. There's a reason I escape to adult only Palo, which coincidentally, is the same reason my alcohol tab is so high in the MDRs.

All of this is said with nothing but love for my two darlings, of course, but they are not Palo ready either.

 

[RRB]

While some of you may have very well behaved children, there are plenty of people who don't.

Correct.

Palo is either a fine dining restaurant for adults or it is a family dining area with better food, it can't be both.

 

[drea21]

While I think money is a factor, I think a bigger factor is the evolution of fashion. Jeans are no longer just for casual dress, like it or not. Dress denim is what is in style right now and is absolutely more formal than tennis shoes and I really don't see how the two can be compared. Dress denim and nice shoes look much classier than some outdated chinos and tennis shoes.

I would much rather see someone in nicely tailored denim than ill fitting khakis. That's the trend right now (and has been for quite some time). Now, obviously some will push the boundaries on the denim issue, just as they could on the old dress code, but that's not my problem. Something like a stranger's attire isn't going to make or break my dining experience.

 

[FigmentSpark]

Heh... I wonder if dress denim jeggings and a long blouse count?

 

[phinz]

We are 2 adults that enjoy cruising DCL because of the adult areas on the ship...including Palo. Also, the fact there are no casinos and limit smokers to certain areas on the ship we can avoid. I will not put money into brunch or dinner if there are "mature" kids that are allowed in the future.

While I smoke like crazy when given the chance, gamble if I have an extra $20 in my pocket and drink like a fish when I don't have to drive, I concur with your statement. I'll not drop a dime (in the case of Remy, 9,000 dimes typically) if there are children (that being the spawn of humans, said spawn being less than 6574 days old) in any "adult" restaurant while on a Disney cruise, and will seriously consider my options regarding cruise lines if "mature" but underaged children are allowed into areas reserved for those who choose not to spend inordinate amounts of time with said minors.

 

[TestingH2O]

that being the spawn of humans, said spawn being less than 6574 days old

Just for fun, I double checked. You even accounted for least number of leap years! Well done.

 

[steves100]

Our Palo dinner in 2008 was $15 per person.

I think that Dinner was that cheap....

 

[steves100]

While allowing children in Palo would eliminate the 'adult' feel of it, they could certainly allow teens, maybe 16 and up, and still maintain the adult feel. I've seen threads here about children turning 18 in a couple of weeks and not being allowed in Palo. That just seems really picky to me. I know there has to be some cut off, but if the person mostly looks like an adult, then they should be allowed. It's not for the sake of the drinking age, as that's 21, if I'm not mistaken.

This has always been an issue. I have no problem w Palo having a minimum age of 18. But the fitness center I do. My son was a highly skilled athlete at 15/16 and needed to work out. Nope, at least legally : )