Palo Fee Increase

[Horace Horsecollar]

Originally posted by NCRedding
Palo would still be $10 less than the speciality restaurants on the Radiance of the seas. On several cruise lines, the specialty places are $15-30 per person. On NCL with freestyle cruising, they offer restaurants where you pay for your entrees--priced from $8-25. I've also found reading other cruiseline boards, that other lines charge for sodas at dinner, and charge much more for photos ($10-20 for a 6X8).

That's an excellent and accurate point.

And it's one of many reasons why we booked the Disney Magic again for our next cruise, despite the premium pricing compared to other cruise lines. At least DCL doesn't play those "meal upcharge" games -- or so we thought.

So, this is basically a $10 retroactive price increase for us. Again, compared to the overall cost of the cruise, that's not much. But the fact that they're doing it at all is annoying.

(And, don't worry, we'll still add an additional gratuity. But I agree that this could be bad news for the fine service staff at Palo.)

 

[Regina]

Horace, I can assure you that I have better things to do with my time than to make up things like this. As a matter of fact, the terms that I used were from an official source and I was asked to post this information for everyone's benefit.

If my adding a "'s" to Palo makes the whole thing suspect to you, then so be it. Come 1/3/04, the facts will be borne out.

 

[Horace Horsecollar]

Originally posted by dvcreg
Horace, I can assure you that I have better things to do with my time than to make up things like this.

I believe you about the Palo servce fee, and I said I believed you in my first post on this topic.

I was curious about the wording, especially the meaning of "will be reinvested in Palo's to enhance the overall dining experience." After all, reinvested normally refers to capital improvements funded by operating profits -- and that seemed like an odd word choice in this case. I wondered if that's DCL's wording or your source's interpretation.

If I didn't believe you, I would not have made my statements about my disappointment with DCL's decision.

You've provided us with accurate DCL news in the past, and I have no reason to doubt your credibility or sincerity this time.

 

[BibbidyBobbidyBoo]

Horace- I'm with you on the nickel/diming thing. Personally I would prefer to pay the $35 soda charge AND the palo charge already figured into everyone's stateroom price and not have to worry about anything but spa & liquor the entire time on the cruise (okay- pictures and shopping too LOL).
But maybe they are raising the price also to cut down on the ressies there? It seems there is quite a scramble to get ressies there and some people don't get them quick enough. Maybe they think it will be more manageable that those that STILL want ressies might be able to get them since it costs more so maybe less people will want to go to Palo?

Who knows- but I agree with you that the word "reinvesting" doesn't sound right. That's a curious use of that word... it isn't reinvesting- it's INVESTING... our money. LOL

I also worry about the wait staff getting even less tips because of this. I'll be sure to tip- but with 15% already going on liquor (if we drink) and the $20 fee paid up front- we'll probably not tip $40-50! Not when we are already also still tipping our regular waitstaff even though we aren't eating in there that night! But then I live in Texas- and even in Texas or all other places we have visited around the US- we've never had a meal for the two of us equal $200 (less liquor that you'd already be paying 15% gratuity on if you drank it at Palo). I've never ate in Boston or NY or other places where I'm sure it's more expensive though...

 

[crisi]

Maybe this isn't about nickle and diming the guests. Maybe this is Disney looking at the life of Palo's decor and saying "Gee, when we drydock this in a few years, we are going to need to redo the decor." It can't be a cheap restaurant to decorate. And it doesn't seem fair that all DCL guests should pay for Palo's redecorating - why not make the guests who use Palo pay for it.

As for the tips Palo's waitstaff gets, all you can do is make sure you tip generously. If they are unhappy, they are not indentured servents, there are other cruise lines.

 

[BibbidyBobbidyBoo]

why not make the guests who use Palo pay for it.

I can see your point- but I guess mine is that I don't really see why it's on a totally different level than the other dining rooms. They have upkeep also! And all guests are paying for that regardless of whether they ever step foot in any of those dining areas during their cruise. Sure the majority do- but quite a few might not.. maybe they don't want to dress up and would rather eat somewhere else on the ship/ports of call/room service? Never know- but they still pay for the upkeep and decor in the dining areas with their price of being on the cruise. I just don't see why Palo has to be totally different than that.. why they can't pay for that the same way they pay for any other dining area/etc. upkeep and decor/etc?

The increase is nothing to get upset about... YET! I still have over a year till our cruise- so we'll see what the price for Palo is by that time. LOL

 

[KaitlinsMom]

I for one am happy about this change - My DH and I have tried to dine at Palo, only to be turned away due to being sold out - Then finding out from other cruisers that the place was 70% empty!! Maybe they are doing this to keep people from skipping out on Palo - The servers aren't able to make much in tips if people keep pulling a "no show"

 

[Alex]

No shows aren't the reason it looks 70% empty... you can read about real reason here:
thread

 

[Regina]

"Reinvest" was the term used by Disney.

 

[MarkRG]

Palo's is worth the fee. It's there to partially compensate the servers and partially to weed out the lazy ones who reserve then don't show.

My only wish is they would start insituting that for High Tea. It is almost impossible to get in to that now because of so many damn lazy people who reserve then don't go or even check in to say they're not going.

 

[swandiverpatt]

My daughter is a CM and we have to wait until 3:00 to book at Palo. When we cruised in August the ship was full, but we got the day and time we wanted. When we booked in early December with a shipt that was not full, Palo was totally booked and we were put on a wait list. I was very surprised and disappointed! My hubby and I did the "Stem to Stern" wine-tasting at Palo on Saturday (the night we wanted to dine at Palo). It concluded at 4:00 and that was the time they were going to be calling people on the wait list so we thought it a good idea to stop at the front desk and talk to Ivan. At that time, he told us they had one cancellation at 6:00 and it was ours if we wanted it. So, I agree that maybe stopping by Palo on the night you want to dine may be a good option! I told my DH about the increase in the fee and he said it's still worth it. We definitely tipped on top of the surcharge and will continue to do so.

 

[Michelemouse]

Originally posted by BibbidyBobbidyBoo
Personally I would prefer to pay the $35 soda charge AND the palo charge already figured into everyone's stateroom price and not have to worry about anything but spa & liquor the entire time on the cruise

I actually prefer things they way they are. We do not drink soda on the cruise (drink it occasionally at home), prefering to have the lemonade and other offerings at the drink station. We have dined at Palo for dinner once and will not be going again, although we will return for Brunch as often as possible!

If they were to add soda and Palo into the cruise fare we'd be spending an extra $160 ($35 x 4 for soda...$10 x 2 for Palo) for things we won't use.

 

[abitjaded]

Regina, thanks for the heads up. Now, now guys. I remember when a thread (started by Horace?) about "Palo" vs "Palio" vs "Palo's" went wild. I think we ended up going for every mis-use and malaprop known to the English speaking world.

Seems a strange precedent for DCL to set. Here in Colorado, the large ski corporations "tax us". Purchase something (including food, at the wholly owned private resorts, and not only do you pay Federal tax, state tax, local tax, but the corporation tacks on a 7% charge. Go figure. Why not just increase the price of anything you buy from say, Vail and Associates. Everything is actually 7% more expensive than they are willing to admit. Really ticks folks off. DCL needs to define clearly just what is going on or the CM's will pay.

Carla

 

[Dean]

Originally posted by Alex
Of course the CM's will suffer, I can hear it now
"We are already paying 20 dollars!!! No need for a tip"
The way I calculate the tip is a meal of equal quality and service in Boston would run about 200 dollars. 20% tip= 40 dollars (assuming the service was exemplary which it always has been) - the built in 15% on the wine and the five dollar fee so I usually leave about 30 or 35.

It partly depends on where you are. We have a 5 Diamond restaurant in town and a number of other similar class places and you'd have to try to get it up to $100 for two including tip but without wine or drinks.

 

[MrsPete]

I don't think the increase in the fee matters a bit! We all still want to go, and when you consider the cost of the cruise, an extra $10 per couple makes no difference!

 

[Alex]

I agree with you MrsPete
I think I should move where you are Dean.. it's no problem at all around here!

 

[BibbidyBobbidyBoo]

Originally posted by Michelemouse
I actually prefer things they way they are. We do not drink soda on the cruise (drink it occasionally at home), prefering to have the lemonade and other offerings at the drink station. We have dined at Palo for dinner once and will not be going again, although we will return for Brunch as often as possible!

If they were to add soda and Palo into the cruise fare we'd be spending an extra $160 ($35 x 4 for soda...$10 x 2 for Palo) for things we won't use.

A) I was not thinking adding those things to the cruise fare in the way of adding the FULL amount for EVERY guest... more like an avg of what is usually paid for and sure, they'd probably end up with more people getting sodas but soda cost hardly NOTHING. And Palo wait staff would end up getting more tips that way- I bet.

B) My point is that if it was already INCLUDED in the cruise fare (not necessarily raising the cruise fare- it's high enough already IMHO) it would be one less thing to worry about. Whether EVERY single passenger would use those things- is besides the point. Not every guest eats every meal on the ship. Not every guest watches all the movies/shows, uses all the amenities, uses the kids clubs, etc. There are a lot of things "included" in the fare already that not EVERY guests uses to the fullest. The soda and Palo could be just one more thing...

Although really I agree with the Palo thing- because I know it helps keep it from being even HARDER to get ressies there- everyone might be reserving if it was free! The Palo charge doesn't bug me... I was just saying it'd be nice if less things were in "addition" to the cruise fare already. When you're a family of five- you can't cruise cheaply.. usually have to have a higher cat at way more cost than lower categories- or like we're doing- two staterooms. So a girl can dream- right? LOL

$10 p/p for Palo does NOT bother me at all... just dreaming of a cruise where you pay for it all up front and then have no $$ worries while on the cruise. LOL