Please Don't Bash The DDP!

[crisi]

Disney listens to the majority and right now the majority likes the DDP.

Disney also uses this site as the cheapest market research out there. So I'm going to keep saying "sure, keep the DDP - AND work to meet my needs as well - I'm a high margin customer and you don't want to lose my dining or vacation dollars. You don't need to aim for the center - you can address several markets."

Maybe, one day some marketing manager will have the light bulb go off and they can make BOTH groups happy.

 

[Peter Pirate 2]

Crisi! We do what we do for the same reason! Imagine that!!!

 

[BillSears]

Maybe, one day some marketing manager will have the light bulb go off and they can make BOTH groups happy.

To me the easy way of doing this would to just add a few upscale items to the menu that aren't covered by the DDP. I could still get my surf and turf or stuffed lobster and pay more for it and the DDP can get the same menu they are getting now. Imagine going to a steak house that didn't do surf and turf or a seafood place without lobster but that's what you get now at Le Cellier and Coral Reef. I don't want to take anything away from the DDP people I'm just want to bring back some of the things that used to be there before the DDP reduced the menus.

 

[Lewisc]

I posted that idea more than a year ago. Almost 100% of the posters thought that was a horrible idea. They didn't want DDP diners to be treated as "second class" customers and not be allowed to order the "good stuff".

There is a restaurant near where I live that offers a Friday night priced fixed dinner special. All the promotional materials say Any Entrée, Any Appetizer and specifies a special dessert. At least half the items on the menu have an * with an upcharge. I stopped going there.

Having upcharges is a slippery slope. It might be reasonable to offer one signature dish, such as lobster but that probably won't be enough to satisfy the "foodies". Having an upcharge for more than one or two items and the DDP guests will have a right to be upset.

My guess is Disney would exclude a second restaurant (from the dining plan), if they thought there were enough customers. A signature restaurant is credited $50-55 per guest. That should be enough money to provide a reasonable menu. I doubt there are enough guests willing to pay $76-$100 to justify having a restaurant positioned above the current signature restaurants but below V&A.

To me the easy way of doing this would to just add a few upscale items to the menu that aren't covered by the DDP. I could still get my surf and turf or stuffed lobster and pay more for it and the DDP can get the same menu they are getting now. Imagine going to a steak house that didn't do surf and turf or a seafood place without lobster but that's what you get now at Le Cellier and Coral Reef. I don't want to take anything away from the DDP people I'm just want to bring back some of the things that used to be there before the DDP reduced the menus.

 

[fla4fun]

Does the fact that Disney is removing the gratuity from the DDP effective January 2008 change anyone's feelings towards the DDP? (Gratuity to be removed from DDP!!)

--Mr. DB

Was the gratuity calculated on a capped value for the meal, or on the actual price of the food ordered? I've gotten both answers to this question in the past (when it didn't matter so much). There's a great deal of difference in tipping on the actual price paid for the plan vs. the huge bills people are running up trying to maximize their meal value. Will the guests be expected to tip based on roughly $30 actually paid for said TS meal, or the $150 the meal would have cost them OOP? (I'm estimating out of an approximately $40 per day plan cost around $2 snack, $8 CS, $30 TS.)

 

[Colleen27]

Fine Dining is about a complete experience not just the food. I would not consider it fine dining without appropriate dress, tables with linens full place settings, and a small army of servers to take care of your every need or question.

I think that total experience is part of why fine dining isn't terribly in demand at Disney, though. The fine dining experience, to me at least, doesn't involve a room full of kids who are exhausted from hours of touring. And I don't see Disney setting up even a handful of adults-only restaurants to preserve the fine dining experience.

 

[marivaid]

Will the guests be expected to tip based on roughly $30 actually paid for said TS meal, or the $150 the meal would have cost them OOP? (I'm estimating out of an approximately $40 per day plan cost around $2 snack, $8 CS, $30 TS.)

Think you're overestimating this a little bit maybe ?? I don't know of any Disney restaurant that will get you a $150 meal for 1TS.
Taking Le Cellier for example which is one of the most expensive for 1 TS
appy $12
entree $28
dessert $8
drink $4
Total $52

 

[kelscross]

I can't say that I don't like the DDP, we've never used it. We're using the DDP for the first time this trip...it's free...we saved alot of money. We aren't altering the way we eat because of the DDP. We've always ate at least one sit down meal a day.

I'm not a "foodie" by any means. Actually, I'm not even a cuisine eater at all! But I have noticed the quality of food declining over the years. Can I attribute it directly to the DDP..no, but I will say this...this past Christmas trip I had to send my meal back at more than one restaurant and I have never had to do that at these particular restaurants. We weren't the only ones...at the Sci Fi for example, the family sitting next to us sent all of their meals back more than once because it was hardly edible.

Nothing comes for free. Disney is making money somewhere or they wouldn't offer it.

 

[BillSears]

I posted that idea more than a year ago. Almost 100% of the posters thought that was a horrible idea. They didn't want DDP diners to be treated as "second class" customers and not be allowed to order the "good stuff".

Yep, it seems to me the people who champion the DDP want it both ways. They want people to not bash the DDP for the reduced menus but when we ask for additional non DDP items to be added to the menus they're up in arms saying it's not fair. To me what's not fair is not allowing people to order higher priced items. The DDP is making the menus all the same price so that no one item is favored.

There is a restaurant near where I live that offers a Friday night priced fixed dinner special. All the promotional materials say Any Entrée, Any Appetizer and specifies a special dessert. At least half the items on the menu have an * with an upcharge. I stopped going there.

Disney would have to make sure people know that the DDP excludes some items. Of course they wouldn't want to admit this so again the DDP is preventing the restaurants from having a wide selection in prices.

Having upcharges is a slippery slope. It might be reasonable to offer one signature dish, such as lobster but that probably won't be enough to satisfy the "foodies". Having an upcharge for more than one or two items and the DDP guests will have a right to be upset.

Personally I feel they might get upset but people should realize you get what you pay for. The cost of the DDP isn't enough to get lobster and other signature dishes every night. If you want those items you should have to pay for them. As it is now they've taken away the option for those not on the DDP or at least moved the option to restaurants outside of the parks.

My guess is Disney would exclude a second restaurant (from the dining plan), if they thought there were enough customers. A signature restaurant is credited $50-55 per guest. That should be enough money to provide a reasonable menu. I doubt there are enough guests willing to pay $76-$100 to justify having a restaurant positioned above the current signature restaurants but below V&A.

To me excluding restaurants doesn't really fix the problem. Those restaurants would almost certainly be outside of the parks and I want(yea we all "want" things we can't have) the old way of eating back at WDW. Compromise is fine for me but don't tell me that I can still get what I want I just have to go to Downtown Disney or offsite to get it.

 

[marivaid]

Yep, it seems to me the people who champion the DDP want it both ways. They want people to not bash the DDP for the reduced menus but when we ask for additional non DDP items to be added to the menus they're up in arms saying it's not fair.

Don't put everyone in the same basket. I actually think it's a GREAT idea and I can't be the only one. Actually I'd be all for Disney to put a cap on the value of a meal on the DDP, say $40 or so -if you want more, you pay extra. Seems fair to me! And give people the option of getting more expensive meals if they want to pay for them.

 

[Lewisc]

Look at CRT. Disney changed the restaurant to signature status (two credits) and at the same time they reduced the menu. Dining plan customers pay twice as much and get less. Disney wanted to increase restaurant utilization and improve profits. Look at the new bar menus. DDP is the result of that new philosophy, not the cause.

You don't have to go to DTD. You can go to V&A in the GF. Bistro in EPCOT. Il Mulino in the Swan. blueZoo and Shula's in the Dolphin. Most of the complaints regarding Jiko and Citricos seem to revolve around normal menu changes. Most of the restaurants in the them parks were never exceptional.

Many of the people "bashing" the DDP don't like the fact that the restaurants are now crowded and it's harder to get last minute ADRs. Most restaurant owners look at that as a positive.

Posters keep talking about changes in Le Cellier. Listen to some of the posters and you'd think the restaurant went from Palm quality to Sizzler quality.

To me excluding restaurants doesn't really fix the problem. Those restaurants would almost certainly be outside of the parks and I want(yea we all "want" things we can't have) the old way of eating back at WDW. Compromise is fine for me but don't tell me that I can still get what I want I just have to go to Downtown Disney or offsite to get it.

 

[Dreamfinder2]

We live near New Orleans, and I really enjoy Emeril's, Commander's Palace, etc. I'm also very fond of Waffle House ... it just depends on what I'm in the mood for. And I don't have a lot of trouble finding good meals at WDW.

Just asking: I sure don't see V&A's jumping on board the DDP anytime soon, and I'm guessing its because they want to preserve the fine dining aspect of this very special place. Would a possible compromise (and note I didn't say "solution") be for more of the upper-tier restaurants to drop the DDP and give the chefs more of a free hand in designing the menus, a la V&A? I don't have a strong feeling one way or another - just raising the question in a valiant attempt to discern the win/win in all this.

 

[Nancyg56]

I posted that idea more than a year ago. Almost 100% of the posters thought that was a horrible idea. They didn't want DDP diners to be treated as "second class" customers and not be allowed to order the "good stuff".

There is a restaurant near where I live that offers a Friday night priced fixed dinner special. All the promotional materials say Any Entrée, Any Appetizer and specifies a special dessert. At least half the items on the menu have an * with an upcharge. I stopped going there.

Having upcharges is a slippery slope. It might be reasonable to offer one signature dish, such as lobster but that probably won't be enough to satisfy the "foodies". Having an upcharge for more than one or two items and the DDP guests will have a right to be upset.

My guess is Disney would exclude a second restaurant (from the dining plan), if they thought there were enough customers. A signature restaurant is credited $50-55 per guest. That should be enough money to provide a reasonable menu. I doubt there are enough guests willing to pay $76-$100 to justify having a restaurant positioned above the current signature restaurants but below V&A.

I would not mind if there were some items offered that were not included on the DDP. If the literature advised that items over a specified amount were not on the plan and I was informed in advance of my purchase, I can't see an issue. While I understand that the dining experience at Disney can't be everything to everyone, it seems reasonable that those willing to pay an additional fee for a higher priced item should be able to do so. This would in no way detract from the meal offered on the DDP.

There are a few restaurants that are not on the plan. There are two that I know of that went from 2 TS credits to 1. I believe they went to 1 credit in order to bring more people to the house. While there are those who would not mind paying more for "high end" dishes, there may not be enough to do this to consistently in order to justify the cost of ingredients kept on hand.

We have a few "higher end" restaurants in our area that had a more sophisticated menu than the chain steak houses. They gradually cut back on the items that were priced higher than the general population would pay on a daily basis. There were just not enough special occasions to cover the cost of maintaining the menu.. I don't think that it was dumbed down, I think the change reflected the price point that patrons were willing to pay. I bet that the same holds true for Disney. If the customer base would support another restaurant that was excluded from the plan Disney would do this.

 

[Nancyg56]

Yep, it seems to me the people who champion the DDP want it both ways. They want people to not bash the DDP for the reduced menus but when we ask for additional non DDP items to be added to the menus they're up in arms saying it's not fair. To me what's not fair is not allowing people to order higher priced items. The DDP is making the menus all the same price so that no one item is favored.



Disney would have to make sure people know that the DDP excludes some items. Of course they wouldn't want to admit this so again the DDP is preventing the restaurants from having a wide selection in prices.



Personally I feel they might get upset but people should realize you get what you pay for. The cost of the DDP isn't enough to get lobster and other signature dishes every night. If you want those items you should have to pay for them. As it is now they've taken away the option for those not on the DDP or at least moved the option to restaurants outside of the parks.



To me excluding restaurants doesn't really fix the problem. Those restaurants would almost certainly be outside of the parks and I want(yea we all "want" things we can't have) the old way of eating back at WDW. Compromise is fine for me but don't tell me that I can still get what I want I just have to go to Downtown Disney or offsite to get it.

It seems to me that the "fault" then is not with the DDP, but with Disney's reluctance to exclude some items or to place a cap on the amount per meal. Most reasonable people understand the cost of the plan vs the cost of the meals. The resentment would occur if the DDP was sold with the understanding that you can choose any item you want and the buyer finds out that that was not true. Sell the plan with the exclusions or caps disclosed, where is the problem?

I think that Disney wanted a carrot to entice more "captive" customers. They are also willing to trim the pricier items off of their menus if those items do not generate a profit or at least pay for themselves daily. There is no "fault" in this.

 

[afcgirl]

I agree with the OP, I love the DDP.

I resent the posts where people say things like "I could never eat that much food" or "who can eat that much", like all of us DDP users are gluttonous pigs! Or they say things like "what a waste of food", as if we are the only people whose eyes are bigger than our stomachs and order too much.

No one is against an honest critique of the DDP. Just don't try to ruin it for those who love it.

 

[Sammie]

Disney also uses this site as the cheapest market research out there. So I'm going to keep saying "sure, keep the DDP - AND work to meet my needs as well - I'm a high margin customer and you don't want to lose my dining or vacation dollars. You don't need to aim for the center - you can address several markets."

Maybe, one day some marketing manager will have the light bulb go off and they can make BOTH groups happy.

I think everyone can agree to that.

 

[bicker]

But we as guests don't have to be happy with it.

Happiness is irrelevant to this discussion IMHO. There is a difference between saying you don't like something and saying it shouldn't exist.

 

[bicker]

Disney should easily be able to keep a workable DDP, with great restaurants and appropriate choices at an acceptable price level while simutaneously operating three or four high end, chef driven dining experiences to please another segment...

Which they do, in the right measure: Victoria & Albert's, Bistro de Paris, blueZoo, etc.

 

[bicker]

But what is stopping Disney from applying a broad spectrum approach to dining, as they do to resorts?

Lack of interest on the part of guests, most likely. While a few vocal people in this thread might like more capacity directed that way, they won't fill a restaurant as readily as the alternatives which Disney does offer. That's why Disney offers the number of fine dining restaurants that they do: It matches the interest on the part of guests. If more guests wanted better restaurants, then Disney would provide that. If less guests wanted better restaurants, then Disney would convert more of the existing top-notch restaurants into casual dining restaurants. The guests are 100% completely driving these things.

 

[ncbyrne]

I know why two chef's have left and I'm sure you wouldn't like the answer. The servers aren't happy because of the formula for tip sharing I'm told...They're not reaping the benefits of their extraordinary service. Some of the better ones have moved on (as all the regular restaurant patrons know).

You are getting to eat at restaurants you maybe couldn't before but (IMO) it is no longer the same restaurant. You're eating in the same building but minus the same same food quality, menu diversity and service quality as was known in the past. So what are you really getting? A building with moderate service and a quickly changing menu that looks just like every othr WDW eatery.

:

We used the DDP on our last trip and loved the convenience. As we are normally off-site guestss, the DDP has worked to keep us on-site to use the plan. Please help me understand WHY the quality of food and service has deteriorated. Exactly what is the "formula for tip sharing". And why would this new plan prompt chefs to leave? I'm not trying to bash either side of this debate, I truly would like to understand.