Rant: The DDP is ruining everything!

[gokenin]

I have not read all of the replies to this post so if this was said already I am sorry but I have a question for everyone on here. Do we all really need to have an appetizer, main course, and dessert with every meal of the day? And also who wants to schedule a vacation around where to eat and what time you are eating, is it just me or does that not sound like a vacation anymore? Vacations are not all about food it should be more about family time and having fun, eat special meals with your family yes but to schedule your life around them no.

I agree however you are on the dining board and for many here this is the reason they go to disney and not the parks, I admit I go for both myself and I go once a year so its not that big a deal for the menus to change or the size of a drink to go from 20 to 16 oz or something like that but to some these things are very very important as well as there personal dislike for any changes from what they think Walt Disney himself would have wanted with the parks, lets remember he was the one that convinced us all in the first place to visit a tropical location in the summer time for fun afterall, but enough ranting lets just all remember why we love WDW in the first place and leave it at that

 

[OKWAnneMarie]

IMHO, if dining is such an important part of your criteria, I would not be rushing to Vegas. Not that there aren't some excellent dining facilities there (albeit on average a price often significantly higher than at WDW, IMO), but Vegas, too has a higher priority than dining. Vegas wants you to gamble, Disney wants you to spend $$ at their parks (and not just for admission). The majority of dining options in Vegas have also increased substantially in price while (noticeably) decreasing in quality. Of course, if you have not been a regular visitor to Vegas, odds are you will not be aware of the changes, just as is true for the "newbies" and future guests of WDW. I have noticed the same change in cruising, as well. We have been regular cruisers for many years now. The dining experience has deteriorated greatly, IMO, but people still book.

I think there is a recurring theme here: vacations such as Disney, cruising and even visits to Las Vegas were once geared to a wealthier clientele. In the quest to draw more visitors, the reality is the best way to up the bottom line is to increase the number of bodies entering one's domain. It's why the Atlantic City casinos subsidize so many bus trips - the avg guest arriving by bus may not be a high roller, but as a group they are loyal and steady patrons, and they affect the bottom line, not to mention "appearances" (who wants to play in a casino that appears empty all the time?); the casinos cannot afford to turn their noses up at such volume, either.

I'm sure Disney will miss you, and Disney is more likely to at least acknowledge your dissatisfaction than many companies. However, if in the long run the DDP allows more patrons to return more often, they will allow you to leave. Just as Las Vegas is not in the "family vacation" business, Disney's primary business is not dining.

BTW, I do agree with you that the loss of quality in dining is sad (although you might use a stronger word furious:?), but it is definitely part of a larger trend within the industry.

I must disagree with you about Vegas. In my opinion, the quality of the restaurants there has gotten so much better. I go to Vegas more to enjoy the fine dining than to gamble. I just returned from Vegas a couple of weeks ago and every meal was fabulous.

Vegas is definitely a fine dining destination and WDW was becomming one also. My trip to WDW in June was filled with wonderful meals from Artist Point, Blue Zoo, Flying Fish, Pucks, etc. If Disney wasn't trying to become a dining destination, why have all these type of restaurants?

Disney should not be lowering their standards when it comes to restaurants, but, of course, they will. Just like they've lowered their standards with everything else. For those of you, like me, who have been visiting WDW for well over 20 years, you can see the difference in many, many things. They used to give you chocolates after every meal (in every restaurant), every hotel had turn down service, the parks and rest rooms were cleaner, etc. Of course, you get used to change, but those little things would add up to make a Disney vacation just a touch more magical.

Yes, I agree with you that it is sad to see the loss of quality in any good company.

 

[DisneyMommyMichelle]

We LOVE the DDP and we love the new kids menu!!

 

[victoria&al]

I must disagree with you about Vegas. In my opinion, the quality of the restaurants there has gotten so much better. I go to Vegas more to enjoy the fine dining than to gamble. I just returned from Vegas a couple of weeks ago and every meal was fabulous.

Vegas is definitely a fine dining destination and WDW was becomming one also. My trip to WDW in June was filled with wonderful meals from Artist Point, Blue Zoo, Flying Fish, Pucks, etc. If Disney wasn't trying to become a dining destination, why have all these type of restaurants?

Disney should not be lowering their standards when it comes to restaurants, but, of course, they will. Just like they've lowered their standards with everything else. For those of you, like me, who have been visiting WDW for well over 20 years, you can see the difference in many, many things. They used to give you chocolates after every meal (in every restaurant), every hotel had turn down service, the parks and rest rooms were cleaner, etc. Of course, you get used to change, but those little things would add up to make a Disney vacation just a touch more magical.

Yes, I agree with you that it is sad to see the loss of quality in any good company.

I agree with you on Vegas. The dining experience there is incredible. I believe part of it is because there is a lot of competition among restaurants trying to get your business. It forces everyone to stay on their toes. Disney owns and/or controls the restaurants onsite. The competition to get your business does not exist among the restaurants onsite and, therefore, no one rises above the rest. (For instance Victoria and Albert's has not changed their dessert selections in more years than I can remember. That would not happen to a restaurant of their caliber in Vegas.)

I do not begrudge anyone using the DDP. Disney has set up the program and everyone is welcome to use it. I don't understand what the objection to people on the DDP is to two menus. If Disney has come up with a way to let more people have TS meals and lays out what choices can be ordered on the plan, why would one have a problem with there being other menu items that are not included on DDP? If you go to any other restaurant, different entrees are priced differently. Someone could order lobster and someone else could order chicken. There would be an obvious price difference. Why should it be any different at Disney?

My DH and I do miss the quality and creativity that used to exist in the restaurants. Dining was always a major highlight of our trip. It was the main reason DH liked going to WDW. We hope there can be some resolution or we, too, will be spending more time at the Swan and Dolphin.

 

[Lewisc]

DDP customers don't want to be treated as "second class" customers and Disney wants the ability to promote the dining plan as being a great deal. A plan that lets the customer order whatever he wants.

What would the dining plan menu look like? Dining plan customers would not be happy if the DDP menu featured chicken, chopped steak and a pasta dish.
I wouldn't have an issue if Disney allowed each restaurant to exclude one or two "signature" items, such as lobster. Every time a suggestion like that is made many posters complain. That type of change might not be enough keep the "foodies" happy and will annoy DDP guests.

The DDP allowance, at least for signature restaurants, is enough to cover the cost of almost any entrée and most appetizers. The guest is basically getting the drink and dessert for free.

At least some of the menu changes were made so the restaurants can more efficiently handle the increased number of customers. I don't know if it's fair to attribute those changes to the dining plan.

I do not begrudge anyone using the DDP. Disney has set up the program and everyone is welcome to use it. I don't understand what the objection to people on the DDP is to two menus. If Disney has come up with a way to let more people have TS meals and lays out what choices can be ordered on the plan, why would one have a problem with there being other menu items that are not included on DDP? If you go to any other restaurant, different entrees are priced differently. Someone could order lobster and someone else could order chicken. There would be an obvious price difference. Why should it be any different at Disney?

My DH and I do miss the quality and creativity that used to exist in the restaurants. Dining was always a major highlight of our trip. It was the main reason DH liked going to WDW. We hope there can be some resolution or we, too, will be spending more time at the Swan and Dolphin.

 

[Sammie]

I don't think you can say all the changes are Disney's fault and/or blame it exclusively on the DDP.

I think there is plenty of blame to put on those that abused the program from the begining, by paying $10.99 and feeding an adult lobster and steak on that.

 

[saschab]

Dining plan customers would not be happy if the DDP menu featured chicken, chopped steak and a pasta dish.
I wouldn't have an issue if Disney allowed each restaurant to exclude one or two "signature" items, such as lobster. Every time a suggestion like that is made many posters complain. That type of change might not be enough keep the "foodies" happy and will annoy DDP guests.

This is what I don't get.

We'll be using the DDP because it is offered to save us some bucks on our food. Has nothing to do with "food stamps" or "second-class" as some folks have evoked to make a point. If it didn't save us money, we wouldn't use it.

That being said, you get what you pay for. So the quality of meals is defined by the DDP margin. I now have less choice at many restaurants. I'm still using DDP because it makes financial sense for the CS and many TS meals.

If there were add-on $$ options at a signature restaurant, a person has a right to make their own decision. Why would it be skin off of anyone else's nose if I choose to partake or not. I like fine dining. Don't care who does or doesn't, and don't judge them in any way or form.

It's called choice. Some folks choose 1 park a day tickets, some choose the more expensive hoppers. Some choose moderate resorts, some choose deluxe.
Folks cry "snob", but many of those doing the calling are making a bigger deal out of "pretend" class issues than those who advocate CHOICE.

So what's the big deal with allowing folks to choose; DDP, OOP, add-on, separate menu, whatever. Things aren't always the same. You get to choose.

 

[Lewisc]

The problem is Disney doesn't publish official menus. Guests who chose the dining plan will be making their decision without having the facts necessary to make an informed choice. Most of us wouldn't purchase the dining plan if it became, in effect, paying $40 per day in exchange for getting food that's valued at $40-$45.

Guests are being presented the plan as a way to experience a restaurant. My concern would be if the restaurant was allowed to offer a very limited DDP menu. Assume I purchase the DDP and make an ADR to eat at Chefs de France. I'd be very unhappy if I was limited to the chicken price fixed dinner.

I wouldn't have an issue if a very limited number of menu items had surcharges for dining plan guests. Limited to one or two "signature" menu items. I suspect this type of limited exclusion would be the worst of both. Not enough options to keep the "foodies" happy but DDP guests complaining about not being allowed to order lobster.

Look what Disney is doing to the bar menus. Many of the changes to TS restaurants may have been implemented without the DDP.

edited to add Assume Disney goes to the extreme of having a completely different menu for DDP guests. A menu that's very similar from restaurant to restaurant. A menu that doesn't have anything special and a menu that's missing most of the "good" entries that's on the regular menu. Guests who know the situation won't purchase the plan and guests who don't understand what's going on will be complaining when they get to WDW.

This is what I don't get.

........So what's the big deal with allowing folks to choose; DDP, OOP, add-on, separate menu, whatever. Things aren't always the same. You get to choose.

 

[DisMN]

At least some of the menu changes were made so the restaurants can more efficiently handle the increased number of customers. I don't know if it's fair to attribute those changes to the dining plan.

I think it's very fair and accurate to attribute the changes to the dining plan.

DDP led to an increase of customers led to the changes to the menus.

DDP = Increase of customers = Changed menus.

I completely understand the reasoning behind the changes but I sure don't have to like it. LOL

 

[saschab]

The problem is Disney doesn't publish official menus. Guests who chose the dining plan will be making their decision without having the facts necessary to make an informed choice.

and

Guests who know the situation won't purchase the plan and guests who don't understand what's going on will be complaining when they get to WDW.

And that differs from what's happening now, how? (just kidding)
Besides those not informing themselves on what they purchase (their fault), that is Disney's problem to solve. Even with DDP as it stands now, there is not enough info and not enough consistency. I'm hoping that will change.

Most of us wouldn't purchase the dining plan if it became, in effect, paying $40 per day in exchange for getting food that's valued at $40-$45.

and

I'd be very unhappy if I was limited to the chicken price fixed dinner.

Well of course not. And I'm not advocating that.



A "reasonable" person recognizes that DDP may be convenient, will save some money, will encourage them to try restaurants they would not likely have tried, will keep people in the parks, etc.

I think it is unreasonable to expect a $100 dinner for a $25 dinner credit. But I've looked and am probably getting a $60 dinner for $50 (2TS) credit at Cali Grill in a week or so! 4 people, for a total savings of $40! So, DDP....good! (although california roll is no longer an appetizer, it's now listed as an entree as of 10/06...there is absolutely no other reason I can imagine for that, except DDP impact.)

My point is, if I wanted a $100 dinner of quality...say, meal including expensive raw bar items at a bluezoo type restaurant, even paying OOP for it; Disney has very little to offer.

Just give me an add-on. I'm smart enough to figure out it is way out of DDP's ballpark. And I'm sorry for the folks who seem so confused by the concept. I haven't seen people show outrage at Gold vs. Platinum package. And I still stand by my tickets and resort analogies. They have details on what they're getting for the different price points. Maybe Disney needs to consider the same on dining.

Please feel free to dissuade me, and I say that sincerely. I promise I won't continue to argue....I'm much too burnt out on this topic, and am now sticking to posting only sunny, happy threads, as I'm soon on my way!!

 

[Lewisc]

It's not a matter of being right or wrong. Put surcharges on the menu and DDP guests complain about "bait and switch" and being treated as second class guests. Delete the more expensive items and "foodies" complain about diluted menus.

I stopped going to a local restaurant. They have a price fixed menu that says everything is included yet many of the menu items have an * that lists a surcharge. Less than half the menu is now included but the big print says everything is included. Excluding a few, expensive menu items was acceptable to me. Excluding most of the menu, while saying everything is included, is at best sleazy.

Disney has to decide how many exclusions, if any, will be accepted as reasonable by dining guests. Disney then has to decide how many non DDP guests will only patronize a restaurant if those items are available. They have to decide if enough customers will pay for those few items to make it worth wile to even offer them.

I wouldn't have a problem if one or two menu items were "signature" and had a surcharge but Disney has decided that not having restrictions will satisfy more customers.

You have a valid point of view, Disney has just decided that more guests will be happy if they don't adopt your suggestion.

and

Please feel free to dissuade me, and I say that sincerely. I promise I won't continue to argue....I'm much too burnt out on this topic, and am now sticking to posting only sunny, happy threads, as I'm soon on my way!!

 

[TDC Nala]

I agree with you. At this point in our lives fine dining is also a major part of our vacation. Our children are grown and we all still LOVE to go to WDW, but we've also began seeking out other destinations. We just returned from our 25th anniversary trip in Vegas. Talk about a dining destination!!!! Wow, the food and service was outstanding. I just think Disney doesn't care anymore, because they still make money. Oh, well.

I am going to be spending more time in Vegas as well.

I have noticed that a lot of the sushi selections that were on the California Grill menu on Labor Day were removed recently.

I think that's because the more expensive sushi offerings were going as dining plan appetizers. I got one myself at Labor Day.

Of course, now that I won't be using the dining plan again, the sushi I liked so much isn't on the menu. I suppose I could try asking for it if I intend to pay OOP.

 

[saschab]

I have noticed that a lot of the sushi selections that were on the California Grill menu on Labor Day were removed recently.

I'm not sure which selections you were referring to, but if you look at the entree listing, you might be surprised.....sushi and cheese selections are now entrees!!

Have a peek: http://www.wdwinfo.com/wdwinfo/dining/diningdetail.cfm?Restaurant.ID=105

That's not streamlining, that's a change specific to DDP usage. Too expensive for a DDP appy? Well, then we'll just move it to an entree.

 

[rie'smom]

I'm thinking that it would be a good idea to write to Disney at this point. I will write them one of my past dining schedules (CG, AP, Citrico's, Narcoossees) then compare it to my upcoming plan (BlueZoo, Shula's, PftS & one Disney restaurant, Flying Fish)

I will also tell them of our plans for spring (Rent a car, so we can add Tchoup Chop & other's to our plans for BlueZoo, Shula's & hopefully, Il Mulino - notice not one single Disney Signature where in the past every night was a Disney Signature) I will also tell them that we are even looking at new vacation destinations like Vegas since dining has gone downhill at WDW.

Granted, I am representing only one family of 3 adults that goes an average of twice a year. We spend a significant amount of our budget on dining. But, from the looks of this thread, there are many of us like-minded families who are frustrated with the current trend in Disney Dining. I plan to speak with my Wallet & voice my displeasure to the powers that be. I hope enough of us will do the same & affect some change.

I sent off an email about 30 minutes ago telling them of my displeasure. Even if they do nothing,at least I feel better. If everyone who has a problem with the DDP sent an email,maybe WDW would pay attention.
This trip(Thanksgiving)we wil go to the Sci-Fi because my DD loves it and San Angels,because it's tradition but we will have the rest of our table service meals at the Swan/Dolphin.

 

[bell.of.the.ball]

My thoughts: Make the menus great again and either charge more for the dining plan or.....have a DDP menu that limits what they can order, dont punish the people wha are paying OOP

 

[Kay1]

I don't think you can say all the changes are Disney's fault and/or blame it exclusively on the DDP.

I think there is plenty of blame to put on those that abused the program from the begining, by paying $10.99 and feeding an adult lobster and steak on that.

People were really doing this?

 

[Allison]

People were really doing this?

Yes, they did. Pay out of pocket for a kids meal and use their credit for an adult meal.

 

[everest]

Yes it did happen. IMHO I don’t think that it is a huge wide spread problem. Say a family of four who gets a TS meal everyday pays for the kids OOP and saves the credits for future use, that would mean that they would need to have 2 TS meals in the same day. That family would have spent an incredible amount of time in the restaurant’s on their vacation. Yes I believe that it does happen but I don’t think most families try to take advantage of the DDP because there really is to much food as it is for the families.

 

[wrldpossibility]

I have read through the thread, and I understand the legitimate issue you are debating, but IMO, the portion sizes being reduced in general in the WDW eateries is a GOOD thing, no matter what the reason.

This goes for the new kid menu, too. We're going in 6 weeks with three kids (on DDP), and I'm thrilled to see healthy options on the kid menu. I also know I won't begin to be able to eat all the food offered on the DDP, so the smaller portions means they'll waste less (good for Disney and us). I'm sure the portion changes are a result of cutting costs due to the DDP, but it fights the serious problem of obesity in our country too. I have noticed more and more restaurants doing the same, for health reasons. Patrons are starting to complain about the huge portion sizes.

I completely understand the POV of the OOP fine diner paying the price for these cost cutting measures, and I would completely agree with Disney excluding some entrees from DDP. Personally, I was very surprised at all the options I have on it. I would have expected DDP to not cover all it does. Or, maybe a few more restaurants that do not accept DDP. I think these are viable options.

 

[Amyrlin]

I did not think this at all, but there is one exception, CG, the new menu has really upset me, compared to the others is is just cheap, maybe they are trying to get enough complaints so they can pull out of the DDP.

Otyhers are not so extreme, only the dissapperance of speciality items, but the rest remaing the same, only a bit smaller on what were very large portions already.