It seems that WDW is saying that you cannot walk into a restaurant and order ONE meal using a dining credit and expect it to serve two people without ordering a second meal. If two meals are ordered, WDW doesn't care who eats what off of it AS LONG AS EACH ADULT HAS PURCHASED THEIR OWN MEAL WHETHER THROUGH THE DDP OR OOP. In other words, you can't buy ONLY one meal and share it between 2 people on the DDP without the second person also having bought a meal.
For what it's worth…My family went to Disney World last week and my DH and I shared 3 table service meals. Two were on the dining plan and one was OOP. The two on the plan were at Coral Reef and Spoodles. We were never questioned there (of course we wouldn't have attempted it if we knew they were not allowing it anymore!). At Olivia's we were sharing and paying OOP for that dinner. We told the server that we would be sharing and she started to say (I think) that if we were on the dining plan, we couldn't share. We told her we were paying OOP and she said, "Oh! No problem…" So I think that some locations are starting to "crack down" while others are still lenient.
Gina, I totally agree, and Waseller, I do not doubt at all that was what you experienced. I'm just wondering -- why would splitting a meal not be allowed on the DDP, but be allowed if paying OOP?
The main reason that has been given here for not splitting meals is that the restaurant is effectively losing capacity -- two people splitting one meal does not generate as much revenue as two people each ordering their own meal, which is at first glance true. However, it does not take into account that two people who share a meal are likely to order a least some extra menu items, such as a salad, an extra appetizer, a second beverage, a second dessert, after dinner drinks, or coffee. It also does not take into account that two people ordering OOP are not likely to
each order an appetizer, entree, and dessert -- appetizers and desserts are often shared, or simply not ordered at all.
But, if that is truly the case, and the restaurants are primarily concerned about wasted table space, why do they allow patrons paying OOP to split meals?
I wonder if the real reasons are that Disney is counting on unused leftover credits on the DDP (thus increasing their profit), or that people will use up their credits more quickly on signature dining and dinner shows, and they have to pay additional OOP for at least some of their meals (again, increasing their profit). And I say
additional OOP, because the majority of guests on the DDP did not get it for free, they paid $11 per child and $39 per adult, per day. Although, if people are sharing TS meals, doesn't it seem like they would be more likely to have TS credits left over?
It is similar to several other situations where it is in Disney's best interest to allow something (in this case, an additional child meal to be ordered), but it just opens the door to too many additional complexities and confusion that Disney will almost always stick with the simplest manner of enforcement (in this case, 2A3C means two adult meals and three child meals, maximum, no matter what).
)
)
