Why all the fuss about DDP?

[havoc315]

Sample Day:
Flame Tree: Ribs $10.50, Water $2.50, water for dessert $2.50= $17ish w/tax
Boma: $40
Snack: $4
__________

That's $61. The plan only costs $46. That's 24% savings.


Sample Day 2:
Sunshine Seasons: Asian $10, Water $2.50, Strawberry Cake $4 = $18 w/tax
'Ohana: $33
Snack: $4
___________

That's $55. The plan costs $46. That's 16% savings.

Sample Day 3:
WPE: Spag w/Meatballs $16, Tea $2.65, Creme brulee $5 = $25 w/tax
Whispering CC: Pork loin $23, Coffee $2.65, Bread pudding $6.50 = $34 w/tax
Snack: $4
___________

That's $63. The plan costs $46. That's a 27% savings. I would have had the skillet ($29), which would have made it 33%, but I did the less expensive choice.

That's the way we eat at WDW.

My entire discussion has been about the 2012 pricing, where the 20-30% savings are still being claimed.
In your examples -- even factoring in reasonable inflation-- the savings are well under 20%.
I never said 20% was unrealistic in 2011.
My complaint for 2011, was for a while, they listed the price as $42, when it was really $46.

 

[dandave]

Oy vey! This is really my last post - scout's honor!

Here goes: But we don't know what the prices are for 2012 menu items.

 

[havoc315]

Sample Day:
Flame Tree: Ribs $10.50, Water $2.50, water for dessert $2.50= $17ish w/tax
Boma: $40
Snack: $4
__________

That's $61. The plan only costs $46. That's 24% savings.


Sample Day 2:
Sunshine Seasons: Asian $10, Water $2.50, Strawberry Cake $4 = $18 w/tax
'Ohana: $33
Snack: $4
___________

That's $55. The plan costs $46. That's 16% savings.

Sample Day 3:
WPE: Spag w/Meatballs $16, Tea $2.65, Creme brulee $5 = $25 w/tax
Whispering CC: Pork loin $23, Coffee $2.65, Bread pudding $6.50 = $34 w/tax
Snack: $4
___________

That's $63. The plan costs $46. That's a 27% savings. I would have had the skillet ($29), which would have made it 33%, but I did the less expensive choice.

That's the way we eat at WDW.

As I said, this whole discussion has been about the 2012 plan.
Under the 2012 plan, same meals would have been a savings of 10-15%. Throw in a high estimate of inflation, still talking about savings of 13-18%.

Of course, if you had taken out WPE, and put in almost any other cs meal at any other location, the savings would have been less than 10%.

But even going with basically the most expensive buffet at Disney for 1 meal, getting the most expensive possible CS meal, you were still well under 20%.

 

[Cafeen]

Oy vey! This is really my last post - scout's honor!

Here goes: But we don't know what the prices are for 2012 menu items.

It's true, we don't. However, historically, over the past few years (so it's an admittedly small sample set), the menu prices have risen far less than the DDP prices. So, unless they match the 8-20% jumps in DDP prices this year, that gap is going to widen even more, thus driving down the savings. We won't know for sure until we start seeing the increases (which, mind you, don't come all at once like the package info), but it's also very likely that the savings will decline.

Of course, I'm not saying that it'll be extreme (going from ~30% to 0% or anything, or that you'll have to "order the most expensive thing at the most expensive restaurant every meal"), but there will be a decline in overall savings, some of which could easily switch some users from saving on a plan to spending more.

 

[kdawg8762]

Havoc, you simply blow my mind.

A) There is no class action possiblity, it would be thrown out.
B) In there example of 42 vs 47, did you include tax? Did they? Legally they are not required to because they don't charge tax, legally they collect it
C) When someone advertises "up to" they do mean if you maximize everything, it is a legally accepted concept
D) This discussion wasn't about 2012, I started the thread and it was too point out the ridiculousness of people doing what you are doing. I understand if it works for some and if it doesn't for others. The assault on it is what i don't understand and talk of class action is ridiculous.

 

[havoc315]

Havoc, you simply blow my mind.

A) There is no class action possiblity, it would be thrown out.
B) In there example of 42 vs 47, did you include tax? Did they? Legally they are not required to because they don't charge tax, legally they collect it
C) When someone advertises "up to" they do mean if you maximize everything, it is a legally accepted concept
D) This discussion wasn't about 2012, I started the thread and it was too point out the ridiculousness of people doing what you are doing. I understand if it works for some and if it doesn't for others. The assault on it is what i don't understand and talk of class action is ridiculous.

Since when are you a lawyer? I have worked on several class action suits. Misleading advertising, even if literal truth, is a deceptive business practice, and the basis for a class action.
A decade ago, I worked on 2 class action suits brought against life insurance companies for suggesting people would get returns "up to" a certain level, but most people saw much smaller returns. The suits reach multi million dollar settlements.
In the case of Disney, if most people in 2012 do fairly see 15-20% savings, then a class action would have no merit. If typical savings are really -5% to 5%, then there would be a slam dunk class action.


The 42 v 47 was outright incorrect. It may have been due to miscommunication with the Internet department. $42 was the 2010 price, $47 was the 2011 price. The website continued to advertise the 2010 price for 2011 packages.

 

[kdawg8762]

1) Its not misleading, do some misunderstand or construe things that aren't there? Yes. Then again, nothing will convince you otherwise. You have set upon the DDP like Goliath against the israelites in the Bible and nothing will convince you that you are wrong. Not class action attorneys (ones husband said you were wrong on this board), Not restaurtant owners, no one. The other reason there is no legal action here is that it is not the only way to purchase food. If you find it doesn't work for you, you go out of pocket. Some see a bit of savings, some see none but like to prepay, others see a lot of savings. But it doesn't matter, you want to attack it because you disagree with it. One question, why not simply not use it instead of wasting the energy to assault it like a filipino warlord?

2) Its not a slam dunk because Disney does not guarruntee savings, they simply say you can save and that its convenient.

3) You're an economist and now an attorney? You'd have to be an attorney because a class action litigator already said that it has no merit.

4) You do realize that high priced attorney's for Disney, in all likelihood, already vetted all the language right?

 

[kdawg8762]

Insurance companies, especially term life ones which is to what you are probably referring, are held to much higher regulation that the option of purchasing a dining plan while on vacation. Also, in most cases such as that, generally it is because the group was fradulent and really wasn't going to return a profit at all. Under the DDP, you are still going to eat. FYI, for our 2011 trip, i ran the prices and we save well over 30%. Once menu prices are out for 2012, i'll do the same. Will I save the same? Maybe, maybe not, but as long as I break even, it doesn't matter to me. We eat like we are on vacation, we throw out the diet, we eat bigger, better, richer foods and meals. We avoid CS like a plague (we do DxDP).

Still though, you have other options, other choices, simply excercise that right.

 

[havoc315]

Insurance companies, especially term life ones which is to what you are probably referring, are held to much higher regulation that the option of purchasing a dining plan while on vacation. Also, in most cases such as that, generally it is because the group was fradulent and really wasn't going to return a profit at all. Under the DDP, you are still going to eat. FYI, for our 2011 trip, i ran the prices and we save well over 30%. Once menu prices are out for 2012, i'll do the same. Will I save the same? Maybe, maybe not, but as long as I break even, it doesn't matter to me. We eat like we are on vacation, we throw out the diet, we eat bigger, better, richer foods and meals. We avoid CS like a plague (we do DxDP).

Still though, you have other options, other choices, simply excercise that right.

You are absolutely correct, about having your own choice, and using it if it works for you. And, you indicate you use the DxDP -- which does allow for much greater savings.

The problem is, Disney hides the pricing, and misrepresents potential savings. Thereby, leading many families to purchase the plan under a false pretense of savings, when they might actually be spending more by being on the plan.

Exaggerated claims are often the successful basis for class action lawsuits. For example, Kohl's Department Store is currently facing a class action lawsuit on the grounds that their "sale prices" are misrepresented. (That they always keep their items "on sale" and therefore, the sale prices are actually regular prices). Wrigley gum paid $6 million to settle a lawsuit for claiming that their gum fought germs. (The claim was correct. But they claimed that "scientific studies showed.." And while they were being technically truthful -- scientific studies did back them up -- Some of the studies were effectively exaggerated). Several computer companies have settled/lost class action lawsuits for exaggerating the battery length on their laptops (claiming "up to 4 hours" when 2-3 hours was more typical).

Turning to the cases that I worked, without going into excessive detail, there were claims for common law fraud.

I'm not trying to break your love for the DDP. You love it. That's fine for you. Other people dislike it, that's fine for them.
A separate issue is whether Disney is actually upfront in their selling and advertising of the dining plan, and this is much more gray. Clearly, there was a time where they completely advertised the wrong price. Currently, the hiding of the actual price, can be considered a deceptive business practice. Savings that are exaggerated from typical savings, can also be considered a form of false advertising.

 

[Cherinva]

I'm going to respond to the OP original post....I don't understand the hype either on tearing down the DDP.....

For each trip we take, I run the numbers (I'm the math person of the family)...yes, it takes a little time (not 6-8 hours though), but it's worth it....I know pretty much what each of us would want to eat....I check out the menus, write down the prices, and then enter that into a spreadsheet that I found for the DDP and see what happens.

We've used the TS Dining plan a couple of times...we find this of value to "us" when we are on longer trips. For short trips, we find the that QS Dining plan works better.

I think it's a matter of personal preference....try it, and if it doesn't work for you, so be it....you can state your experience, but there's no need to tear it down.

I like the fact, that when using the DDP...the food portion of the trip is already paid for...all I need is tip money...and based on knowing what everyone will eat, it's not that hard to figure out what the total bill will be so I can have that tip money already planned out and accounted for.

I will continue to use the DDP as long as it's a value to us....if the day comes that I find it isn't, then we won't use it....no big deal.

 

[kdawg8762]

I don't love the DDP, i simply don't understand that hate of it. They are not misleading. But, lawsuits aren't the answer to someone not doing any research. Class action lawsuits are usually nothing more than a ploy to get money from someone that isn't earned. The members of the suit make little to nothing, the attorneys make a fortune. Every case you mentioned, has fraud in it and there isn't any here. Since we can't go on 2012 yet as not all menu's and such are posted, lets go with the key questions to 2011.

Can you get the price for 2011 DDP? Yes
Are prices for menu's and such available for comparison? Yes
Can the consumer make a rationally expected educated decision based on this available data? Yes
If the consumer decides not to buy said product, is their service or the product provided, in any way, of lesser value? No

Most companies settle CA lawsuits because it isn't worth their time. In fact, CA lawsuits are basically the liberal's way of bullying "evil" business.

In the end, speak for yourself alone on this, because basically you are calling a lot of people stupid here, indicating they can't figure out the DDP on their own. Took me all of 1 hour to actually run both the DP and DxDP, look at menu's on all ears, and make a decision.

You know who loses in your way of thinking, the OOP people. If disney was sued (based on what I have no idea, but we'll run with it), Disney probably keeps the DP, but they will want to ensure they don't get sued again, thus they need to make the DP worth it...so, the cash price at TS and QS will rise, probably by 5-10%. Then you'll be able to say that the savings are there, but what actually occured was the prices went up.

 

[yanilat]

OOP or DDP, those 3 are easy to do. Also, if you have to budget cheaply to the point of pinching pennies...you shouldn't be going on a vacation, you should be putting that money to better uses.

whoa.. we went to Peru on a budget and pinch pennies and paid cash..no CC debt there..Guess I am old fashion..

 

[KrysiaG]

I honestly haven't seen any fuss about it (didn't know about the lawsuits). I think if it works for you, buy it.

If it doesn't, don't.

We are not doing the DDP.

 

[KrysiaG]

whoa.. we went to Peru on a budget and pinch pennies and paid cash..no CC debt there..Guess I am old fashion..

we saved every single penny and are not charging any part of our vacation either.

 

[kdawg8762]

Big difference between not charging a vacation and pinching pennies to the point a few bucks matters. At that point, you shouldn't be taking a vacation but should be putting money in the emergency fun.

 

[havoc315]

I don't love the DDP, i simply don't understand that hate of it. They are not misleading. But, lawsuits aren't the answer to someone not doing any research. Class action lawsuits are usually nothing more than a ploy to get money from someone that isn't earned. The members of the suit make little to nothing, the attorneys make a fortune. Every case you mentioned, has fraud in it and there isn't any here. Since we can't go on 2012 yet as not all menu's and such are posted, lets go with the key questions to 2011.

Can you get the price for 2011 DDP? Yes
Are prices for menu's and such available for comparison? Yes
Can the consumer make a rationally expected educated decision based on this available data? Yes
If the consumer decides not to buy said product, is their service or the product provided, in any way, of lesser value? No

Most companies settle CA lawsuits because it isn't worth their time. In fact, CA lawsuits are basically the liberal's way of bullying "evil" business.

In the end, speak for yourself alone on this, because basically you are calling a lot of people stupid here, indicating they can't figure out the DDP on their own. Took me all of 1 hour to actually run both the DP and DxDP, look at menu's on all ears, and make a decision.

You know who loses in your way of thinking, the OOP people. If disney was sued (based on what I have no idea, but we'll run with it), Disney probably keeps the DP, but they will want to ensure they don't get sued again, thus they need to make the DP worth it...so, the cash price at TS and QS will rise, probably by 5-10%. Then you'll be able to say that the savings are there, but what actually occured was the prices went up.

Whoa. You are all over the place.

First off, I never discussed whether class action lawsuits are good for society or not. Simply that depending on a close analysis, Disney could be opening itself up to exposure to a class action.
Secondly, I never suggested that the discounting information for 2011 was misleading. For 2011, the only accusation I have made about anything being misleading -- was when they were advertising $42 but actually charging $47. That was unquestionable false advertising. If you advertise $42, but then charge $47 to the person's credit card, there is absolutely no question it comprises false advertising. This misinformation is no longer on the Disney website, but it was there for about a month.
I have suggested that based on 2012 pricing, I think the discounting information is misleading. You're right-- it's not 2012 yet. We don't know with any certainty the savings. As I've said, you would need to analyze it at the appropriate time. And if typical savings are significantly less than advertised, there would then be meritorious claims against Disney.
Thirdly -- I never suggested or implied anybody here was stupid. Quite the opposite -- the people that are "here" are learning the additional information, and making an informed choice. What I have said, is that Disney's advertising can be considered deceptive, because they try to conceal this information. And people need to come to unofficial sources like this, to learn the truth.
You said that you figured out which plan to use in under an hour. That might be the case for you, but I doubt you calculated every meal, every snack, every dessert you are going to eat over your trip. And as you said, 2012 prices aren't out -- So it would be physically impossible for you to determine whether you will save a penny in 2012. So, you really are left making a shot in the dark if you are trying to book in 2012. But remember, many people who are booking on the website or the phone, are simply asked to make an instantaneous decision -- yes or no, add it or don't. Yes, individuals are free to change their mind, but Disney is not giving the appropriate information to make a decision. (They refuse to tell you the price. You can only get the price from unofficial sources).
Finally -- The actions by Disney are very very similar to the other cases I cited.
For example, the computer maker who advertised that their batteries "last up to 4 hours." Identical to the claim of "Savings up to 30%."
And sure enough, the computer maker showed that under absolutely ideal circumstances, the battery lasted 4 hours. But Consumer Reports and other "unofficial" sources showed average battery length was only 2-3 hours. Just like our current scenario -- people could get the truth from the unofficial sources.
Needless to say, it was a successful class action lawsuit.

You seem very bitter and defensive... Like, "How dare anybody accuse Disney of doing anything legally questionable..."

I happen to like Disney quite a bit. But I can be objective. Disney does some things absolutely wonderfully. There are other things that they do, that don't appeal to my personal subject tastes. And then there are some things they do, that I find morally and/or legally questionable.

Different individuals, different attorneys will obviously have different opinions. You don't find Disney's business practices with the dining plan to be questionable. I find a refusal to give an individual an itemized price, to be questionable. So be it.

 

[addiedisney]

I'm thankful for the "complaints" or "dislikes" on this board. If everything that was written was "Disney's pixie dust perfect," then I probably would not do my research. When I read someones comment that says,

"Hey, if you are "trying to save the % that Disney claims" make sure you do the calculations to see if the DP is worth it for your family.

I think, great advice! If everyone only said, for the DP, then I would be disappointed getting there and not reaping as much as a savings as I wanted to.

With honest opinions (and a lot of them) I can form my own, to make my families perfect vacation.

PS....off to find a spreadsheet to compare DP with OOP.

 

[clanmcculloch]

I've been reading this thread and shaking my head. Kdawg, your original point about people just ripping the dining plans as though they're the worst thing ever for everybody is absolutely valid. I never understood that. I'm not a fan of the way they are now but I would certainly always recommend to people to do the math and evaluate their own dining preferences to see if any of the plans would work for them. The plans certainly don't work for me just like they don't work for lots of people but they do definitely work for some.

What I don't understand is the way YOU are ripping havoc for not liking the business practices behind the marketting and selling of them. He has not been in any way bashing the plans themselves. He has not once made any personal attacks on you despite your repeated personal attacks on him. He's stated his view of the business practices. You on the other hand have made numerous personal attacks on him. Aren't you doing exactly what you said you can't stand in others? Actually, it seems worse since you're actually making it personal and not even about the dining plans (which again, havoc has not once said are bad, just that they're very deceptively marketted). Are people not permitted to state a different opinion than you?

 

[addiedisney]

Kwadg... Is it true that you won your trip to Disney ($5,000 free trip right)? Gosh, if I did not have to pay for a dime for my trip I would not be wasting my time trying to defend the DDP.

Is there any way you work for Disney Marketing (I sure hope not with your foul mouth)? If you don't work for Disney do you indirectly work for them?

If not, just go have a fun time on your free vacation and relax!! You seem to need it..

 

[kdawg8762]

I won this one. And where did i use foul language?

I am ripping havoc clam because for everything anyone has stated, he has stated he is a genius at it. First he was an economist, then a legal expert, then this, then that....Its one thing to complain, but another to patently slander something for what it is not. I have the same problem with people who defend the DP as great for everyone, however, i rarely see them, but you can't go a day without seeing someone post that it stinks.