No more segmented vacations for ddp

[Dean]

Agreed, at someone who's worked in CHQ finance for 31 years now at a company larger than Disney any potential program has to meet business objectives.

Disney has a long history of introducing a product that actually makes sense for many people then squeezing it until it no longer makes any sense for anyone. They did this with the Food n Fun program and it's related replacement in the 90's and first part of this century. I believe it's all about controlling behavior than trying to provide a product that's a win/win.

 

[cdtommie]

Disney has a long history of introducing a product that actually makes sense for many people then squeezing it until it no longer makes any sense for anyone. They did this with the Food n Fun program and it's related replacement in the 90's and first part of this century. I believe it's all about controlling behavior than trying to provide a product that's a win/win.

The makes sense and squeeze comment is interesting...I've always advocated going to F&W events the first year they are offered since it's likely the best it will be because going forward they will A) offer less and B) cost more.

 

[tjkraz]

It could work for Disney if priced properly (why couldn't it reflect your points 2 and 3)?. For example, I'm staying for a week and I want to buy 8 dining credits. They have to be used during the trip at either 1 or 2 credit restaurants during your length of stay. Just strip out the value of a mug and the snack credits from the DxDP and it might work (factor in usage assumptions likely higher than average but price per meal assumption would probably not change). No new room keys required on certain days - easier for the front desk to administer, restrict only to the guests staying in the room and and this might appeal to DVC members who have the option of cooking in their villa but would like a few dinners out. With the DxDP heading to the $85 range next year, there will be a lot less takers IMHO (I know I'm not signing up for it). We have changed our dining behavior over the past few years for sure - used to do signature restaurants at least 2/3 of nights we stay, now down to 40-50% maybe...might incent people to come back.

There is a class of people that think the DP isn't a good value and the restaurants are no longer a good value due to the endless price increases...I'm sure I'm not alone.

If you give guests total control, they will only use the solution when it most benefits them.

If you're obligating a guest to buy the DDP for their entire length of stay, they won't mind so much using a TS meal credit for an inexpensive breakfast buffet.

But give them a la carte dining credits and every single dining situation is scrutinized for it's value. If a TS meal credit was priced at a flat $28, sure you'll buy credits for use at Chef Mickey's or Crystal Palace dinner which normally runs around $35. But nobody...NOBODY...is using a $28 dining credit to pay for the $16 breakfast buffet at Trail's End.

Price snack credits at $3 each and people will use them explicitly for $4 popcorn boxes and cinnamon rolls, not $1.20 bananas or $2.50 sodas.

With any a la carte system, Disney loses the week-long commitment, there is very little chance of credits being used for purchases less than their face value or of credits ever expiring unused.

 

[Tiger926]

If you give guests total control, they will only use the solution when it most benefits them.

If you're obligating a guest to buy the DDP for their entire length of stay, they won't mind so much using a TS meal credit for an inexpensive breakfast buffet.

But give them a la carte dining credits and every single dining situation is scrutinized for it's value. If a TS meal credit was priced at a flat $28, sure you'll buy credits for use at Chef Mickey's or Crystal Palace dinner which normally runs around $35. But nobody...NOBODY...is using a $28 dining credit to pay for the $16 breakfast buffet at Trail's End.

Price snack credits at $3 each and people will use them explicitly for $4 popcorn boxes and cinnamon rolls, not $1.20 bananas or $2.50 sodas.

With any a la carte system, Disney loses the week-long commitment, there is very little chance of credits being used for purchases less than their face value or of credits ever expiring unused.

ITA! But during peak season, these amounts are even higher - character dinners are approaching $50.00, so I would imagine that you would then have peak season dining credits, as Disney would surely lose even more during these peak season times.

I absolutely agree that a credit-based system would be most beneficial for guests, but least financially benefically for Disney, and thus, I can't see Disney ever doing this, unless they price credits really high, and then they would have to market them for the convenience factor.

DH and I were totally surprised when they let us DVC members purchase the DP without tickets, and even more surprised when they allowed segmenting this year.

I have to imagine that if they truly wanted DVC members to eat more on property, they would offer a TIW card to DVC members at a discounted rate, instead of just to AP and Florida residents.

Many DVC members eat in their villas, and so I really don't think dining for DVC members is a huge concern to Disney corporate.

Tiger

 

[cdtommie]

If you give guests total control, they will only use the solution when it most benefits them.

If you're obligating a guest to buy the DDP for their entire length of stay, they won't mind so much using a TS meal credit for an inexpensive breakfast buffet.

But give them a la carte dining credits and every single dining situation is scrutinized for it's value. If a TS meal credit was priced at a flat $28, sure you'll buy credits for use at Chef Mickey's or Crystal Palace dinner which normally runs around $35. But nobody...NOBODY...is using a $28 dining credit to pay for the $16 breakfast buffet at Trail's End.

Price snack credits at $3 each and people will use them explicitly for $4 popcorn boxes and cinnamon rolls, not $1.20 bananas or $2.50 sodas.

With any a la carte system, Disney loses the week-long commitment, there is very little chance of credits being used for purchases less than their face value or of credits ever expiring unused.

Spoken like a Disney executive...seems some people want to advocate as if they are the CEO these days rather than focusing what would enhance the customer experience (and still turn a profit - I'm sure Disney has quite healty food and drink margins). I'm far from naive, I've priced offerings at a company larger than Disney during my career. There are people who visit Disney that are educated consumers. We are not asking for "total" control, rather something that meets our dining needs. And the alternative is to reduce our spending WDW dining wise which we have.

 

[Dean]

Spoken like a Disney executive...seems some people want to advocate as if they are the CEO these days rather than focusing what would enhance the customer experience (and still turn a profit - I'm sure Disney has quite healty food and drink margins). I'm far from naive, I've priced offerings at a company larger than Disney during my career. There are people who visit Disney that are educated consumers. We are not asking for "total" control, rather something that meets our dining needs. And the alternative is to reduce our spending WDW dining wise which we have.

I don't read it that way at all and Tim has a history of having reasonable, if not middle of the road, comments. The reality is that Disney has to decide what works for them and we must decide what works for each of us and each act accordingly. While we can all vote with our feet, threatening to doesn't help at all. ALL DDP options, and any forerunners, have always been specialty options that did/do not work for many people. Every change for the program thus far has certainly reduced the benefit and the % of people that the plans work for. Given Disney's track record on such matters I sincerely doubt we'll see a reversal to a program that works well for those the current plans don't, such as an al a cart program where you can pick and chose. Personally I think they could design a win/win program along such lines but I truly don't see it happening or else if they did, the price would be so high such that you wonder "why bother". This is exactly what happened with the Food n Fun program which at the end was totally changed and called the "World of Dining" and was a bust because it provided essentially no value to anyone.

 

[tjkraz]

Spoken like a Disney executive...seems some people want to advocate as if they are the CEO these days rather than focusing what would enhance the customer experience (and still turn a profit - I'm sure Disney has quite healty food and drink margins). I'm far from naive, I've priced offerings at a company larger than Disney during my career. There are people who visit Disney that are educated consumers. We are not asking for "total" control, rather something that meets our dining needs. And the alternative is to reduce our spending WDW dining wise which we have.

In any decision that Disney makes, there is some intersection between what is good for Disney and what is good for the guest. Park innovations like FastPass, interactive queues and virtual adventures are certainly appealing to guests, but they wouldn't be approved if Disney didn't see a business value.

In the case of the DDP, most guests save money over menu prices so Disney is absorbing some loss. But the trade-off is getting guests to commit to eating all of their meals on Disney property for the duration of the stay. A family who might previously have purchased groceries or gone off-site for some meals will now happily give Disney $800-1000 for a week's worth of Dining credits, and feel ecstatic about the "savings."

I just don't see any benefit to Disney in an open a la carte system.

Yes it would be very generous and "enhance the customer experience" to offer guests a way to reduce their dining prices. But as a rational observer, I know that Disney--like most other corporations--does not pursue policies which could cost them millions in revenue without having some profitable endgame in sight.

 

[bookwormde]

Increased value does attract additional customers, but that is a at the sacrifice of some profits margins.

I used DDP/DXDP for the first time because of the extra value and convenience that was available with segmenting. I will not be using it in the future. Being tied town to Disney dining for the duration of our trip (or while we are staying at one resort) just does not work for us (either financially or for practical reasons).

I think if the implementation had not been such a nightmare (Disney IT makes of mess of everyting) that it would have "survived much longer" even with Disney's realization that they have quite a number of savvy consumers in the DVC ranks.

bookwormde

 

[disneynutz]

Increased value does attract additional customers, but that is a at the sacrifice of some profits margins.

I used DDP/DXDP for the first time because of the extra value and convenience that was available with segmenting. I will not be using it in the future. Being tied town to Disney dining for the duration of our trip (or while we are staying at one resort) just does not work for us (either financially or for practical reasons).

I think if the implementation had not been such a nightmare (Disney IT makes of mess of everyting) that it would have "survived much longer" even with Disney's realization that they have quite a number of savvy consumers in the DVC ranks.

bookwormde

We used the segmented DXDP and saved a couple of hundred dollars compared to paying out of pocket for the same meals. In the past we would segment by changing resorts and only used the DDP if it made financial sense to do so. Disney has fined tuned the DDP to guarantee a decent profit margin and DVC segmenting took away the fine tuning. Disney has proven that they will do what ever is necessary to cut costs and increase profit. Remember when they replaced the DVC drink coasters to the paper thin ones. How much money did that save?

Bill

 

[Brian Noble]

eems some people want to advocate as if they are the CEO these days rather than focusing what would enhance the customer experience

Don't confuse understanding or acceptance with advocacy.

 

[Sammie]

Spoken like a Disney executive...seems some people want to advocate as if they are the CEO these days rather than focusing what would enhance the customer experience (and still turn a profit - I'm sure Disney has quite healty food and drink margins). I'm far from naive, I've priced offerings at a company larger than Disney during my career. There are people who visit Disney that are educated consumers. We are not asking for "total" control, rather something that meets our dining needs. And the alternative is to reduce our spending WDW dining wise which we have.

Not spoken like a Disney executive, spoken like someone that understands how Disney does things. Just because some of us understand how they think does not mean we always agree with them.

 

[cdtommie]

Don't confuse understanding or acceptance with advocacy.

Brian, I understand quite well. The tone some posters take to responses to this and other threads such as could DVC members get more perks given they have made a long term committment to Disney reads lke advocacy to me. Framing in responses so as not to come off as lecturing or condesending is key.

 

[Brian Noble]

You say this...

I understand

...and then say this

reads lke advocacy to me

which suggests to me that you don't understand at all.

No one *wants* Disney to charge them more and give them less. I would much rather have more perks and discounts, and I suspect Tim would too. But, we accept that giving us those might not be the best possible thing for Disney's bottom line. And, ultimately, that's the only driver in this equation. If I am guilty of advocating anything, it is to encourage people to remember the wisdom of Don Corleone: "It's not personal. It's strictly business."

The standard dining plan has always served dual roles from Disney's perspective. The first is to upsell guests who might not quite average one TS meal a day to move up to that level. The second is to lock guests into pre-paying for all of their meals on property, so as to reduce the chances that they will go offsite to eat, visit Potter, etc. Along the way, a few guests might save money over what they normally would do if left to their own devices, but on average that isn't likely to be true. It may have been in the first year or two, but Disney very quickly decreased plan values (by dropping the tip, etc.)

The balance of these goals is pretty clearly reflected in the price points of what are now three plans. QSDDP is, effectively, no discount at all except for the hard-core optimizers---it doesn't upsell, so it is less generous, but it does get guests to commit. On the other hand DxDDP is a bit more generous for folks who average closer to two TS meals per day, as a way to reward further up-selling.

There's no particular reason why DVC guests might be viewed differently than AP or package guests from the point of view of either of these goals. If anything, Disney might benefit *more* by getting a DVC guest to pre-pay for everything, because those guests are more familiar with the theme parks, know they are coming back, and might more willingly leave property. If that's so, then the very last thing Disney wants to do is allow DVC guests to segment.

 

[bobbiwoz]

I just noticed that my vacation over NYE, beginning at BWV with just DH and myself, and extending through the Marathon weekend with 8 of us at AKV has the same reservation number. It's 10 days, the first 6 at BWV and then the last at AKV.

Each segment was booked at 11 months and because TIW isn't valid for some of the BWV time, we did want the DDP, but I haven't paid. Is this going to be a problem?

 

[tjkraz]

I just noticed that my vacation over NYE, beginning at BWV with just DH and myself, and extending through the Marathon weekend with 8 of us at AKV has the same reservation number. It's 10 days, the first 6 at BWV and then the last at AKV.

Based upon conversations with people inside DVC, the official policy is that whenever you switch resorts, room size or view, it's a separate reservation and you can vary the dining plan purchase options. In your case you should be able to attach a dining plan to either the BWV or AKV stay, but there is no obligation to get it with both.

As for the same reservation number thing, honestly I'm not sure what role that even plays anymore. Having worked 20+ years in software design / configuration, it now strikes me as something that sounded appealing on paper--or perhaps sounded good when programmers and executives were involved int he design process--but to a front line rep making and managing reservations it really has no use.

 

[cdtommie]

You say this...

...and then say this

which suggests to me that you don't understand at all.

No one *wants* Disney to charge them more and give them less. I would much rather have more perks and discounts, and I suspect Tim would too. But, we accept that giving us those might not be the best possible thing for Disney's bottom line. And, ultimately, that's the only driver in this equation. If I am guilty of advocating anything, it is to encourage people to remember the wisdom of Don Corleone: "It's not personal. It's strictly business."

The standard dining plan has always served dual roles from Disney's perspective. The first is to upsell guests who might not quite average one TS meal a day to move up to that level. The second is to lock guests into pre-paying for all of their meals on property, so as to reduce the chances that they will go offsite to eat, visit Potter, etc. Along the way, a few guests might save money over what they normally would do if left to their own devices, but on average that isn't likely to be true. It may have been in the first year or two, but Disney very quickly decreased plan values (by dropping the tip, etc.)

The balance of these goals is pretty clearly reflected in the price points of what are now three plans. QSDDP is, effectively, no discount at all except for the hard-core optimizers---it doesn't upsell, so it is less generous, but it does get guests to commit. On the other hand DxDDP is a bit more generous for folks who average closer to two TS meals per day, as a way to reward further up-selling.

There's no particular reason why DVC guests might be viewed differently than AP or package guests from the point of view of either of these goals. If anything, Disney might benefit *more* by getting a DVC guest to pre-pay for everything, because those guests are more familiar with the theme parks, know they are coming back, and might more willingly leave property. If that's so, then the very last thing Disney wants to do is allow DVC guests to segment.

Brian, I still don't think you don't understand my point. When I say "I understand", I mean I understand that Disney's obligation is to it's shareholders and their sole focus is to meet or/exceed quarter profit estimates and they are under no further obligations etc etc etc.. This to me is always a given and doesn't need to be included in various forms in responses in what I perceive to be lecturing.

When people say they've invested a lot of money in Disney and are wishing for something a little extra in return many of the responses seem to be in the "why would they do that, you got exactly what you paid for" vein. Rather than people framing their responses as yes, I understand prices are escalating etc but as we all know given the current tough economic conditions it's unlikely that anything is going to be offered as Disney is only focused on short term profits, the tone in responses is one of advocacy. Do these posters here also believe Disney outsourcing/offshoring as much resource as possible since this provides short term help to the bottom line?

 

[Chuck S]

Please return this thread to the topic of segmenting. As others have stated, there is a difference between explaining the reasons for one's position and advocating. People clearly explaining what is likely the reason behind the changes are not, by default, advocating the changes.

You may discuss the changes and disagree, but do not read "motives" into other posters responses.

Technically, DVC is NOT an investment in Disney. They are completely separate operating companies under one umbrella, but DVC and Disney do not always have the same mutual goals. As Disney provides the DDPs to DVC via a contract, Disney is in control of the rules for DDP usage. DVC must follow those rules or give up access to the DDP programs. While we, as owners, may not like the changes, they are what they are. Sometimes the goals of DVC and Disney are mutually inclusive, sometimes they are not. The DDP is simply a case of "not."

 

[n2mm]

I wanted to mention today that I asked again today during my conversation with DVC about adding the ddp to my one night reservation. Just a brief recap, I booked a reservation during my home window and at the 7 month window I decided to add one day earlier using different points. On my confirmation (dvc online) it shows a 1 day reservation and a 6 day reservation. Originally they had different confirmation numbers, but during the last upgrade, the reservations numbers became the same. I asked during a recent call if I could add the dining to the first night reservation and was told no and during my call today, again I asked, hoping that things had settled and again was told no. It's not a big deal since it was only one night, so I will modify my ADRs now. But while making reservations today, which were for several of my adult kids and grandkids who all have different agendas and different departure dates, I made sure I specifically told them to NOT make the reservations the same confirmation numbers just in case one family wants dining and the other does not.

 

[Brian Noble]

As for the same reservation number thing, honestly I'm not sure what role that even plays anymore.

I suspect it might be useful from a marketing/customer relations management perspective.

the tone in responses is one of advocacy.

I think Chuck put it best:

People clearly explaining what is likely the reason behind the changes are not, by default, advocating the changes.

 

[lam]

i wonder what the number was of clients that had segmented but didnt add the dining plan yet.....

I am one of those members who HAS segmented my trip for next Easter but who HASN'T yet added the DDP (mainly because I was waiting to see dates & times of some of the Dinner shows etc to do ADR's first!!)

As its only a few weeks away from when I can start making my ADR's, I logged on tonight to have a 'browse' and check for any updates etc.

Got the shock of my life when I seen they had stopped segmenting.
Where does that leave me? Does that mean I cannot now add DDP?
I'm staying in 1 resort only in same room BUT had planned on doing 1 or 2 different dining plans on separate dates!

I thought this was a DVC Perk and had no idea it was a 'loophole' as is being suggested. The CM I spoke to during making the reservation earlier this year actually suggested I segment there & then to make it easier to add the vars DDP's when I'd made my ADR's and decided which plans I wanted!!!

I'm cross now! Hope I don't have to 'scrap' the whole idea!!

One consolation is for the 1st time, we have AP's and I bought a TIW (again just by browsing got info from this website-ta much).

SO not all bad I suppose as I can get discount!!

lam