Rapid Fill Mug Program Fails (at more ways than you might think)

[flynnibus]

I guess they could have not allowed refills, moved the drink machines behind the counter like some counter service restaurants in the parks and just gotten rid of the refillable mugs. That would have been relatively easy, but I think people like the refillable mugs and they are probably profitable. You would be decreasing the guest experience and losing money in the process.

Just have a dedicated drink line for mug users.. problem solved. No need to get rid of the mugs.

 

[GoofGoof]

Are you talking about refills? Disney should in reality eat the cost, if at Cheesecake Factory you get free refils on cheaper priced Coke, just give free refils. 75% of guests wouldn't keep the paper cups for more than a couple of hours and your giving a value add to customers.

I'm not talking about someone who paid for their drink and wants a refill. I'm talking about people filling up an old mug or a personal cup that they aren't paying for.

 

[SirLink]

I'm not talking about someone who paid for their drink and wants a refill. I'm talking about people filling up an old mug or a personal cup that they aren't paying for.

Old mugs that allowed for unlimited refills for life? Don't have a problem with that one.

 

[englanddg]

The situation is nothing alike except both being counter service

1) You don't tend to pass through burger king on your way to and from your bedroom every day
2) Scale
3) Existing design/layout

And many of these places do NOT ignore soda fountain abuse. It tends to depend on your location... because the biggest factor is the environment and demographics.

If Disney just freaking stood up to their customers, such a system would be necessary in the first place. Same with photo flashes, etc. Every guest has an ID associated with them.. room card or ticket.. and now MDE profiles. Track problem people and punish them. Don't want to give up your 'id'? Fine, we'll escort you off property.

It doesn't take running a prison to get the message across... just change the mentality and expectations that Disney isn't going to let you walk all over them.

Exactly. Especially the "running it like a prison" part. It's lazy management that would rather be able to "blame the system" and shrug their shoulders at an upset guest than actually do their job and enforce the rules and provisions in place.

This also includes the ability (which an automated system doesn't do well at all) to make exceptions to the rule. For example, if I was FOH and I saw someone approach my beverage bar at PORS with an old 32oz Dixie Landings cup, I'd probably walk over and start a conversation about how cool that is and ask them about their stay, not get into the no "unlimited refills when I bought it argument". I would pass into the conversation that the rules did change, but I would let them use their obviously decades old mug.

Why? Because, if they kept it that long, they probably love the heck out of my resort, and I'd rather have a magical encounter with them than tick them off and make them consider looking elsewhere (like offsite).

But...<shrug>

 

[flynnibus]

Anyhow, I am deeply against this system, but I wanted to run through some of the numbers and considerations Disney certainly looked at as a matter of information for anyone unaware of the details of F&B costing.

Sorry so long!

Nice - thanks for the exercise.

I think the problem in Disney's case is complex because of the mugs and the interaction between F&B vs the location.

For instance your example, you focused on refills. One could also look at it and say 'people aren't just stealing refills, they aren't buying sodas at all' - then the lost opportunity cost is much more a significant factor. Because... who is going to eat a meal without a drink? That means killing the shrinkage should lead to either 1) greater drink sales or 2) greater adoption of mugs.

I'm not really clear on what their like or dislike for the mugs are. The mugs are so small, there might even be some favor thinking it reduces how much people consume... Lots of complicated factors that depend so much on how Disney handles the revenue and costs internally between the different cost centers.

Generally one would look at a mug as an upsell opportunity.. and makes sense in a single day scenario. But in a length of stay scenario? At $18... if the average resort stay is 4 days or more... and Disney charges on average about $3 a soda.. I would think the upsell gain fades damn quick. Of course, this would be why you don't extend the service resort wide.. and one would argue 'how many drinks do you drink AT THE RESORT' that you would buy if you had to pay for it.. and there I can see the average probably more like 1-2.. restoring the upsell value for the company.

Since mug usage wasn't tracked and not linked to food sales, it also makes it difficult to statiscally look at customer patterns and identifying shrinkage.

I wonder if a cheaper hybrid would have been to limit usage to mugs and 'one time use' cups enforced through labor. Who needs RFID if you just tell people they can't reuse cups and if you have a receipt for the valid window I'll give you a cup..

 

[flynnibus]

Are you talking about refills? Disney should in reality eat the cost, if at Cheesecake Factory you get free refils on cheaper priced Coke, just give free refils. 75% of guests wouldn't keep the paper cups for more than a couple of hours and your giving a value add to customers.

But it's not just refills - it's 'drink with my food purchase' - how many people are going to eat their salty fries and burger without a drink?

 

[englanddg]

Nice - thanks for the exercise.

I think the problem in Disney's case is complex because of the mugs and the interaction between F&B vs the location.

For instance your example, you focused on refills. One could also look at it and say 'people aren't just stealing refills, they aren't buying sodas at all' - then the lost opportunity cost is much more a significant factor. Because... who is going to eat a meal without a drink? That means killing the shrinkage should lead to either 1) greater drink sales or 2) greater adoption of mugs.

I'm not really clear on what their like or dislike for the mugs are. The mugs are so small, there might even be some favor thinking it reduces how much people consume... Lots of complicated factors that depend so much on how Disney handles the revenue and costs internally between the different cost centers.

Generally one would look at a mug as an upsell opportunity.. and makes sense in a single day scenario. But in a length of stay scenario? At $18... if the average resort stay is 4 days or more... and Disney charges on average about $3 a soda.. I would think the upsell gain fades damn quick. Of course, this would be why you don't extend the service resort wide.. and one would argue 'how many drinks do you drink AT THE RESORT' that you would buy if you had to pay for it.. and there I can see the average probably more like 1-2.. restoring the upsell value for the company.

Since mug usage wasn't tracked and not linked to food sales, it also makes it difficult to statiscally look at customer patterns and identifying shrinkage.

I wonder if a cheaper hybrid would have been to limit usage to mugs and 'one time use' cups enforced through labor. Who needs RFID if you just tell people they can't reuse cups and if you have a receipt for the valid window I'll give you a cup..

Size certainly is a consideration. I remember reading a very interesting article in the Restaurant News that detailed a study that was done about cup sizes in relation to consumption / number of refills. This was over 15 years ago, so I doubt I'll be able to dig it up, but what it found was very interesting.

When restaurants used smaller glasses (say, 10 or 12 oz), consumption actually increased. It wasn't real consumption, per se, but rather distribution. It wasn't enough to satiate the consumer, so they would ask for or otherwise obtain a refill.

When you put a price constraint on that (no refills), people were less likely to get one. However, they were also more likely to ask for water, which is all cost, or in the case of fast food, not order a drink to go, and get a can or bottle from somewhere else.

The sweet spot the study found was 20 oz. cups. When lower than 20 oz, people were more likely to get a refill. So, say your cup is 16 oz...now you have distributed 32 oz of product for no gain. At the time, this proved perfect for quick service, and if you watch cup sizes at fast food restaurants during this period, there is little doubt this was a factor at the time.

I'd be curious to read a more modern study, because I believe consumption behaviors have changed. And, restaurants increasing their standard sizes to 20 oz portions certainly helped that.

Now I want to go dig up that article.

 

[GoofGoof]

Old mugs that allowed for unlimited refills for life? Don't have a problem with that one.

If someone has a lifetime mug from the time when lifetime mugs were sold they should be able to bring the mug to any Disney resort quick service location and receive a refund of their original purchase price now that the program is ending. In all my time going to WDW I never saw an unlimited for life mug offer, but since some people claim they got one and I have no reason to doubt them I think they should be fairly compensated. Disney would have a record of when the lifetime mugs were sold and what they look like so it would be easy to identify them and offer compensation.

 

[SirLink]

But it's not just refills - it's 'drink with my food purchase' - how many people are going to eat their salty fries and burger without a drink?

Water ... ... is free ....

But Disney should eat the cost their are far more obvious things to clamp down on for loss prevention.

 

[John]

I understand what the reasons are for implementing such a system but I think it goes back to the reasons why so many of us complain about the place to begin with. Guest experience, yes Disney is a business and have every right to make as much money as possible but what formula they used in the past is no longer the way they choose to use now.

The parks have always been a cash cow for the company. The day of making the experience world class and thus the guest spending time and money because of the experience is now frowned upon by this current management team. How can we squeeze every dollar possible is now the mantra. Isnt this what is really behind MM+? So these two programs are very much related. The parks were extremely profitable before this soda lock down program was implemented, they just wanted to see how much more they can make. I am not holding it against them I just think it takes away from my experience. Lets face it because of McDonalds and almost all other types of restaurants we as a consumer have been lead to almost expect free refills these days. So with that mind set Disney doing this kind of feels like they are trying to squeeze us.

If I am staying at a resort and I am paying $600 a night, sorry I expect way more then some free soda. I appreciate the exercise @engladdg layed out for us but I can not help but think that they could use this way of thinking about everything. Wait! we allow CM's bring in three guest.....look how much money we are losing, if we charge them regular admission look how much more money we would make. It could go on and on. As a business there a certain cost that are absorbed and incurred for just doing business. Although the potential monies made seem huge with locking down the soda machines I am sure they still make a profit....just not as much as they possibly could. SO again just like MM+, is it worth the investment and IMO the lose of the guest experience?

 

[englanddg]

I understand what the reasons are for implementing such a system but I think it goes back to the reasons why so many of us complain about the place to begin with. Guest experience, yes Disney is a business and have every right to make as much money as possible but what formula they used in the past is no longer the way they choose to use now.

The parks have always been a cash cow for the company. The day of making the experience world class and thus the guest spending time and money because of the experience is now frowned upon by this current management team. How can we squeeze every dollar possible is now the mantra. Isnt this what is really behind MM+? So these two programs are very much related. The parks were extremely profitable before this soda lock down program was implemented, they just wanted to see how much more they can make. I am not holding it against them I just think it takes away from my experience. Lets face it because of McDonalds and almost all other types of restaurants we as a consumer have been lead to almost expect free refills these days. So with that mind set Disney doing this kind of feels like they are trying to squeeze us.

If I am staying at a resort and I am paying $600 a night, sorry I expect way more then some free soda. I appreciate the exercise @engladdg layed out for us but I can not help but think that they could use this way of thinking about everything. Wait! we allow CM's bring in three guest.....look how much money we are losing, if we charge them regular admission look how much more money we would make. It could go on and on. As a business there a certain cost that are absorbed and incurred for just doing business. Although the potential monies made seem huge with locking down the soda machines I am sure they still make a profit....just not as much as they possibly could. SO again just like MM+, is it worth the investment and IMO the lose of the guest experience?

Right. That's exactly where it's going. Squeeze every last drop out of the orange, but you better not hope it turns into a lemon!

I am quite sure all of these were smart business decisions on paper. And, I actually applaud Management for thinking outside of the box regarding this. That doesn't mean that every idea is a good idea.

I was at POFQ when they rolled out RapidFill there, and while I took quiet amusement at people being befuddled by the machines (and confused looks from the obvious trainers / managers who were manning the stations to help out when I'd start answering guest questions for them).

Why, because I was already pretty familiar with the system, and it didn't take me long to figure it out.

Also, because I know that look (anyone who has worked service jobs with any manner of professionalism knows "that look" on a guests face, and when to approach a guest rather than waiting to be asked...though, Disney as of late has been doing a poor job of this, in my opinion...all reactive, never proactive. The Cruise Line, the exact opposite.

Anyhow, my point is this. Management in a meeting room somewhere came up with the idea. It looked and sounded great (I can even make operational arguments for it, like the fact that the nozzles don't operate when there isn't a cup underneath, which...in theory (not in practice) should keep the beverage bar cleaner thereby easing operational requirements both in frustration and labor while improving the Guest Experience by having cleaner beverage bars.

It's not hard to see how IN A MEETING ROOM this all makes sense.

But, because I highly doubt that most of Disney's upper management actually bothers to VISIT Disneyworld and experience it as an average Guest, and when they do they don't do it as a "normal guest" would, they have forgotten (if they ever understood) what it feels like to be a "guest".

All I thought, as I looked at the trashed tables, the dead roach that sat on the floor, the Beverage Bars that were in constant disarray (running out of product, empty or slow ice machines, straws EVERYWHERE)...was...

For whatever this system cost, it's merely a distraction.

The key to great service (and it took me a while to realize this, because I used to be a "lets make a complicated system with new rules" sort)...many times is just getting back to the basics.

Cleanliness, Friendliness, Proactive service behaviors, and Quality Product.

 

[flynnibus]

Water ... ... is free ....

Yet, it doesn't dominate the market. Obviously the 'free' aspect doesn't offset the other elements and people still opt to buy drinks at food service locations.

But Disney should eat the cost their are far more obvious things to clamp down on for loss prevention.

It depends on your business model. Its like the oft cited Movie theatre situation. Telling them to 'just give soda away' is entirely different to them than to a location where the f&b isn't their primary revenue stream.

If Disney has shaped it's pricing and business model around that revenue.. it can be far more significant than other elements.

 

[SirLink]

It depends on your business model. Its like the oft cited Movie theatre situation. Telling them to 'just give soda away' is entirely different to them than to a location where the f&b isn't their primary revenue stream.

If Disney has shaped it's pricing and business model around that revenue.. it can be far more significant than other elements.

I'll put it in a more straightforward manner ... stop bending over to pick up the Pennies as the Notes fly over your head ... the amount of stuff that gets broken ala Tony Baxter portrait or merchandise that goes walk about from the Emporium or Star Traders... those people should either be billed for the damage ... and maybe just maybe correct the loses...

 

[The Visionary Soul]

Yet, it doesn't dominate the market. Obviously the 'free' aspect doesn't offset the other elements and people still opt to buy drinks at food service locations.

It depends on your business model. Its like the oft cited Movie theatre situation. Telling them to 'just give soda away' is entirely different to them than to a location where the f&b isn't their primary revenue stream.

If Disney has shaped it's pricing and business model around that revenue.. it can be far more significant than other elements.

Water does dominate the drink market. Just more in its bottled form.

I agree that most want something to drink with their meal. But you're not going to convince me that everyone will pay 3 dollars for a coke if you couldn't get it for free. Some will choose something that was free... like water.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Also, because I know that look (anyone who has worked service jobs with any manner of professionalism knows "that look" on a guests face, and when to approach a guest rather than waiting to be asked...though, Disney as of late has been doing a poor job of this, in my opinion...all reactive, never proactive. The Cruise Line, the exact opposite.

When you have trouble speaking English and you're being payed $7/hr, do you really want to go out of your way to deal with a guest's problem?

If you'd like to keep your job the answer is yes, but a poor corporate/management culture doesn't help in this area.

 

[surfsupdon]

We always bought mugs and I always used them for lemonade!

Most recently, we stopped buying mugs. And ask for a cup of water. Needless to say, I am saving my mug purchase price and CMs typically fill up a big cup of water for us.

So that's cool. But yes, they are losing our money, b/c we don't even buy the mugs any longer.

And the bigger plus is that I am no longer drinking SUGAR WATER!!

 

[flynnibus]

I agree that most want something to drink with their meal. But you're not going to convince me that everyone will pay 3 dollars for a coke if you couldn't get it for free. Some will choose something that was free... like water.

Nothing is an absolute when dealing with customer behavior... but I'd wager if given asking for a cup of water vs buying one of the offered drinks... 9 out of ten would buy a drink. Just my speculation... but just about everyone will give you a cup of water if you ask... yet most still buy the offered drinks. Even in restaurants where the water is there without asking.. most still order drinks.

Ordering a drink with your meal is an expectation most customers are comfortable with.

 

[flynnibus]

I'll put it in a more straightforward manner ... stop bending over to pick up the Pennies as the Notes fly over your head ... the amount of stuff that gets broken ala Tony Baxter portrait or merchandise that goes walk about from the Emporium or Star Traders... those people should either be billed for the damage ... and maybe just maybe correct the loses...

I get that.. but you also have to look within the horizon people are working within. F&B doesn't give a crap about how much Parks spend on repairing cheap paint. If F&B relies on drink sales as part of their established revenue model... they can't just walk away from it. They would have to redefine their business and that means being viewed and measured differently from above as well.

Not impossible - but it's not about 'free salt vs free soda' - it's about what I am expected to deliver to the company and how I am measured.

 

[englanddg]

When you have trouble speaking English and you're being payed $7/hr, do you really want to go out of your way to deal with a guest's problem?

If you'd like to keep your job the answer is yes, but a poor corporate/management culture doesn't help in this area.

True, good point.

But, if you are a manager and you are hiring customer facing in a venue where the people largely speak English, wouldn't it be a smart idea to hire people who speak passable conversational English (and this includes people whose native tongue is English as well!)?

Shouldn't that be a priority?

Instead, Disney Management (like a lot of Hospitality Management) bought into the "hire immigrants" concept that was popular in the late 90s early 2000s. Why? Because then they could be lazy managers lording over their miniature realms like kings of the proverbial castle, with hours as the whip to beat the employees with.

Also, you get to get away with stuff if your staff has trouble communicating, because who are they going to report it to? Your boss?

It's not poor management, it's stupid management. Period.

 

[Wilt Dasney]

I blame 'creative accounting' more than soda banditry, but if DCL can give soda away so can the resorts at rates charged, Lets face it the non-resort guests are a tiny fraction of those using machines

And (essentially) everyone in the food courts has paid for a park ticket. As mentioned, Disney has plenty of opportunities to recoup their nickel-per-head cleanly.