New policy: No young kids at Victoria & Albert's

[_queenie_]

uva What I do not understand is the elitist feel that just because a child is young that that, by itself, takes away from the atmosphere.

Yeah, I guess I'm going to have to agree with this statement. When we're with our children in a nice restaurant we often get starred at, but the way I see it is if they're acting just as well, if not better, than many of the adults, they're not taking anything away from the dining experience.

 

[uva185]

Oh, and if you are cross country or farther, fly at night, try to get them asleep.

Yeah, I try early am or late evening....the flight I mentioned was right before Christmas which was sort of at night...arrived at Dulles at 1am. There were a lot of kids on that flight (but just that one in First) I nearly went crazy when at baggage claim, after flying for 36+ hours from Auckland, New Zealand 3 kids around me kept saying "is that our bag, is that our bag, is that our bag" as every bag came around. I think the parents had given up by that point.

For the record I don't have kids so my tolerance is low.

I do like VA. I think it is one of the best restaurants around. There is a pretty close runner up in cave creek az, Binkleys, if you ever get out there. We had a party for our 15 yr anniv. last year for about 5 couples that came out with us, and it was fantastic.

Duley noted, looks nice, I'll check it out next time I'm out in Phoenix. While we are on the topic of nice restaurants The Mansion on Turtle Creek in Dallas, TX is also a lovely restaurant!! But not quite as nice as V&A.

 

[WillCAD]

Really?? Has Disney announced this? It appears that is stricly speculation from some postings on this board.

No, you misunderstand what I meant. I did not mean that it's the tip of anything that Disney has planned. I mean that it is the tip of a larger issue that has been discussed among WDW fans, especially on these boards, for a long time.

Part of the issue is that some people are afraid that this one restaurant out of 97 might lead to Disney instituting a minimum age at other signature restaurants. While I would like to see a limited number of adults-only restaurants, I don't think that Disney has any plans to try this anywhere else at WDW, even if the new policy at V&A is 100% successful. In fact, I was terribly shocked that they finally made this move at V&A after so many years.

I really do have to disagree with this. I really think the number of families that have children misbehaving at the resturaunts is realitively small. Its just that their behavior takes up so much more space!! If 80% of the diners with children were misbehaving it would be bedlam. It just takes a few who let their kids run around, throw things or carry on very loudly to fill a room.

I vote "yes" for the new policy at V&As, "no" for extending it to other existing places- people often look forward to returning to a favorite. Now, if they were to build a new place, I would just look forward to going there when my kids were old enough. (I know this isn't a vote!!)

I agree - the number of disruptive children at any WDW restaurant is quite small, even at popular in-park character buffet like Crystal Palace (which is usually MOBBED with small children and often is bedlam.) But those whose meals are disrupted by bad behavior don't notice the silent majority, they only notice the ones that are screaming and throwing food.

I suppose that's understandable, but when I'm in a restaurant (at WDW or at home) and my meal is disrupted by badly behaved kids, that only increases my appreciation for those kids in the restaurant who are well-bahaved.

Very good point.

But I believe the reason this is the case is that Disney has set ZERO precedent for dealing with the issues. If they did, and made it clear they would deal with it, I think it would cut down on the already very rare cases where there is a disturbance.

At the very least, they should give it a legitimate shot before banning even the well-behaved.

One of the high-end restauranteurs quoted in the Sentinel article even said they would prefer to deal with the parents when the issue arises rather than keep all kids out.

Disney has actually set quite a lot of precedent for dealing with disruptive Guests, of any age - the precedent is that the disruptive Guest is allowed to continue their behavior until property damage, assault, or other law-breaking occurs, at which time WDW Security or the local police are called in to restrain them.

I believe that the reason for this is that loud, obnoxious people are the ones most likely to cost Disney money by bringing suit or stirring up bad publicity. Look at what happened with the whole "Tigger hit my kid" incident; the kid is the one who actually assaulted the CM in the Tigger suit, yet Disney didn't throw them out of the park. Instead, the father of the kid stirred up a bunch of trouble for Disney.

Last month's Pop Warner brawl at ASMU is another example. A small number of PW kids have been behaving in a disruptive manner at the event for years (whitness all of the complaint threads here about line cutters, loudness, foul language, etc.) But little or nothing was done about it until a brawl involving 100 people erupted at a WDW resort. And even then, the parents of the kids who were thrown out tried make trouble for Disney by going on TV and threatening a lawsuit, even though they clearly hadn't a leg to stand on.

Calming disruptions seems to only be done when violence or property damage occurs, otherwise it's left alone so as not to cause the disruptive Guests to cause a stink that would cast a bad light on Disney with the general public even if they were 100% in teh right.

Imagine the headlines if a family went to V&A and really did bring a disruptive child who threw food and screamed through the entire meal, and Disney even suggested that they might be asked to leave if they didn't control their little darling! I can see it now "DISNEY THREATENS 3-YEAR FOR CRYING!"

Besides, I don't think this is entirely about not wanting to have disruptive kids at a restaurant; it's about wanting to dine out with other adults, and not having kids present. If Disney chooses to provide such a venue and market it to such people, that's their right, just as it's everyone elses right to either patronize the venue or not.

Personally, I would patronize it in a heartbeat, if only I could afford it.

As with many threads on disboards, it's obvious this thread is one that passes time while we wait on our WDW trip, or to plan for the next one. I understand that, but it's aggravating to see ADULTS complaining about ONE restaurant at WDW that doesnt allow children.

Who Cares?!

If you are offended by this policy, please stop going to VA! Show them what you think, write letters...pitch a fit! If you can judge a child's behavior by the post on disboards, I would say Disney was just in creating this policy.

If you're not offended by this policy, just soften the tone and look at those offended with understanding eyes and listen. VA will still be adults only after they have voiced their opinion.

Peace!

I Care! And obviously, a lot of other people do, too, otherwise this thread wouldn't be so long.

We're just discussing the relative merits of the new policy. If you don't want to join in, you don't have to, but why are you trying to tell the rest of us that we shouldn't?

Peace and Long Life to you, too. \\//_

That also started with ONE person.
Its ALWAYS very wrong to rule out o group just because you don't like them ore just think they behave another way than yours.

If you don't like kids around go to NY ore another aduld place.

Last time I was there, NY wasn't an adults-only city. And they didn't have MuppetVision 3D or Star Tours, either, so I guess I'll just keep going to WDW, and I guess I'll keep liking the fact that some parts of WDW do not allow children under the age of 10.

But if the new policy at V&A offends you so much, perhaps you can go to another kid-friendly vacation spot instead of WDW

Yeah, I guess I'm going to have to agree with this statement. When we're with our children in a nice restaurant we often get starred at, but the way I see it is if they're acting just as well, if not better, than many of the adults, they're not taking anything away from the dining experience.

It's not taking away from YOUR dining experience, but that doesn't mean it's not taking away from anybody elses dining experience.

However, as long as a restaurant allows your kids in, and your kids are well-behaved, then nobody has a right to hold that against you, and if somebody stares at you or your kids, I suggest you give them the old "You got a problem, pal?" in your sternest voice. Just keep the volume low; not only will it avoid disrupting other diners, but the lower volume is actually more menacing.

 

[uva185]

No, you misunderstand what I meant. I did not mean that it's the tip of anything that Disney has planned. I mean that it is the tip of a larger issue that has been discussed among WDW fans, especially on these boards, for a long time.

Part of the issue is that some people are afraid that this one restaurant out of 97 might lead to Disney instituting a minimum age at other signature restaurants. While I would like to see a limited number of adults-only restaurants, I don't think that Disney has any plans to try this anywhere else at WDW, even if the new policy at V&A is 100% successful. In fact, I was terribly shocked that they finally made this move at V&A after so many years.

Gotcha, I don't visit this boad too often. I didn't realize an age requirement was discussed before this decision was made.

For the record I do not support an age restriction at any other signature restaurant.

 

[BarleyJack]

I Care! And obviously, a lot of other people do, too, otherwise this thread wouldn't be so long.

We're just discussing the relative merits of the new policy. If you don't want to join in, you don't have to, but why are you trying to tell the rest of us that we shouldn't?

Peace and Long Life to you, too.
.

As I said in a previous post. If you can judge behavior of children by the behavior of adults on this thread..........then Disney did the right thing. If adults get this upset about ONE restaurant going adult only, then can't we expect the children of those adults to be just as whiny?

If you feel that my opinon is meritless, you can choose to ignore it. It (as well as any rule Disney imposes) will not change my life.

 

[WillCAD]

Gotcha, I don't visit this boad too often. I didn't realize an age requirement was discussed before this decision was made.

For the record I do not support an age restriction at any other signature restaurant.

Yeah, it's an old and well-worn topic with many passionate opinions on both sides of the issue.

 

[BarleyJack]

Disney did not make this rule with the intention to offend anyone. Most likely the rule was developed based on 1 of 2 things:

1. As a direct result of an incident, or
2. As a direct result of market research.

Disney is not going to do anything that will affect the bottom line. (ie. upsetting patrons unduly or ignore untapped markets). While I think Disney is accommodating in many aspects of patronage, it's a business. Theres no emotion or feeling in it. It's unusual that someone would take this personally. Wild speculation and gossip is only for the emotional. They want your dollars.


"We are not trying to entertain the critics. I'll take my chances with the public." W Disney

 

[eliza61]

Disney did not make this rule with the intention to offend anyone. Most likely the rule was developed based on 1 of 2 things:

1. As a direct result of an incident, or
2. As a direct result of market research.

Disney is not going to do anything that will affect the bottom line. (ie. upsetting patrons unduly or ignore untapped markets). While I think Disney is accommodating in many aspects of patronage, it's a business. Theres no emotion or feeling in it. It's unusual that someone would take this personally. Wild speculation and gossip is only for the emotional. They want your dollars.


"We are not trying to entertain the critics. I'll take my chances with the public." W Disney

Well done!
Disney has done their homework. They know absolutely this will bring in a lot more adults with big dollars to drop on a meal (at least $200 bucks for dinner for 2 when we were there).

 

[TDC Nala]

I wonder if this had to do with the popularity of the Disney Dining Plan?
The Platinum Plan includes V&A's and perhaps more people were bringing their kids:
http://www.mousesavers.com/mywplatinum2008.html

Unless I am wrong, the platinum plan or something like it, which includes V&A has been around for years. Could be more people are trying it because the plans are aggressively marketed.

I speculate if it has to do with the Disney Dining Plan at all, it is about the popularity of the plans in their various forms filling up the restaurants and leaving customers groping for a place, anyplace, on property to get a sit-down meal. I can sort of imagine their frustration upon finding out that the only place with openings won't feed their kids for less than $125 apiece and the kitchen refuses to fix special orders for them if they don't like the elk or foie gras. (I would hope they were told this before they actually made the reservation.)

 

[TDC Nala]

To a family one of the BIG advantages od WDW is that it's family friendly EVERYWHERE.

Technically this is not so. There are several clubs at Pleasure Island (part of WDW) that are not accessible to anyone under the age of 21 (frankly I wish all of them were, at least after a certain hour). There are two clubs at the Boardwalk (not so sure about Atlantic Dance anymore but I am about Jellyrolls) that allow only adults (they are not owned by Disney but are on Disney property). The tours generally have a minumum age of 16. I guess it depends on where one wants to go (and who they wish to bring along) as to whether they believe certain areas should be restricted to certain ages or not.

I think another thing I am seeing is a visceral reaction to the fact that V&A is a restaurant. Seems to be something about restaurants.

I don't know what the ideal solution would be - offer more macaroni and cheese meals for a reduced price at V&A? That would make the core constituency of WDW happy, I suppose. I am not particularly concerned with other people's perceptions of Walt Disney World, but I guess WDW is. If WDW managers started kicking families out of WDW restaurants because the children were crying or being otherwise disruptive, the headlines would be bigger and bolder than the V&A headlines.

I just know if I saw little children at V&A my immediate reaction would be to hope nothing would happen.

 

[mattsdragon]

That also started with ONE person.
Its ALWAYS very wrong to rule out o group just because you don't like them ore just think they behave another way than yours.

If you don't like kids around go to NY ore another aduld place.

I didn't state my opinion one way or another regarding this new policy.

I was calling you out for your offensive and inappropriate comment comparing this policy to Nazi Germany. I find it hard to believe that someone in the land of Anne Frank and Operation Market Garden would make such light of the events of the holocaust.

I think you owe a lot of people an apology for even attempting to make such a comparason. It wasn't apples to oranges, it was apples to duck-billed platypus's.

 

[raidermatt]

I think another thing I am seeing is a visceral reaction to the fact that V&A is a restaurant. Seems to be something about restaurants.

I've tried to stay out of the emotional hyperbole on this, but I think the reason restaurants cause more of a reaction is very simple... everybody eats.

Not everybody, and in fact I'm sure a relatively small minority of WDW guests visit the clubs and do the tours. Also, with the clubs, it's pretty common practice everywhere to keep them either 18 and over or 21 and over.

Age requirements at restaurants are much more rare in the outside world overall, and WDW has a reputation of being far more "kid-friendly" than the outside world, so it seems counterintuitive to a lot of people I think.

 

[raidermatt]

Disney has done their homework. They know absolutely this will bring in a lot more adults with big dollars to drop on a meal (at least $200 bucks for dinner for 2 when we were there).

Oh I don't doubt that they've done research. Though you might be surprised at how flawed the research practices of major corporations can be at times.

That aside, yes, I'm sure they have looked at some data. Guest complaints, guest surveys and such.

However, that doesn't always mean they will come to the optimal conclusion, an they have reversed or regretted plenty of decisions in the past.

Who knows for sure if that will happen here or not?

 

[mattsdragon]

Now, people downplaying the holocaust aside, let me air my feelings. . .

The policy. . .LOVE IT. Think it's a great idea. I know there are people who have perfect children, or loved this kind of meal when they were kids, but to the majority of people with normal kids, a five star restaurant geared towards romance is not the place to teach your kid table manners, and your kid won't know the difference between V&A and Bistro de Paris. Furthermore, I would never consider paying that kind of money to watch a kid move thier food around the plate and be full a quarter of a way through a $100 meal.

Since when does Disney not do market research? Do you really think that they thought that the potentially offended would seriously outweigh those that are even more thrilled about the policy? Look at the boards. Those con are far outweighed by those pro. Sorry squeeky wheels, in business, it is easier to replace you than spend the time and money continually re-greasing you. Life's not fair, deal with it or get out of the pool, that's reality.

Enough with the speculation that they are now going to follow with signature restaurants having the same policy. Someone said they would like it, someone else agreed, and the next thing you know, people with children are restricted to eating at the McDonalds near the All Star Resorts, and Hitler had his SS goose-stepping down Main St. Quit being so over-reactionary. It's one restaurant, an expensive romantic one at that. Get over yourselves.

Yes, Disney is for family, but it's also the most popular honeymoon spot on the planet as well. Give people who are on their honeymoon a bone will you. I remember the lady with the two young kids at the table near us at Bistro on our honeymoon. They wouldn't eat and that's a cheaper place to go than V&A.

 

[3DisneyKids]

As a I asked before.
What about parents with an adult but mentally handicaped child who sits in a wheelchair, can't control his moves, needs a nappy and drools over his dinner.

Will they also be banned out??

Its so easy to judge over other people's children.

It has absolutely NOTHING to do with judging other people's children. It is just a desire to have ONE and only ONE adult-only restaurant. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

And this is by no means the first time Disney has done so....there are MANY adult-only experiences all throughout WDW.

Wanting one child-free environment does not make anyone a child-hater. I have never used the "block this poster" button before, but I gotta tell you, I am ready to now.

Count me as one who is still waiting for the apology for the comparison to Nazi Germany. Having lost grandparents in a death camp, your analogy is beyond repuslive and disgusting.

 

[2Princes2Princesses]

So therefore, if this really is a problem, the solution Disney should be aiming for is to deal with the unruly children when the issue arises. Nobody would begrudge them that except for the family that was being dealt with. This was even stated by some other high-end restauranteurs in the Sentinel article, that they would deal with the parents that allowed the disruption.

With only three families a month MAX bringing kids to V&A, it's not like they would have to deal with it very often.

However, for the couple who has waited possibly years for a night there, the couple who is there so the guy can propose....if it happens to be one of the THREE nights there was a disruption, to that guy, it is TOO MANY.

And even if V&A's booted them, the disruption has occurred. If someone at the next table drops an F bomb loudly in front of your child, and the manager throws them out, great. But the person being tossed out does not erase what happened. And I am sorry, but if someone was asked to leave V&As with a child because of something, I fear the disruption would become an outright incident. I have seen CMs at Disney be verbally harangued because a child was too short for a ride. My cousin worked at the ticket booth for Hoop Dee Doo for a while. She was made to cry more than once because a guest did not like some policy.

I know not all kids are unruly in restaurants. I happen to have a 4 year old that if you couldn't physically see in a restaurant, you would not even know she was there. She is quiet, well behaved, napkin in her lap, uses utensils correctly, etc. Unfortunately, though, the few that act nuts ruined it for everyone else. Like so many other things in life. If every child acted appropriately in a restaurant, it would not be a hot topic, or if every parent removed the child from the situation when they did get unruly, as kids do, then it would not be, either. But many don't.

And to whoever said to go to NY if you don't like kids? Umm....I live in NY. There are a lot of kids here. Schools too. Pets. Whole FAMILIES of kids live here!

 

[2Princes2Princesses]

I would never support Yachtsman banning children. That's just crazy to me. We always stay at an Epcot resort-BW or BC and dining at Yachtsman is something we have done every trip except our last one. We have happily put it back on for our May trip. My kids have eaten there without incident or disruption to other diners since our youngest was an infant. Why should we be banned from eating there??

Relax, I only used Yachtsman as an example, because they serve steak, which is available elsewhere. Everyone who replied originally kept saying ALL signature restaurants. I was only saying ONE. So I used an example.

Here's a question. What about a whole new restaurant? What if Disney opened the 18 and over Cafe? All adults, all the time signature dining, but with a lower priced menu than V&A's? Then there would STILL be the same number of restaurants, both signature and non-signature that there are right now, that would still allow kids. Only the new place and V&A's would not.

Would that be a huge offense by Disney and cause parents to rethink their vacation plans?

ETA: Mattsdragon: Great post. I LOL at "next thing you know, people with children are restricted to eating at the McDonalds near the All Star Resorts, and Hitler had his SS goose-stepping down Main St."

I agree about the overreaction. I think it would be nice to have a lower priced eatery for an adult atmosphere. I do not work for Disney, nor do I make their decisions for them. So, until I become CEO, I don't think anyone should worry too much. I just find it immensely interesting that it would offend people that V&A's instituted this policy and that it would even more so if one more out of 97restaurants did the same.

 

[Uncleromulus]

From all that I've been reading on multiple threads about this topic, only a handful of people seem offended. The poll on the subject shows LESS than 4% (of those who voted) who thought it was a bad idea. And I suspect that ratio holds true for those who didn't vote. You'd be hard put to find that sort of agreement on any subject, anywhere!!

 

[maxiesmom]

However, for the couple who has waited possibly years for a night there, the couple who is there so the guy can propose....if it happens to be one of the THREE nights there was a disruption, to that guy, it is TOO MANY.

And even if V&A's booted them, the disruption has occurred. If someone at the next table drops an F bomb loudly in front of your child, and the manager throws them out, great. But the person being tossed out does not erase what happened.

Whenever I eat out, fine dining or not, most of the disruption is caused by adults, not children. So is V&A going to turn a blind eye to any adults causing problems? If they are so afraid to set adults with children off on a tangent, does the same hold true for adult only groups?

This new policy may lesson the disruptions, but it will not stop them. It seems to me that Disney just needs to grow a backbone and start tossing people if they can't behave in public.

 

[TDC Nala]

I've tried to stay out of the emotional hyperbole on this, but I think the reason restaurants cause more of a reaction is very simple... everybody eats.

Not everybody, and in fact I'm sure a relatively small minority of WDW guests visit the clubs and do the tours. Also, with the clubs, it's pretty common practice everywhere to keep them either 18 and over or 21 and over.

Age requirements at restaurants are much more rare in the outside world overall, and WDW has a reputation of being far more "kid-friendly" than the outside world, so it seems counterintuitive to a lot of people I think.

Then following that logic through it's counterintuitive for WDW to have a place like V&A on property in the first place. But there it is, it's not going anywhere, and I guess WDW is going to risk whatever ire they arouse in parents by declaring V&A off limits to the under 10 set.

Being an adult, I like that WDW has things for ADULTS to do. I admit to being saddened at the idea of V&A dishing out macaroni and cheese kids meals. I guess that makes me someone who doesn't understand family and children to some of the posters.

If adults persist in the kind of behavior that cause problems in restaurants, then the restaurants will kick them out. I am not talking about talking and laughing, I'm talking about true disruption. If kids can't stay in their seats (my niece and nephew are incapable of sitting still longer than 20 minutes at a stretch but geez, they're little kids) and invade the personal space of other diners, cry, or talk loudly, they're just being kids. Disney can't kick them out for just being kids if they're already there.

I think the conversation has just about worn itself out but I'm going to the kiddie mecca this weekend and won't be able to try and keep it on topic... I wish I could go to V&A but it ain't in the budget right now A little sniping seems to be creeping back into the discourse...