Advantages Of On-Site Stay

[wee-haggis]

I have read several posts indicating the advantages of staying at on-site hotels as opposed to the group who suggest that the off-site ones are more than adequate.
My personal feeling is that although the advantages and perks of staying on-site was once a major feature,it seems that these same perks and extras are slowly dissapearing.
What do you think?

[jldriscoll]

To coin a phrase, when you stay on site, you are part of the magic!!!

[cinmell]

Once we stayed on site, we never went off site. EE was never a factor in our decision to stay at Disney, in fact, we didn't use EE. We stay on site because it's convenient and the atmosphere is great. :D

[eeyore0062]

Well, since there are 3 reasons in the above poll of why we stay onsite, I will just write them here.

1) atmosphere
2) convenience
3) perks

[UltimateWDWFan]

I am a huge proponent of staying onsite, especially now that the All Stars make it much more affordable. We recently stayed offsite for the first time in twenty years, though, and--depending on your hotel, it isn't that bad. We stayed one night at the Holiday Inn Family Suites which is quite nice, and with the senior discount, it didn't cost us much more than the All Stars would have been. On the same trip we also stayed at some dump just outside the WDW gate (I think maybe it was a Comfort Inn), and I would not recommend that, under any circumstances. :mad:

Many offsite hotels are just a near the parks, overall, as some of the onsite places are. The HIFS seemed to do a good job of creating a great atmosphere and some magic of their own. We avoided EE anyway, so the loss of that wasn't an issue. (Those of us "in the know" have learned that they almost always open before the published opening time anyway, so you can go an take advantage of this secret at any WDW park and still not have to hassle with crowds all day.)

I love some of the onsite perks that are still available, though. While some offste resorts offer transportation to the parks, none that I know of have been able to duplicate the WDW bus system (especially in terms of frequency). Or, if you prefer to drive to the parks, staying onsite means that parking at the parks is free. (I know that, comparatively, it's not a lot of money to park, but it does add up.) We just love being able to buy stuff and have it delivered to our room without having to lug it around all day. And charging in-park purchases to our room is great, too.

In summary, offsite (at some places) isn't as magic-less as I thought it would be, but onsite is much better!:cool:

[wee-haggis]

I'll probably get my head chopped off for this...but....
Don't you think for the most part,most guests are gone for the entire day and really only use the hotel for breakfast and sleeping (and swimming of course).
Perhaps I'm being over critical but, i'm really still not sure what exactly you get from an on-site hotel that you can't get from a good quality LBV hotel?
Its true to say that on days gone by the perks were obvious(park entry,character breakfast etc).Is the same still true today..mmm?
Although my stay a few years back at CBR was nice,I would'nt go overboard in recommending it as a "must do".In fact,it really was'nt any different to a comparable "outside the fence" hotel.
Now,I realise that there is probably a difference between moderate and luxury hotels in the Disney area,but is the extra costs(and I think you will all admit ...it is quite substantial) really worth it?.

[UltimateWDWFan]

I'm not sure there really is an extra cost, especially if you're comparing a decent-quality offsite hotel to All Stars or even the Moderate onsites. OR... perhaps it's a fly/drive question. When I fly, if I stay offsite, I have to rent a car/van in order to duplicate the convenience of WDW transportation (and then pay to park each day). --Of course, if I've driven in, then I only pay parking, so it's not as significant. If you stay onsite at AS and take advantage of off-season discounts, you get a good quality room and the onsite perks (of which I never considered EE to be one, since I slept in and went to the less-crowded non-EE parks).

[wee-haggis]

The Holiday Inn Family Suites room is far superior to the CBR and PO rooms we visited but (when we went last year) prices were about 30-40% cheaper than the moderate equivalent.It was far more spacious,had all the conveniences and more and was a hop-skip-and a jump from everything.
I think what I'm trying to say is.....
Is it fair to say that the folk who prefer the on site stays do not base their opinions on the room size,layout,ammenities etc?

[ripleysmom]

I like staying on-site for 3 reasons....

short commute

I can hop a bus back to the resort midday if I so choose

I can use my room key to pay for everything


I also like the Disney atmosphere but that is not my primary reason for staying....

[DaisyDebbie]

I'm with Ripleysmom on this one. Nothing worse than having to find your car in the parking lot, then drive to your hotel. Especially during the day. Once I stayed on site that was it, I was spoiled.

[Brier Rose]

It's all about the atmosphere for us! We never used EE either, so we don't miss it. except for the fact that we always knew which park NOT to go to. When we go to WDW, we want to stay in WDW. I want my special resort tv station, Mickey to wake me up in the morning.characters in the lobby(yes, we voted for CC), fireworks from my resort, Cinderella Castle out my window, I could go on all day!! Just the location alone is enough to justify the $$$. When you go to the beach and want to stay in a hotel ON the beach, you pay more $$$ simply because of the location. No extra perks, just location.

[Shooter]

I think that the biggest perk to staying on site is the transportation.

No parking hassles, not me behind the wheel :mad: and you are dropped off right at the front door of the parks and your hotel.

EE never was a factor to us when deciding either. I've heard that it was overated and in fact the designated parks for EE were more crowded on those days.

[Kermit]

I voted that on-site is better based on proximity, but we also like the transportation, which I think is a similar advantage. We drive to WDW and then leave our car in the hotel parking lot the whole time. I'd much rather get on an air conditioned bus that I waited for in the shade instead of navigating a busy parking lot to get into a very hot car.

[Tiffany]

Originally posted by wee-haggis
I have read several posts indicating the advantages of staying at on-site hotels as opposed to the group who suggest that the off-site ones are more than adequate.
My personal feeling is that although the advantages and perks of staying on-site was once a major feature,it seems that these same perks and extras are slowly dissapearing.
What do you think?

To us it is location, location, location. Even the All Stars has a better location then an off-site resort. If cost is a factor an you are trying to decide between the All Stars or off site picking up a bus that runs every 20mins from an hour before the parks open until an hour after the parks close cannot be beat. Much better then fighting the crowds back to the theme park parking lot and then fighting the traffic out onto I4 or IDrive.

If cost is not an issue then the BW,YC/BC,S/D are amazing for location. You can walk to EC and MGM along with Minigolf and access to great dinning and renting watercraft.

If the MK is for you then the CR,POLY and GF have access that cannot be beat.

The themeing of each resort is only challeneged by proboaly LasVegas.

If money is not an issue then I would reconmend that people stay on site hands down.

[Tiffany]

Originally posted by cinmell
Once we stayed on site, we never went off site. EE was never a factor in our decision to stay at Disney, in fact, we didn't use EE. We stay on site because it's convenient and the atmosphere is great. :D

I would have to second this. We have been staying on site since 1991 and never used EE.

[gina2000]

I stay onsite because it gives our family the opportunity to split up and not have to meet at a car at any point in time if we chose not to. We do use our car....just not all of us all of the time.

I think if you do the park commando style, an onsite, inexpensive hotel can more than suit your needs and your pocketbook (unless your are a larger family). It gives your family the flexibility you wouldn't have if you were offsite and needed to take a child back to his/her room for a nap. It also allows you to split up the family easily without worrying about meeting up at the car at a certain time. That alone is worth the price of an onsite hotel.

If you vacation at Disney regularly and like to spend time at your resort, it's nice to be in a deluxe if you can afford it. The hotels are quite lovely and worth the time to explore. The more time I spend at a resort, the more luxurious I would like it to be. We plan to spend time at our resort this time instead of doing the commando thing, so we'll be at a better hotel with more amenities.

Offsite would work for me too....especially once my son is older and we would be spending significant time outside of Disney. This year we've split our trip between Universal and Disney....and our hotel stays as well. In the future, we may just stay offsite altogether and enjoy the hotel amenities at a cheaper price and spending less time at any park at all.

[Mjasp]

I prefer staying offsire at Vistana Resort. I have stayed on site twice. Once at the Fort Wilderness Resort, we had a mobile home
The other was at All Star Music. Although I enjoyed the space at Ft. Wilderness. The kids LOVED the All Star better.

If you are not only planning to do Disney, then I prefer off site.

I have alot of family in Orlando. MIL, Brother, Sister, niece, and nephew. At Vistana with a 2 BR, there is more room to entertain, while the kids have fun playing on the grounds of the resort.

I voted for other.

JMO


JOanna

[new_yawka]

A Disclaimer...I, like many on these boards, am suffering from Dineyitis and my opinions are clouded by a sense of happiness and joy which overcomes me when I think about going to Disney....That said:

I love the "Disney Experience" - Just as the Magic Kingdom was designed as a living movie experience....so too, I view the entire experience once you enter through the gates of WDW as an experience designed to help you feel the koy and "magic" that is WDW. I have stayed off site many times and there are many wonderful hotels which would rival some of the best hotels in the country...none of them are Disney, though.

There is an energy and theme which is constant throughout WDW. The CMs are, for the most part, unrivaled. The fact that you can enjoy The Disney characters anytime of day or night make it special and different. There is nothing like entering into the "city" that is WDW and losing yourself in that experience for a week or more, never to come out, until they tell you its checkout time....having to get into a car and drive offsite, IMHO, dilutes that feeling (although the DD hotels, and Dolphin and Swan are a close second to the Disney resorts - although not themed in such creative and fun ways).

Where else can you spedn multiple days "resort-hopping" - just to see the themes and differences between the various resorts. Such an activity has nothing to do with going to the MK, Epcot, MGM or AK. Its an enjoyable part of a WDW stay which, in my experience is unique to WDW.

One valid point above was regarding Vistana, an excellent timeshare resort (so I have heard). I have solved this dilemna, while still enjoying all the benefits of being "on-site." I bought at DVC :). Those who want a luxury "apartment" experience (even those that have not purchased DVC) can get it by either: (1) renting DVC points; or (2) making a reservation (at one of the DVC resorts - OKW, BWV, BCV, VWL) through Disney.

We'll be in a 2BR luxury suite at Old Key West Resort in October...we can't wait!

See...I told you I have Disneyitis ;) :bounce:

[C.Ann]

I prefer off-site for many reasons..

First would be the cost savings and the roominess of an entire cottage compared to a hotel room or 2-room suite.. For $89 a night we had a 2-bedroom cottage (which also had a sleeping loft that would accomodate 2 - as well as a pull out sofa that would also accomodate another 2) - full size kitchen appliances (including a microwave, coffeemaker, and dishwasher) and a wonderful deck with picnic table and patio chairs for rest and relaxation after a long day at the parks.. There was also a 24-hour heated pool on the premises, a wonderful kiddie pool, an awesome poolside cafe with incredibly low prices, an extremely clean laundramat, and a small grocery store.. You could also drop off your film for developing at the office (for a VERY good price) and have it back in 24 hours.. The park setting was wonderful - extremely quiet at night - and yet we were only minutes from anything we wanted to get to - including the parks.

Transportation is irrelevant to us because whether we stayed on-site or off we would still rent a car because we also visit other theme parks in the area as well as going to the beaches, shopping at the outlet stores, etc. Our drive time to WDW was never more than 10 minutes and sometimes even less..

Magic doesn't factor in for us either because to us the true "magic" of Disney is when you stand at the foot of Main Street and see Cinderella's Castle at the very end.. Nothing compares to that and fortunately one doesn't have to stay on-site to experience it..

We also feel there is something to be said for leaving the parks at the end of each day and returning to a more relaxed atmosphere.. I truly LOVE Disney but I don't think I could deal with being immersed in it 24 hours a day for 14 days at a time..

With the money we save by not staying on-site we probably have two to three times as much money to spend on tangible things that we can bring home with us and enjoy for many years to come.. Considering we don't get to WDW once a year like some folks do, we always try to get the most for our money and so far this seems to be the way to go - at least for us..

Our accomodations are wonderful and spacious - our drive time is minimal - and we end up with loads of extra spending money.. Guess that's kind of "magical" in itself! :)

[Mjasp]

C.Ann...Well give us the name of this place. Is this the place with brightly colored cabins?

[wee-haggis]

Nicely said ...C.Ann.

I have to agree with just about everything you said from the use of the car to go to other "non" Disney locations to....... the quietness and peacefulness of an off-site location.
I've experienced both and I have to say that my spending money at the parks (which is where 90% of our time will be spent....not the hotel!)is almost double what it would have been had I spent the extra money on an on-site hotel.
I can't speak for everyone but, when the 4 of us wake up early in the morning....we can't wait to get going to one of the parks and enjoy every minute of it!
We usually return to have a swim and get cleaned up before going back again to another WDW location till closing time.
Perhaps other folk spend more time at the hotels than we do and they would therefore get "more out of" the amenities on offer but as C.Ann says....the magic is at the parks...not the Hotels.
Just my humble opinion.

[C.Ann]

Originally posted by Mjasp
C.Ann...Well give us the name of this place. Is this the place with brightly colored cabins?

Yes - it's the pastel colored cabins.. Tropical Palms Fun Resort.. They have studios as well as the 2-bedroom cottages and according to the time of year you go their rates vary.. We were there last September and friends of ours were just there last month and absolutely loved it..

It's SUCH a relaxing atmosphere.. My son-in-law is STILL raving about it and believe me, he is NOT easy to please! :)

[AZKathy]

I think the best is DISNEY MAGIC right now.

I was not happy with EE going away only for getting Fantasyland done at MK; did not use it any where else, but that was a big plus for us with little kids. I have not taken advantage of the Character Caravan, yet.

Our last trip in May was very disappointing with the loss of e-ride nights for the entire month. We plan our time at MK with an evening at e-ride night for the big rides. It was a big loss for our family, although I know a lot of others don't miss it.

Transportation is nice, but if we get a rental car during our stay, we use the car for different needs such as going to other resorts easier.

Being a member of DVC, we don't have to pay too much attention to the costs of rooms compared to outside WDW. When I did check, I thought the prices were kind of high; we went off site for a weekend and stayed in Kissimmee in a nice off site for a few nights. (That weekend I did miss that wonderful DISNEY MAGIC!!! ):D :D

[new_yawka]

Having done both off-site and onsite many times (and having never come away with less than a smile on my face), I am enjoying this discussion.

What I believe I am taking from this (which is not dissimilar to my thoughts previously), is that there are great off-site options, which can add there own twist on a magical vacation and that Disney on-site resorts provide many with a feeling that they are getting an "all-in-one" vacation experience.

Having done (and enjoyed) both, I would suggest that it simply speeks to the wonderful variety of experiences available in a vacation experience in the greater WDW area. Clearly there is no answer (but some individuals will have answers for themselves), if there were an answer neither Disney nor offsite resorts would continue to be built, but alas, both have significant benefits and appeal to different vacation styles.

Although I am unlikely to stay at an off-site hotel any time soon (my parents now own a home in the area), I believe people will get the most out of Orlando by trying each. Having been immersed in the Disney vacation experience my whole life, it is hard to step back...but I guess one interesting question would be:

"If you are only going to visit the Kissimmee/St.Cloud area once, where should you stay to have the most fulfilling vacation experience?" Once again, maybe there isn't one answer, and I cannot possible answer it, except from my biased "disneyitis" laden position, but it is curious...

[MJames41]

I think it all depends on what you are looking for. For me, unless I'm doing something other than Disney, then I will always do everything I can to stay on site, especially if my kids are with me.

I have two teenagers, and when we stay on site, I don't have to worry about them as much if they decide they want to stay longer at a park than I do, or if they want to stay in the room for whatever reason. This happened on our last trip, my son was feeling great and wanted to lay down for a bit. We set meeting spots for each hour, in case he wanted to join us later and he went and stayed in the room til he felt better. He joined us about an hour before the park closed - just in time for E-Ride night. Would not be able to do that off site.

E-Ride night itself (if they have any when you are there) is worth it. That you can't do staying anywhere else.

If I was going to visit other attractions, then staying off site would hold more appeal, especially at some of the nicer ones (I like the idea of that cottage). But I don't really want to go anywhere else, so I'm happy on-site.

[buzz2400]

I don't think it is worth staying onsite anymore. We just came back from All Star Music. Because of the shorter hours, we did not have the time to come back midday and rest. We stayed at the parks until closing and then came back to the hotel and went to sleep. I think my son went in the pool twice (we went for a week). We stayed at a Hampton Inn the first night for half the price and got free breakfast. If they don't give back EE I will not stay onsite. I was "sick" every night thinking about how I was paying about $100 for the room and not using the facilities. My feeling is that the "magic" is very slowly disappearing.

[denisem]

I voted "other".

For myself (been on-site and off)...I'm now a rental home convert. You get much more for your money. (Private pool with no ducky doo-doo, for one ;) )

However....I've had the good fortune of visiting WDW enough to be comfortable driving the area. Prefer having my own car. We have dinner at various WDW resorts each trip to get a "glimpse" of their theming/offerings/"magic".

OTOH, I totally recommend on-site to newbies to WDW (or after a long respite), and those seeking a driving-free vacation or total immersion into Disney.

Denise < ---- actually visited 10 days in July and didn't go to one park...but confesses we're thinking of relocating, so we concentrated on that ;)

[DeeP]

the magic is at the parks...not the Hotels
There is plenty of magic at the hotels!!!! Just walk around the Poly at night with the tiki torches lit and the ability to watch the MK fireworks from the beach, or walk around the Epcot resorts at night and see the light reflecting off the water, the Friendship boats pulling in, the entertainment on the boardwalk, or go sit in the GF and listen to the piano player while you are relaxing with a nice drink, etc., etc. Believe me there most certainly is a lot of magic at the Disney hotels. I have stayed off site 2x in so many trips to WDW I can't even count them and I would never stay offsite again. It is simply not the same vacation when you stay off site.

[Daisimae]

The first trip I ever took to WDW without family, I booked a room off-site. There were not value or moderate resorts then and I didn't want to spend $$ on the others. We booked a room at a US 192 hotel. When we got there we found it was a dump and we were stuck there for at least one night! When we left Sea World that first day, I ended up driving up and down US 192 looking for a decent room that we could afford. We actually went into the hotels and inspected the rooms, to see if it was decent before we made a reservation for the following night.

The next year CBR opened and since I had family who always stayed on-site and told me that the rooms were consistent. I booked there and was very happy with the room and housekeeping. So I wouldn't stay anywhere else but on-site.

The next benefit I got hooked on was the transportation. I was accustomed to traveling with a bunch of girlfriends who were curious about WDW and wanted to go, but, were not full-fledged Disney nuts like I am. Usually, they didn't like to get up early, didn't want to stay late and wanted to go back to the room to watch TV or nap. I didn't want to do any of these things and having WDW transportation meant that we didn't have to rent a car and pay extra for two drivers, or argue about who was going to drive. It also meant that we could go our own way and meet up with each other when we wanted too. Making the trip more enjoyabe for all of us.

When DH and I first went to WDW two years ago. I didn't know how he would like it. I knew that we wanted to go to US/IOA and Sea World and I knew the likelyhood of that happening while we we on Disney property was almost nil. I had planned to go to US on other trips and always took the easy way out of not leaving Disney property. This trip we split the stay and stayed off-site first, then went to POFQ. It worked out well.

Now that there are reasonably priced, close hotels in DD that have transportation to Disney I would stay in one of them for my whole trip. Courtyard is a preference of mine, because of the quality of hotels I found in other cities. When we go anywhere else, I always look for a Courtyard or Fairfield Inn. In my experience they have been consitent. Transportation to the parks is more imporant than ever becauase we don't like to rent cars and I need to use a scooter in the parks. The busses keep DH from having to lift the scooter and gives me independence since I can't lift the scooter at all.

Also I've still found that although DH likes WDW, he still prefers to go in earlier than I do. So he can leav and go back to the room and I can stay in the parks. That would not be possible unless we stay on-site. So now we spend the first few days off-site, doing full days at the other parks, using Mears to get to them with the scooter. Then we move to Disney were we can slow down and still enjoy ourselves. Sinve we fet groceries during out TTC stop, we aren't held hostage by the cost of food, for every meal, on-site either. It's the best of both worlds.

Daisimae :cool:

[Lisa P.]

Buzz & Denisem expressed similar opinions to mine. Overall, for most purposes, I prefer very nice offsite resorts. For the same money as a Disney Value motel, we get much, much better accommodations offsite. I don't like the All Stars much (tacky, noisy, crowded, student groups, no hot tub or shade at the pool, turbo-toilets, strangers peering into your only window, which doesn't open, as far from MK or AK as an offsite hotel). And I cannot stand seedy, unsafe-feeling, rundown, offsite strip motels. Comparing those to a nice offsite or onsite hotel is a true disservice to anyone reading. There are specific situations that lend themselves to staying in a Disney hotel:

--- no car for driving or hate to drive
--- special need for frequent returns to the room (medical, infant, etc.)
--- need to split up with travel group regularly (tho a taxicab is possible)
--- very short trip (maximum convenience) or solo traveler
--- special trip with a special hotel theme desired
--- money is not a concern
--- strongly desire room charge privileges or e-night, when available
--- don't mind missing all the nice area restaurants outside Disney, USF/IOA, Sea World, Florida beaches, other attractions & mini-golf, shopping outlets, reasonably priced grocery/pharmacy/gift shops, etc.

EE, most e-nights & room delivery are no longer offered (just resort gift shop delivery, with limitations). Park-front package pick-up and home shipping are available to everyone. Major credit cards are accepted wherever room charges are taken. Driving is as fast from nearby offsite as from onsite hotels.

With shortened park hours, a nicely landscaped resort pool area with hot tubs and poolside food service, other resort activities for the kids, a spacious 2BR/2bath suite and easy access to nearby (lower priced) mini-golf and entertainment are all more useful & appreciated than they used to be. Together, these things add "magic" and enjoyment to our family trips. We can't get all that for under $700 per week onsite. LOL! So for us, offsite usually wins. :)

[wee-haggis]

LisaP...its looks like we are in the minority (at least according to the poll.......but then again,I would guess that the thousands of folk who use off-site hotels would most likely not be on this message board in the first place).

I think I can sumarize by saying that whatever you prefer,nobody will change your way of thinking.I have tried both and if you are somewhat limited to the $ you have available at your disposal,then I think off-site is the only way to go.
We are compromising this year by going to both, so I will be eager to report back as to whether the extra $ spent on AKL was worth it.....mmmmmm
I think I can safely say that AKL will definately be superior to the other CILBV hotel we are going to ....but the question is......
Is it 4 times better (ie:accomodation is 4 times more expensive).
LisaP also brought up some other good points including the fact that there is a multitude of other activities and locations to visit in and around Orlando that would require a car but it seems that the majority of on-site patrons choose not to hire one.
This is JMO ...but to me ,the magic is walking down MSUSA,meeting all the characters around WDW,watching the kids faces light up during the fireworks or Spectromagic,the rides and attractions ...etc,etc.
I would calculate that (other than sleeping) we are probably only at the hotel for 5% of our waking hours and for us....that just does'nt justify the extra costs of most WDW resorts........
As fantastic as they obviously are!