Is it just me....

[WILDERNESS FAN 55]

Originally Posted by Laketravis

You also pay for what you get. You seem pretty confident in your sense of value and bang for the buck at WDW, and from your signature it looks like the last time you stayed on site was at WL in 2011. So at what point would even you start to question the cost of a night at WL?

$300 a night? $500 a night? $1500 a night?

That WL stay was for appx 175.00(if I remember correctly) in January with discounts. I loved the hotel and would pay more. There are always discounts however. Now a DVC owner so there are new places to explore.
Never have I felt I wasn't getting my $ worth....that's why I keep going back whenever I can.

[Laketravis]

Originally Posted by WILDERNESS FAN 55

That WL stay was for appx 175.00(if I remember correctly) in January with discounts. I loved the hotel and would pay more. There are always discounts however. Now a DVC owner so there are new places to explore.
Never have I felt I wasn't getting my $ worth....that's why I keep going back whenever I can.

Right - it's apparent from your comments that you think it's worth it. You've even made a large investment in DVC so from a marketing standpoint you benefit from price increases. Now I can understand why you may not mind them.

Others who don't mind the price increases share the same sentiment, that it's "worth it" without quantifying what that value component is.

So my question was, disregarding your interest in DVC for a moment, at what price would you NOT think it's worth it?

[davedmaine]

Originally Posted by Laketravis

Right - it's apparent from your comments that you think it's worth it. You've even made a large investment in DVC so from a marketing standpoint you benefit from price increases. Now I can understand why you may not mind them.

Others who don't mind the price increases share the same sentiment, that it's "worth it" without quantifying what that value component is.

So my question was, disregarding your interest in DVC for a moment, at what price would you NOT think it's worth it?

Give it up, Travis. You can't agrue with this bunch. I completely agree with your points; Disney truly dropped the ball on the expansion. You'd think after hitting the ball into the net and losing out on HP rights, they would have hit the next ball to the moon. But no, they came up with the same old, same old. Don't get me wrong, I love Disney and am a DVC member, but at some point they're going to need to step up their game. Universal is seeing 30% jumps in park attendance. Disney is doing well, but we all know that their deep resort discounts and free dining (thanks for killing fine dining at WDW, BTW) are driving attendance. HP really set the bar -- an expanson project that became an actual vacation destination. Sadly, the new Fantasy Land will never be that.

[maxiesmom]

Originally Posted by davedmaine

Give it up, Travis. You can't agrue with this bunch. I completely agree with your points; Disney truly dropped the ball on the expansion. You'd think after hitting the ball into the net and losing out on HP rights, they would have hit the next ball to the moon. But no, they came up with the same old, same old. Don't get me wrong, I love Disney and am a DVC member, but at some point they're going to need to step up their game. Universal is seeing 30% jumps in park attendance. Disney is doing well, but we all know that their deep resort discounts and free dining (thanks for killing fine dining at WDW, BTW) are driving attendance. HP really set the bar -- an expanson project that became an actual vacation destination. Sadly, the new Fantasy Land will never be that.

I don't think you can compare Fantasyland to Harry Potter. HP's main ride is one that makes a lot of people motion sick. I can't see Disney sticking a ride that extreme in the middle of what is at heart a Princess area.

I will say when I was there, I thought the new stuff looked lovely. But without the new roller coaster finished there was not much for me to do back there. But I guess not everything needs to be geared towards adults and older children. And I don't think Fantasyland is.

I did love the new store back by the splash area.

[WILDERNESS FAN 55]

Originally Posted by davedmaine

Give it up, Travis. You can't agrue with this bunch. I completely agree with your points; Disney truly dropped the ball on the expansion. You'd think after hitting the ball into the net and losing out on HP rights, they would have hit the next ball to the moon. But no, they came up with the same old, same old. Don't get me wrong, I love Disney and am a DVC member, but at some point they're going to need to step up their game. Universal is seeing 30% jumps in park attendance. Disney is doing well, but we all know that their deep resort discounts and free dining (thanks for killing fine dining at WDW, BTW) are driving attendance. HP really set the bar -- an expanson project that became an actual vacation destination. Sadly, the new Fantasy Land will never be that.

Fantasyland didn't need to be a destination ...just an addition to WDW which IS a destination in itself. HP was good for Comcast Universal (or whoever owns it this week) and they NEEDED it to be.Geez first addition in what 15 years?It's a nice little park and good place for the runoff from WDW. Easy to jump a big % when you don't have that many people in the 1st place.Disney has had discounts since it opened!! It's called marketing strategy. Here let me explain......

By the way I believe Travis and I were having a conversation not an argument.

[Shaden]

Also don't forget that "Dragon Challenge" is just a recycled ride that already existed and was just rebranded ...

Disney doesn't need to add something to make it a destination... it already is.

[Laketravis]

LOL! I don't mind - I think the WDW vs. USO debate is a lot like Chevy vs. Ford owners - most pick a side and are very passionate about it.

I haven't been to Universal because my little guy isn't tall enough yet for most of the attractions.

But what I am really interested in is the answer to the question I've already asked.......

For those who don't mind the current price increases because they continue to see value in return for dollars spent, at what point do you think that value equation turns in the other direction for you.

I mean, if someone can tell me that $500 a night at CR is "worth it", doesn't logic follow that they could also tell me at what price it isn't?

[Shaden]

Originally Posted by Laketravis

LOL! I don't mind - I think the WDW vs. USO debate is a lot like Chevy vs. Ford owners - most pick a side and are very passionate about it.

I haven't been to Universal because my little guy isn't tall enough yet for most of the attractions.

But what I am really interested in is the answer to the question I've already asked.......

For those who don't mind the current price increases because they continue to see value in return for dollars spent, at what point do you think that value equation turns in the other direction for you.

I mean, if someone can tell me that $500 a night at CR is "worth it", doesn't logic follow that they could also tell me at what price it isn't?

Hey Travis, I totally see what you are saying, and wonder the same thing.

BTW, I am sure your little guy will LOVE USO, we did, just couldn't do more than 3 or 4 days there, which is why we prefer disney.

As for how much is too much ?

We can -afford- to go to a deluxe, but just don't think they are worth it. In fact, whenever I see anyone posting about going Deluxe or Club level I think they are insane, want to point out how many children they could feed or how much of a difference they could make in the world with the money they would save if they stayed at a Moderate instead. (of course, I guess thats true for a trip to disney in general... which I am guilty of) But really, I can't understand people who pay for deluxes, but they don't seem to have an issue with it.

For Me, Maybe $300/night (for room and tickets) would begin to be a problem. But thats just me.

Then again, if it were 350/night or no Disney .... might still bite it.

Will find out soon enough, looking at a Christmas 2014 Trip, so likely rack rate, peak season, will be interesting to see the prices when they come out.

[WILDERNESS FAN 55]

Originally Posted by Laketravis

LOL! I don't mind - I think the WDW vs. USO debate is a lot like Chevy vs. Ford owners - most pick a side and are very passionate about it.

I haven't been to Universal because my little guy isn't tall enough yet for most of the attractions.

But what I am really interested in is the answer to the question I've already asked.......

For those who don't mind the current price increases because they continue to see value in return for dollars spent, at what point do you think that value equation turns in the other direction for you.

I mean, if someone can tell me that $500 a night at CR is "worth it", doesn't logic follow that they could also tell me at what price it isn't?

Sorry didn't mean to take so long to reply. I really was having a hard time thinking of an honest answer.Some things are relative to what you are used to and your paycheck. I know if the WL in 2011 was 300.00 I wouldn't have stayed there because I couldn't afford it. Probably would have gone back down to a moderate.For my 10th wedding anniversary I paid a lot to stay in the Poly.If Disney can fill the rooms at these prices I can't and never will hold it against them. I guess bottom line is I do have a limit I just don't know where it is. BUT I'll stay on WDW grounds no matter what....AllStars if necessary As you can see in my ticker off site many times until I found out the "magic" of staying on property.

[Laketravis]

Wilderness/Shaden:

Thanks for making those very good points. For some groups, the cap is what they can afford and the experience is so worth it for them that they will make sacrifices in order to do it. (Boy, I wish some of those people were MY customers!)

For others, it's what they feel is reasonable. I can afford a Mercedes, but I drive a Kia. I love WDW as much as anybody, even more now that I've got a seven year old that takes me along with him

But I have a hard time paying more than $200 a night at CSR. For me, anything over $325 for a CR Tower MK view is unreasonable, and unfortunately those days are probably long gone and I'll never do it again.

It's that upward price pressure that is not "forcing" but "causing" more and more people to start considering staying offsite. And as that causation works it's way up the ranks from those who do so because they can't afford it to those who do so even though they can, I can't help but believe that it will have a negative impact on WDW.

They have to fill those resorts. It's not an option. Maybe the only way they can do it right now is by offering up to 30% off rack rates that were recently increased by 20%. The bean counters at corporate Disney will be happy, because hey - that's really only a 10% discount. But pricing in itself is both a science and an art, and what Disney is doing has me very, very curious to watch, learn, and observe the outcome.

I kinda/sorta do this for a living, which is why I'm so interested in what each person's "cutoff" point is when they are finally forced to decide whether it's still worth it or not - even if they can afford it.

Wilderness, my signature line is telling in a manner similar to yours - except in reverse. The last four years, I've been "downgrading" myself from CR, to CSR, to BLT - and while BLT isn't a physical downgrade, it's a cost downgrade because I rented points. Basically, each year I've found a way to spend less on lodging while still staying on site.

Does Disney win when more and more people follow that strategy?

[Shaden]

Originally Posted by Laketravis

Wilderness/Shaden:

Thanks for making those very good points. For some groups, the cap is what they can afford and the experience is so worth it for them that they will make sacrifices in order to do it. (Boy, I wish some of those people were MY customers!)

For others, it's what they feel is reasonable. I can afford a Mercedes, but I drive a Kia. I love WDW as much as anybody, even more now that I've got a seven year old that takes me along with him

But I have a hard time paying more than $200 a night at CSR. For me, anything over $325 for a CR Tower MK view is unreasonable, and unfortunately those days are probably long gone and I'll never do it again.

It's that upward price pressure that is not "forcing" but "causing" more and more people to start considering staying offsite. And as that causation works it's way up the ranks from those who do so because they can't afford it to those who do so even though they can, I can't help but believe that it will have a negative impact on WDW.

They have to fill those resorts. It's not an option. Maybe the only way they can do it right now is by offering up to 30% off rack rates that were recently increased by 20%. The bean counters at corporate Disney will be happy, because hey - that's really only a 10% discount. But pricing in itself is both a science and an art, and what Disney is doing has me very, very curious to watch, learn, and observe the outcome.

I kinda/sorta do this for a living, which is why I'm so interested in what each person's "cutoff" point is when they are finally forced to decide whether it's still worth it or not - even if they can afford it.

Wilderness, my signature line is telling in a manner similar to yours - except in reverse. The last four years, I've been "downgrading" myself from CR, to CSR, to BLT - and while BLT isn't a physical downgrade, it's a cost downgrade because I rented points. Basically, each year I've found a way to spend less on lodging while still staying on site.

Does Disney win when more and more people follow that strategy?

Good insights, interesting trend for you as well.

Maybe I will eat my own words and ditch the on site lodging sooner than I thought. Since we are looking at Dec 2014, (for the trip after this may...) I am kind of intrigued by Bonnet Creek and I think I could Bring my Mother and my Nephew along for the same price as my Wife an I alone on site.

[WILDERNESS FAN 55]

Honestly I looked into DVC because my daughters are in college and probably from here on they will bring along friends or boyfriends. In years to come a husband and maybe kids. WDW is a place we as afamily will always meet no matter where our lives take us. However, it really does look like it will save me many dollars over the next 30 years.MF's will go up but that's nothing compared to always having to get at least 2 rooms on property.

[PinkLemonade7503]

I think value is so relative.

Right now, to me, staying in a deluxe seems weird. It just isn't what I expect with a Disney World stay. I could see a time when we've had more kids and gone to Disney World so much that the added luxury from a deluxe would make it a bit more palatable. For now, if I think of those prices I would rather go on a cruise.

The other thing that brings value for me is kid's enjoyment. Dh and I love HP, but don't feel like we can take little dd to Universal yet. We have many future years of awe and wonder at Disney World, but sure, yeah, as kids get older that goes down to a degree and Universal seems like a better deal.

[aubriee]

Originally Posted by Laketravis

Wilderness/Shaden:

Thanks for making those very good points. For some groups, the cap is what they can afford and the experience is so worth it for them that they will make sacrifices in order to do it. (Boy, I wish some of those people were MY customers!)

For others, it's what they feel is reasonable. I can afford a Mercedes, but I drive a Kia. I love WDW as much as anybody, even more now that I've got a seven year old that takes me along with him

But I have a hard time paying more than $200 a night at CSR. For me, anything over $325 for a CR Tower MK view is unreasonable, and unfortunately those days are probably long gone and I'll never do it again.

It's that upward price pressure that is not "forcing" but "causing" more and more people to start considering staying offsite. And as that causation works it's way up the ranks from those who do so because they can't afford it to those who do so even though they can, I can't help but believe that it will have a negative impact on WDW.

I kinda/sorta do this for a living, which is why I'm so interested in what each person's "cutoff" point is when they are finally forced to decide whether it's still worth it or not - even if they can afford it.

Wilderness, my signature line is telling in a manner similar to yours - except in reverse. The last four years, I've been "downgrading" myself from CR, to CSR
Does Disney win when more and more people follow that strategy?

I'm an AP holder that goes to WDW 4-6 times a year. I remember getting a courtyard view at WL for $149.00 and a moderate for $79.00 just a few years ago, using an AP discount. Those days were nie, but they are now gone. I can afford to stay in a Deluxe (and in fact did spend a week at AKL just this past Sept). However, for the most part, I've chosen the moderates for most of my trips the last few years. I do not like the Values and the Deluxes just don't seem worth it anymore. For our Oct/Nov trip, I had CBR booked with a discount, but just a few weeks before we left, a coworker offered us a week in a one bedroom condo at Westgate Town Center for just $400.00 (plus the $50.00 trade in fee, so $64.00 per night). That was the turning point for us. I had always swore I would never stay offsite, but that deal was just too good to pass up, so we decided to give it a try. We figured that even if we didn't like offsite, that it was just for one trip and we'd live through it. We absolutely loved having that fully equipped kitchen, large screen TV, washer/dryer and all that extra space to spread out. We wondered what took us so long to finally give offsite accomodations a chance. I came back and canceled my onsite reservation for my May trip and booked a one bedroom at Bonnet Creek through a third party. I'll be in a nice fully equipped condo, physically on property, for $89.60 per night. Why should I pay more than twice that much for a single room at a Moderate with just two beds a dresser, and small fridge, when I can get twice the space and much better amenties (fully equipped kitchen, living room, separate bedroom, two TVs, jacuzzi, nice walk in shower, multiple hot tubs, nicer pools, two lazy rivers, etc) at Bonnet Creek. Why should I pay three times that amount for a Deluxe that's alot smaller and not near as nice? I use a rental car anyway and have an AP, so won't need to pay for parking at the parks. Bonnet Creek is still on property and closer than alot of WDW owned resorts. My eyes were finally opened when I stayed offsite for the first time this past Oct/Nov. I can't see ever staying on property again, unless Disney goes way down on their resort prices.

For that matter, I am a RN, so if I wanted to, I qualifiy for the Nurses Discounts over at Swan/Dolphin. Why would I want to pay BC/YC/BW prices when I could stay at the Swan/Dolphin for half the price? I can afford it and in fact did spend a trip at the YC a few years ago, just so I could check out Storm Along Bay. While there, I decided it was not worth it, for what I paid.

[aubriee]

deleted