20 dollars for parking now...? Come on now...

[Chelley00]

Then stop going. Its really that simple. Disney is a luxury. I really think that you are not the target audience for Disney. They are not that interested in people that stay offsite and pop in and out. They want people that stay onsite, eat onsite, shop onsite, etc., and for those people this changes nothing.

.


First of all, you assume we can't afford to go. Or that we can't afford to stay onsite. Not everyone subscribes to the "Disney Magic bubble" theory. And it's not just "poor" people who stay offsite

If you look at my signature I have quite a few trips under my belt, including a couple deluxe resort stays. We eat onsite every meal but breakfast, we do two MNSSHPs every trip, we do plenty of shopping. We buy anywhere from 7-10 day tickets. We don't just "pop in and out". And we pay to park. We spend plenty of money every trip. I just like getting more bang for my buck and Disney is slowly taking that away.


We will be down there in a couple of weeks. And we have no Disney days planned other than a MnSSHP because last year when we were there we were cut out of fastpasses because we are offsite visitors (aka now low class citizens).

 

[maxiesmom]

.


Guess my point wasn't clear. Disney is doing everything they can to force people to stay onsite. it makes it not an appealing vacation for large families or those on a budget

I think most people who go to Disney World have a budget of some sort. There are so many variables, that if the extra $3 a day does put a crimp in your budget, there are ways to get it back. Eat breakfast in the room just once. Bring a refillable water bottle into the park one day.

I have traveled to WDW many times with a lot of family members. Sometimes we stay off site, sometimes on. Whatever works for the budget at that time is what we do. What I'm trying to say is that there are ways to make either option work, or either option make sense for your family. If someone wants to stay on site, there should be a way to make it work. Be it saving for a longer period of time, or changing resorts, or eating in your room. Whatever works for your family.

 

[bpadair32]

.


First of all, you assume we can't afford to go. Or that we can't afford to stay onsite. Not everyone subscribes to the "Disney Magic bubble" theory. And it's not just "poor" people who stay offsite

If you look at my signature I have quite a few trips under my belt, including a couple deluxe resort stays. We eat onsite every meal but breakfast, we do two MNSSHPs every trip, we do plenty of shopping. We buy anywhere from 7-10 day tickets. We don't just "pop in and out". And we pay to park. We spend plenty of money every trip. I just like getting more bang for my buck and Disney is slowly taking that away.


We will be down there in a couple of weeks. And we have no Disney days planned other than a MnSSHP because last year when we were there we were cut out of fastpasses because we are offsite visitors (aka now low class citizens).

My point was that person for person, you are not going to be as much revenue for Disney as someone staying onsite. If you don't think you are getting enough value, don't go was my point.

 

[atricks]

Parking was only $10 back in 2007. Double in 8 years seems waaay out of whack with inflation. Are cast members making double?

 

[maxiesmom]

Parking was only $10 back in 2007. Double in 8 years seems waaay out of whack with inflation. Are cast members making double?

Why does everything have to follow inflation? Where should the money for all of the new stuff come from then?

 

[SparklePixie]

Then stop going. Its really that simple. Disney is a luxury. I really think that you are not the target audience for Disney. They are not that interested in people that stay offsite and pop in and out. They want people that stay onsite, eat onsite, shop onsite, etc., and for those people this changes nothing.

Couldn't disagree with you more. I think the food is great, the crowds are part of going to a theme park, the FP+ and ADR system work great for us, and its as magical as ever.

What kind of places do you eat around your home to think Disney's food is great?

 

[bpadair32]

Parking was only $10 back in 2007. Double in 8 years seems waaay out of whack with inflation. Are cast members making double?

Why is it that everything a company does should be tied to inflation. If demand is higher, they charge more and make more, thats how it works. Also, doubling 10 is a lot easier than doubling thousands so the comparison to wages is not valid.

 

[bpadair32]

What kind of places do you eat around your home to think Disney's food is great?

I have greatly enjoyed all of the food I have had at the TS restaurants. I will grant you that the QS is average but its still better than most of the fast-food/casual joints you will find elsewhere.

 

[ols386]

Parking cost is ridiculous.

Disney (and other places) charge outrageous parking prices, because they can, and they KNOW they can.

 

[Nancyg56]

Then stop going. Its really that simple. Disney is a luxury. I really think that you are not the target audience for Disney. They are not that interested in people that stay offsite and pop in and out. They want people that stay onsite, eat onsite, shop onsite, etc., and for those people this changes nothing.

I am not sure that I agree with you. First, Disney is only a luxury if you consider it a luxury. I do not. I consider it a vacation.

Disney is interested in a diverse group of guests, although it may seem to some that they are gouging the off site visitor. No matter how you look at it, parking lots need to be maintained and someone needs to pay for it. I believe that the parking costs are tucked into the resort fees, and as resort costs rise, they are included in them.

I also think that a kneejerk reaction telling those who object to the fees increasing is kind of rude. We all are entitled to how we feel about increased costs, and we all have "sore" spots. For some there are too many incentives to entice folks to stay onsite, and for others, there should be more to compensate for higher costs of lodging. Both are valid.

 

[amylevan]

Parking in cities is a very limited commodity and it makes sense that "they" charge a lot for it. Parking in a former swamp in the middle of nearly 30,000 acres owned by same company that runs the parking is totally different. The people who stay onsite get parking (and internal transport) for free. This is just another effort to get more money from offsite guests, who don't contribute as much to the bottom line as those of us who pay a lot of money to stay onsite.

Parking is limited in cities; therefore, the price is up. Basic supply & demand.

This is parking at a theme park in which attendance is up; therefore, the price is up. Also supply & demand. (and it doesn't matter that it used to be a swamp; it's currently one of the top vacation destinations in the world - they aren't charging you to park in a swamp.)

 

[atricks]

They haven't done anything to expand capacity in the last 15 years either, which is entirely WDW's fault. They are expanding the MK's parking lot by knocking down the speedway.

I think Disney World is following PT Barnum's values more than Walt Disney lately.

Yes...they raised prices because they can. They have hardcore fans that will defend them until they are bankrupt and a win-win for Disney. Fewer Annual Pass folks, less people and parking, so less people using the room and infrastructure. And less people complaining Still a very bad trend.

 

[bpadair32]

I am not sure that I agree with you. First, Disney is only a luxury if you consider it a luxury. I do not. I consider it a vacation.

Disney is interested in a diverse group of guests, although it may seem to some that they are gouging the off site visitor. No matter how you look at it, parking lots need to be maintained and someone needs to pay for it. I believe that the parking costs are tucked into the resort fees, and as resort costs rise, they are included in them.

I also think that a kneejerk reaction telling those who object to the fees increasing is kind of rude. We all are entitled to how we feel about increased costs, and we all have "sore" spots. For some there are too many incentives to entice folks to stay onsite, and for others, there should be more to compensate for higher costs of lodging. Both are valid.

Vacations are a luxury.

 

[MrInfinity]

What kind of places do you eat around your home to think Disney's food is great?

What kind of argument is this? Are you challenging what kind of food someone thinks is great? :-/ If he thinks it's great, he's probly going to Disney World to enjoy it. If you don't think it's great, then so be it I don't expect you to like it or go at all. You should go enjoy something that YOU think is great.

I happen to love the food at Disney World. We went to Cedar Point last summer... Oh my you want to see some junk food! Disney is pretty awesome for a theme park. Even the QS is good. You can get fajitas, braised pork, lobster rolls, and so on. It is worlds beyond every other theme park. TS food is on the pricey side, but you do get really good food! I don't think I'm out of line in believing this either, as pretty much every single TS restaurant is booked solid for the entire week we're going. So lots of other people seem to think they're worth the cost... and it's not even "free" dining time... people are booked solid to pay for the food!

 

[gdrj]

Parking fees are a pet peeve of mine. I understand it is not going to change. To me it is different parking in a city lot or a parking garage, because the parking garage is usually a separate business. What I have a problem with is Universal, Six Flags. Disney or a hotel charging to park on their property. I am visiting that business and paying to get into or use their facilities. The parking fee to pay on top of admission is just an additional money grab which obviously is a great source if revenue, but at what price does it stop.

I don't visit CityWalk because I don't want to pay to park so I can eat dinner or visit the area. If I go to a sporting event I can pay $40 or more to park next to the stadium or walk a few blocks and pay $10 bucks. As Disney or some hotels I have no choice but to park and pay whatever fee they want. I can visit a Mall that charges to park in their parking garage or go to a Mall in the suburbs I choose the suburbs. The local NFL team seat prices are crazy but can be had on the secondary market sometimes at a decent price. I don't bother because I am unwilling to pay 40 or 50 bucks which might be more than the ticket price on StubHub. With the economy strong (in theory), and attendance continuing to rise it seems like Disney is trying to grab every single penny they can.

At what do they start charging a 5 bucks a towel at the pool or $25, $50, or $100 to have the right for a fastpass for Character Greetings (and that be the only way to meet characters). Tiered ticket prices with magic bands, some with additional cost for "roller coaster" some without.

Just because you can charge for something, even as a corporation, doesn't mean you should. Sorry I got off topic a bit.

 

[ols386]

Vacations are a luxury.

For many folks it's a luxury, but certainly not for everyone.

 

[GreatLakes]

Parking was only $10 back in 2007. Double in 8 years seems waaay out of whack with inflation. Are cast members making double?

That is assuming that $10 was the correct market price for parking back in 2007 and they want to continue the same pricing strategy in 2015 adjust only for inflation.

What I think is happening, and this is all conjecture on my part, is Disney is purposely making parking extraordinarily high in order to leverage free parking as an added perk for staying onsite.

I'll go a step further and say I could see Disney selling special off site packages that bundle parking with park admission and decreases the cost of additional days of parking just as they do currently with park admission.

 

[amylevan]

For many folks it's a luxury, but certainly not for everyone.

Luxury by definition is something that you do not need to survive. Therefore vacations are a luxury. You do not have to visit WDW.

 

[5kidsmommy]

Vacations are a luxury.

I think people are getting hung up on the word luxury thinking it means it's an actual luxury vacation when what people are saying is that Disney vacations are not a necessity like food, shelter, clothing...vacations are a luxury. We are one of those families that only vacations at Disney every few years, we have a large family and we have other expenses and we want to do other trips. I am grateful we can take vacations, it is certainly a luxury that many people can't afford. I am compassionate about that but I think the point many of us are trying to get across is Disney is not a need, therefore it will always be out of reach for some people.

 

[Nancyg56]

Vacations are a luxury.

Not to me they aren't. For my family they are now a necessity.

For many folks it's a luxury, but certainly not for everyone.

I think that for some yes, they are. Certainly when I was young and raising my children, many levels of vacation were a luxury. Get-a-ways were still a necessary component of our lives. As my circumstances changed, vacation destinations became more a necessity than they were when I was younger. I always scheduled some sort of vacation but as a young mother my vacations were day trips, and as I was more financially able, they evolved. They were always a necessary part of our budgets.

Luxury by definition is something that you do not need to survive. Therefore vacations are a luxury. You do not have to visit WDW.

Oh stop...Potato Potaaaato....What is a luxury to you is a necessary part of my budget. I don't need a definition to determine what I consider to be a luxury. For me a Lexus that has a payment associated with it is a luxury and my 2004 highlander paid in full when I bought it 11 years ago is not. But to the guys who work for us, that old car would be a luxury and the bike they ride is not.