Staying off-site?

Discussion in 'Disney Resorts' started by 3littlecuties, Apr 25, 2013.

  1. 3littlecuties

    3littlecuties Mouseketeer

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2011
    Messages:
    174
    OK...one more question for today. DH has mentioned staying off-site because we can get a place significantly cheaper than the deluxe or moderate Disney hotels. I feel like some of the "magic" will be lost though.

    Thoughts? Has anyone done both and can compare?
     
  2. Avatar

    DIS Sponsor The Walt Disney World Swan and Dolphin is located in the heart of the Walt Disney World Reosrt.

    to hide this advert.
  3. Lynne M

    Lynne M Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2001
    Messages:
    9,483
    You might want to also pose this question on our Orlando Hotels and Attractions board, to get some opinions from the folks who regularly stay off site. :thumbsup2
     
  4. HM

    HM My tag from the Tag Fairy is now too long to use.

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Messages:
    9,015
    I've done both. We do like staying onsite and not having to drive but lately more of our trips have been offsite at timeshare resorts and they really do save us money and we get a lot more room. I don't know about the 'magic' of it. It still feels like vacation at WDW and you still spend a lot of time in the parks.
     
  5. ExpatDisneyLover

    ExpatDisneyLover DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Messages:
    2,254
    Well I have done both and enjoyed both. I guess you'll only know once you try an off site stay how you feel about it. My personal preference is to stay onsite in the "Disney bubble" but I do think it is all magical really.:)

    If I were going to stay offsite I would definitely stay in a place I would really enjoy, comfortable with amenities and/or space I might not be able to get onsite at the same price (like at the Waldorf Astoria - LOL) - that way I have something special to look forward to even in my off site stay.

    Have a great trip whatever you choose!pixiedust:
     
  6. abner1776

    abner1776 DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2006
    Messages:
    1,061
    As a DVC member, I have cast my lot with staying on property, but to me the issue is not so much the cost per se as it is with, as people will say, the magic. Even staying at OKW, I still felt that I was at WDW and not at a local hotel. I feel more connected with WDW by staying on property and I guess it comes down to what you expect to get out of your vacation.

    If you look at WDW is just a glorified Six Flags, then staying off property is probably the way to go, but if you look at WDW as something special, then staying on property is what you need. Everyone has to answer that question for themselves and what works for me may not work for you.
     
  7. maxiesmom

    maxiesmom The Mean Squinty Eye Works

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Messages:
    25,316
    We have done both, and both have their benefits.

    Off site you usually have way more space for a lot less money. But for me, that is the only benefit. You have to rent a car if you don't have one (off site transportation is no where near as good as Disney's) and then you have to pay for parking. If you are a family who usually ends up splitting up so that some can go back to the resort to relax while others want to stay in the parks, now someone has to pay for a taxi to get around.

    I like using DME to get from the airport to the resort. I like being in the Disney Bubble the whole time I am on vacation. I like being able to walk to a bus stop, and hop on a bus to the theme parks. I like Extra Magic Hours, and I like being able to have purchases delivered to my resort, so that I don't have to carry them around the parks.

    I would have no problem staying off site again, and actually found a great rate on a trip we are hoping to make in the fall. But I was out-voted, and even if it costs a lot more, we are staying on site.:) For this trip, convenience wins out over savings.
     
  8. danceintherain

    danceintherain DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    Messages:
    5,267
    I've done both. We stayed off property for the 2 trips we took when I was growing up, then again when my parents were footing the bill a few years ago. They have 6 kids, so staying on property is quite the cost.

    I do prefer staying on property, but I expect at some point we'll end up favoring more time at Disney over staying on property.
    As it is...DH has already decided that he wants to rent a car from now on, we don't save by using the dining plan, and we rarely use Extra Magic Hours, so the benefits of staying on property are definitely dwindling for us.

    If we do stay off property in the future, it will be for the space at a lower cost.

    Unfortunately, you're the only person who can decide what's worth it.
    I just stayed at Port Orleans - French Quarter, and I felt as if it was lacking some "magic". It's just a matter of preference.
     
  9. mickey2minnie1

    mickey2minnie1 DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    1,734
    We have decided to stay at Reunion for 145 a night for 6nights. Three bedroom and 3 bath condo with amenities. We are five people. This will allow us to stay longer and do 5nights at the Poly.:thumbsup2
     
  10. Sparkly

    Sparkly Starlight, starbright...

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2012
    Messages:
    2,603
    You get lots more space for the money offsite plus privacy rather then everyone squashing into a hotel room. And often you can find ones with Disney themed kids rooms so no lack of Mickey Mouse. And villas with their own private pool are great too.

    But onsite is convenient because you can come and go as you please rather then everyone having to go out in the morning and come back later in the same car (so say if I wanted to stay and watch the fireworks and everyone else wanted to go back, all of us would have to go back, rather then the others going back to the resort by bus and me coming back to the resort when I'm done) and it's just so..magical. We stayed 1 night onsite, and now I'm hooked!
     
  11. Missytara

    Missytara I'm all ears!

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    14,304
    My stepbrother and family stayed off-site the first year and did not "get" why I would spend so much money to stay at POR.

    The second trip, I helped them snare FD at POP with QSDP - which was just their speed. They "got" it.
     
  12. Granny square

    Granny square Always planning a trip!

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2012
    Messages:
    2,737
    Less magic, scads more space. We love akv, stayed there in January. No embers trip we will have a 2 bedroom condo at silverlake, literally 5 minutes from akv for $229 for the week. Very pleasant place to stay. It just depends on the situation for us.

    I can't imagine always having to stay on or off site. I'd much rather be flexible. :)

    Lol. What kind of answer do you expect to get asking on the resort board?
     
  13. mejo

    mejo Mouseketeer

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2000
    Messages:
    341
    We have averaged going twice a year since 2000, twice we stayed offsite, once in 2000 and once in March. Both times we swore we would never stay offsite again, we hated it. The magic so so much a part of WDW and you just don't get it offsite. Onsite you are in the magic the entire stay, off site only while you are at the parks.

    This though is only my opinion, some people don't feel the magic like I do.
     
  14. mecllap

    mecllap <font color=limegreen>"Skamps"<br><font color=mage

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2006
    Messages:
    2,821
    This may fall under the Abe Lincoln quote: "Most folk are about as happy as they make up their minds to be." Either approach has pros and cons. I've done both, and now seem to usually go with a combo of both. Now that I'm retired and can spend more time travelling, and have a lot more experience with knowing how to budget my travel dollars (used to have to watch every penny, so could only stay off-site anyway), I've worked out ways to stay in the area longer -- a lot of it is by fixing most of my/our own food, which is healthier as well as a lot cheaper.

    As noted already, only you can answer the question for yourself. We stayed next to WDW in a timeshare once (for DGS's 8th birthday) and did not even go to WDW on that trip (did other stuff, had a great time). I bought some DVC points because as I'm getting older, it will be handy for me to use WDW transport to get back and forth if others want to do other things than I will want to do. Staying on property is great, but so is off-site. There are ways to make your own magic.
     
  15. clapton

    clapton DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Messages:
    536
    Definitely on Disney property! The convenience is worth it!
     
  16. mamabug70

    mamabug70 Amy L

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2012
    Messages:
    60
    I have done both several times. We are a family of four with two daughters 13 & 15. I usually stay on property when they offer the free dining because it makes the cost comparable to staying offsite. We stayed at AOA LK suites in October and while it had a great theme, the resort was very loud and crowded. We usually travel with family and booking a 2 or 3 bedroom at WDW is too expensive. This year we are staying at a timeshare just minutes from Animal Kingdom. We are booking a 4 bedroom for the 10 of us going and for 5 nights it will cost our 2 families $600 each. While there is some magic staying on property, I find it much more magical when the whole family can stay together in comfort. We have a washer and dryer, a kitchen, and a separate bedroom for the kids. We always rent a car anyway because each trip also includes Universal Studios and this year a cruise on the Dream! Whatever you decide, you will have a great time.. I have enjoyed each one of our annual trips regardless of where I stayed. Disney and family time together is a perfect combination!
     
  17. Dallas_Lady

    Dallas_Lady I only work for the vacation money

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2001
    Messages:
    3,031
    We have done both and have enjoyed both. I will say that if you stay offsite, you should have a car. Lots of offsite places will tout their transportation to and from Disney, but it can be unreliable. They drop off and pick you up farther from the park entrances, the shuttle times are often sporadic and their buses fill up fast.

    I will also say that we found driving to and from our condo at Windsor Hills to be a faster process than waiting for and riding Disney transportation when staying onsite. And it's hard to beat getting a 3 bedroom condo for the price of a tiny Value resort room.

    But our next trip is going to be onsite because we haven't done it in awhile and want to give the kids the full experience this time.
     
  18. Ilivetogo

    Ilivetogo I really DO want to live there!

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Messages:
    9,205
    I've done both numerous times. Like many PPs have already said .... there's pros and cons for each.

    Can't deny how fabulous being immersed in the "magic" is by staying ON-site. There's the CMs, the theming, the music, the buses drop you right at the park entrances, etc. If I could stay on-site every time, I would!!! (But it does cost a bunch more.)

    That said ...

    Check out Liki Tiki Village. They have an AMAZING pool area with slides, etc. They call it a water park. http://www.likitiki.com/
    We've stayed there several times and loved it. It's straight down 5 miles or so from the park entrances. Publix across the street (practically) and you can have breakfast, etc. in your room. Non-park days are a lot of fun at this place. Obviously you'd have to rent a car though.


    .
     
  19. sharadoc

    sharadoc Visit WDW since '86, driving since '94.

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    6,936
    It all depends on where you are coming from, financially. We have stayed onsite since 1992 at all levels and loved it every time. We like the amenities at the resort, we like to use the pools and activities on a daily basis, and the Disney feel is great.

    BUT - the staffing has decreased lately and we don't feel the customer service as much. Lines at check-in and concierge are longer, attitudes are a little grumpier, like the cast members are overworked and underpaid (just like the rest of us LOL) and it seems to be showing.

    Disney has raised their resort prices so much over the past 5 years that we seem to be effectively priced out of staying onsite for what we want and need in our vacation. In 2010 we stayed at a 1BR at BWV for a 45% discount, for under $300 a night. Now the best you can get is 30% and with the base price of $600, we'd still pay over $400 a night. That's a significant difference, and we really can't afford to spend that much and buy park tickets so - we are staying offsite our next trip.

    We're going to Bonnet Creek which seems to be a perfect alternative. Because we drive to Disney from home, we almost always drive to parks, so transportation will not be an issue. Distance to the parks should be about the same as OKW distance and location, so we feel good about that, we'll still be inside the overall Disney geographic bubble. Paying $120 a night for a 2 br condo, so no one is on a sofabed. We are hopeful that this will work for us and we can continue to do our week-10 days every year and not break the bank. We only go on cash so we won't go into debt for any trip.

    Disney onsite comparable room $3000 vs. offsite $900. Total trip cost reduced over $2,000. Wow!! Our condo cost is comparable to a value resort room onsite.
     
  20. mommyrosa2

    mommyrosa2 DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    2,124
    This is us pretty much to a tee :)
     
  21. GaSleepingBeautyFan

    GaSleepingBeautyFan DIS Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    8,529
    I've done both.
    While I did like saving the money on an offsite hotel, I missed not having to drive anywhere. I also missed having purchases delivered direct to the resort so I could pick them up at my convenience.

    Also there are 4 of us and 3 of them now like to sleep in instead of enjoying the parks early. Staying onsite works much better for us because of that. I can't stand wasting my precious vacation time sleeping in. I want to be doing something so I get up and go to the parks while the rest sleep in - I'd be major grumpy if I couldn't do that.

    So for us it's better to stay onsite.
     

Share This Page