Ahh, why is it so expensive

[cmpeter]

I'm really glad you had such a great vacation, but it's only natural you wouldn't feel like you missed out on the magic at all--you don't have anything to compare it to! Next time try staying on property and see if you feel the same way, then you will be able to make an apples-to-apples comparison and choice for future visits.

I have stayed at the Grand and off site (BWPP) and had just as much fun if not more when we stayed off site. In my opinion, there is plenty of magic at DLR, you don't need to stay at an on site hotel to experience.

 

[BCmomma]

I have never stayed at a Disney property either. We definitely don't feel like we are missing any of the magic. For us the magic is in the parks and the hotel is our place to sleep. I definitely don't need to spend an excessive amount of money on a room to feel the magic! Sometimes we don't have the money to stay at a Disney hotel and other times we would just prefer to spend that money on other Disney things!

Agree with Dot 100%! How is staying at a particular hotel making your vacation more magical? Nothing anyone can say would ever change my mind. For us it's a total waste of money to spend so much more on a hotel. We're there for DL/DCA, not the hotel.

 

[larina]

Agree with Dot 100%! How is staying at a particular hotel making your vacation more magical? Nothing anyone can say would ever change my mind. For us it's a total waste of money to spend so much more on a hotel. We're there for DL/DCA, not the hotel.

I think it's a matter of perspective, priorities, and touring styles. For us, the hotel is a part of our vacation. We really only take one long family trip like this a year. For us, it's more than a trip to Disneyland, it's a family vacation. We take a mid day break, often eating lunch in the room. My parents and I play cribbage and drink coffee every morning before we wake the kids. After the kids go to sleep at night, we like to watch the action from our room. And my dad often stays behind, checking in with business manager, or just enjoying not working for a change. He often won't join us in the parks until lunch time. At PPH, the incredible view of DCA is a huge selling point for us. We ARE in the room enough for it to matter to us. We do utilize the view and space, that the resort hotels provide. We also go back and forth a lot, several times a day sometimes, so the convention hotels aren't really convenient.

 

[Mililani Mouser]

I'm in the same boat with you Kailuagirl. Last time we went, we stayed at the GCH, but the rates seemed to have almost doubled! We are staying at the DLH this time around.

 

[dtnrhi]

... it's only natural you wouldn't feel like you missed out on the magic at all--you don't have anything to compare it to! Next time try staying on property and see if you feel the same way, then you will be able to make an apples-to-apples comparison and choice for future visits.

I thought I'd chime in.

For my brother's wish trip last August, we were blessed to stay in the Paradise Pier Hotel. We got an upper theme park view room, and it was fantastic. It was something we viewed as a once-in-a-lifetime experience, and I still think we view it that way. Don't get me wrong, it was FANTASTIC, but we don't feel we would ever pay that much for a hotel. I really don't understand why people would book to stay onsite without a view IMO. Other than that, it is just a normal hotel and room.

With that said, we still can't get over the view. If it ever happens again (me staying onsite), I will not stay on Disney property without a view room. This comes into your "comparison" statement. I feel that it wouldn't have been so cool if we couldn't see DCA every night, and if I'm spending that much money on a room (unlikely), then I would want to get something that sets it apart from other hotels. The "Magic" and EMH just don't cut it for me.

As a side note, we had some great luck this year, and with a little extra, unexpected income and a goal, we had a fantastic trip to Disneyland and Universal this past February. We got five day PH, a day in Universal, hotel, gas, and food for six people for less than $2200. This was with us staying off-site, at a hotel my mom liked more than the PPH (Less than $90 a night. YAY CYBER MONDAY DEALS! ) and eating what we wanted. This may sound to some like a bare-bones trip, but it was not. It was absolutely perfect. We ate what we wanted to, got souvenirs, and had a great time, all while coming in EXTREMELY underbudget.

Did we feel it was different than staying onsite? Yes.

Did it affect our trip? No.

My post is just showing that staying onsite is just not for everyone, regardless of budget or preference, and that I get much more excited about a good deal than staying at an onsite hotel.

 

[ajrwdwgirl]

I'm really glad you had such a great vacation, but it's only natural you wouldn't feel like you missed out on the magic at all--you don't have anything to compare it to! Next time try staying on property and see if you feel the same way, then you will be able to make an apples-to-apples comparison and choice for future visits.

It is really all about budget, since I like to take multiple vacations a year I have to look at the bottom line, $$. There is plenty of magic in the parks, if I was spending a lot of time at the resort or it was my only vacation of the year I might feel differently. I was just offering my opinion, as that is what a forum is for. And I do have something to compare it to as I always stay on property at WDW so I know what it is like to stay at multiple Disney resorts.

 

[DisneyMomma81]

I'm really glad you had such a great vacation, but it's only natural you wouldn't feel like you missed out on the magic at all--you don't have anything to compare it to! Next time try staying on property and see if you feel the same way, then you will be able to make an apples-to-apples comparison and choice for future visits.

Hmmm, I've stayed at all three on site Disney hotels *I prefer the DLH* and I have no problem staying off site *often closer to the parks* all we do is sleep and get ready in our room; as long as it's clean, safe and close we're happy.

 

[Kauinohea]

I'm in the same boat with you Kailuagirl. Last time we went, we stayed at the GCH, but the rates seemed to have almost doubled! We are staying at the DLH this time around.

Same here...we travel to DLR every two years with our 3 children and the last time we finally stayed at PPH. Prior to that we stayed at FFI and HOJO. While FFI and HOJO were perfectly fine, for our family it's just not the same as staying on site. This Christmas we will again be at PPH....and I toyed with the idea of staying off site to save some $...the reality set in and I booked A PPH view room. I knew we would miss staying on site...the huge tree in the PPH, walking thru the GCH every morning to see their glorious tree. We also love the convenience of being able to go back for lunch and a nap every day.

With that said, if staying offsite was the only way I could make a trip "happen", then I would stay off site.

 

[monkeymers]

We loved GCH (got it for around $200 soon after 9-11), really liked PPH and were just okay with DLH. We are part of a rare breed that prefers PPH over DLH.

We prefer PPH over DLH as well! GCH is always the first choice, but not if we can't get it for under $299 a night, annual passholder rate. We can almost always get a view concierge room at PPH for under $299!

Because my DH can't do more than a few hours at a time in the parks because of health issues, we often find ourselves at the hotel a few times a day. We usually eat lunch in our room because of DH dietary restrictions (vegan). We like to change from shorts and tee-shirts to pants and sweaters when the sun sets. Any our three kids LOVE to swim in the pools. Staying on property is just part of the magic for us. It's factored into the budget.

My personal biggest reason for staying on property: Ending my day with a stroll down DTD. It keeps the magic going even after you've left the park.

 

[DisneyJamieCA]

My personal biggest reason for staying on property: Ending my day with a stroll down DTD. It keeps the magic going even after you've left the park.

You make a very good point! When we stay onsite, we get back to our room tired, but happy. The walk to Harbor, no matter how close, just seems to drag. The same goes in the morning - there is an extra bounce in our step, despite the early hour, when going through DTD. There is something about walking back through DTD that makes the walk seem not as bad, even if it technically further than across the street.

 

[sheetz]

My post is just showing that staying onsite is just not for everyone, regardless of budget or preference, and that I get much more excited about a good deal than staying at an onsite hotel.

On my upcoming trip we're staying at the Sheraton GG Club level for free using points. Now for me that's magic!

Seriously, though. For our family it's magical just spending time together. We don't need musical headboards!

 

[tamiandryan]

Different strokes for different folks. Last year we stayed at Hojo's. The walk is closer than 2 of the 3 DLR hotels and the pool was great for my young boys.

I think it is worth it for my family because we can then spend the money elsewhere (character breakfast or getting them souvenirs.)

Hotels are more or less just a crash pad for us. The pool is fun too, but a bed is a bed. That is all I need after long days in the park.

 

[crystal1313]

We've stayed on site and on Harbor. Of course our first choice is on site....but the prices have been so crazy lately, we've been staying on Harbor. We can take more trips staying off site. If money was no object, we'd be staying on site all the time! For us, it's a principal thing too. I cannot imagine paying $500 a night for the GCH! It's a nice room, but not $500 nice. I could do a lot of other things with that money. To others though, $500 might be totally worth it.

I have to say we just had the quickest, best trip ever with my DS5 and DS3. We stayed at the Ramada Maingate. Went to the park one day and had the best time ever! =)

 

[DisneyJamieCA]

I'm not talking about anybody else's level of magic. For those who go from open to close, I can see how staying onsite is just a waste of money. For us, it's not a waste. We have stayed offsite plenty of times and when the budget doesn't allow for onsite, we will again. I have nothing against offsite, but for our needs/wants in a vacation, onsite is more magical. Again, for us.

 

[Malcon10t]

We stay onsite, and we stay offsite. I enjoy being closer in the GCH, but honestly, due to room size, won't do it again. I like the DLH. However, contrary to what a lot of people say, I do not find the walk back thru DTD to be "magical", but usually more of a continuation of the congestion of Adventureland after Fantasmic! lets out. I asked my kids if they felt the walk was more "special" through DTD or the walk down Harbor to the CCI, and we all agreed the walk down Harbor is more peaceful.

That said, my preferences are Residence Inn Maingate, Candy Cane, Hilton, Fairfield, and DLH, in no particular order.

 

[whoever]

Our last trip this past May averaged out to $230 per person per day (infant not included as she was essentially free). That included fuel, tips, parking (pretty sure I never got charged for valet parking though), 3 nights with a courtyard view at the GCH, 4 days of park hoppers for 2 adults, and 2 children, expensive lunch/dinners/Breakfasts, and a decent amount of souveniers.

 

[luulu1999]

Agreed! Some of our best trips to Disney have been our more budget friendly trips. We try to teach our kids that 1.) Taking several Disney trips per year is an incredible gift that their dad works very hard for and that many kids never get a chance to go at all. 2.) You don't have to do the best or fanciest stuff to have the best time while there! They have never done BBB. We explain that extras like that or Disney hotels are great but unnecessary. And one trip with all of those things would mean one trip per year instead of four! They want to buy more souvenirs on our next trip so they are learning to save for them and they are beginning to appreciate how much all of this costs!

This is very true and what all kids who get to go to Disney should know!! My first trip to either Disney park was last year im 32yrs old....and it was the trip that I took my kids on...so there first time was also mine....there are a TON of kids that never get that opportunity and it is a major privilege just to get to go it doesn't matter where you stay the parks should be what matters.....my kids are 4&5 and they are currently saving their money for our trip next summer so they can buy their own stuff, they have done a lemonade stand and have sold stuff in yardsales right now they have about $50 each and it excites them to be saving for Disneyland and on our last trip I gave them a set amount of money to spend and that was it but they were just so excited about the trip they didn't throw a fit for a bunch of stuff they got ears and two other things and they were content

 

[DisneyJamieCA]

I hope I'm just reading too much into these comments, but the idea that kids who stay onsite don't appreciate the trips, sort of irks me. As I have said plenty of times, we have stayed offsite and done budget trips, but we have also had trips where we've gone all out. To us, the extras DO matter and are part of what makes it a vacation to us. My kids do build-a-bear and Disney 365 and character meals (when the budget allows of course). Some years that means we may only go once a year, sometimes it can be more. Sometimes we stay onsite, sometimes we don't. Regardless, my kids appreciate and respect every trip. We are not spoiling them by staying onsite, we are choosing to take a vacation that makes OUR family happy. That may not be what makes another family happy and that's fine, but it's not wasting money to us. It's utilizing our money in a way that makes us happiest and makes our vacation worth it. My kids all understand how hard we work to afford these trips, they save their own money and they know we go when we can afford it.

As has been well documented over multiple threads with this topic "is it worth it" it subjective. People should take the trips that work best for their family and try not to judge those who may choose to spend their money differently.

 

[whoever]

I hope I'm just reading too much into these comments, but the idea that kids who stay onsite don't appreciate the trips, sort of irks me. As I have said plenty of times, we have stayed offsite and done budget trips, but we have also had trips where we've gone all out. To us, the extras DO matter and are part of what makes it a vacation to us. My kids do build-a-bear and Disney 365 and character meals (when the budget allows of course). Some years that means we may only go once a year, sometimes it can be more. Sometimes we stay onsite, sometimes we don't. Regardless, my kids appreciate and respect every trip. We are not spoiling them by staying onsite, we are choosing to take a vacation that makes OUR family happy. That may not be what makes another family happy and that's fine, but it's not wasting money to us. It's utilizing our money in a way that makes us happiest and makes our vacation worth it. My kids all understand how hard we work to afford these trips, they save their own money and they know we go when we can afford it.

As has been well documented over multiple threads with this topic "is it worth it" it subjective. People should take the trips that work best for their family and try not to judge those who may choose to spend their money differently.

Well put. Our family friend came over and watched our kids with her daughter. She and her daughter were staying offsite, and were so sad to leave and go back to their hotel on harbor when it was time to go at the end of the night. The kids enjoy it just as much as the adults IMHO, and the amenities are simply great. For us, totally worth it. We've looked into offsite, but its just never made sense to us. The kids LOVE the bunkbeds too.

 

[Dot2Vegas]

I hope I'm just reading too much into these comments, but the idea that kids who stay onsite don't appreciate the trips, sort of irks me. As I have said plenty of times, we have stayed offsite and done budget trips, but we have also had trips where we've gone all out. To us, the extras DO matter and are part of what makes it a vacation to us. My kids do build-a-bear and Disney 365 and character meals (when the budget allows of course). Some years that means we may only go once a year, sometimes it can be more. Sometimes we stay onsite, sometimes we don't. Regardless, my kids appreciate and respect every trip. We are not spoiling them by staying onsite, we are choosing to take a vacation that makes OUR family happy. That may not be what makes another family happy and that's fine, but it's not wasting money to us. It's utilizing our money in a way that makes us happiest and makes our vacation worth it. My kids all understand how hard we work to afford these trips, they save their own money and they know we go when we can afford it.

As has been well documented over multiple threads with this topic "is it worth it" it subjective. People should take the trips that work best for their family and try not to judge those who may choose to spend their money differently.

My comment was not meant in that way. I would hope that all kids appreciate their trips, regardless of where they stay and what they do. The point of my particular post was to say that no one should *need* to stay on property to enjoy the magic. I also find it a little rude (and this is not directed at anyone on here, just in general) to hear people say that staying on property is more magical. To me, a statement like that could make someone who does not stay on property (perhaps a family of first time visitors on a tight budget) feel bad and doubt their trip. If someone has the money and chooses to stay on property then more power to you! I don't think you will have a better vacation than me and I don't think I will have a better time than you either. Saying one place is better than another (in terms of "magic"-obviously DLR properties are nicer quality hotels) just seems unnecessary.