Any advantage to staying on site anymore?

[OtherScott]

The Disney rooms are so much nicer than comparably priced offsite accommodations

 

[BuckeyeBama]

If it is value that you are looking for, you will not find it in WDW resorts. It is far less expensive to stay off property, and you get a whole lot better accommodations for far less money. The only exception would be if you manage to snag a free dining deal, which adds enough value for a family to balance out the losses in comfort.

That said, we almost always stay on property because we like to be totally immersed in Disney while at WDW. Every time we drive off property we are reminded of all of the things which we vacation at WDW to escape.

 

[Day-Day]

Do we have to give a reason, i prefer to stay on site, don't ask me to justify why, i just do.

This is us. We have AP's (free parking) and always have a car. We drive off site many times to visit grocery stores and for meals. The benefits for staying at a WDW resort are minimal to us but we still stay at WDW resorts. We stayed offsite once when my wife had a hotel for a convention and then we did a priceline stay for a couple of days to extend the trip. It was very nice but whenever I mention a "real" Disney trip and bring up the possibility of staying offsite...forget about it.

We have a trip planned for May and will spend $93 a night for POP Century. We have never stayed there and want to give it a go.

Staying at a monorail resort is pretty special but the cost doesn't really make up for a few minutes of saved travel time...

Just not logical.

 

[mill4023]

For me, the advantage of staying on-site is just the whole Disney resort atmosphere.

With that said, our last trip was offsite and I don't foresee us staying on-site anytime soon. We're a family of 7, so the cost savings of staying off-site are even greater for us than for smaller families. On our last trip, we stayed in a 5 bedroom house with a private pool for $140/night. We absolutely loved having all that space and the kids loved having their own pool.

We would much rather spend 2 weeks at WDW, staying in a nice big house for the same price it would cost us for 5 days at a moderate resort.

 

[michsig]

I like staying onsite as opposed to off just for the feeling of being "in Disney" for the entire time we are there. Whenever we've stayed onsite, we've always used a rental car (for DTD so we don't have to wait on the busses, to go to other resorts for dinner, etc). I just can't imagine NOT staying onsite. That's just me though!

 

[HM]

The only thing I miss when staying offsite (with an AP) is being able to take advantage of EMH hours. We drive our own car to FL. Without an AP, we'd have to pay for parking....and we did have to do that once.

If they hadn't made FP+ available to offsite or AP holders, I would definitely have stayed onsite for future trips. Now, like you say, that incentive is gone.

 

[Sparkly]

I'm a onsite convert! It's magical and I love being able to take a bus back to the hotel and not have to leave when everyone else is done like when we're offsite.

 

[GJF323]

When I was at Epcot there was a CM that was talking about FP+ and it's availability to off site guests. He was saying that it was always part of the plan that FP+ be available to everyone. He was saying the advantage to staying at the resorts is the resorts themselves. He said one day you will have to be staying at a resort to be there. Basically scanning your MB to prove you are staying there to access the grounds. We all know to take this stuff with a grain of salt but there may be something to it. Disney may very well believe their resorts stand on their own and the theming and the service and the magic are enough of an advantage to staying on site.

I hope this is wrong. I routinely eat at resorts where I'm not staying (Boma in particular, but others too). And what about at Christmas to look at the resort decorations? We also go to Cape May at Mother's Day (driving 2 hours down to do it - central location for all family members).

 

[CFioren317]

I'd be curious to know what the actual savings is to stay off-site. I mean, when you consider the cost of the park tickets, I found it really wasn't that much more to stay onsite as opposed to off-site. But I haven't done the full-on research.

I have a 4 night/5 park days trip lined up in June and it's clearly not much more to stay onsite. The tickets themselves would be $950 for the 3 of us. With the room, the stay is only around $1500. I guess I could get a room for $30 a night, but that's not what I would do anyway. I'd likely spend $99 a night on a room outside the park so why not just include it all into one thing and then not worry about staying offsite.

Not to mention I drive my van to Florida and so it would be another $85 (5 x $17) to park were I not staying onsite.

I guess the question is "What are the financial benefits of staying off-site...especially when driving down in your own car?"

 

[CFioren317]

For me, the advantage of staying on-site is just the whole Disney resort atmosphere.

With that said, our last trip was offsite and I don't foresee us staying on-site anytime soon. We're a family of 7, so the cost savings of staying off-site are even greater for us than for smaller families. On our last trip, we stayed in a 5 bedroom house with a private pool for $140/night. We absolutely loved having all that space and the kids loved having their own pool.

We would much rather spend 2 weeks at WDW, staying in a nice big house for the same price it would cost us for 5 days at a moderate resort.

Exception to my previous post...we have also gone down with a bunch of people and renting a house is just awesome. Private pool and so much space.

But for parties of 3 or 4 this kind of thing would probably be more of a waste than anything else.

 

[FoundMyPrince]

I love the Disney bubble: Magical Express, the dining plans, walking from our Boardwalk resort to two of the parks, early and late magical hours, the theming of the resorts, etc. Our holiday is to Walt Disney World - we've taken other trips to Florida, but this trip is all about Disney World...and I love it!

 

[Dis703]

Well for me the biggest perk is that I can walk right into Epcot and HS from our resort. Then of course the ME from the airport with delivery of our luggage so we don't have to worry about it. Package delivery back to the resort so we don't have to carry stuff around when we shop or haul it back on the bus. Use of the buses so we don't have to deal with driving. We've never used EMH before but are considering it this trip. I like the FP+ at the earlier time too though only because by 30 days ahead I have so much else going on getting us ready it's nice it's already taken care of.

 

[disneyfan55]

Over the years for the most part we stayed on site. The AP discounts seemed to be larger in the past. Also, the FD and PINS seemed to have more value to us. The past time due to needing at least 2 rooms, we found it much more inexpensive to stay off site. We found an offer through Mousesavers at Caribe Royale for a villa that slept 8 plus full kitchen/washer/dryer and $30/day food credit. It was a very short drive and much more inexpensive. We had been driving to the parks on recent onsite stays due to our experiences with slow WDW buses and very jammed buses in the evening. We have AP so parking cost not an issue (even though even with that the off site would have been less costly with much more room)

 

[JimmyV]

I'd be curious to know what the actual savings is to stay off-site. I guess the question is "What are the financial benefits of staying off-site...especially when driving down in your own car?"

Cost is often the least relevant factor. It is what you get for your money that matters. $140 a night on site at WDW rarely gets you a room that is any bigger than or nicer than a Days Inn in anytown USA. Consider the post below...

On our last trip, we stayed in a 5 bedroom house with a private pool for $140/night. We absolutely loved having all that space and the kids loved having their own pool.

That poster couldn't have "saved money" even at a Value resort because they would have needed more than one room. But even if you are comparing one room at a Value to a 5 bedroom house with a kitchen and pool, perhaps you save money at the Value, but what do you get for that price? When it comes to on site versus off site, space is often the biggest factor. You can get a 900 sq/ft suite at the Waldorf for the price of a standard room at Port Orleans. There is no cost savings there, and indeed, one could "save" money by booking an All Star room. But for many people, 900 sq/ft for under $200 is a better deal than a 280 sq/ft room for $ $119.

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

The Disney bubble is the best perk of being on site. No rental car, no parking, no non-Disney roads or non-Disney service to worry about. Just being at WDW.

 

[GaSleepingBeautyFan]

For us it's all about the transportation and evening emh.

I have teenagers and a husband who like to sleep in so it's nice for me to be able to wake up and catch a bus to a park while they are sleeping.

I wouldn't be able to do that if we were staying offsite and I'd be grumpy waiting for them to get their lazy bums out of bed.

 

[NavyDad]

A few months ago it was obviously an advantage to stay on site so that you can get the FP+.....now that this is open to AP and even off site guests, is there any reason that you should stay onsite to make the FP+ experience different?

We have AP...prefer to stay offsite for the cost savings.....and back many months ago when the MB wasn't available unless you stayed on site, we were going to stay a couple nights onsite and get those perks, and then move offsite. Now that our trip is rapidly approaching, I'm thinking about NOT staying onsite. We got our FP+ because we have APs, our MB's have arrived....so tell me what reasons are there for us to stay onsite? I just want to be sure I'm not missing something before I cancel our hotel reservations.

Thanks!

I think it depends on where you are staying....

Pop Century (which we loved) - small rooms, long walks to the bus stops, crowded and noisy

Beach Club (which we loved even more) - Boat ride to HS, walk 5 minutes to Epcot and eat dinner in a different country every night, shorter walks to bus stops and shorter bus lines on our trip.

 

[pepe of ohio]

The Disney bubble is the best perk of being on site. No rental car, no parking, no non-Disney roads or non-Disney service to worry about. Just being at WDW.

For us... If we drive, fly or train to WDW, 1050 miles one way... We're staying with the mouse.. No matter the cost ...

If we're vacationing at some ocean beach, I want my resort right on the beach ocean view...

If we go to a concert or ball game, I don't watch to watch being up in the nose bled section...

Get the drift, we want immersed in the realm of our destination, not cheapen out and having to drive in each day like an amusement park for one day... We're here for better than a week and want to feel a park of the magic, not sample it from afar..

 

[PJGP]

I guess that for FP+, other than 60 vs 30 day in advance reservations, there is no much of a perk. Specially since people reports finding good FP+ reservations for the mayor attractions even just days in advance. then that perk is not even worth it. I guess that for Anna and Elsa, and maybe SDMT, having 60 days is an advantage.
Then maybe the ability to make ADR 180 days in advance? Don't know if that is available for off-site guests too?
Personally, I hate to deal with parking, driving, etc in WDW. I feel we waste too much time, specially in MK, besides I can't enjoy too many drinks
For us, staying on-site ends up being part of the whole adventure. But for sure that from an economical point of view there is no advantages.

 

[NavyDad]

All these "pros and cons" highlight (to me anyway), why staying at the Swan/Dolphin, or Bonnet Creek, or, soon, the Four Seasons is such a benefit. For example, at the S/D, you are still inside the bubble, still get to use Disney Transportation, still get to use EMH, but pay Moderate prices (and with a good discount, Value Prices) for Deluxe hotels. The only thing you lose is the +10 on the ADRs and the Magical Express transportation to/from the airport. At Bonnet Creek, you lose a few more of these perks, but the size of the rooms and price can get even better. Since Bonnet Creek has its own transportation arrangements, you don't really "miss" the Disney buses. And the dining options at these hotels is a step up from what Disney offers. With options ranging from the S/D, Hilton, Wyndham, Waldorf Astoria and the Four Seasons, it is hard for me to imagine ever staying "off property" ever again, and, frankly, it is becoming harder and harder to justify staying at a WDW Resort except for a couple of days as part of a split stay if I want to be at a monorail resort for a little while.

Bonnet Creek - I love the resort and the rooms are amazing for the prices you can sometimes get. However - their bus system is TERRIBLE! Again - great resort but anybody staying there should plan on having their own vehicle or they will be very dissapointed IMO.