Any advantage to staying on site anymore?

[NavyDad]

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).

I don't see this ever happening for many, many reasons....

 

[Angel Ariel]

The same on-site benefits that existed prior to the whole MyMagic+ program starting haven't changed. If those perks weren't enough to entice to you to stay onsite before MM+, and you don't need/care about having an extra 30 days of prebooking (onsite guests get 60 days, offsite get 30), then it seems pretty clear that offsite would be the better choice for you.

 

[jtowntoflorida]

For me, it's all about location. FP+ was never seen by me as being an onsite perk, because it was clear from the beginning it was going to be extended to everyone. We stayed onsite before FP+ and will continue to stay onsite now that FP+ is rolled out (sorry, I refuse to say it's still "in testing"). Onsite for us is about one thing: location. There is no other place, no matter how close to the park, where you can be in your room and then less than 10 minutes later be in a park. Not be entering the gate, not be in the parking lot, not be on a tram or a boat, but inside an actual park. I have a shortish commute (<30 minutes if traffic is good) for work every day...I don't want to commute while on vacation, too. If we're going to Disney, that means staying on site. If we're going to a beach destination, that means a hotel on the beach. That convenience is worth the increase in cost to us. YMMV.

 

[OtherScott]

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...

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.

Bingo.

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

Bingo.

Not really. Renting DVC points is certainly cheaper in most cases than off site. And a LOT nicer!

 

[BuckeyeBama]

Not really. Renting DVC points is certainly cheaper in most cases than off site. And a LOT nicer!

I would argue with this. A standard DVC "studio" room doesn't even have 2 beds (pull-out bed is not a bed). For the cost in points for comparable room, DVC comes up short.

Again, we love staying on site, but no matter how you slice it you can get a much better room off site for the money.

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

I would argue with this. A standard DVC "studio" room doesn't even have 2 beds (pull-out bed is not a bed). For the cost in points for comparable room, DVC comes up short.

Again, we love staying on site, but no matter how you slice it you can get a much better room off site for the money.

I just slept on a pull out at AK in January. It was amazing.

 

[Princess Disney Mom]

If you prefer offsite go with that.

 

[BuckeyeBama]

I just slept on a pull out at AK in January. It was amazing.

I should edit my statement to say that, for us, a pull-out bed does not count as a bed. I am glad that you were happy with it, and am sure that many more are as well.

 

[HM]

I would argue with this. A standard DVC "studio" room doesn't even have 2 beds (pull-out bed is not a bed). For the cost in points for comparable room, DVC comes up short.

Again, we love staying on site, but no matter how you slice it you can get a much better room off site for the money.

I agree.

We've rented DVC points and will not stay in a Studio with four people. It has to be a one bedroom for the space.

For us, the last couple times we've stayed offsite have cost us nothing personally (five night gift at a timeshare owned by FIL). That is always a better deal than a value room at WDW. I'd always choose free offsite to a $ stay onsite. I'm sure others have been in a similar situation.

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

That is always a better deal than a value room at WDW. I'd always choose free offsite to a $ stay onsite.

Well, free is cheaper, but I don't think it's a better deal. Like many people have said, if you've got to drive to a theme park, the magic is largely gone.

 

[mill4023]

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.

True in some cases.
If you are a party of 3 or 4 and you like the Value resorts, then you can still save money staying offsite, but the savings aren't nearly as big. But even then, you can get a lot more space and nicer accommodations for the same price. Of course, that decision really depends on your priorities. For some, the extra space is worth it and for others, it isn't.

 

[OtherScott]

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?"

If it's a single resort hotel -vs- single non-resort hotel, resort scores enough points to win most games. A room is a room, as they say, but the former includes transportation, EMH, merchandise delivery to room, probably better pools, immersion, etc.

So for small group with similar sleeping habits over a relatively short time, resort makes financial sense.

But for me, it's balancing accommodations with cost. I want a 3BR townhouse minimum because my group is wife and I, her parents, our 2 kids. For that I pay about $100/night at WH. I'd willingly pay Disney ~5 times that if they offered it.

Cheapest 3BR at Disney is >$700/night (DVC points rental).

 

[Zeebs]

Well, free is cheaper, but I don't think it's a better deal. Like many people have said, if you've got to drive to a theme park, the magic is largely gone.

Not for us, but then we are "foreign" so all of the trip is magical and exciting, from the trips to Walmart and driving to the Disney.

No way ever I would spend the money required to stay on site in comparable accommodations that we have offsite (not that there is a comparable accommodation for a 4 bed villa with own pool)

That said, I don't care how others spend their money, everyone wants different things from their time away from home. My way is best for me, won't be best for everyone, just as that works vice versus. Nothing anyone can say would make me change my preferences just as I imagine nothing would make you change yours.

Kirsten

 

[mill4023]

Not really. Renting DVC points is certainly cheaper in most cases than off site. And a LOT nicer!

I'd like to see the math on that.
The going rate is what, about $12 per point?

I believe Old Key West is one of the cheapest DVC properties.
Weekly point cost for a studio ranges from 76 to 152.
So $912 to $1824 per week or $130 to $260 per night.

Let's take the "Magic" season as an example. That's peak season, but not Easter weeks or Christmas weeks.
It's 108 points for a week in a studio. That's $1296.
That is $185 per night.

How exactly is $185 per night for a studio "certainly cheaper in most cases than off site"?

You can get a fantastic suite off site for substantially less than that.

And for larger families, it's even more drastic.
One week in the summer for our family would require a 2 bedroom DVC.
Old Key West is 296 points or $3552 renting points.
That is $507 per night for a 2 bedroom.
I can get a 4 or 5 bedroom with a private pool, offsite, for less than $200 per night.

 

[mill4023]

Well, free is cheaper, but I don't think it's a better deal. Like many people have said, if you've got to drive to a theme park, the magic is largely gone.

That's very much a matter of personal opinion.

We aren't big fans of Disney transportation, so even when we stayed onsite, we usually drove to the parks. That didn't take any of the magic away for us.

Now, I do agree that driving past all the touristy crap on 192 was less than magical, but it still wasn't a big deal for us. And even on our first trip, when we spent the first part of our trip at a Fairfield Inn just off property near DTD, the trip certainly had plenty of magic.

Like I said before, we really enjoyed our onsite stays. We enjoyed All Star Movies and Pop Century, and we absolutely LOVED Port Orleans Riverside. I do miss staying there. But for our family, the huge cost savings of an offsite house and the luxury of all that extra space and our own private pool, definitely outweigh the benefits of being onsite at a Disney resort. Of course, others feel differently, and that's ok.

 

[ShaggyB]

Well, free is cheaper, but I don't think it's a better deal. Like many people have said, if you've got to drive to a theme park, the magic is largely gone.

I remember when Hollywood studios was MGM and the magic felt gone having to get on a bus to go to it as opposed to the monorail. I want more monorails.... lol

But in all seriousness, the magic for me starts when i see the purple road signs.... but I just dont want to leave property. There are a few on property non-Disney resorts that I could get, but i give up the theme and a portion of the bubble.

I'm just not willing to do that if I dont have to. When I go to Disney with my wife, we save for a few years and pay cash for the trip. Its a big deal to us and we want the whole experience. To me / us, that is worth the extra cash.

To others it is not. This is what a family has to weigh when they plan for the Disney trip. Much of Disney's advantages are not literal line items that can be matched dollar for dollar. A cast member welcoming you home and a room with a mickey made from towels is not worth massive amounts of money.... but for me, the trip wouldnt be the same without that.

 

[SweetMissy]

Everyone has given all the same reasons I would give to stay onsite. I just want to say that both this year and last year we thoroughly looked into staying offsite and I found that it's cheaper to stay onsite. When you factor in having to rent a car/van, stocking your rental with food/drink, parking fees, gas, etc...plus there's the added "bonus" of entering and leaving the parking lots at the parks which I can imagine during busy times isn't fun...for us it makes sense staying onsite. Yes, offsite places are nice.....having a whole house and pool to yourself is awesome, but that's like being at home. I don't want a kitchen in front of me while on vacation. We prefer to be immersed in disney by staying onsite.

 

[Angel Ariel]

Well, free is cheaper, but I don't think it's a better deal. Like many people have said, if you've got to drive to a theme park, the magic is largely gone.

There really isn't much, to me, that could take away the magic I feel seeing Cinderella Castle. Being in a car to get there most certainly wouldn't.

 

[Disney4nonah]

I love staying on-site.
We get a small rental car and enjoy, zipping from our resort in the morning to the park with not having to pay for parking. I get excited driving into each parking lot, crazy, eh?

I like that we can go to the store if need be, we go to universal(only one day mind you).
We eat at place we don't have in Pacific NW, Cracker Barrel & Chilies.

But we return Home to our resort. I should mention we are two adults, no kids. Lots of time and I seriously can't believe how our touring of the parks has changed. We are so laid back now, we often leave with every intention of coming back later, and usually end up asleep at the Pool or off to a restaurant.
We are so not commando....but haven't had a bad time yet!

I think the point is, make your vacation whatever you want it to be. All immersive or slightly removed. I would say there is no wrong answer.