Are all Disney resort perks fair?

[cakebaker]

First of all some people say that Disney gets more money from people who stay onsite. That isn't necessarily true.

If it wasn't true for the most part (of course there are exceptions) Disney wouldn't be working so hard to encourage on site stays. They do it because that's where the money is. They may be on the losing end now and then, but the bottom line has to show that on site makes them more profit on the whole.

 

[mummabear]

People stayed onsite long before there were fastpass perks. Maybe if the prices weren't so high...

But some of the perks that used to exist for on site guests have been removed either partly or completely, EMH for example are no where near the length or frequency that they used to be.
FP+ perks, a small booking preference opportunity replaces that.
Really it doesn't matter that it is 30 days difference it could be one or two days ahead and the net result would be the same.

 

[Jadyreen1282]

I'm just being dramatic. Sorry

 

[ArwenMarie]

I have to say this is something that I appreciate about Disney and prt of what has us skipping US for the first time in 10 trips(LA and Orlando) is that while there is on site perks I don't think they go so far as to not be worthwhile visiting without them, once you arrive at the park you are not second class like you at at US

Yeah. I won't go to UOR anymore unless I am onsite or have a throwaway room booked. Especially since we go during busy weeks sometimes. I agree about the second-class citizen feeling there without the Express Passes

 

[Fantaluminishes]

I respect opposing opinions and there are some really good ones on here. I totally understand that I have a choice about everything to do with Disney. I choose to pay the high ticket prices, restaurant prices, etc. I choose not to pay the resort prices and I accept the consequences of not getting the perks. At the end of the day what I think is fair or unfair changes nothing as far as Disney is concerned and I was just looking to get some different opinions on the matter. And I still choose to have an awesome vacation whether I get Anna & Elsa FP or not.

Great points. Prior to moving to SoCal last year, I refused to stay at onsite Disney hotels at Disneyland because they are too overpriced, without any real benefits, and they lack the Disney Bubble. But I only stay onsite at WDW, and usually at Deluxe resorts. I just prefer being immersed in the WDW experience. You simply can't get that at Disneyland.

 

[lauradis]

http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-where-disney-really-makes-money-2015-1

http://thewaltdisneycompany.com/investors/financial-information/earnings
Guest spending growth at our parks and resorts reflected higher average ticket prices and
increased merchandise, food and beverage spending

Now how many threads do we have taking about dinning off site for off site guest to save money?

How many threads do we have taking about shopping off site for off site guest to save money?

When you stay in the "Disney bubble" all that you spend stays with Disney for a higher profit.

 

[LuvGoofy6]

Right, but I am pretty sure those in value resorts get the same perks as those in deluxes

I agree...I've stayed at deluxe and value and the general perks are the same. The amenities are the difference (room size, two sinks, queen beds, transportation options...all at a price) but all on-site guests enjoy the same perks.

I would never stay onsite if it weren't for the perks.

180+10
FP+ at 60 days
EMH
Free transportation (except technically anyone can use the buses or monorail)
No parking fees

So yes it's fair.

Agree...and the EMH perk alone makes staying onsite worthwhile for my family, especially when it's a busy time of the year.

 

[Babsy]

yes

 

[Rash]

They are as fair as capitalism.

 

[gschon]

Love me some capitalism

 

[Planogirl]

If it wasn't true for the most part (of course there are exceptions) Disney wouldn't be working so hard to encourage on site stays. They do it because that's where the money is. They may be on the losing end now and then, but the bottom line has to show that on site makes them more profit on the whole.

I think that Disney wants both. They want to book their rooms and also lure the offsite people. They are walking a tightrope of sorts and so far no one seems to mind that aspect of what they offer.

 

[Planogirl]

Yeah. I won't go to UOR anymore unless I am onsite or have a throwaway room booked. Especially since we go during busy weeks sometimes. I agree about the second-class citizen feeling there without the Express Passes

I get more of a second class citizen vibe from Disney than I do Universal. I get three FP+ but I can't book when others can, I can't get dining packages, I can't take part in some special events, I can't go to EMH and so on. Disney won't even let me buy my way into getting the same fastpass treatment. When I go to Universal, I can stay at a low cost offsite hotel and buy Express passes IF I need them and still come out ahead in my opinion.

 

[Planogirl]

Love me some capitalism

Nothing wrong with capitalism. It isn't always fair but that's as it should be.

 

[cakebaker]

I think that Disney wants both. They want to book their rooms and also lure the offsite people. They are walking a tightrope of sorts and so far no one seems to mind that aspect of what they offer.

I agree completely. While I think on site guests bring in the biggest per guest profit, Disney definitely needs the off site guests as well.

 

[mom2rtk]

I think that Disney wants both. They want to book their rooms and also lure the offsite people. They are walking a tightrope of sorts and so far no one seems to mind that aspect of what they offer.

I totally agree with that. Disney would never fill the parks in peak times with just onsite guests. Yet they would not want to take on the task of operating enough hotels to fill the parks. I'm sure they are quite happy to have other companies willing to house paying guests for them without all that fixed overhead on their books.

 

[Rosebud123]

Coming from someone who typically stays offsite (although I did book a one night throw away campsite to get 60 day FP and a few days of free parking), I think it's totally fair. They want you to stay in their hotels so you get a little advantage.
I don't think it's even that big of a deal. If I were staying offsite for our upcoming trip I never would have bothered with a throw away.

 

[mummabear]

I get more of a second class citizen vibe from Disney than I do Universal. I get three FP+ but I can't book when others can, I can't get dining packages, I can't take part in some special events, I can't go to EMH and so on. Disney won't even let me buy my way into getting the same fastpass treatment. When I go to Universal, I can stay at a low cost offsite hotel and buy Express passes IF I need them and still come out ahead in my opinion.

I think this shows how difficult it is for them to get it "fair" because each of us has a different idea of it.
I think the FOTL access is way more of an advantage over other guests and that is basically pointless to visit US without it these days.
Yes those with the most money always "win" but I think this is way too blatant of a way to do it(outright purchasing the pass), at least with Disney during park hours all guests are equal.

 

[LaurenT]

Off-topic, but can you go further into this? We're considering going to Uni for just one day. It's kind of annoying, we'd have to buy park-to-park. Thinking of not getting Front of the Line, since we mainly want to see the Harry Potter stuff, and the line pass doesn't work there right? What are other drawbacks of just going for a day vs staying onsite?

Staying onsite gets you unlimited FotL access -- all the time at most of the rides. And in the past has given early access to Harry Potter - not sure what they're doing with that now. But there's a Universal forum here ... You should go browse through the stickys there...

 

[ArwenMarie]

I get more of a second class citizen vibe from Disney than I do Universal. I get three FP+ but I can't book when others can, I can't get dining packages, I can't take part in some special events, I can't go to EMH and so on. Disney won't even let me buy my way into getting the same fastpass treatment. When I go to Universal, I can stay at a low cost offsite hotel and buy Express passes IF I need them and still come out ahead in my opinion.

Yeah, I can see that. I guess I'm basing that on our day we spent there in February without Express Passes. I would have LOVED to have three prebooked FPs that day, the lines were so long. Our offsite Disney park days were better that week than our offsite Universal day. It was a very crowded week so that didn't help.

 

[ArwenMarie]

I think that Disney wants both. They want to book their rooms and also lure the offsite people. They are walking a tightrope of sorts and so far no one seems to mind that aspect of what they offer.

They do, they want everyone's money. And they are in a balancing act. I thought they would have given more to onsite by now in terms of FP (such as an extra prebooked FP per day). But with such scarce good ride capacity versus crowds, they must have to be careful not to alienate offsite too much.