Are all Disney resort perks fair?

[itchin2go]

I think a great many people don't stay on site due to cost, yes. I read posts here all the time saying that exact thing. If you choose value resorts, with discounts then cost is much lower. I fully understand not wanting to stay at values, and I understand the desire for certain amenities that only come with a Deluxe or DVC villa. Not everyone can afford those and I'm sure there are many people, while they would love to stay on site, cannot afford to pay what it costs to get those choices.

Choosing not to pay a high price for something and lacking the finances are 2 different things.

Most wealthy people I know are quite conservative in their spending. That's one of the reasons they're wealthy.

If someone chooses an offsite location with a lower price, that doesn't mean they lack the money to stay onsite.

People actually choose offsite for many different reasons (something I've seen explained in detail in other threads, at least one of which you participated in, if I'm not mistaken). Cost is certainly a factor in the decisions of some, but that does not translate into a HAVE/HAVE NOT situation.

 

[LaurenT]

If I were paying $765/night they'd best offer me more than a bus and a few more hours in the park. And honestly, I'd need WAY more than 30 days earlier FP.

That's why its not just about money.

If you were paying $765 a night you'd be one of two things - a multimillionaire or crazy.
Grand Floridian is MUCH more expensive than the other deluxes, and $765 is close to their top rate. It makes zero sense to pay that for "free dining"

 

[cakebaker]

If I were paying $765/night they'd best offer me more than a bus and a few more hours in the park. And honestly, I'd need WAY more than 30 days earlier FP.

That's why its not just about money.

They couldn't offer enough to make me pay that much, but I don't have to and neither does anyone else. I've never come close to paying that rate even for a 2 BR DVC villa, booked directly thru Disney. That rate used as an example is not a good example of what one should expect to pay for a deluxe resort.

We are currently paying less that $250 per night for our WL room in June and that's with a premium view.

Edited to add....Yes, actually they could get me to pay that. If they offered me the Castle suite for that price, I'd book a week minimum!

 

[cakebaker]

Choosing not to pay a high price for something and lacking the finances are 2 different things. Most wealthy people I know are quite conservative in their spending. That's one of the reasons they're wealthy.
If someone chooses an offsite location with a lower price, that doesn't mean they lack the money to stay onsite.

.

Absolutely agree. But it can be a reason and I'm sure it is.

 

[eliza61]

I think a great many people don't stay on site due to cost, yes. I read posts here all the time saying that exact thing. If you choose value resorts, with discounts then cost is much lower. I fully understand not wanting to stay at values, and I understand the desire for certain amenities that only come with a Deluxe or DVC villa. Not everyone can afford those and I'm sure there are many people, while they would love to stay on site, cannot afford to pay what it costs to get those choices.

Not all though.

We stay deluxe, now we do have a dvc so we use our points but sorry I will never pay Disney prices for their deluxe. they are not true Deluxes imo. like I said we loved the Waldorf absolutely stunning. Now for me, I'm totally a "resort" gal.. I truly don't understand the sentiment that a "room" is just someplace to sleep. I plan on retiring soon and for my retirement party, I saving up for a stay at the 4 season. lol. I'll probably have to be dragged out by my legs to get me to leave

 

[cakebaker]

Not all though.

Yes....that's why I didn't say "all".

 

[Nigel Channing]

when you commute using public transportation, you have to stand most of the time. that's how it works. But if you are not used to public transporation, it might be inconvenient or uncomfortable.

Yep. I grew up in Chicago using public transportation my entire life so I love vacations where I get off the plane, take a cab or train into town, and don't have to drive the entire time I'm there. We just went to NYC with the kids for 5 days and it was glorious being able to walk everywhere or relying on the subway to get around. I drove once at Disney and did not enjoy it at all.

 

[itchin2go]

I think a great many people don't stay on site due to cost, yes. I read posts here all the time saying that exact thing. If you choose value resorts, with discounts then cost is much lower. I fully understand not wanting to stay at values, and I understand the desire for certain amenities that only come with a Deluxe or DVC villa. Not everyone can afford those and I'm sure there are many people, while they would love to stay on site, cannot afford to pay what it costs to get those choices.

Choosing not to pay a high price for something and lacking the finances are 2 different things.

Most wealthy people I know are quite conservative in their spending. That's one of the reasons they're wealthy.

If someone chooses an offsite location with a lower price, that doesn't mean they lack the money to stay onsite.

People actually choose offsite for many different reasons (something I've seen explained in detail in other threads, at least one of which you participated in, if I'm not mistaken). Cost is certainly a factor in the decisions of some, but that does not translate into a HAVE/HAVE NOT situation.

Absolutely agree. But it can be a reason and I'm sure it is.

Yeah, but it's curious that it's the one reason onsite people bring up in threads like these.

 

[cakebaker]

Yeah, but it's curious that it's the one reason onsite people bring up in threads like these.

Why is it curious? It's a valid reason some people have for not staying on site. It's not the only reason that exists, but it's common on these boards. What's the problem with saying that?

 

[SupplySide]

That would be the worst possible discount to apply. Free dining requires paying rack rate. The general or AP discounts save a great deal more.
Also, Christmas week is one of the most expensive times to stay. And lastly, the GF is one of, if not THE most expensive Deluxe. All in all, you couldn't choose a set or circumstances where the rates would be higher.

Value Season with at 35% discount at Wilderness Lodge would probably net you the lowest rate.

I understand, but it's on-site and people book rooms there. As far as I know, it doesn't receive any other perks that the Contemporary or Poly don't get. So if someone where inclined to "take advantage" of free dining over Christmas week and that's the hotel they wanted to stay at, that is the rate they would be paying. And my bet is there are people doing just that.

 

[cakebaker]

I understand, but it's on-site and people book rooms there. As far as I know, it doesn't receive any other perks that the Contemporary or Poly don't get. So if someone where inclined to "take advantage" of free dining over Christmas week and that's the hotel they wanted to stay at, that is the rate they would be paying. And my bet is there are people doing just that.

There may be, and they're welcome to do it. It's still not a typical rate that one should use to show what it costs to stay deluxe on site. It's misleading.

Btw- welcome to the Dis! There's been so many new people lately, I can barely keep up!

 

[Planogirl]

And, more importantly, if you ordered the hamburger you wouldn't sulk because the guy at the next table ordered the steak.

I would only sulk if the restaurant told me that I couldn't order the steak because of the table I was sitting at. Or something.

 

[Planogirl]

We stayed at the Royal Pacific at Universal. I don't know what quality it's supposed to be, but we were completely unimpressed. The pool was small and packed and my grandson couldn't enjoy it for all the kids in the splash area shooting him and everyone else in the face constantly. We only tried the pool once- that was enough. The bathroom door in our room had a hole in it. It was just the right height for my grandson to have no end of fun yelling through it to whoever was in the bathroom at the time- so that was fun.

The breakfast buffet there at at 20 something per person was the worst breakfast I ever tried to eat. The server was extremely nice though and even had them make my grandson his favorite strawberry milk.

Perhaps their other resorts are nicer.

We stayed at the Royal Pacific and our experience was nothing like this. Recounting of experiences is very subjective.

By the way, my guys hopped over to the Hard Rock pool while I shopped. I'm not much of a pool person but they said the Hard Rock's was far superior.

 

[Planogirl]

I've stayed deluxe at Universal, it was nice, but not even close to Animal Kingdom Lodge!! Maybe you just haven't stayed at the right Disney deluxe - I HIGHLY recommend it - I could stay in the bathroom at the pool and be happy!

I seriously adore the AKL but I would never claim that it's as nice as any of the Universal resorts. The rooms are too small and the pool isn't as nice in my opinion (even though I'm not a pool person). However I seriously love the AKL because of the theming and food. You can't beat that!

 

[atilley01]

I would only sulk if the restaurant told me that I couldn't order the steak because of the table I was sitting at. Or something.

But if it's a $500 steak, they can keep it anyway. I'll just sit over here and enjoy my hamburger.

 

[LaurenT]

I seriously adore the AKL but I would never claim that it's as nice as any of the Universal resorts. The rooms are too small and the pool isn't as nice in my opinion (even though I'm not a pool person). However I seriously love the AKL because of the theming and food. You can't beat that!

Funny - I love the Jambo pool and, like another poster, did not like the Royal Pacific pool at all. No ambience, small, crowded...

 

[Planogirl]

But if it's a $500 steak, they can probably keep it.

If their steak cost $500 then I wouldn't be there so it wouldn't matter.

 

[Planogirl]

Funny - I love the Jambo pool and, like another poster, did not like the Royal Pacific pool at all. No ambience, small, crowded...

We had a kid with us and he enjoyed the waterpark features. Plus the area is just plain pretty. I find the AKL pools kind of plain.

But who cares when the rest of the resort is so gorgeous?

 

[SupplySide]

There may be, and they're welcome to do it. It's still not a typical rate that one should use to show what it costs to stay deluxe on site. It's misleading.

Btw- welcome to the Dis! There's been so many new people lately, I can barely keep up!

I don't think it's misleading at all. I thought I saw several other much higher rates when I priced that out. Yes, just confirmed. Free Dining offer, Grand Floridian, and that was the cheapest rate that came up. It only gets higher from there.

And yes, that's full price because of the dining offer. So what other current discount could be applied to that? 35%? That would make one of the least expensive nightly rate at that resort close to $500 a night.

Grand Floridian is the swankiest deluxe? What about Polynesian? The cheapest room there for the same dates is $590. With a 35% discount it's $384 a night.

Is a 35% discount even available for Christmas week?

Either way, my point was that I do believe people who stay on-site should receive perks.

 

[JoeA]

Of course people who stay on-site should get more. It's Disney World, and the hotels are part of that world. Spend more get more.

If one of my customers spends more with me they get more than the company that spends far less.

It's a simple tenet of business.

Why would a person who spends less at a given company expect the same as someone spending more?

That's not how it works. That's not how any of this works