Are all Disney resort perks fair?

[Luckybee]

Well it's Disney World we're talking about here, where millions of families visit a year. When staying on Disney property, you know what you're signing up for. If you want a nice, peaceful, relaxing vacation, go visit the caribbean or something. Don't come to Disney World and complain about screaming kids, are you kidding me? And 6 star restaurants, not so sure they exist anywhere. You act like i'm telling people what to do, that's just my opinion, and I spoke it. If you're a true Disney fan, you wouldn't mind dealing with the hustle and bustle of a few screaming kids. Cause that's what it's all about. I was gonna use a "fathom" reference, but it seems like you pretty much played out the phrase. So yeah, that's that.

Well that's the difference in our choice from yours. I can go to Disney and have fun but still have a peaceful relaxing vacation. Im sorry but you don't get to dictate to me what type of vacation I am going to have. When we choose to go to the Caribbean we do. When we choose to go to Disney we do. And we can do the Disney Parks or the Universal Parks and still stay at a property that fulfills our needs just fine ty by not staying on property. We've stayed at countless properties in Orlando ( well perhaps not countless but at least 15-20 ) and have found quite a few that suit us just fine. And no for us a vacation is not "all about " the hustle and bustle of a few screaming kids. I expect that at the parks but for the rest of my holiday I don't choose to. You may find that an essential part of your trip but I don't find it an essential part of mine. So enjoy your onsite stay, and we'll continue to enjoy our offsite ones in Orlando .

 

[Luckybee]

With all due respect, this is NOTHING like our offsite experiences. If it were, I might feel as adamantly as you. We are not "prisoner to the resort" because we have a car. We do go to the parks every day. We have a gorgeous 2BR, 2BA villa, and we walk out our screened porch to a stunning pool.

This idea that this "Tiki Village" is all there is out there ..... Surely you know there are nice resorts outside of Disney World, notwithstanding your experiences ....

I don't begrudge you your choice and your experience. Please don't begrudge mine.

And back to the topic at hand, I think Disney should give MORE privileges to onsite guests, not less. I have friends who stay at GF, MK view every trip ... in ONE hotel room ... with one room and one bathroom. The GF is a lovely resort, but honestly, that sounds like hell to me. And they spend 3 times or more a night than I spend. For that kind of money, in THAT kind of room, I can't see doing it without MORE incentives.

There are some resorts that I wouldn't mind being a prisoner at....we've done the Ritz in Grande Lakes and it is absolutely gorgeous, peaceful, serene and relaxing, the facilities are top notch, with impeccable service (main reason why we added Lakeshore Reserve this time around since it is part of the same complex Anyone know where I could sign up to be a permanent prisoner...lol.

 

[ArwenMarie]

We do both now, onsite, offsite and sometimes a combination of both in one trip! So I don't think it's true that you'll never go back to onsite. When I am offsite, there are things I miss about offsite, but then I remember the savings and those feelings dissipate

I think it's great that Orlando has SO many lodging options, truly. When I look at other vacation destinations I am always disappointed in the selection now because i am so spoiled by all of the choices.

 

[Kevin355]

The perks are great for those staying on property. I don't pay for parking; take the buses everywhere, get dropped off near the gates, get to book FP+ 60 days out, and I pay for it by staying on-property. I got a discount on KTTK tour because I am a Chase Visa cardholder, also got a discount on my wife's massage at GF because I am a Chase Visa cardholder. I also got the free meal deal because I booked and am staying on property at an included resort.

Disney is not the only place to offer perks to those who use their services. If you fly Southwest Airlines and have one of their credit cards, you earn travel points faster than those who don't. It is beneficial to WDW and it is beneficial to me because when we fly, I leave my car in Ohio, and WDW does the driving. You pay for your perks. What you have to decide is that is it worth the price to get more? To me it is.

 

[Kevin355]

I guess my original logic was that the perks for staying inside a Disney resort remain inside the resort and once you get to the parks every ticket holder is on a level playing field. I get what you guys are saying about the resorts and the parks being under the umbrella of Disney and therefore the perks can extend into the parks so I can see how my original argument may not hold water in everyone's eyes.

Thank you to the people who are able to have a discussion of differing opinions in a way that is respectful.

We've stayed off-site and we've stayed on-site ever since. I like the feel of not worrying about parking, like the ease of having someone drive us to the parks and also having the opportunity to get the whole Disney experience of being on property. When we stayed off-property, we had a larger room, but we also seemed to have to rush to get the hotel shuttle to and then a long wait from the parks. Don't feel that on-property. I can catch a shuttle at 9:00AM, or I can catch a shuttle at 10:00AM. And with park hopper,if I get tired at one park, I take a bus to my resort, take a nap, eat, then have the opportunity to go to another resort. And with EMH, I can go early and get into the parts of the park I want, or I can stay late and ride the rides that I want. I also got lucky with Free Dining again. I understand your points on this thread, but I look at it as "Is it worth the extra money to me?" Yes it is.

 

[Mary2e]

I've long said that onsite guests should be provided with something a bit more than what is currently. For example, the resort monorail should be just that - for resort guests. And what I mean by long is that I used to stay at the Poly CL when it was half price of $125 on the AP discount Yes, that's a long time ago

Many people I know have asked me to help plan their Disney vacations. I always do my best. Some of them regularly stay in Four Seasons, Ritz, etc and have a certain level of expectations for when staying at a hotel. For those people asking my advice, the first thing I say is that they're going to be paying 5* prices and getting a 3-4* experience. That's because Disney calls their top end hotels "deluxe." In reality, they're really not much better than some Hiltons or Hyatts. The service and amenities just aren't there. When I call to ask for something in a non-Disney hotel, I don't expect to be routed to a call center who will then forward my request/need/question to the appropriate person. When I call the front desk or housekeeping at my hotel I expect to get them.

Disney is an expensive vacation. I can go to Hawaii for 2 weeks and stay in a very nice ocean front hotel for about the same as I spend for a week in Disney. I know and accept that.

When Disney deluxes start in the $300s (at a discount) and hover much closer to $400-$500 people are going to expect far more than what they're getting.

 

[RUSTYGATOR]

Let just be happy that the perks haven't extended to more fastpasses depending on the level of resort you stay at. I'm sure those staying in the deluxe, multi-room villas would likely be in favor of that, while those staying is values would not be.

I'm sure Disney weighs the public reaction of the perks and wether they are likely to cause public out roar. Is it fair that EMH at the Magic Kingdom have limited access to the entire park and many of the rides are inning at severly reduced capacity? Tommorrowland Sppedway 20 minutes after opening s usually backed up with only one of the 4 lanes being open. Also, the larger question is EMH really a benefit since often those parks end up being much worse later in the day.

 

[ArwenMarie]

I know Disney Transportation gets a bad rep sometimes, but I still think it's great that it's there and it is a huge perk of onsite. Think about all of the people it transports, as well as people who use ECVs as well. Right now we drive everywhere when we are there (because my husband does the driving!) but I think it's great to know that people can go to Disney and as long as they can get themselves to their home airport, all of their transportation needs can be taken care of for the entire trip. Who knows, maybe one day I will want or need to take advantage of that.

 

[ArwenMarie]

Many people I know have asked me to help plan their Disney vacations. I always do my best. Some of them regularly stay in Four Seasons, Ritz, etc and have a certain level of expectations for when staying at a hotel. For those people asking my advice, the first thing I say is that they're going to be paying 5* prices and getting a 3-4* experience. That's because Disney calls their top end hotels "deluxe." In reality, they're really not much better than some Hiltons or Hyatts. The service and amenities just aren't there. When I call to ask for something in a non-Disney hotel, I don't expect to be routed to a call center who will then forward my request/need/question to the appropriate person. When I call the front desk or housekeeping at my hotel I expect to get them.

I do think it's important for people to know this. And ditto for the moderates and values, because they are priced high for what they are as well.

 

[BrerRabbit1114]

There are offsite resorts that have slews of restaurants and other amenities. I respect your choice to stay onsite but don't think that everywhere is like the place you mentioned.

Oh I know not every place is like the one I stayed at. I'm sure some are even nicer than some Disney properties. I just prefer to stay onsite, that's all.

 

[BrerRabbit1114]

Our first 2 trips we did, it was fine, our 3rd trip we stayed at AOA and this upcoming trip ASM. For the small price difference to stay off site we definitely would not do it...However we are now a family of 5, we can still stay in the value while #3 is an infant but once she is over 3 I believe the Caribbean Beach is the cheapest so we will have to reconsider as the difference between onsite and offsite costs will be larger
I can't justify the cost of a deluxe, frankly from NZ I can fly to an actual Polynesian Island and get a hotel for 4 nights for the same sort of price as one night at the Poly....

Oh wow, really? That's pretty cool! But I agree, it's not that expensive to stay at one of the value resorts, and have all the benefits of someone staying at a deluxe resort. I think staying onsite is worth the price. But as your family grows, i'm sure you'll have to reconsider your options.

 

[BrerRabbit1114]

All I know is I've done both, and I prefer having a car.

Disney does an exemplary job with their transportation. Really, they do. I prefer having a car, though. Plenty of others do too. I have read numerous posts on these boards advising even onsite people to drive to the parks (except MK) rather than rely on Disney transportation.

I GET that some don't feel the same. You, in particular, don't feel the same.

However, to reiterate. I've done both, and I prefer having a car. The implication in your post is that I'm making this up. It's how I feel. Why would I make it up?

Regarding "waiting in lines, and dealing with people just to make it back to [my] car", I don't have to wait in lines or deal with people to make it back to my car. As far as lines or people in the parks, often we push ourselves to the limits in the parks. We do wait and we do walk and we wear ourselves out. At the point when we cry "uncle" and want to take a break, standing for 30 minutes at the bus stop waiting for a bus to go back to the resort seems interminable. That's just me. You don't have to feel the same. But please don't assume I'm lying or crazy. It's how I feel.

As far as "hav[ing] someone drive me back to my resort" vs. "driving myself home", I personally don't find the short drive back to my offiste resort exhausting or taxing in any way. I understand some find a 5-10 minute drive to be less than pleasant. I can't really fathom why that would be the case, but I don't doubt that people are being truthful. FWIW, I am a control freak, and being at the mercy of others drives me crazy. I CAN'T control the lines in the parks or the people with the stroller in front of me, but I CAN control being able to come and go from the parks when I see fit.

I have done both, and I strongly prefer having a car. If I were to stay onsite tomorrow, and truly, I consider it all the time, we would drive to all parks except MK and we would certainly drive to resorts for ADRs. Scout's honor.

Touche Well said, and I respect your opinions. And for some reason I can't stand the word "fathom" anymore

 

[itchin2go]

And for some reason I can't stand the word "fathom" anymore

YES!

 

[BrerRabbit1114]

With all due respect, this is NOTHING like our offsite experiences. If it were, I might feel as adamantly as you. We are not "prisoner to the resort" because we have a car. We do go to the parks every day. We have a gorgeous 2BR, 2BA villa, and we walk out our screened porch to a stunning pool.

This idea that this "Tiki Village" is all there is out there ..... Surely you know there are nice resorts outside of Disney World, notwithstanding your experiences ....

I don't begrudge you your choice and your experience. Please don't begrudge mine.

And back to the topic at hand, I think Disney should give MORE privileges to onsite guests, not less. I have friends who stay at GF, MK view every trip ... 5 people ... in ONE hotel room ... with one room and one bathroom. The GF is a lovely resort, but honestly, that sounds like hell to me. And they spend 3 times or more a night than I spend. For that kind of money, in THAT kind of room, I can't see doing it without MORE incentives.

I hear you, and you make some very valid points. I know there are some beautiful offsite resorts, I must of just had a not so good one. It was actually "Liki Tiki Village", I mispelled and said "Like". And I know how expensive it can be for so much money, but I don't mind dealing with the hassel, cause I enjoy being on the property that much. But that's just my opion, that's all.

 

[BrerRabbit1114]

Only responding, because can you believe I've actually stayed at Liki Tiki Village? In 2005. We had a week at a gorgeous vacation rental, and then stayed three nights at LTV. We had a blast. We had an older unit, but it had a nice layout. Friends of ours (with a bigger family) stayed in a newer unit that was heavenly. The water park was exceptional and ahead of the curve as far as those go. They also had bikes to rent, places to fish. I believe you that your experience was not as rewarding. But it's funny you name the one NON-rental house I have stayed at in 13 years.


This is beautiful. Except I typically don't stay in Windsor Hills. It's an amazing development. Stayed once. I prefer staying on 27.

Haha, that's too funny we stayed at the same place. Like I said, the room was outstanding, but that's about all. Just imagine a kid who has spent his first 12 Disney vacations in Disney, and then having to spend his 13th vacation offsite. It just wasn't for me. I respect anyone who chooses to stay offsite. And I shouldn't have used the word "fathom", I actually regret it now. I'm just always gonna be an "onsite" kind of guy. I just over reacted initially.

 

[Ariel Wanna-be]

Let just be happy that the perks haven't extended to more fastpasses depending on the level of resort you stay at.

Nope, not at all happy about that. I realize that I'm in the minority, but I am 100% in favor of deluxe resort guests receiving more perks than moderate/value guests. And moderate resort guests should receive more perks than value resort guests. And value resort guests should receive more perks than offsite guests.

I'm not sure how people can argue that "onsite should get more perks than offsite because they are giving Disney more money" without seeing how the same logic applies when discussing deluxe vs. value guests. Same principle.

As far as the onsite vs. offsite debate: I recognize that Disney deluxe resorts are absolutely not "deluxe" in the real world..the only thing truly deluxe about them is their price and their proximity to the World. They are beautiful, clean, and creatively themed, but certainly not deluxe. That being said, I am willing to pay the high prices for the experience of staying in the Disney bubble 24/7, and therefore don't mind forgoing the true deluxe experience in favor of Mouse Immersion. It is well worth it to us, but I can appreciate that others may feel differently. We have friends who can only take Disney in 8-hour bites; by the time their day in the park is done, they are OVER Disney and don't want to see another pair of mouse ears until they arrive back in the parks the next morning. (After thinking about it, I cannot understand how we are friends, lol).

.

 

[whiporee]

Nope, not at all happy about that. I realize that I'm in the minority, but I am 100% in favor of deluxe resort guests receiving more perks than moderate/value guests. And moderate resort guests should receive more perks than value resort guests. And value resort guests should receive more perks than offsite guests.

I'm not sure how people can argue that "onsite should get more perks than offsite because they are giving Disney more money" without seeing how the same logic applies when discussing deluxe vs. value guests. Same principle.

As far as the onsite vs. offsite debate: I recognize that Disney deluxe resorts are absolutely not "deluxe" in the real world..the only thing truly deluxe about them is their price and their proximity to the World. They are beautiful, clean, and creatively themed, but certainly not deluxe. That being said, I am willing to pay the high prices for the experience of staying in the Disney bubble 24/7, and therefore don't mind forgoing the true deluxe experience in favor of Mouse Immersion. It is well worth it to us, but I can appreciate that others may feel differently. We have friends who can only take Disney in 8-hour bites; by the time their day in the park is done, they are OVER Disney and don't want to see another pair of mouse ears until they arrive back in the parks the next morning. (After thinking about it, I cannot understand how we are friends, lol).

.

We're definitely in the minority, but I'm with you to an even greater degree. I think the parks should be limited to resort guests a couple of times a week -- not the weekends or the peak months/weeks, but a couple of times a week the real benefit of the resorts would be that you're allowed at the parks and no one else is. After all, there are 100,000 people at the resorts at any given time, more than enough to make it worthwhile to open them.

They'll never do it, of course. But it would be cool if they did. Or really stretch out the EMHs to a few full-service hours in the morning, so the parks were limited to resort guests until noon, or closed the park at 9 and let the EMH run until midnight or 1. Real, actual enjoyment benefits to the people paying Disney a bunch of money. Again, it'll never happen, but as a frequent guest who stays at deluxe resorts, it would make my trip more enjoyable. And like all of us, that's my primary concern.

I also agree with you about the resort monorail (really agree about that). Out of things that annoy me as a deluxe guest are the plethora of people who get off at the TTC at the end of the night.

 

[Nancyg56]

I totally get that Disney makes the rules and you either choose to play or you don't. Staying offsite is a choice and I fully understand the consequences just like people who stay onsite understand the consequence of paying more for a room. I guess I just feel that the heftier Disney resort price buys you convenience to the parks and the opportunity to stay inside the "Disney bubble". But Disney is going to go what's best for the bottom line just like any other business and I guess perks are just part of that. Just expressing my opinion and I appreciate everyone else's.

You get that Disney Bubble but you also get a little more. What incentive can Disney offer to get their guests to spend the majority of their vacation dollar withing Disney? Give them a reason to choose an onsite resort. Getting that little bubble is not going to cut the mustard when you figure that if a guest stays offsite meals, souvenirs, and additional local attractions will be so much easier to access. No. Fair just really has no place when a business is competing for a finite vacation dollar. Disney had to give people a reason to become captive on property, and DME transportation, the DDP (Even though this is not for everyone, it does factor into a decision), 180 + 10, and a 30 additional window on FP is quite an incentive.

Disney offers multiple spending categories, but even with the number of choices, their resorts simply are not the right choice for every family. Your family chooses to spend your lodging portion of your vacation offsite, and I bet that means some of your meals money will benefit offsite establishments, as may your shopping dollar. Disney is not obligated to reward your decision. Fair? Not fair? I don't know, but I do know that from a business prospective, Disney needs to try to capture as many dollars as possible. They reward those who do just that.

 

[fla4fun]

I think the decision to stay on site or off site is a very personal one. It can vary from family to family, and even from trip to trip. There are advantages and disadvantages to both, and no one can decide for someone else where to draw the line.

I do think it's fine that Disney offers perks to people who stay at their hotels. As a local, I can do day trips without the perks, or stay on site to get them. More often than not, I prefer to stay on site. I drive in this local traffic every day, so I am thrilled to leave the driving to someone else for a change. While I have limited access to FP+ with my AP, as an on site guest I have a longer window to make the bookings (I seldom book at 60 days, but usually around 45). There are a lot of people who think I'm nuts to stay on site when I can stay at home for "free" - but it just doesn't feel like WDW to me if I have to get in the car and fight the traffic to get home. But that is my choice - and yours may be different.

 

[momof2n2]

We do both now, onsite, offsite and sometimes a combination of both in one trip! So I don't think it's true that you'll never go back to onsite. When I am offsite, there are things I miss about offsite, but then I remember the savings and those feelings dissipate

I think it's great that Orlando has SO many lodging options, truly. When I look at other vacation destinations I am always disappointed in the selection now because i am so spoiled by all of the choices.

This is so true ArwenMarie.
I'm always traveling and I'm so often disappointed with options anywhere else.