Disney , please don't do this...

[oliviaik]

Exactly, you are paying more money for THOSE things whether you call them "perks" or not. At what point does it end? When on-site guests get exclusive bathrooms and drinking fountains in the park? If you don't think the resorts are worth what you are paying for them as they stand now, then don't stay there. Staying on site shouldn't give you an advantage in everything. One to two extra hours in the park isn't enough for you? What is? Maybe we should just kick all off site guests out of the park entirely!

 

[morethananyonex]

Exactly, you are paying more money for THOSE things whether you call them "perks" or not. At what point does it end? When on-site guests get exclusive bathrooms and drinking fountains in the park? If you don't think the resorts are worth what you are paying for them as they stand now, then don't stay there. Staying on site shouldn't give you an advantage in everything. One to two extra hours in the park isn't enough for you? What is? Maybe we should just kick all off site guests out of the park entirely!

Wow. Little bit dramatic, don't you think?

Why would Disney not want to maximize the amount of money they get from a family on their vacation? Capturing their lodging money is huge, especially at Disney prices. If they did choose to have exclusive onsite guest only washrooms (which is a hilarious concept by the way), that's their right.

Disney is a resort, it's not strictly theme parks. It makes no sense to not use one to increase revenue in the other.

 

[Planogirl]

The bolded aren't perks. Those are things any hotel would give you for charging more money. As for EMH, while considered a perk, it's a joke. 1 hour in the morning. Big deal. The park is mobbed and not all the rides are open.

I'm shocked that people think it's "unfair" for Disney to offer more perks like more Fastpasses to onsite guests. Universal has done it for years, and they've just gotten more successful.

I've said this over and over but you don't usually need fastpasses at Universal plus if you do for some reason they are available for purchase. When I'm an offsite visitor, I'm not completely locked out of the Universal Express system like some here are advocating offsite Disney visitors should be.

I've never had a big problem with some form of pay for play at the Disney parks but the fastpasses not being available or being available in some lesser form feels real unfair to me.

 

[Planogirl]

Wow. Little bit dramatic, don't you think?

Why would Disney not want to maximize the amount of money they get from a family on their vacation? Capturing their lodging money is huge, especially at Disney prices. If they did choose to have exclusive onsite guest only washrooms (which is a hilarious concept by the way), that's their right.

Disney is a resort, it's not strictly theme parks. It makes no sense to not use one to increase revenue in the other.

Disney does like it when the offsite people eat in their restaurants though. Would they at least have some restrooms still available for those people at the resorts?

 

[morethananyonex]

Disney does like it when the offsite people eat in their restaurants though. Would they at least have some restrooms still available for those people at the resorts?

5 minutes of restroom access per ADR. 10 minutes for signature restaurants .

 

[HereForMinnie]

Honestly, when I saw you and Crostofer disagreeing I thought maybe there was a chink in the armor for "Team FP+ Sucks".

Was thinking this might be an opportunity to lure you back to Team Pixie Dust

Ok. I usually bite my tongue when it comes to these threads but I agree with you Planogirl.

How does someone onsite know they're spending more money than me if I'm staying offsite? Just because you paid more in lodging? Did any of these people stop to think I may be spending more on dining and shopping than they are?

Well, yes. The average offsite hotel is what, $99 per night? The average deluxe hotel at Disney is $350 (after tax and WITH a discount!). If you're staying offsite for a week ($693) and I'm staying onsite for a week ($2450), do you really think you're going to match the amount I'm spending with a few dinky souvenirs and dinner? You would have to spend $1757 just to match what I've already given Disney. And this is before I've purchased tickets or food!

I just get sick at the the thought that people staying on site somehow deserve more FP than someone staying off site. You are paying more in general, yes, but you already get perks for doing so. You get a whole different feel at a Disney resort than you do off site. That is worth something to people. In general, you get better pools, although there are a few off-sites with competitive ones. You get better scenery and landscaping. You get a much more convenient location close to the parks. You get unique dining options at the resort. You get services such as merchandise being delivered to your room. You get to use your Magic Bands to charge purchases to your rooms. You have kids clubs and babysitting offerings available. YOU GET ACCESS TO MORE HOURS IN THE PARK RIDING RIDES THAN OFF-SITE GUESTS. The perks of staying at a resort should be limited to the quality of the resort itself. Otherwise, the in-park experience should be the same for all guests. I have a feeling that some people would keep advocating for more perks for only on-site guests even if on-site guests were given 8 exclusive hours per day in the parks and off-site guests only had 4 hours that they could visit. I mean, after all, the on-site guests did pay more for their rooms. . .

Most of these things aren't perks and some EMHours have been cut.

Exactly, you are paying more money for THOSE things whether you call them "perks" or not. At what point does it end? When on-site guests get exclusive bathrooms and drinking fountains in the park? If you don't think the resorts are worth what you are paying for them as they stand now, then don't stay there. Staying on site shouldn't give you an advantage in everything. One to two extra hours in the park isn't enough for you? What is? Maybe we should just kick all off site guests out of the park entirely!

Did you just compare something as silly as extra perks at a theme park to segregation?

 

[Planogirl]

5 minutes of restroom access per ADR. 10 minutes for signature restaurants .

I love the conversation on the Rumors forum about FP+ for restrooms hilarious. Hopefully that is one area that will always be available for everyone!

 

[morethananyonex]

I love the conversation on the Rumors forum about FP+ for restrooms hilarious. Hopefully that is one area that will always be available for everyone!

Hah, I'll have to check that out.

On the bright side, maybe they'll add FP+ for restrooms to tier 2 in Epcot and DHS! Won't be the most useless FP+ they offer

 

[Planogirl]

Well, yes. The average offsite hotel is what, $99 per night? The average deluxe hotel at Disney is $350 (after tax and WITH a discount!). If you're staying offsite for a week ($693) and I'm staying onsite for a week ($2450), do you really think you're going to match the amount I'm spending with a few dinky souvenirs and dinner? You would have to spend $1757 just to match what I've already given Disney. And this is before I've purchased tickets or food!

There are some very nice offsite resorts and some are even nicer than the Disney resorts and a few even cost much more. I don't see why that matters though. If someone is staying at the Allstars and getting free dining then chances are the offsite visitor who is PAYING for Disney dining for several days is actually spending more than that onsite guest.

Or did you want to limit extra FP+ to only those who stay in deluxe resorts?

 

[HereForMinnie]

There are some very nice offsite resorts and some are even nicer than the Disney resorts and a few even cost much more. I don't see why that matters though. If someone is staying at the Allstars and getting free dining then chances are the offsite visitor who is PAYING for Disney dining for several days is actually spending more than that onsite guest.

Or did you want to limit extra FP+ to only those who stay in deluxe resorts?

Where did I say that? Reading is so underrated these days.

But since you (sorta) asked: I would love for Value hotels to have one extra FP, two for Mods and three for Deluxes and Villas.

 

[sonofanarchy]

I've said this over and over but you don't usually need fastpasses at Universal plus if you do for some reason they are available for purchase. When I'm an offsite visitor, I'm not completely locked out of the Universal Express system like some here are advocating offsite Disney visitors should be.

I've never had a big problem with some form of pay for play at the Disney parks but the fastpasses not being available or being available in some lesser form feels real unfair to me.

I've been to Universal every July for the last several years. I can assure you, Express is invaluable.

 

[oliviaik]

Clearly I was joking. I don't seriously think they would start segregating bathrooms or water fountains. I was just pointing out that I feel on-site guests would complain about not getting enough "perks" no matter how many they had and that at some point the treatment starts to be unfair. I don't agree with the argument that they paid more so they should get more perks. Yes, they paid more, but they do get a better hotel in certain ways for that extra money. The hotel is more valuable BECAUSE of the better location, atmosphere, etc. So, it is not like they are not getting their money's worth already.

 

[morethananyonex]

Clearly I was joking. I don't seriously think they would start segregating bathrooms or water fountains. I was just pointing out that I feel on-site guests would complain about not getting enough "perks" no matter how many they had and that at some point the treatment starts to be unfair. I don't agree with the argument that they paid more so they should get more perks. Yes, they paid more, but they do get a better hotel in certain ways for that extra money. The hotel is more valuable BECAUSE of the better location, atmosphere, etc. So, it is not like they are not getting their money's worth already.

It's not that onsite guests pay more so they deserve more. It's that Disney wants as many guests as possible to pay more so they give them incentives beyond the room and location.

It's not about guests getting their money's worth. It's about Disney getting the most they can out of their guests. Increasing onsite perks only makes sense, even if these weren't traditionally onsite perks. I mean, EMH started somewhere didn't it? As did the dining plan, which was a perk way back in the day (mid 2000s ), believe it or not.

I mean, people could have said "That's so unfair! Why should onsite guests get better deals at the restaurants??? They're already getting Disney rooms and EMH!" Well, they should get better deals because in the long run it increases profits for Disney. All the perks have to start somewhere.

 

[mefordis]

Not trying to sound like a know-it-all, but I said this the day they announced FP+. It makes perfect sense to add it as a feature to purchase on your ticket.

I don't see why people think this would be so shocking. If they've got the audacity to charge you for a No Expiration option, this is nothing.

Yep and you were/are correct. Give me a break, people who are up in arms about charging for FP+. OMG of course they are going to make money on something that people place such value on. And you will still go, trust me.

The only question in my mind is how much they will charge for it. Thoughts?

 

[kuzco-like]

Apologies if this has already been asked/discussed, but I'm curious about the history of admission costs. When Disneyland opened, was there both an admission charge plus a charge for tickets? I know that, at some time, it changed to admission only. Was a reason given for that change? Was it due to guest demand or was it just because it was a better model for Disney? Just curious.

 

[Planogirl]

Where did I say that? Reading is so underrated these days.

But since you (sorta) asked: I would love for Value hotels to have one extra FP, two for Mods and three for Deluxes and Villas.

Your snide comment aside, you only mentioned deluxe in your previous post. But we'll just overlook that little tidbit.

 

[Planogirl]

I've been to Universal every July for the last several years. I can assure you, Express is invaluable.

I don't deny that it can be needed. We have been in August for the most part and once in October and December. We managed without at those times.

I guess what I'm trying to stress is that regardless of resort, I just want access even if I have to pay extra. No access at all or even lesser access stinks. Paying for it wouldn't surprise or bother me at all. Of course some others disagree.

 

[*disgal*]

I love the conversation on the Rumors forum about FP+ for restrooms hilarious. Hopefully that is one area that will always be available for everyone!

I can see it now. Seventy-five % of the bathroom stalls are for use of onsite guests only and each of them open when your MB makes the Mickey turn green. The rest of the stalls are for offsite guests. Maybe one also for exclusive use of AP holders.

Clearly I was joking. I don't seriously think they would start segregating bathrooms or water fountains.

I know. But thanks for the giggle.

 

[morethananyonex]

I can see it now. Seventy-five % of the bathroom stalls are for use of onsite guests only and each of them open when your MB makes the Mickey turn green. The rest of the stalls are for offsite guests. Maybe one also for exclusive use of AP holders.



I know. But thanks for the giggle.

And if anybody even considers booking a campsite to get access to those stalls, well, I'm just glad I was raised better than that .

 

[sheetz]

Apologies if this has already been asked/discussed, but I'm curious about the history of admission costs. When Disneyland opened, was there both an admission charge plus a charge for tickets? I know that, at some time, it changed to admission only. Was a reason given for that change? Was it due to guest demand or was it just because it was a better model for Disney? Just curious.

Yes, there was always an admission charge in addition to the cost of the A-E tickets. Or, at least you had to buy the attraction tickets to gain entrance to the parks. I'm not old enough to clearly remember the details, but I believe Disney was not the first theme park company to institute the changeover to admission only pricing.