Oh, I think you could have resisted the jab but you decided not to. I think that your decision to ridicule lodging decisions that do not mirror yours is disrespectful, and reduces what had been a thoughtful discussion to a "my ball is bigger than your ball" playground argument.
I get that you like onsite resorts. I do as well, but how can you or I or anyone else determine if this is the best decision for other families, and then dump it all in the "Frugal" pot? You cannot. I have a friend who can buy and sel; all of my worldly goods several time over, and she would no more stay in a WDW resort than she would perform her own root canal. Not her thing. Period. Disney found a way to capture guests lodging and meal money but their resorts and restaurants often leave families with more than 4 people compromising a lot in order to stay onsite. Let's face it, WDW are convenient, but for many families, those over 4 people in particular, they have nothing to offer that would in any way justify the cost.
If you want to add to the conversation, it is possible to point out the benefits of WDW onsite lodging without insulting those who do not agree with your choice. And when folks point out their own reasons, maybe take those reasons at face value.
I think that people felt the need to justify their decisions after a poster ridiculed their choices. There are many reasons why a family would choose to stay offsite, and as you said, value is a key factor. And value is not necessarily tied to money. And I do want to say that there have been times when those buses were a real problem, and we had to call a cab. But...........we had a time or two when calling was not an option, and getting back to the resort was a bear. You do not want to get stuck in FW.............just sayin'
At the end of the day there are pros and cons to both and for us not a single pro of staying on site made it worth it for us.
Maybe it depends on where you stay? Or maybe what your definition of "wait and wait and wait" with lots of ellipses is? My last two trips I've stayed at POP, and I rarely recall waiting more than 10 minutes for a bus. And I can guarantee that I got to the parks faster than someone staying off site and waiting for a shuttle - most of which only run on scheduled intervals or might only drop off at the TTC. And yes, offsite, most people probably have a car, but that's either a rental ($20+ per day plus gas) or it's your own, which means you drove to Orlando (something I can do, too, but it would take me 3 days).
You can hail a cab if you're onsite, too. You can rent a car or drive your own if you're onsite, too. Being able to call cabs or drive yourself is not a "benefit" or advantage of being offsite.
Drinks?
And I love EMH, getting to mill around the parks a couple extra hours at night, which is my favorite time. Epcot until 11, MK until 11 or 12 during the slow season when the parks would normally close around 9 is a wonderful benefit for me. Even if there are lots of people and still some long lines, I love being able to spend more time walking around at night - it lets me hit the attractions harder during the day, knowing I'll have those extra two hours to soak up the evening atmosphere at the EMH park that night.
But all of that aside, I stay onsite mostly for one reason, and that's because I feel like staying onsite is an extension of the parks. I might only get to go to WDW once every 3 or 4 years. I wouldn't dream of spending that time anywhere but in the heart of the magic. I feel so much more special at a WDW resort than I do in any hotel I've ever been in, and I've been in a couple really expensive hotels that were nice, but still didn't give me the feeling I get at a Disney Value resort.
Seriously, now? I've seen the Universal resorts. They're nice. They're also not nicer than the WDW deluxes.
The 2 queen bed rooms at the Portofino Bay (see pic below) are barely = WDW moderates. FQ's or POR's rooms are nicer. And it certainly does't compare to Poly, AKL, WL, GF...
I just now priced some rooms: Compare a $282/night Portofino Bay room to a $232/night room at POR, for the same dates in October:
Portofino Bay Garden View ($282 inc tax)
Port Orleans Riverside Royal Guest Room ($232 inc tax - A river view room is $265 inc tax)
Here's a great video overview of the Royal Guest Rooms: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7sFvDptu-s
Nicer than a WDW Deluxe? Seriously? Yes, Universal has their deluxe suites and whatnot that are better than the $280 rooms at Portofino - and some of them are upwards of $1,000. Is that really a better deal than WDW's Deluxes?
Look, I understand why people stay offsite. For many, it's simply a much better value. I consider it an incredibly smart decision if cost is a concern, because spending less money on your hotel means being able to stay longer and see more during your vacation. And for some, they're not fans of the theming of the value resorts. I totally understand it. But you don't need to justify staying offsite by exaggerating the bus wait times, implying that EMH has no value, or that Universal's onsites are some great bargain or nicer than WDW.
).
I guess I just leave the parks at the right time or something. Admittedly I rarely leave the parks when the mob is headed out after fireworks/Illuminations/Fantasmic, so maybe I've avoided some of the worst issues.
I've checked everything and the lowest price I can find is around $250/night for Portofino. AP discounts aren't an option since it's basically 2 days max at Universal+IOA; I can only visit Orlando once every few years at best. If I were ever to pay $250-$300 and up for a hotel room in Orlando, it's going to be near parks that I spend extended time at.
Apparently the furnishings and color schemes changed during a refurb (not sure when that was). The pic I posted seems to be pre-refurb. Here's a current pic https://www.universalorlando.com/Images/PBH_Dbl_Queen_big_horz_tcm13-33671.jpg
Beautifully stated.
The great thing for me is that the value resorts aren't expensive enough to make me feel like I'm overpaying - but there's a huge key here in my case: I'm only traveling with 1 other person this Sept/Oct; it's just me and my GF. And I'm getting the free QS dining, which for me, is absolutely huge. I can easily spend $25 for food and drink just for myself ($25 = 2 quick service meals and 2 drinks... I don't see how I could possibly spend less than that during a full day at the parks). Between the 2 of us, that's $50/day. I'm paying $127/night for the room. If I didn't get free dining, I'd probably find a way to skimp and save on food (I'm honestly a cheapskate most of the time), but even so, $127 a night is pretty good considering it includes 4 quick service meals and 2 snacks per day between the two of us. This way, I don't need to try and pinch pennies for our QS meals.
If I was staying offsite, I'm not sure I could even find a monetary advantage when considering the food situation... $127/night at POP, minus $50 per day in food, drink, and snack brings my POP room-only cost down to $77/night including tax. That's only a bit more than a decent offsite. And if I stay offsite, I'd absolutely have to have a rental car. That's another $20 per day, give or take, plus gas money. So that takes me down to $57 that POP costing me per night when subtracting the food and car rental... Not to mention the MYW package I booked includes 2 tickets to DisneyQuest, 2 rounds of minigolf, a few other misc discounts, refillable POP mugs, and EMH. (If I get really lucky, I'll have one of those dangerous refrigerators in my room and that will knock off another $15/night. That would basically bring my POP room-only price down to $42/night!)
But again, that's for 2 people! It's far more reasonable that way. If you're talking about a family of 5 or 6, these numbers go disastrously out the window. Room costs would suddenly escalate into dangerous territory because the values aren't an option (unless you want two rooms). And it's not just the room itself, but offsite you might have a chance to cook some of your own meals and eat at cheaper offsite restaurants. Cost is a very appropriate, rational thing to consider when talking about onsite/offsite.
The point is that everyone should do what's best for them, when considering ALL of the pros and cons. If money were no object, I'd love to stay at a Disney Deluxe. I can't remotely afford it - or more precisely, I'd have to cut my stay down to less than half of what it's going to be. I haven't been to WDW since 2008, so cutting my trip that short is out of the question. I'll take 14 nights at POP.
All told, with 2 cross-country flights, my room at POP with free dining, and 10 day hoppers, I'm down for $3,200 ($228 per day, including air, food, and tickets). That's basically all inclusive for my entire trip, aside from incidental costs, tips, and any out of pocket food and souvenirs (I won't be spending very much on all that - I told you I can be cheap
Could I bring that number down by staying offsite? I honestly don't know. After paying for gas, food, and rental car, I'm not sure I could - at least not by more than a couple hundred bucks total over 14 days. Personal emotion is what makes staying onsite the clear-cut choice for me, but in my particular case, even the finances don't work in favor of staying offsite.
So anyway, sorry for the lengthy post. Whether you're staying offsite or onsite, just make the most of it! If you love Disney, your trip will be 95% in the eye of the beholder. Go in with a good attitude and you'll come out with a great vacation.
I said in the post before that it was Pop Century. I wasn't giving the $ value to compare it to a deluxe resort, rather just to point out that it was affordable enough for me to stay for 14 nights.
