FW vs. WL

poohmom3

Earning My Ears
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Messages
49
We have the Dream maker pkg. for May 29 - June 6, 2004 at FW cabins. I'm hoping to apply the code that comes out Tuesday to our reservation, but then I started thinking, hmmmm, maybe I should check and see if we could get a room at WL with the code for the same price (or less) than we are already paying for FW cabin. This will be our 2nd trip and last time we stayed at ASMusic, so an upgrade to WL would be fun, but then again having the full kitchen and more room in the cabin would be nice too. There are 4 of us going - me 40, DD 18, DS 16 & 14. For you experts out there, should I just stick with FW cabins with whatever ever discount I can get applied and save some money OR should I take the plunge and see if I can get WL for the same price I am now paying for FW? :crazy: Ugg, I hate these tough decisions!
 
Id be surprised if you could get the same rate but heck go for it - it wont hurt to ask
 
Tough call!

We've stayed at WL and loved it! We don't mind not having a kitchen as we always eat out. You still could do b/fast in your room at WL. There are plenty of toasters at RF so you could toast your own bread or bagels. I guess it just depends on how much you plan on cooking as to whether or not a kitchen is needed.

Which ever one you stay at, you can easily visit the other as there is a boat that connects them.

Maybe split your stay?

Good luck! I'm sure you'll have fun where ever you stay!
 
Although I love WL. I think the extra space with all those adults will make it best to stay FW.
 



Disney Vacation Planning. Free. Done for You.
Our Authorized Disney Vacation Planners are here to provide personalized, expert advice, answer every question, and uncover the best discounts. Let Dreams Unlimited Travel take care of all the details, so you can sit back, relax, and enjoy a stress-free vacation.
Start Your Disney Vacation
Disney EarMarked Producer






DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter

Add as a preferred source on Google

Back
Top Bottom