have you done both on and off site?

[Tiger Fan]

We have stayed on and off site and actually usally do both on each of our vacations. We are lucky in that we can travel most of the summer. We have more time than money in that sense. What we like to do is stay a few nights on site (we've stayed at value, moderate and deluxe and loved them all), then we can get a trade through our timeshare company for 7 nights - during that week we take advantage of laundry and a little more relaxation, then we end with another couple of nights back on site before heading home. Now for our vacations that were not in the summer, some have been totally onsite and some totally offsite, both have their advantages/ disadvantages. When onsite we do love the totally Disney feel and the ease of getting to and from some resorts and parks. I use an ECV so we always take this into consideration as well. If we only stayed onsite, we'd go less often and not be able to stay as long. On the flip side, when we stay offsite we are always in a 2-3 bedroom unit with a washer and dryer and can frequently invite friends or family to join us for parts of this stay. If money were not an object at all I would most likely stay at deluxe resorts, but I still would miss the extreme amount of space you have in those 2 bedroom condos. We have annual passes so it's no big deal or uncommon for us to sleep in and head off to a park for just the evening. The couple of times we've flown down, we did stay only onsite and appreciated the transportation, all though when it comes to the buses and the hassle of getting my chair onboard (and the nasty looks I get from those waiting) we find we prefer to just use our van. When we can stay at the Boardwalk/Yacht & Beach, Wilderness or Swan/Dolphin then we love the boats, and likewise the monorail at the Poly, Grand Flo and Contemporary. Sorry this got so long, but wanted you to hear as many sides as possible.
Lisa
Tiger Fan

 

[HappyLawyer]

All i can say is Magic is what you make of it, after the parks, the hotel is just that, each one has different ammenities it is just a matter wants, i stayed onsite and loved it, but i love offsite and i will always go that route, no one or nothing can ruin a vacation -not if you don't let it or them

have fun all

 

[MouseLover]

We have stayed at the Polynesian (loved it & a great rate) and several off-site places.

Buena Vista Suites was very close to the parks, had roomy suites, full buffet breakfast, etc. Rate was $102/nt. (3/01)

Country Inn @ Calypso Cay was just a few minutes drive too. They also have roomy suites. We stayed in a standard room for part of the stay and a kidsuite for part of the stay. (asked to be moved when a group of loud college kids came in). This place had a great kids pool, nice continental breakfast, free cookies & popcorn, free minigolf, children's small playground. We paid $44/nt with Entertainment discount (3/04). (I'm not sure they still offer the Ent. rate.)

Both BVS & CI offered several daily shuttles to/from the parks. We used our rental car though.

My parents have stayed at the All-Star Sports and said it had small rooms but was just fine, and they didn't have to rent a car. They used the MEARS shuttle from the airport and Disney buses.

If money was no object, I'd stay at a deluxe resort every time. I would love to stay at the GF or Beach club. BUT money is an object. I would rather stay off-site, nearby, and spend my money elsewhere. We always spend part of our "down day" visiting resorts anyway. Last trip we checked out AKL, CBR, YC, BC.

We truly enjoyed our stays at the off-site places mentioned, especially the Country Inn. I will call them first next trip to check for res. I do miss the Mickey wake-up call though..........

 

[bdb7607]

We visited for the first time as a family (the 5 of us), my parents, my brother & his fiancee in late '03 and stayed offsite in (2) 2 bedroom condos via Skyauction for $460 total for the week (Orange Lake Country Club).

After deciding we're heading back this fall, with the same crew (10 people in total) and diving through these boards. I felt compelled to try and swing an on-site package for all, even with the major cost, because I kept hearing over and over again, "it's just not the same", "no magic to offsite", etc, etc.

I just read through this thread and felt I got slapped back to reality and remembered our '03 vacation which was perfect, because of the space, the pools, the "magic" of being together. So we're now renting a 5 bedroom house for less than $1,000. Unbelievable....

By the way, I still don't understand the comment of how having little kids it would be better to stay on site? Our kids are 6,5,& 4 - we would have to go to bed at the same time they did in a "hotel room", no thanks. Give me space to relax...

 

[Gillian]

I think when people say with little kids it's better to stay onsite they mean because you can go back and rest in the afternoon. But it's not so hard to do when staying offsite. It can be easier, depending on where you stay.

Except for MK and the trams, driving is easier than the busses. With only 2 adults to handle the kids, the strollers and the backpack, it can be a challenge to get on a bus!

 

[Mom of Sleepy Bashful and BabyDoc]

Mom of Sleepy....

We'll be staying at the SHERATON VISTANA in May. (First time back since 1972!!)
We'll be eating in a few nights. Do you recall whether there were any outdoor grills on the grounds? Or maybe each unit would have to provide it (or not)?

Hi there. Sorry ....I've been away so I didn't get a chance to check the boards.

You know, I don't remember there being any but I never was looking for one either. Sorry.........is there anyone that can help JeanneBab??

 

[Tiger Fan]

I agree that most mean staying onsite with little kids is easier because of naps, but also know that soemtimes that does not mean easier always. One of the best things we had the option of when we were the entire family (11 total) when onsite was the option of some leaving when others wanted to stay, that was nice not having to worry about who was getting where and when. However having so much space with all 11 of us we loved the huge 2 bedroom condo we had (we had 2 condos, so a total of 4 bedrooms, in addition to full kitchens and large dens and screen porches). This allowed us all so much privacy and space for each family that onsite just wouldn't justify the one or two times we needed to split up the 2 vehicles. It only took a little bit of effort to work out how and who would go when and where Have fun whatever you decide.
Lisa
Tiger Fan

 

[my3princes]

I am so glad that I started this thread. Financially it makes sense for us to stay off site this trip, but I was having a hard time convincing myself of this. Cramming the 5 of us (youngest is 2) into a value just seemed like it would be too tight so a suite is what we have been looking into. I hadn't even considered a rental home. What rental companies to you use and what rates have you gotten. We really won't be at the hotel/home much so I am still leaning toward Buena Vista Suites, but I will check out CI and rental homes.

Thanks for posting. I look forward to more opinions and info.

Deb

 

[Toni300z]

wow, U guys are awesome! I love this thread , I love the people here and I love the responses! I learn each time I open a new thread such as these! I am new to the Board and fairly new to Disney! My 1st trip was last August and we stayed at this Timeshare Place called Wyndham Palms Resort! Absolutely beautiful and gorgeous! I apid 425 for 7 nights! Hated the sales spill tho! We also stayed at a Condo @ Windsor Palms, and a hotel room at Double Tree Club Hotel on Apoka Vineland . DT Hotels rooms were actually HUGE compared to a standard room. I could just imagine Disney!

The 2nd trip was in Feb 2005. We stayed in a Vacation Pool Home 5/ bed 4 Bath, Heated Pool and the works! Nice! 495 for the week plus 70 in taxes and 15 a night for Pool heat (which was well worth it) Loved every minute of it! Would never do another hotel again in Disney! Its a home away from home, plus U HAVE your own Pool with no one HOGGIN the pool. Its a beautiful thing. You go spend about $50 to $75 on food to fix during the week and you are good to go!

I never stayed On site at WDW, but reading the last cpl weeks on here, has made me want to try it, because of the EXTRA MAGIC HOUR! but I hear they are soo small. I do not know. I would have to go alone and check it out before I bring the kids and experience a possible CRAMMED room.

Thanks for reading! Sorry so wrong!

 

[Mainebound]

By the way, I still don't understand the comment of how having little kids it would be better to stay on site? Our kids are 6,5,& 4 - we would have to go to bed at the same time they did in a "hotel room", no thanks. Give me space to relax...

Having just returned form an offsite/onsite stay, as I posted above, I can definitely agree that the kids (DS5 and DS3) rested and slept MUCH better offsite than in a WDW resort hotel. They get up at different times -- in a house they didn't wake each other up. Big brother could sleep while baby got his breakfast and watched TV in another part of the house.

And when we returned at night, the kids instinctively knew the active part of the day was over, and they got into sweats/pjs and vegged out (playstation, Nick Jr. on broadband, tv), maybe after a swim and hot tub. They-- and WE-- felt RESTED the next morning. However, at WL, with the noise outside, they were constantly trying to escape the room. And once, when we retuirned to WL at 9:30 at night (after Illuminations), so many kids were running around in the lobby that they refused to go to sleep. Why should they, when all these other kids were runninga nd screaming in the lobby and pool? So, I guess I agree there is "magic" at the resorts, but we learned that we don't want any "magic" before 8:00 am and after about 8:00 pm at night, thank you.

And it was so much easier getting them to bed because they had separate rooms like at home and Mommy and Daddy took turns reading to them like at home every night.

As for the afternoon break, I TOTALLY agree that unless you are (1) returning to an MK hotel after a morning at MK, or (2) an Epcot hotel after a morning at Epcot, taking your car to a villa on 192 was faster and less stressful. Oh, and it is much easier to get the kids to settle in and behave on the ride when they are in their carseats, as opposed to a bus or monorail.

This year we did not take afternoon breaks on several days and it was great. I think the kids had more energy because they slept well at night.

I am still glad we were able to stay onsite for a few days, because it is exciting to stay at a resort, with the pool and all the activities, but if I HAD to choose one, next time, I would stay offsite. For us, it is not even an issue of money because we can and have afforded a long onsite stay the last two years in deluxe WDW hotels. I do not begrudge spending the money on our one big trip a year, and WDW hotels are really excellent for the most part, but if I don't come home relaxed, then it is not worth it. And since we travel with my mother, a two bedroom DVC villa is just not going to cut it.

Have a great trip!

 

[disneysteve]

By the way, I still don't understand the comment of how having little kids it would be better to stay on site? Our kids are 6,5,& 4 - we would have to go to bed at the same time they did in a "hotel room", no thanks. Give me space to relax...

I couldn't agree more. It amazes me how anyone finds putting 4 or 5 people in a small hotel room to be a more enjoyable experience than spreading out in a multi-room suite, condo or house.

One thing that I rarely hear anyone mention is safety. Folks who would never think of driving without their kids in seat belts and car seats happily crowd on to a Disney bus with no restraints at all. Over the years, I've seen many kids get injured when a bus stopped suddenly or made a sharp turn. I'd much rather have my kid belted into my own (or a rental) car.

And getting to and from our offsite accomodations is quick, easy and convenient.

 

[Pooh Girl 71]

We've done both. The magic is in you. It has nothing to do with the hotel room. I don't get that logic at all.

We can get RCI bonus vacations for our exchange rate ($149 for the entire week). We usually do that. We have stayed on-site but only if we get a really good AP code. We usually tack a day or two onto the vacation to do that.

Now, if DH goes, we definately stay off-site. I love my family but we don't stay cramped in one room at home, why would be do that on vacation?

Plus, I like to go to Disney a lot. I'd rather stay off-site and go many times than stay on-site and go once.

 

[Aimeedyan]

Count me into the "magic is what you make it" crowd -

We have done both, and now that I have family there, I often stay with her - doesn't make my trip to the World any less magical, just because I stay with my mom to sleep at night. Last trip, we stayed on and off site at both Disney and Universal - didn't make a difference at all! Matter of fact, we really really really didn't like Pop at all, and slept MUCH better at the other hotels. We won't do value again, I know that for sure. We liked renting the vacation home, as well - having a full kitchen, several tv's, private pool, etc. WONDERFUL! And so inexpensive!

Even when we stay on property, we rarely take the buses - they take forever!! Now if I was staying on a monorail or boat, that would be different. We always drive our car to the parks. We also attempt to avoid the food courts, as they are overpriced and the food is mediocre at best. I'd rather drive through ChickFilA for breakfast =)

Either way doesn't matter to me, as long as I'm there and I get a good night's sleep!

 

[Dallas_Lady]

You know, I truly think the difference in opinion on this topic boils down to this... what type of Disney/Orlando vacationer are you?

Are you die-hard Disney, must do every ride/attractuon during your trip and will only go to Disneyworld while in Orlando? Do you believe that "time is money" and would rather have convenience over comfort? If so, then onsite is probably for you.

Will you probably see other Orlando sites as well? Do you think that having comforble (even luxurious) accomodations is just as important as the activities you do while on vacation? Do you want to get the most for your money while on vacation? Then offsite is probably for you.

We've done onsite, and I loved it. But, we are looking into a condo or vacation home for our next trip.

 

[UKDEB]

We find there are advantages to both, so we usually try to do both! The first couple of times we visited Orlando we stayed in offsite hotels. We booked packages from the UK (because we didn't know any better - it was before the advent of the internet) and never imagined we could afford to stay onsite. As our girls got older and we found that we didn't particularly relish the thought of spending 2 or 3 weeks with them in one hotel room (we get more vacation time than you guys, so tend to visit for longer), we progressed to villas.

We still dreamed of staying onsite and so, in 2000, we spent a night at the Beach Club. One night wasn't enough to really feel part of it all - you check in at 3pm one day and out at 11am the next - so these days we usually do 2 or 3 nights. Sometimes WDW, sometimes US, and occasionally both.

I love Disney, Universal and the whole Orlando area. If I was just visiting for a week, I could be persuaded to stay onsite at WDW for the entire duration, but I wouldn't want to restrict myself to just Disney for any longer than that. I think I would still want a car - couldn't go a week without a shopping trip!

For me, the benefits of staying in a villa are space, privacy, our own pool, ability to do a daily wash, not having to eat out at every meal and cost:quality ratio (in April/May we will be staying in a brand new, ex-show model, 6 bedroom villa furnished to a higher standard than any onsite hotel I've stayed at including the BoardWalk Grand Villa, Grand Floridian and Portofino Bay, for £650/week (around $1200) including pool heat and taxes). We usually stay near the Splendid China area of the 192 which is as close to the parks as many of the onsite hotels. There is nothing I look forward to more than relaxing in the jacuzzi with a glass of wine. I even love the experience of grocery shopping in the US just because it's a bit different!

Having said that, we also love doing the hotel thing. There is a lot to be said for being able to stroll down to the bar for a drink and then on to dinner. And you don't need to think about driving or taxis. For me, this gives the BoardWalk and Yacht & Beach Club the edge at WDW. We stayed at AKL when it was brand new and it is a fabulous hotel, but there is no real benefit to staying there. I'd rather stay at the Ritz-Carlton which is a million times superior to any onsite hotel. The monorail resorts are good, too, but there's nothing quite like being able to take a leisurely stroll back to your resort after an evening at Epcot. The same can be said about the Universal Resorts and staying onsite there really does enhance the whole experience. Staying onsite also gives our daughters much more freedom to do as they please. The downside is that we need 2 rooms (they're now 20 & 17) which gets expensive, but we wouldn't want to stay onsite for the entire trip in any event.

We try to have our onsite fix mid-trip. We can then just pack an overnight bag and leave everything else at the villa. It does mean that we're paying for accommodation we're not using, but it somehow isn't the same when we've stayed onsite at the end of a trip. Once you pack up to leave the villa and move onsite, it somehow brings the end of the vacation closer.

 

[cyansmom]

Aloha!

Our one and only trip to WDW in Nov 2004 was for two weeks and we did stay on and off property (in DD). I really enjoyed staying at OKW (1 week). It was really beautiful and I loved the jacuzzi tub! However it was really expensive. We also splurged and stayed at the AKL concierge for 3 nights to end our stay. In between we stayed at the Best western (DD) and the Doubletree suites. They were both fine and worked for us. I think next time I would stay at a vacation home/condo. I like the idea of not being immersed in Disney or Universal 24/7. I would also like to end my vacation at AKL. It just seems so serene and peaceful.

In short, I'd stay on and off property again!

cyansmom

 

[SammieG]

after two weeks at Dixie Landings (as was) before we had kids.. with the limited tv that disney have.. i was going to scream if I heard on the TV again..

"Have a Zipideedoodah day!"

That made me realise, that however much I adore Disney.. you can have too much of it.

I like the sanity that being off site for two - three weeks gives me..
more space, more facilities etc.

having said that.. if we could afford to spend time at one of the two bed villas then I would love to do that.. but we are never gonna afford that!

 

[HappyLawyer]

hey, guys i did a poll for onsite and offsite on the polls board go and vote for on or off please, i thought it would be very interesting
thanks

 

[newholidayx2]

we spent part of our 96 trip off-site, part on-site - that was our last off-site
now we consider staying at Pop our equivalence of off-site