Is staying on site really worth it?

[DrTomorrow]

It is to us - that's why we bought into DVC!

As others have pointed out, the real question is "Is it of value to YOU?" In our case (40-something empty-nesters) we enjoy being in the middle of the magic 24/7; staying off-site - even if in a nice condo - would feel like we were only staying in a nice condo . But on-site, we're already there.

But it a very personal choice. We go Las Vegas 2-4 times a year (living in Phoenix, we drive) and we try to stay cheap - we don't understand paying $200+ per night for Caesars when the good old Imperial Palace is right across the street. However, we still prefer to stay on the Strip - there's something about walking out of your hotel and 'being right there' that's so much more vacation-y than a 10-15 minute drive....

IMHO - YMMV

 

[Cinderella94]

Yes, DEFINITLY stay in site. I stayed at the Pop Century Resort the last 2 times we were there and absolutely loved it!

 

[3DisneyBuggs]

I never stayed onsite. I can say that we stay at a Marriott timesshare, drive 18 hours and still have a wonderfully magical vacation. I would love to stay onsite but right now it's not worth it to me to plunk down that much money to stay onsite. I would only stay deluxe so maybe in a few years I'll change my mind.

 

[dvcgirl]

If money isn't an object, stay on-site deluxe, because there is a difference IMO. They have prime locations in most cases (AKL isn't a great spot, but it is a neat resort), and so it's easy to get to at least two of the parks while staying at a deluxe. I think that "The Magic Factor" goes down a fair amount once you get into the Moderate resorts and tenfold when you get into the Value resorts. They are not nearly as convenient. Yes, you'll be driving back and forth from the Sheraton each day (which is *very* close BTW), but if you're at one of the Moderates or Value resorts you'll spend a great deal of time on WDW buses. Not all that magical if you ask me. Even staying at VWL a couple of years ago, it would take us 40 minutes in one direction from VWL to AK with all the stops that our bus made. It takes us less time then that now and we live 15 miles from Disney property!

And as for the EMH perk, well, depending on the time of year you visit, it's not always a great perk. The EMH evenings are very often packed and you'd be better off hitting the park that had the EMH evening the previous night. The deal you have for Sheraton is great. Their pool has a real resort feel to it. They have music some evenings and a restaurant by the pool. I'd go off-site and see how you like it. If you enjoy it....think of all the money you'll save in the future!

 

[DVCajun]

It is to us - that's why we bought into DVC!

Ditto!

I agree that where you stay can make a big difference. I don't know if I'd want to stay at a resort where busses were my only travel option every trip (note, I didn't say "never," just not all the time).

While I'm there I completely forget the real world, and that includes cars, traffic and parking spots.

 

[WIcruizer]

I still don't get why the mods and value resorts are considered to have "magic" while, as an example, the Sheraton Vistana Resort or Wyndham Palms does not. I mean it's a hotel...all are very close to the theme parks. We decided to try the All Stars a few years ago, and ended up checking out after two days. We found nothing magical about packing 4 people into an All Star room. We got into a Summerfield Suites I think it's Homewood now) about 3 minutes from DTD. Closer than the All Stars. Same price s the All Stars, only we had a massive 2 bedroom suite. Free breakfast buffet. Free transportation to the parks. (though we didn't use it.) Very nice pool area. Now THAT'S Magic. I've said on the board before, WDW needs a moderate suite-type property.

 

[Disneynutbsv]

Well, I'm used to staying at a Timeshare, usually a 2 bedroom, 2 bath and I finally stayed at All Star Movies. I loved it! It was so nice, everything being so close, the perks of emh, the shopping and having it shipped to the hotel for pick up the next day. I'll never go down again and not stay on site. And even though it was a value, we were surrounded by disney icons, it was fabulous!

 

[dvcgirl]

I still don't get why the mods and value resorts are considered to have "magic" while, as an example, the Sheraton Vistana Resort or Wyndham Palms does not. I mean it's a hotel...all are very close to the theme parks. We decided to try the All Stars a few years ago, and ended up checking out after two days. We found nothing magical about packing 4 people into an All Star room. We got into a Summerfield Suites I think it's Homewood now) about 3 minutes from DTD. Closer than the All Stars. Same price s the All Stars, only we had a massive 2 bedroom suite. Free breakfast buffet. Free transportation to the parks. (though we didn't use it.) Very nice pool area. Now THAT'S Magic. I've said on the board before, WDW needs a moderate suite-type property.

I totally agree with you on the value resorts. For the price, you can get a really nice suite off-site and spend less time in your car than the All-Star gang will spend on the buses. The Mickey Soaps and EMH aren't worth it...

I think that spending $150+ for a Moderate where you enter your room from the outside is not a great value.

I do like many of the Deluxes though. Some of them are very nice hotels and while they are pricey and not the best value, if you afford it, it's the most magical experience, primarily because it's the most convenient.

 

[lfama]

Personally, for me and my family, I say yes. Staying offsite has it's major set backs, such as not having the bus service between parks. That alone is reason enough for me to stay onsite. Also, the added perks such as using your key as a charge card + park hopper (so you don't have to carry around a million different cards), and, of course, EMH! You are also that much closer to the parks, which means you can wake up later (if you like to do things early) etc., and you don't need to rent a car if you are only going to be visiting Disney.

We stayed offsite one trip, and it was very difficult for us because we all wanted to do different things, but couldn't because getting around was difficult with only a rental car. We ended up taking a cab a few times!

 

[disneysteve]

Ah ha! I think I see a trend here. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that the people who have stayed off-site at just a "regular" hotel (i.e. a comfort Inn, or the like) don't seem that thrilled and now prefer to stay on-site only.
But the others who have stayed off-site at more of a resort type place with the 2-3 bedrooms, 5 pools, full kitchen, etc are saying that it's just as good if not better. Right?

I think this is essentially true, though not 100% (nothing's ever easy, is it?).

When it was just DW and I, we stayed in regular rooms offsite strictly for the cost savings and we were perfectly happy. We would not have been any happier onsite. And we did stay onsite a couple of times and found it was no better for us.

Once DD came along, there was no question at all. We don't sleep with our daughter at home and don't want to sleep with her on vacation either. So offsite is much better for us.

 

[Luigi's Girl]

Reading this thread of pros and cons of on-site and off-site sure makes me extra glad I joined DVC!

 

[goofie4goofy]

I find it is not only worth staying on site but also to be at a monorail hotel. It saves sooooo much time. No waiting for busses (excpet for MGM) which has never been long anyway..I don't think the busses "share".

With not having to rent a car and saving time = less money spent, since you don't have to stay as long...that means more trips per year to WDW


Honelsty, I do find WDW monorail resort prices to be on the high side, but there is a lot of value for your money..just my humble opinion. However, we do not have children...which makes a huge difference $$ wise...so for us based on 2 adults, I can say it is worth it.

 

[DOOM1001]

We live in S.Fla and go often and yes I would love to stay at the Wilderness lodge on every visit but that would be pretty pricey.We hit other parks besides Disney, Universal, Sea World, Busch Gardens and drive up so we have a car to get around. People who fly in to just do Disney would definitely be better off staying at a Disney resort to get the total Disney experience.But I usually hit Orbitz, travelocity and coupon books for rooms in the Lake Buena Vista and International Drive areas, there's plenty of nice hotels there, they just don't have the Disney Magic.

 

[simzac]

All I know is that if you told my family that they could go to WDW, but have to stay off site, they would all say, no thanks, we will always stay on site or not go. Simple as that.

 

[Disney Doll]

It's a matter of perspective. Our perspective is yes, it is worth it to stay on site. We usually stay in at least a moderate, we also own DVC. That may make a difference.

 

[disneyholic family]

like with everything in life, it depends on the person...
i'm willing to spend $1,000/night for a hotel (at WDW or anywhere else)...and i often have....and if i have, that must mean it's worth it....for me.....

but i would never ever spend a lot of money on designer clothes just to get the name of the designer....but i know other people would....and that's fine....it's worth it for them....but not for me....

everyone chooses what's right for them....that's the beauty of having choices....

 

[Harley-Mouse]

The only way to go it took me some 15 trips to try it out. But I said we will never stay off site again and now we belong to BCV Disney Vacation club.

 

[diznee25]

I've done both, stayed off-site and on-site. After having experienced the great benefits of staying at a DisneyWorld resort, I'll never stay off-site again. I'm just a hop away from the parks, I can go back to my resort mid-day without wasting a lot of travel time, and all those impulse buys can be sent to my resort without me lifting a finger! (sigh) Wish I was there now!

Diznee25

 

[Skroops]

I prefer onsite. I have stayed both on and off property. IF you wouldn't be able to afford the on- property hotels, then I would definately chose off property rather than not go. If you have more kids, one room can be a challenge, and there are a lot more hotel choices reasonably priced off site. It isn't the same vacation, but not bad by any means. It could also be more relaxing for a large family to look into renting a house. Many off site hotels have WDW transportation too.
Many choices, either way you can't go wrong. Don't break the bank for your vacation. There is always next year, or a couple of years from now.
Enjoy!

 

[MrsPete]

I just read a post about someone who spent $370 for one night at a Disney resort! I've only stayed onsite once at ASMu and to be honest wasn't that impressed. Granted it's only a value resort and not the Grand Floridian but with so many other hotels in the area at a better price is it really worth it

You're asking about the top of the line and the bottom of the barrel. Try a mid-point hotel, and you'll find good value with lots of benefits.

We love onsite because of the free and easy transportation. The family doesn't have to stay together all the time, and we love avoiding long walks from the parking lot and getting into hot cars. The other huge benefit is early entry and late evenings, which are only open to onsite guests.