Just need to vent a bit...

[minnie61650]

For those of you that do not understand fire codes. Normally during a fire evacuation, small children (like under 3) will be carried by their parents away from the fire scene. Thereby not needing to be counted in the space required to evacuate the building and get to safety. However, you get too many of these occupants and suddenly there is no one to carry them to safety. Thus the allowance for one child under the age of three.

The square footage of the room is not part of the calculation, only the width of the doors and exit corridors. So the larger villa size at OKW does not contribute to the calculation of the exit capacity. Only the doorways, stairways and exterior corridors.

I hope you never are occupants of a hotel that is on fire. I hope you all exit safely if you are. It's kind of scary to be awakened at 3AM by the fire alarm going off in the hotel with pounding on your door telling you to get out of the hotel immediately. That has happened to us.

Quite scary.
That has happened to me in the past twice. Once at Niagra Falls and once in Las Vegas.

Some may think fire codes are just a ploy used by hotels so they can rent out more rooms but the codes are very real. Disney also limits the number of disabled who are allowed on Spaceship Earth. We enter thru the exit and have to wait sometimes About 30-40 minutes when the line outside is a walkon for able bodied people.
Fire Codes are there for our safety!

Anne,

I agree with your more kids equals more costs but not your "apart from vacation". Saying a family having a third child will suddenly spend less on vacation than say a family with two children is not logical. If you choose to stay in a regular Disney hotel room, the average vacation cost per person does seem to decrease when you consider 1 to 4 members of the family because the hotel accomodation is a fixed cost and you are spreading out a fixed cost over more family members, but adding another person (over 2) causes that hotel cost to go up with either the addition of another room or the possible upgrade to a larger room to accomodate 5. The OP just wants more lower cost options for families of 5. It is a valid request and Disney appears to be addressing it by adding the Value Suites.

Dawna

The new suites will meet the fire codes.

Well, I'm getting out of this thread, as it has gone unbelievably off-topic from the OP's premise. I just want to reiterate that I agree with the OP: it would be nice to see more options for groups of more than 4. The value suites will help a little, and I hope they're like the suites in CBR, which sound nice. But I'd just like to see more of them. Yes, Disney apparently has not seen a bottom-line need to build them until recently, but they ARE building them now, so apparently their bottom-line needs have been adjusted a little bit to reflect the OP's desire. Note to OP, however: be careful when you vent in the future. A vent is fine. But be sure not to indicate you will be doing something against the rules as a support for your argument.

No sweeping generalizations from me = the same amount of disposable income as I had before I wrote this post = no "straw man" economics arguments that could be refuted by any freshman student of MicroEcon 101 = I'm out of this thread.

Yes, It did get way off topic.

These so-called "economics" are laughable. You don't know what the average income of Disney vacationers is, so you're randoming assigning a number that suits your argument. And you're assuming, for what reason I don't know, that they all have the same income and thus can be evenly compared.

And to take it one step further, you've cooked up a bogus statistic that says the more children a family has the lower their income is and thus the less disposable income they have.



Riiiiiiight.

We have 4 children. My husband owns his own multimillion dollar company so we also have lots of dispoible income.
Each family's situation is unique.

To the OP - I agree.

I do wish the other mods had the option of POR. Even if they did not want to ADD more rooms for a family of 5, I wish that they would "take" the option for 5 at POR and move them around equally to the other mods. Instead of having lets say 80 rooms for 5 at POR, that it would split the 80 rooms up between ALL the mods. Does that make sense???

I guess I can grumble about it. But when it comes down to it, we WILL stay onsite. So they are not losing my business. I guess that is what it comes down to. Although I do not like the choices, I go and stay anyway...wish I did not like WDW as much as I do!!!

And everyone...we all have our opinions. I do not believe there is a right or wrong. Just an opinion.... We can agree to disagree!!!

Disney does offer the junior sites at CSR.
AS for the CBR maybe they can't offer rooms for 5 because of the fire codes.

 

[KimberlyC]

Oh yes, very interesting. More than one brave soul who chose to respond to this thread as the first one out of the box.

Before anyone accuses anyone else (either rightly or wrongly) of creating a screen name to post, please leave room for the possibility that its controversial topics like this one that get some people heated up enough to make the effort to write his/her first post.

I have no opinion one way or the other because I haven't personally looked into accomodations for 5 +, but lets face it, this thread is like a car wreck on the side of the road that everyone must stop and look at.

So if a lurker feels compelled to post for the first time (and in the absence of proof to the contrary, this should be the assumption) I don't think accusations are the nicest way to welcome him/her. I received a very nice welcome to the DISboard and just think others deserve the same regardless of the topic.

 

[Lewisc]

I'd think a lot of families like the second bathroom that you get with connecting rooms.

I know a lot of posters in this thread are speculating about income levels and how much larger famlies spend on vacation. I'll speculate most of the famlies who are looking for a room that will accomodate 5 or 6 as an alternative to paying for two rooms are probably on a budget and might not be spending as much $$$ on food and souvenirs.

Disney is experimenting with value suites. The question is are guests expecting the extra room for free or are they willing to pay for what they ask for. If enough guests pay Disney will either convert more rooms or build part or all of POP as suites.

Suite hotels such as Embassy Suites and Doubletree are popular. Having value suites makes sense if guests are willing to pay.

 

[snowy76]

Then why do'nt thye ahve rooms that only sleep three at a lower cost? Or two? or songles? Do you see where this is leading?

The room we had on our honeymoon held four people, but there were only two of us. Where's my 50% off?

What Anne has said about larger families spending less on vacation -- I, for one, took this to mean PER PERSON. Yes, certain costs automatically increase. Having one kid, or two, or three, means thinking through spending more carefully than you did before you had a child! IMO, I think most larger families have to take extra measures to be frugal out of necessity -- in the end they may end up spending a dollar amount similar to a smaller family, but less per person.

Dh and I know many people who just increase their spending with each child. We have two kids now with a third on the way... and we're not planning on increasing our vacation or Christmas budgets exponentially to match the number of kids we have. In other words, the pie is about the same size; the pieces are getting smaller. That is the choice we are making to have another child.

Say I used to spend $200 on each of my two children for souvies, etc. Total of $400. Now I have three kids. Does that automatically mean I am going to spend $600 on those souvies? I may choose to still spend $400, so each child now gets $133. I think it's a great lesson in budgeting for my older ones and they're quickly understanding that the more mouths there are to feed, the less impulsive spending can be.

These are all generalizations though, and each family is different. Plus, this all assumes we're talking about people who are relatively good with money. I'm sure there are plenty of families of ALL sizes who are breaking the bank on vacation -- not because of family size but because of spending habits. Just look at the families Oprah had on last week. I would KILL for the incomes they had -- but I don't envy them at all for being in debt like they are!

 

[tinkerdorabelle]

My husband and I always wonder how people do it, how they bring more than 2 children to Disney. You really do get very little breaks and they certainly make up the money on these families. The only thing we would ever do if bringing more than 2 kids or would be able to do, would be to rent a vacation home. And honestly, they're reallllly nice. I recommend Winsor Palms, 5 minutes to Disney and the prices are less than most average hotels a night. We went with a large group of our family and had a 6 bedroom home which cost us $1400 for the week, 3 families chipped in and that came to $466 for the week, and we were never crowded, had 14 total in the home, that was a couple yrs back. I'm now seeing some of these homes going for less even. And certainly a family of 5 could get a 2 or 3 bedroom (most have sleeper sofas) which are MUUUCH less. They should at least offer roll away cots for these families in the resorts. I couldn't imagine having to purchase two rooms let alone 1 with the costs.

 

[twinmomplus2new]

I hesitated to respond to this but here goes. We are a family of 5. One adult and 4 children. I am really curious as to how Disney is responsible for my choice of life syle. there are many options open to me as a family of 5. Adn I can choose to exercise any of them I wish.

One deluxe room, at Yacht, Beach, Boardwalk, AKL, Floridian,Poly, CR.

Or POR with a trundle, ( I haven't taken this option yet.)

or DVC, I do own DVC and stay Monday thru Friday at my home resort. Generally I go with a deluxe for my 2 weekend nights. This past summer I did 2 connecting rooms at All star movies. With an AP rate is was very cheap. Maybe $135 for BOTH. Well under the cost of one room at a deluxe. So basicly pay the extra for the deluxe or do the two rooms at a value. Where is the problem in this equation? looks to me like that gives you 4 choices. 5 if you stay offsite where there are abundant options for larger families.

The one thing I totally disagree with is the whole discretionary income arguement. This family for one... Did not divide what has been spent with the addition of children, specifically my twins, when they came along. I doubled my expenses going from 2 kids to 4 kids, The first 2 kids did not have to divide what has traditionaly been spent on them. I simply added to my total exspenditures. say Christmas was $300, that meant another $600 not dividing the original $600. Same with Travel I have added to my expense. And I honestly do not see why anyone should subsidize my life choices. I am blessed to be able to pay it I guess? If I couldn't I would be in 2 rooms at the values and that would be the end of it.

 

[maxiesmom]

The fact of the matter is that Disney does offer options for families of 5 or more. They are just not cheap options. So what most posters are looking for is a cheap option for parties of 5 or more. Is that likely? Nope. And as far as the roll-away beds go, I can see it now. I can request a roll-away and say it is for little Timmy who won't sleep with his brother. Then I can cram Aunt Hilda in the room too. Haven't we all read posts where people brag about putting more people in their room than is allowed? Disney isn't stupid. Why encourage bad behavior?

Oh, and I deal with the over 5 people problem all the time. My sister has 3 kids and her wonderful husband lets me go along on vacation with them too. So this fall we have 2 rooms booked at Disney. It is expensive, but I don't feel I am owed anything cheaper. However, we are still debating saving money and staying off-site.

 

[ChrisnSteph]

Last year we had even looked into the Disney cruise and, lo and behol, it came to over $11,000 for a 7 night cruise because we HAD to get the 'family cabin' on the verandah deck.

Speaking from experience, you don't HAVE to get the family cabin on the verandah deck to accomadate your family of five. You can always do what we are doing - book two adjoining rooms (yes they're guaranteed!). We are a family of five, and this is what we are doing for our March 3, 2007 cruise. The rooms are Cat 9, deck 2, with a porthole. This cruise will cost us $5612, not including airfare which will likely run about another $200 per person. $11,000 for a cruise is insane!

 

[snowy76]

This family for one... Did not divide what has been spent with the addition of children, specifically my twins, when they came along. I doubled my expenses going from 2 kids to 4 kids, The first 2 kids did not have to divide what has traditionaly been spent on them. I simply added to my total exspenditures. say Christmas was $300, that meant another $600 not dividing the original $600. Same with Travel I have added to my expense. And I honestly do not see why anyone should subsidize my life choices. I am blessed to be able to pay it I guess? If I couldn't I would be in 2 rooms at the values and that would be the end of it.

Although your family has a different approach than mine, I don't think either is right or wrong, just different. So if anyone took offense, I apologize!

I shared my family's approach because I saw some posters who seemed in complete disbelief that any family would spend less as it grew. My argument is that there must be SOME. We are going to at least TRY. In fact, we have very little choice but to try. Neither DH nor I will get a raise this year.

We were blessed to take our two oldest to WDW two years in a row. For now, having a baby means NO Disney trips. We will wait until we have the means to do it the way we want to do it, even if that's years away.

Now I think I'll head off to pay my bills and leave the discussion to the rest of you fine folks!

 

[rt2dz]

I have to disagree here. My sister and I have different lifestyles, incomes and families. She wanted one and only one child as she felt she would not be able to financially provide all she wanted to if she had more kids. I am expecting #3 and likely still have more disposable income than she does (we don't exactly sit down and compare tax returns or anything) I know that my third child was a choice. We would not have chosen to have this child if we were not able to raise all three without feeling a pinch. This is just our situation and I know not everyone's but we do have disposable income and we will buy souvenirs for all 3 kids, eat at the nicer restaurants and stay at the nicer hotels if we are able.

However, I am with the OP and others who say we should not be penalized for having a family of five. Paying for 2 rooms is essentially paying for accomodations for 8 when we only need room for 5! I know there are options but what if I don't want the theming of POR? Or a cabin that costs as much as 2 rooms! Asking for one more resort that offers accomodations for 5 is not unreasonable. And as far as the suites in Pop or the all stars go, someone stated that they think they will be priced at around 200% of the cost of one room. Again that is paying for 8 when you are sleeping up to 6. This doesn't seem like a great solution to me!

I haven't finished reading the thread yet, but I could have written this so far. I think some of the "reasoning" is just ignorance about having more than 2 children. Especially since the trend is moving to an average of 3 kids. You still run across many, many families of 4, but younger families our becoming families of 5.