More for Less: A Theme Park Planning Strategy

[SmithSmith]

Hmmm...Trip Advisor-CSR 3 1/2 stars 185 out of 327, Rosen 4 1/2 stars- 25 out of 327 , Carib Royale 4 stars and 128 /327
Expedia-CSR-3 1/2 stars and 4.0/5 rating, Rosen 4 stars and 4.6/5, Carib Royale 4 stars and 4.4/5
Orbitz-CSR 4 stars and 3.9/5 rating, Rosen 4 stars and 4.6/5,Caribe Royale 4 stars and 4.2/5
Oyster-CSR 3 1/2 stars, Rosen 4, Caribe Royale 4

Now which one was the "offsite bare minimum hotel" ?
On not one site could I find where CSR was rated higher or even equivalent to RSC . They were closer to Caribe Royale but still lower overall. As I said earlier LT is being more than generous with his comparison.

I believe Fuzzy was referring to the unnamed condo for $35/night.

 

[WillAustin]

If that's what this thread is meant to demonstrate, then have the title be "A Strategy: Central Orlando Vacation Aimed at Giving as Little Money as Possible to Disney" instead of "More for Less".

Maybe "Getting an equivalent WDW experience while adding even more things while spending less than we did before." My family already knows we're getting less WDW rides in a summer day than we did before, so if we can add activities outside the park, maintain the new amount of WDW rationed rides that we'd get anyway, and still end up spending less money than we did our last trip, we come out ahead.

 

[DisneyKidds]

I believe Fuzzy was referring to the unnamed condo for $35/night.

Correct. I'd be a bit apprehensive about a condo that goes for $35 a night. I bet the owners are putting a whole lotta those ducats into maintenance and amenities.

Let's talk about ratings (this hotel is x stars, this hotel is y stars, this condo is z stars.) I'm not sure you can take anything away from that. Unless it's the same set of guests rating all three, it's apples and oranges, AGAIN. Those who rate the $35 condo a 3 might do so because it's wunderbar compared to the flea bag motel they previously stayed in for the same amount. Those who rate CSR a 3 might very well rate the $35 condo a 1. So you can't assume they are equal just because a number says so. That would be naive, and LT ain't naive .

But assume you take that leap, a 3 is a 3. Well what are they rating? The cleanliness? amount of space? Well, assuming that CSR and the $35 condo are the same in those regards, does that mean they should be the same price? I guess the theming and attention to details doesn't make a difference. I guess the free transportation doesn't make any difference. In real estate its location, location, location.....but I guess the proximity to WDW parks (for those that are interested in a WDW vacation, unlike LT) doesn't make a difference. I guess multiple pools and other amenities don't make any difference. I guess the cast members and customer service don't make a difference. No, none of it does, and Disney should provide the 3 star room, equivalent to LT's 3 star off-site condo, for $35!

Again, it's LT and crew taking things that can't possibly be related, and falsely relating them to try and prove some point. LT is smart enough to know that. Some eat it up, some have no patience for it.....

 

[Cormoran]

It's not the choices so much as the comparison, which has always been LT's goal. LT frequently uses unrealistic worst case scenarios when presenting the expensive Disney option, while presenting unrealistic/unreplicable best case options for his cheaper off-site option. Case in point, CSR. Yeah, yeah.....go on today and the discount rate is not available for the standard view. Aww...gotta use the $400 more expensive water view. How convenient. When he booked the condo he certainly could have gotten the discounted standard view at CSR (it was available last week, no), so why on earth use the more expensive rate for the comparison? Forget the possibility that he might not be able to replicate condo rate if he tried today. It's stuff like that that comes off as a little disingenuous. Too much to ask to have a reasonable, objective discussion about what is actually an interesting (albeit not for me) plan I guess. No, we have to make a point....

All I see is a bunch of accusations and there is an expectation that LT has to be accountable for his choices. Really? Why? Are you the one paying for his vacation? Is he stealing something from you? Again, if you don't like his comparators why don't you provide your own? Why don't you pick on and off site resorts and restaurants and provide a price comparison? Wouldn't this be a more productive method of proving your point?

 

[MrInfinity]

On not one site could I find where CSR was rated higher or even equivalent to RSC . They were closer to Caribe Royale but still lower overall. As I said earlier LT is being more than generous with his comparison.

Lake is not quoting Rosen in this. He has since said Rosen is not relevant once he pointed out it was nearly double the cost per day of a Disney Mod. Lake's current comparison is for a $240/wk ($35/day) 2 or 3 star hotel chosen by Orbitz which can be anywhere in Kissimmee. That's what he's suggesting as an alternative to a Disney Moderate like CSR, POR, or PFQ.

Also, you can make the title of the thread anything you want since you have a problem with the title of this one. I just don't understand why you keep demanding more information, as if LT is committing some type of criminal act. What are you trying to prove? Honestly, whatever it is, it's not working.

Why do you look at it as "demanding"? Lake posed a strategy. A strategy, which he said is a way to "do more" and "for less". Then he puts down some cool stuff. Like instead of staying onsite, why not rent a car, and go do other things like Universal and Cape Canaveral. Great -- A lot of ppl can benefit from this. So, Lake says just go get a car for $84, and you're all set. Errch... hang on, several people interrupt to ask how he got a car for $84, w the consensus that Orlando cars go for about $200. He doesn't answer. So folks prod. "If you are going to say this is a strategy and we should do it, how do we get that rate". Then he shows a snapshot and does not appreciate being challenged. It's not doubting him, Cormoran, but he's saying "go do this - it's a good idea" but not telling how to do it. How does one get a car for $84? I would find this info valuable!

Why not just answer... "ok, so you go to orbitz, and you punch in these dates, and this car, and this discount code, and you should get about $84". 20 min of trying later, no dice. $200. So I ask again... is this a generally repeatable rate, or something you got special for some reason?

Then we move on to saving money by staying in a condo instead. And, he says spend $102/nt in a condo. Ok great. How? Which do you recommend? He links to a site which directs folks to a selection of condos for $1000/week, and none in the $714/week he said is what we should book a condo for. It's not working for me - can you clarify? Again... screenshot. However, it's not a screenshot of reserving a condo, it's a screenshot of an Orbitz low-price option. So he's not staying in a condo? It's an Orbitz hotel?

Ok fine. I'll go check Orbitz, see if I can still do this. I come up, via Orbitz, a little higher -- but, in the ballpark. Why? What did you do? What did you click on? How did you get that car for $85 or that hotel for $240, and is that a comparison to a WDW resort that goes for $1050, or would the condo you spoke about earlier for $102/nt be more realistic for a family that might be considering changing from POR or POFQ to do this strategy?

These are not unreasonable questions, Cormoran, maybe they seem like nitpicking because he's suggesting a strategy that people are actually trying, but are not able to replicate. And the total trip is coming out to more than we paid before. I'm a road tripper at heart, so I'm right there with Lake in thinking of other exciting things to do -- but his premise was that by doing this you'll save money, and so far the ways he's saved money are by getting a car rental rate that I cannot seem to duplicate, and by staying in a rock bottom Orbitz hotel. Which yes, is a way to save money, but is not generally accepted on the Dis as being a Disney-Moderate alternative. Even WillAustin agrees, maybe the Hilton Grand, sure. But that is not $35/nt, it's $123/nt.

 

[WillAustin]

Personally, I'd probably pick something like a Hilton Grand Vacations Suite. Full Kitchen, and $123/night. Very nice rooms too. Trying to find the absolute cheapest way to do it wouldn't be fun for us.

 

[DisneyKidds]

Wouldn't this be a more productive method of proving your point?

I've got no point to prove, nor am I the one using marginally relevant, cherry picked, worst case scenarios to compare two vacations that can possibly be compared! I'm just trying to keep it real.

Lake's a smart business-like guy. Be it accounting, be it math....heck, even in science, if something is based on faulty assumptions and can't be replicated, well....it's pretty much useless. LT's trip plan is interesting, but many of his comparisons are based on faulty assumptions, and I doubt many (if any) will be able to replicate his results. You draw the conclusion....

 

[cakebaker]

I'm honestly wondering what more explanation you want? Rack rate wasn't use, and if there was no standard room option available to choose from, what should he have done instead?

Ignoring for the moment that there was a point in time he could've gotten a public discount and that he never even checked on the AP rate-

If you were planning a trip, with at least one of your primary goals being to save as much money as possible and the first resort you looked at had no availability with the current discount, what would you do? Say to heck with the plan and just book rack rate? No, you'd look at other resort options and find one that did.

He's paying rack rate for a good portion of his trip. His rack rate for CSR is $2 a night MORE than I'm paying for a deluxe resort with a pool view under the AP discount. It's beyond disingenuous to compare savings and use a rack rate resort in your comparison.

It's the claim of savings that I take issue with.

In regards to food, he wants to add in the cost of a non-discounted DDP and compare it to drinking coffee, water and snacking on pretzels and only eating 1 meal a day off site. When he gets questioned on it , his response is- he'll compare 3 meals on site to 3 meals off site- doesn't want to compare what he's actually purchasing off site with what he'd purchase on site. It's like pulling teeth to get him to do an even handed comparison.

And it's not like we don't know what an even handed comparison is going to end up looking like. Even if done in the most fair way possible, it's going to end up costing less to stay and eat off site. Everyone knows that, it's nothing new, it's always been that way. But that isn't enough- it has to look as lopsided as is humanly possible to do, so he pads one end, shaves off the other wherever he can.

And all this is done with 1 purpose as his end goal- To prove somehow that FP+ is a complete and utter failure and not only that, it has had the opposite intended effect.

 

[DisneyKidds]

While we are at it on his CSR numbers, we'll just gloss over the fact that he "inadvertently" presented the upgraded room rate as Standard View...

 

[SmithSmith]

Ignoring for the moment that there was a point in time he could've gotten a public discount and that he never even checked on the AP rate-

If you were planning a trip, with at least one of your primary goals being to save as much money as possible and the first resort you looked at had no availability with the current discount, what would you do? Say to heck with the plan and just book rack rate? No, you'd look at other resort options and find one that did.

He's paying rack rate for a good portion of his trip. His rack rate for CSR is $2 a night MORE than I'm paying for a deluxe resort with a pool view under the AP discount. It's beyond disingenuous to compare savings and use a rack rate resort in your comparison.

It's the claim of savings that I take issue with.

In regards to food, he wants to add in the cost of a non-discounted DDP and compare it to drinking coffee, water and snacking on pretzels and only eating 1 meal a day off site. When he gets questioned on it , his response is- he'll compare 3 meals on site to 3 meals off site- doesn't want to compare what he's actually purchasing off site with what he'd purchase on site. It's like pulling teeth to get him to do an even handed comparison.

And it's not like we don't know what an even handed comparison is going to end up looking like. Even if done in the most fair way possible, it's going to end up costing less to stay and eat off site. Everyone knows that, it's nothing new, it's always been that way. But that isn't enough- it has to look as lopsided as is humanly possible to do, so he pads one end, shaves off the other wherever he can.

And all this is done with 1 purpose as his end goal- To prove somehow that FP+ is a complete and utter failure and not only that, it has had the opposite intended effect.

Well said!

 

[DisneyKidds]

And all this is done with 1 purpose as his end goal- To prove somehow that FP+ is a complete and utter failure and not only that, it has had the opposite intended effect.

I don't care if you are in the posse or not, I can't fathom how some people can't see this!

 

[SmithSmith]

I don't care if you are in the posse or not, I can't fathom how some people can't see this!

I know!

 

[WillAustin]

And all this is done with 1 purpose as his end goal- To prove somehow that FP+ is a complete and utter failure and not only that, it has had the opposite intended effect.

In my opinion, it's now possible, due to ride rationing to get the same in-park results whether we stay on-site or off-site this summer. We can now add more outside activities and spend less than we did on previous trips, while still maximizing our WDW experience (i.e. # of rides with little waiting). That wasn't possible for us before.

As someone who has always spent 7K+ per trip in WDW, it's a big change, and it does show that FP+ has a negative effect on Disney from our family. And, it's only our point of view that really matters for us anyway.

I wonder if you guys argue loudly enough, you might get the thread closed.

 

[cakebaker]

All I see is a bunch of accusations and there is an expectation that LT has to be accountable for his choices. Really? Why?

Because he's the one putting out these numbers and claims. He should be able to prove them.

I don't care if you are in the posse or not, I can't fathom how some people can't see this!

They can.

 

[Angel Ariel]

Re: the rental car for under $100 not bring realistic - the podcast actually just spoke about that yesterday, and they specifically brought up that Orlando is a cheap rental car town, and that cars can consistently be found for under $100 (outside of the peak weeks like Christmas). The entire podcast team seemed to be in consensus on that point. So I would call into question that there's a "consensus" that renting a car is more like $200/night like is being suggested here.

 

[WillAustin]

Re: the rental car for under $100 not bring realistic - the podcast actually just spoke about that yesterday, and they specifically brought up that Orlando is a cheap rental car town, and that cars can consistently be found for under $100 (outside of the peak weeks like Christmas). The entire podcast team seemed to be in consensus on that point. So I would call into question that there's a "consensus" that renting a car is more like $200/night like is being suggested here.

I'm looking for our trip over the 4th of July and rates are around $35/day for a full-size, and that's without jumping through any hoops with specials or coupons.

 

[DisneyKidds]

In my opinion, it's now possible, due to ride rationing to get the same in-park results whether we stay on-site or off-site this summer. We can now add more outside activities and spend less than we did on previous trips, while still maximizing our WDW experience (i.e. # of rides with little waiting). That wasn't possible for us before.

As someone who has always spent 7K+ per trip in WDW, it's a big change, and it does show that FP+ has a negative effect on Disney from our family. And, it's only our point of view that really matters for us anyway.

Will...other than the fact that you want to discuss campaign strategy with LT, I don't know much about you. Sorry you had a bad experience with FP+. Agreed, attraction for attraction we do ride less under FP+ than we did under FP-. For us its only a couple attractions a day, repeat rides mostly. We take the good with the bad because we have found other MM+ benefits that outweigh the loss of two rides a day. However, I realize that isn't the case for others.

I am always interested in trying to understand how other people's experiences can be so different from what ours has been, and we went in the summer, too! (July).

Since you don't think on-site provides any leg up on seeing attractions I guess I'll assume you aren't morning EMH/rope drop people? I guess I'd also assume you don't close down the parks, but if you did wouldn't having to get back to your off-site hotel be a chore late?

I guess you aren't saying there is no benefit to on-site accomodations, but that the benefit isn't worth the cost because of the ride rationing, which it seems has significantly reduced the number of attractions you are able to experience in a day given whatever touring strategy you employ....It also gives you the opportunity to do other stuff that interests you. Fair enough.

 

[Cormoran]

Lake is not quoting Rosen in this. He has since said Rosen is not relevant once he pointed out it was nearly double the cost per day of a Disney Mod. Lake's current comparison is for a $240/wk ($35/day) 2 or 3 star hotel chosen by Orbitz which can be anywhere in Kissimmee. That's what he's suggesting as an alternative to a Disney Moderate like CSR, POR, or PFQ.



Why do you look at it as "demanding"? Lake posed a strategy. A strategy, which he said is a way to "do more" and "for less". Then he puts down some cool stuff. Like instead of staying onsite, why not rent a car, and go do other things like Universal and Cape Canaveral. Great -- A lot of ppl can benefit from this. So, Lake says just go get a car for $84, and you're all set. Errch... hang on, several people interrupt to ask how he got a car for $84, w the consensus that Orlando cars go for about $200. He doesn't answer. So folks prod. "If you are going to say this is a strategy and we should do it, how do we get that rate". Then he shows a snapshot and does not appreciate being challenged. It's not doubting him, Cormoran, but he's saying "go do this - it's a good idea" but not telling how to do it. How does one get a car for $84? I would find this info valuable!

Why not just answer... "ok, so you go to orbitz, and you punch in these dates, and this car, and this discount code, and you should get about $84". 20 min of trying later, no dice. $200. So I ask again... is this a generally repeatable rate, or something you got special for some reason?

Then we move on to saving money by staying in a condo instead. And, he says spend $102/nt in a condo. Ok great. How? Which do you recommend? He links to a site which directs folks to a selection of condos for $1000/week, and none in the $714/week he said is what we should book a condo for. It's not working for me - can you clarify? Again... screenshot. However, it's not a screenshot of reserving a condo, it's a screenshot of an Orbitz low-price option. So he's not staying in a condo? It's an Orbitz hotel?

Ok fine. I'll go check Orbitz, see if I can still do this. I come up, via Orbitz, a little higher -- but, in the ballpark. Why? What did you do? What did you click on? How did you get that car for $85 or that hotel for $240, and is that a comparison to a WDW resort that goes for $1050, or would the condo you spoke about earlier for $102/nt be more realistic for a family that might be considering changing from POR or POFQ to do this strategy?

These are not unreasonable questions, Cormoran, maybe they seem like nitpicking because he's suggesting a strategy that people are actually trying, but are not able to replicate. And the total trip is coming out to more than we paid before. I'm a road tripper at heart, so I'm right there with Lake in thinking of other exciting things to do -- but his premise was that by doing this you'll save money, and so far the ways he's saved money are by getting a car rental rate that I cannot seem to duplicate, and by staying in a rock bottom Orbitz hotel. Which yes, is a way to save money, but is not generally accepted on the Dis as being a Disney-Moderate alternative. Even WillAustin agrees, maybe the Hilton Grand, sure. But that is not $35/nt, it's $123/nt.

Because he's the one putting out these numbers and claims. He should be able to prove them.


They can.

OK I get it . Everyone who has a problem with the price quotes that LT has provided via screen shots is just too busy to provide their own price quotes. You all can find time to pick apart LT's prices and choices, but you're just too busy to take the time to find your own information.
Why should he be accountable to anyone for the choices he's made? Are you paying for his vacations?

 

[WillAustin]

I guess you aren't saying there is no benefit to on-site accomodations, but that the benefit isn't worth the cost because of the ride rationing, which it seems has significantly reduced the number of attractions you are able to experience in a day given whatever touring strategy you employ....It also gives you the opportunity to do other stuff that interests you. Fair enough.

The on-site benefits for us have somewhat diminished. I love the Disney bubble, but we've been to WDW 9 times in the past 5 years, so it's not necessarily as important as it once was. We are rope drop people some days and still will be. We went to Universal for the first time at the end of January and the kids did enjoy it. Exploring the other opportunities is probably the plan, especially if it costs us less.

I used to be staunch on-site only or we don't go.

Funny thing, at Universal we were walking around and my son said, "Hey, we just passed Murr from Impractical Jokers!" and the kids were able to get a picture with him. Fun if anyone here watches the show.

 

[wisblue]

While everyone is focusing on the cost side of this proposed agenda, there is a more fundamental part of it that I can't get past. Take a look at each day's itinerary from the standpoint of where it starts, where it ends, and what time you would have to get up in the morning and when you would get to bed each night, factoring in time for showering, dressing and other preparation and then transportation to and from each day's start and end points. Then think about how much time during each day is spent getting to and from the parked car and driving to meals and other stops.

Right off the bat, landing at MCO at 7:50 and getting to the gate at MK by 9:20 seems very ambitious to me considering that you have to pick up luggage, pick up a rental car, drive to a hotel, check in to the hotel, take luggage to room (I suppose you could do this later), drive to WDW and to the MK parking lot, then get to the TTC to get the monorail or boat to the park. Maybe this can all be done in an hour and a half, but a lot of those steps are out of your control and a significant delay in any one of them would throw the whole thing off. Maybe more importantly, though, even if it could be done, it seems like a lot of effort for 2 hours at MK and a return to the hotel by probably no earlier than 1AM.

As I look at these itineraries, they all seem to involve getting the family up by about 7 AM, or maybe 7:30 at the latest on most days to get ready and get to the car in time to get to the starting point and returning to the hotel by no earlier than 10 PM, and much later than that when the last event is something like a late MSEP or Illuminations. If I am only going to spend time at the hotel showering, prepping, and sleeping, how much does it matter how many stars the hotel has as long as it's in a safe neighborhood, the bed is comfortable, and the shower and sinks work? As with buying a house, it's location, location, location.

We've already covered the fact that an agenda like this makes no sense at all for the typical one week visitor for whom it makes no financial sense to get AP's for either WDW or US, much less both. But, even if I had AP's, I would choose to spend full days at WDW and full days at US instead of shuttling back and forth between the two of them. It may not be an issue for LT, but getting cars in and out of theme park parking lots and driving around a busy resort area like Orlando is not much fun to me. I put significant value on personal comfort and convenience, and I think even people on a tighter budget put some value on that. Otherwise you might as well stay at the Motel 6 on 192.

Obviously, if cost is a motivating force, staying offsite is less expensive than staying onsite. But, if you're only going to be at the hotel from 11 PM-8 AM (if that) every day, maybe the better comparison would start with a WDW value resort (with applicable discounts), even if you have to get two connecting rooms to accommodate the party. Then you can start comparing the costs and weighing that against the convenience of being closer to the WDW parks (even if you don't use WDW transportation).

Let me use Day 3 as an example, since that's the only full day that is devoted entirely to Disney. LT's plan involves starting the day at Epcot and ending it at DHS. That is the kind of thing we would often do. But, in the middle of the day, he goes back to the Epcot parking lot, drives out to a restaurant (which I think is on 192), eats lunch, and then drives back to the DHS parking lot. To me, this serves no purpose except to keep from spending money on Disney property. If we were on that general agenda, we would have our lunch at Epcot or at one of the many places to eat on the Boardwalk. We wouldn't spend that much because we are satisfied with things like a club sandwich from Norway or a ham and cheese croissant from France, a slice of pizza from the Boardwalk window, or, if we want to have a sit down lunch, the ESPN Club. When we want to go to DHS we can either enjoy the walk there, or take the boat.

I guess the bottom line is that this agenda may make sense for people who are making enough trips to Orlando in a year to justify the cost of APs for both WDW and US and who do not mind spending a significant part of every day (like 2 hours or more?) in their cars and getting to and from them. Otherwise, this whole thing is nothing more than the age old discussion about the benefits of staying onsite vs offsite with the added factor of seeing how little money we can spend on Disney property.