Non-resort guests can not reserve FP+ early

[blessedby3]

And in return Disney doesn't plan its resorts around your family size, and other large families. Not trying to be rude but i just don't get why you think a large company like Disney would want to make that much of a global impact when the US family norm is still 4 people. Yes, in your world maybe large families are the norm but its not typically and Disney has to market and please the families that they can accommodate.

Like I said…all other hotels can come up with a reasonably priced room for my family. I think Disney should be able to also. Disney COULD accommodate families of 5 or 6 at a reasonable rate…just like Comfort Inn, Red Roof Inn, Holiday Inn…etc. They do offer options, just not affordable ones.
Not to be rude either, but I think that you stating people should plan their family size around what rooms they can get at a WDW resort is just silly.

 

[momof2n2]

Some of the larger villas can accommodate up to 12.

At 3-4x the cost of a house, tho.
I'm not one of the off-site guests saying on-site shouldn't have perks. Ugh - you absolutely should get something for paying those prices &/or staying in a hotel atmosphere & having to share a pool & dealing with XY or Z.

I just don't like the pretty regularly shared sentiment (not you personally AmyB) that off-sites are tight-wads.

Every time I plan a trip to WDW I look into it. I wonder, "Might it work for us?" I think DDP could be fun. I'd never do WDW transportation, but EMH might be nice to try. But every time I look into it, it quickly become unappealing.

If WDW means for FP+ to be on site only perk, (or AP, too) fine. Just get on with it already and play all the cards. I'm not the only person out here stumbling in planning, I'm sure.

 

[Queen2PrincessG]

.

You can't make a blanket statement that Disney wanted to make vacations less stressful. It simply wasn't their stated purpose of FP+. It does sound a lot nicer than Disney wants to lock people into their parks before they leave home though, doesn't it?

Youre not locked. We park hopped all days except our Magic Kingdom days. Did we get FP for the second park, no. Did we survive and have fun, yes. I waited 10 minutes to ride Soarin. No FP. its doable.

Yes, it would be nice if onsite guest received maybe 8 options that could be spread over all 4 parks. I can see that happening once the system has been out for a little longer. Again, Disney isn't strong arming people to stay in one park. It is your choice if you do so.

 

[mom2rtk]

This reminds me of the times I've tried to find a hotel on certain websites and received the message, "Please reduce the number of children."

I don't plan my family size around my WDW accommodations…thats just a crazy statement.

I have to say it surprises me how much judgment there is out there on family size.

 

[morethananyonex]

Youre not locked. We park hopped all days except our Magic Kingdom days. Did we get FP for the second park, no. Did we survive and have fun, yes. I waited 10 minutes to ride Soarin. No FP. its doable. Yes, it would be nice if onsite guest received maybe 8 options that could be spread over all 4 parks. I can see that happening once the system has been out for a little longer. Again, Disney isn't strong arming people to stay in one park. It is your choice if you do so.

You're totally missing the point of what I'm saying. Disney execs have stated the purpose of FP+ is to lock guests into Disney parks before they arrive so they are less tempted by offsite activities, spending more time and money at Disney. The purpose was never to make vacations less stressful as you stated, that's just your opinion and how it works out for your family. You can feel however you want about the system, but that doesn't change what it's purpose is.

 

[Queen2PrincessG]

Not to be rude either, but I think that you stating people should plan their family size around what rooms they can get at a WDW resort is just silly.

I never said that, what I did say is that you have to think things through, bigger family means a bigger car correct? Bigger family means a bigger house than normal right? Bigger family means more food, laundry, social obligations etc. Why wouldn't it also mean bigger, possibly more complicated travel expenses? This could be Disney or anywhere else. I never said plan your family around WDW rooms. I did say not being able to always be accommodated is part of that big family choice. Disney just doesn't do cheap big family accommodations. Maybe because it affects transportation, maybe because its more expensive for them to build. I have no clue. They just don't for some reason.

 

[KatieCharlotte]

And in return Disney doesn't plan its resorts around your family size, and other large families. Not trying to be rude but i just don't get why you think a large company like Disney would want to make that much of a global impact when the US family norm is still 4 people. Yes, in your world maybe large families are the norm but its not typically and Disney has to market and please the families that they can accommodate.

I totally get the Type A planner. I don't see how planning your rides now is causing more stress, the underlying truth is that people are scared they are going to have a bad time or make a bad choice and they have been saving all this money and devoted all this time into a "perfect' trip.

I totally understand that Disney isn't going to build budget rooms to accommodate my friends with more than four children. However, budget hotel rooms for five or six people are available all over the country, and even Universal Studios resorts allow five in their standard rooms. Great Wolf Lodge waterpark resorts offer many different options for families of five and six. It's a choice Disney makes when they build their resorts, which does have an impact on families trying to decide where to stay.

Booking FP+ is stressing me out a little because (1) I don't know if my kids will want to ride a mountain (last time they were excited to and then didn't feel their bodies could handle it...this time they say probably not); (2) I don't know what impact FP+ plus spring break will have on the lines for our favorite rides like Haunted Mansion; (3) Since we only get three fastpasses, I have to make them count; (4) No one knows what kind of same-day availability there will be at that point, so I can't count on making last-minute changes.

But, at least I am onsite and know I won't have to book my fastpasses after many thousands of other people. And, our day at MK is a bonus tacked on before our cruise and our first visit to Islands of Adventure. I can't be in Florida and not go to MK.

 

[practicallyperfect77]

At 3-4x the cost of a house, tho.
I'm not one of the off-site guests saying on-site shouldn't have perks. Ugh - you absolutely should get something for paying those prices &/or staying in a hotel atmosphere & having to share a pool & dealing with XY or Z.

I just don't like the pretty regularly shared sentiment (not you personally AmyB) that off-sites are tight-wads.

Every time I plan a trip to WDW I look into it. I wonder, "Might it work for us?" I think DDP could be fun. I'd never do WDW transportation, but EMH might be nice to try. But every time I look into it, it quickly become unappealing.

If WDW means for FP+ to be on site only perk, (or AP, too) fine. Just get on with it already and play all the cards. I'm not the only person out here stumbling in planning, I'm sure.

Just wanted you to know you're not alone! I'm trying to figure out my next trip with my sisters family. There will be 3 adults and 3 kids. I would like to go late Oct which means the good ADRs will need to be booked here in a few months. I have priced off site and it'll be at least $700 cheaper than 2 rooms at Pop (cheaper than AoA) and obviously tons more room
Since I'm paying for the whole trip including flights and meals $700 makes a difference. But I won't stay off site if we can't prebook FP+. It's a once in a lifetime trip and I'm not taking the chance of no TSMM FP+ being available and having to ride standby and waiting for an hour. I'm not so confident of the ability to get everyone up, dressed, fed and at the park at rope.drop. I'd love that to work but as my sis says getting her kids ready is lime herding turtles! =) Anyway, I'm holding off making any room reservations b/c the end product of FP+ is unknown!

 

[3happydancers]

Except FP+ only currently allows that for my family at one park. One. Out of 4. I'm supposed to be excited for that? A system that truly did allow us to take it slow but still reserve the rides we want would be awesome.

At Epcot, we cannot reserve both rides that would allow us to take it slow. At DHS we cannot reserve all 3 rides that would allow us to take it slow. At MK we can reserve 3 rides but there are many more we enjoy that still have considerable waits. All FP+ has done for us is schedule some of the FP- we would have pulled in advance. We still need to get to the parks when they open in order to enjoy all the attractions we like without a huge wait. Nothing has changed in that respect. If you want to minimize your waits you still can't have leisurely mornings, just like before.

It's funny that you mention the stress from planning, I have never felt stress planning a WDW vacation, until this trip. Trying to book appointment after appointment after appointment is much more planning intensive than it ever used to be. Then you add in the constant stalking of the WDW site waiting for certain FP+ to open up (parades, fireworks, BoG) not exactly stress free. For every person who feels FP+ has made their vacations easier, there's a person who feels the opposite as well.

You can't make a blanket statement that Disney wanted to make vacations less stressful. It simply wasn't their stated purpose of FP+. It does sound a lot nicer than Disney wants to lock people into their parks before they leave home though, doesn't it?

Exactly

 

[3happydancers]

At 3-4x the cost of a house, tho.
I'm not one of the off-site guests saying on-site shouldn't have perks. Ugh - you absolutely should get something for paying those prices &/or staying in a hotel atmosphere & having to share a pool & dealing with XY or Z.

I just don't like the pretty regularly shared sentiment (not you personally AmyB) that off-sites are tight-wads.

Every time I plan a trip to WDW I look into it. I wonder, "Might it work for us?" I think DDP could be fun. I'd never do WDW transportation, but EMH might be nice to try. But every time I look into it, it quickly become unappealing.

If WDW means for FP+ to be on site only perk, (or AP, too) fine. Just get on with it already and play all the cards. I'm not the only person out here stumbling in planning, I'm sure.

You definitely are not alone!!!

 

[AmyB2006]

Like I said…all other hotels can come up with a reasonably priced room for my family. I think Disney should be able to also. Disney COULD accommodate families of 5 or 6 at a reasonable rate…just like Comfort Inn, Red Roof Inn, Holiday Inn…etc. They do offer options, just not affordable ones.
Not to be rude either, but I think that you stating people should plan their family size around what rooms they can get at a WDW resort is just silly.

The problem is reasonable to you might not be reasonable to somebody else.

What would you consider reasonable?

 

[blessedby3]

I never said that, what I did say is that you have to think things through, bigger family means a bigger car correct? Bigger family means a bigger house than normal right? Bigger family means more food, laundry, social obligations etc. Why wouldn't it also mean bigger, possibly more complicated travel expenses? This could be Disney or anywhere else. I never said plan your family around WDW rooms. I did say not being able to always be accommodated is part of that big family choice. Disney just doesn't do cheap big family accommodations. Maybe because it affects transportation, maybe because its more expensive for them to build. I have no clue. They just don't for some reason.

Bigger car? Okay, but my 2005 minivan cost much less than lots of 4 or 5 seater vehicles. I have lots of options for reasonable cost vehicles and we never buy new.
More food? yes, but I can buy store brand and we spend less than loads of folks with a 4 person family.
Movies and Fun Stuff? We only rent red box (once in a blue moon we go to a theater) and we eat take out…not sit down around town.
I don't have larger travel expenses except for at WDW. Everywhere else I can get accommodations to fit our family at a reasonable cost.

I realize that a bigger family can cost more on some things (like Disney park tickets) and we budget for that. We can not always budget for Disney resorts as we are priced out of them at this point. We have stayed Deluxe (but only on a great code or discount). The great discounts are few and far between and so I feel we are priced of staying on property. If they offered a reasonable room for 6 (like TONS of other hotels and resorts) then we would and could stay on. Disney just chooses to offer nothing reasonable for a family with more than 3 kids. There is not an option for having a reasonably priced vacation like there is for day to day expenses like I described above.
Pop Century for 7 nights in June for 2 A 2 C, room only…$168.91/night
All Star Music for 7 nights in June for 2 A 4 C, room only….$360.80/night
$200 more per night adds up to $1400 more just for a room for a week. I think that is unreasonable…jmho.
Im done with this argument…moving on

I totally understand that Disney isn't going to build budget rooms to accommodate my friends with more than four children. However, budget hotel rooms for five or six people are available all over the country, and even Universal Studios resorts allow five in their standard rooms. Great Wolf Lodge waterpark resorts offer many different options for families of five and six. It's a choice Disney makes when they build their resorts, which does have an impact on families trying to decide where to stay.

THANK YOU

 

[blessedby3]

The problem is reasonable to you might not be reasonable to somebody else.

What would you consider reasonable?

See my post above. I don't think $1400 more for a room for a week is reasonable.

 

[morethananyonex]

The problem is reasonable to you might not be reasonable to somebody else. What would you consider reasonable?

I think the issue here is that none of Disney's prices are "reasonable" when you compare them to their real world counterparts when you're just considering the space you get. Value resorts are considerably more expensive than a room of that size elsewhere, moderates and deluxes too.

I don't know why people are always so surprised at the cost of suite type rooms in Disney. They are priced in line with the rest of their rooms. Expensive. When you're paying between $100-200 for a small room at a moderate resort, it only makes sense that suites that are bigger will be considerably more.

Sucks for the family who wants to stay onsite on a budget, but that's life. Don't forget, a childless couple still has to pay the same amount per room as a family of 4 with 2 kids, essentially paying more per person.

 

[AmyB2006]

At 3-4x the cost of a house, tho.
I'm not one of the off-site guests saying on-site shouldn't have perks. Ugh - you absolutely should get something for paying those prices &/or staying in a hotel atmosphere & having to share a pool & dealing with XY or Z.

I just don't like the pretty regularly shared sentiment (not you personally AmyB) that off-sites are tight-wads.

Every time I plan a trip to WDW I look into it. I wonder, "Might it work for us?" I think DDP could be fun. I'd never do WDW transportation, but EMH might be nice to try. But every time I look into it, it quickly become unappealing.

If WDW means for FP+ to be on site only perk, (or AP, too) fine. Just get on with it already and play all the cards. I'm not the only person out here stumbling in planning, I'm sure.

Absolutely not!! LOL Yes, I've never said that, so thanks for clarifying. We have friends that always stay off site and bring their dogs. They find a house to rent, a whole house, for cheaper than we pay to stay on site. And that's great for them, it works. I've never thought of them as "tight-wads", that's just silly.

I would just rather stay on site. That's my choice.

Everybody has choices, that's what this all comes down to. There will be certain "perks" whether they are perceived as that or not LOL, that are offered. I don't think off-site guests can complain about any perks that are offered to on-site guests because they are choosing to stay off site. The "perk" in staying off site is larger/nicer accommodations at a cheaper rate.

As a person who stays on site, I'm not asking for more perks either. But if they offer them, I will take them.

 

[Queen2PrincessG]

i can't be in florida and not go to mk.

agree!

 

[AmyB2006]

I think the issue here is that none of Disney's prices are "reasonable" when you compare them to their real world counterparts when you're just considering the space you get. Value resorts are considerably more expensive than a room of that size elsewhere, moderates and deluxes too.

I don't know why people are always so surprised at the cost of suite type rooms in Disney. They are priced in line with the rest of their rooms. Expensive. When you're paying between $100-200 for a small room at a moderate resort, it only makes sense that suites that are bigger will be considerably more.

Sucks for the family who wants to stay onsite on a budget, but that's life. Don't forget, a childless couple still has to pay the same amount per room as a family of 4 with 2 kids, essentially paying more per person.

Agreed. Disney prices aren't reasonable when compared to the real world. Which makes it even that much harder to come up with what someone thinks is reasonable for their family of 5 or more.

So true. Even a single staying in a room by themselves, they're paying the same rate the family of 4 is. It's a simple concept, you need more space, you have to pay more.

 

[FlipHipster]

Since I'm paying for the whole trip including flights and meals $700 makes a difference. But I won't stay off site if we can't prebook FP+.

I'm still convinced that pre-booking will be an onsite perk. The comcast thread, throwaway room threads and all the park attendance posts just convince me even more. Disney is well aware of the fact that people are planning trips to Orlando vs. trips to WDW. Disney is still the big draw and the parks will still have good attendance but I bet they are concerned about resort occupancy. With all the offsite options and US building even more, it gets harder to justify paying the onsite resort premiums if you aren't going to be at WDW parks the entire trip.
We just spent 10 days in a studio at VWL. It was awesome but I couldn't help thinking that we could have booked a 1bdr at BC and still saved around $1k. We like staying at park resorts for the location but if I am spending 1/2 my trip offsite then the premium doesn't make as much sense. Why pay extra for Disney perks that I am not using? I would rather stay at US for my US days and enjoy their perks and then move to WL or YC for our WDW days. This I think is Disney's big challenge going forward.

 

[mom2mickeyfan]

In this time of more and more blended families being formed, which generally mean more children, it seems odd that Disney doesn't offer anything more affordable for bigger families.

I have no idea if pre-booking will be offered to off site guest. In other posts I've made I pointed out some very good reasons why it would benefit Disney to do so. Disney knows there are many of their daily guest that can't and/or won't stay onsite. They need and want their money too.

I still think it is funny that people think all those smart people that work for Disney were sitting around trying to figure out a way to get all those onsite guest locked into their parks. 95% of those guest are already locked in. Disney stated in their press releases the main goal of this system is to lock guest into their parks before they leave home. Totally locking pre-booking for off site guest doesn't locking them into ANYTHING. And leaves those guest open to all the cool brochures lined up in their off site resort/hotel lobby. Something else they have stated they want to prevent. When you check into your Disney resort, do you have a rack full of brochures showing you all the other things offered around the Orlando area??

 

[FlipHipster]

I have no idea if pre-booking will be offered to off site guest. In other posts I've made I pointed out some very good reasons why it would benefit Disney to do so. Disney knows there are many of their daily guest that can't and/or won't stay onsite. They need and want their money too.

True, but they are still have tickets and they will still come to the parks. I don't think Disney believes they will get everyone coming to Orlando to stay in a Disney resort, but they want to be the first choice obviously. People that stay onsite will continue to stay onsite. Some guests that usually stay offsite will probably move onsite to get the perks. Some will continue to stay offsite and work with it the best they can and some will get frustrated and quit coming. As long as they hit their numbers that's all that really matters.