Off Site visit to Disney, why bother?

[roomthreeseventeen]

I wouldn't ever stay off-site, because I like to be on vacation when I'm on vacation. No driving, no parking, no hassles. But I don't care what anyone else does, especially when it gives me an advantage in terms of PF+ and park hours.

 

[PeterPanic]

I normally like to try and be diplomatic but when my intelligence is questioned because I stay off-site ALL the time, then I just must jump into this discussion.

I stay off-site for many reasons. A lot of it is cost. It's not because I can't afford staying on-site, it's that I have an aversion to throwing away money for a questionable value. I have an aversion to having to decide what I want to eat six months in advance. It is currently dinner time right now and I still haven't decided what I'm in the mood for and that's only minutes away. I have an aversion to being packed into a bus with 60 or so sweaty, smelly people who think that because they have a hang nail I should give up my seat even though my feet are on fire from the days activities.

If you want to stay on-site and pay 3 to 4 times more for your accommodations and meals by all means be my guest. So far there have been rumors that those that stay off-site will not be able to get fastpasses. That may be true, I, like everyone else, do not know that is the going to be how it ends up. To me I cannot see how Disney can ignore the thousands of people that don't stay on the grounds and expect to stay in business unless, of course, they get to double what on-site guests are paying to make up the difference. If on-site people are only allowed three (3) fastpasses a day and they are distributed over a number of attractions that NEVER NEEDED them in the past...I fail to see how that is going to use the good ones up completely without having a major impact on off-site people. If that does happen, surely they don't think that we will all just be forced to stay on-site do they. We will just go someplace else.

Driving...if you don't want too. Fine with me, but I always drive and to be honest, I'm from a very rural area and I have never seen traffic on Disney grounds anywhere near as heavy as at home.

If in order to have a good time it is necessary to sleep with a 5 foot mouse patrolling the hallways, who am it to judge you. But tell me that I cannot have a good time or that the hassles I have to deal with are any greater then yours, well that just is completely incorrect. You don't get into a park without paying for it, neither do I. That is where the fun is, not in the resorts. Every hotel off-site has a pool and a pool side bar, maid service, restaurants everywhere within walking distance for the most part and those that aren't do not require queuing up to catch a bus about an hour ahead of time, still waiting because it isn't a time reservation, it's just an as soon as we can get to you reservation, then again with the bus after. And for that you will pay $40.00 for a $15.00 steak or whatever. From the hotels on Route 192, I can be anywhere on site in less then 10 minutes, try that with your "convenient" bus.

I have stayed on-site once and found a few things not to my liking. First...the rooms are standard sized rooms that you find off-site for a quarter of the price. That is with the exception of the value resorts which are about the size of the closets in rooms off-site. The TV has very limited channels, mostly those affiliated with Disney in some way. The food in the food courts is awful and usually cold by the time you sit down not to mention so damned expensive it makes me quiver.

So I hope that you continue to feel that the only way to enjoy the place is by surrounding yourselves with plastic statues of Goofy or a Bowling Pin or a Yo-yo. Personally I will be relaxing in my hotel room while you are still waiting for a bus to get back to yours.

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

I have stayed on-site once and found a few things not to my liking. First...the rooms are standard sized rooms that you find off-site for a quarter of the price. That is with the exception of the value resorts which are about the size of the closets in rooms off-site. The TV has very limited channels, mostly those affiliated with Disney in some way. The food in the food courts is awful and usually cold by the time you sit down not to mention so damned expensive it makes me quiver.

So I hope that you continue to feel that the only way to enjoy the place is by surrounding yourselves with plastic statures of Goofy or a Bowling Pin or a Yo-yo. Personally I will be relaxing in my hotel room while you are still waiting for a bus to get back to yours.

I don't think there's a reason to be snippy. The Deluxe and Moderate resorts aren't bowling pin themed, most of them are gorgeous, and unless you are staying somewhere like Bonnet Creek, there is no way you are back at your resort before someone taking a monorail or bus. Sorry.

 

[Postal68]

So stay onsite in the Disney hotels, what's the problem? You get free transportation, just like all Disney Guests do, EMH, free parking if you drive, DME and no need to rent a car if you fly, and the opportunity to purchase Dining Plans, and FP+ Sounds like a WIN/WIN to me?!

Well, that ends all discussions.

Everyone knows what you say is the correct statement.

I think they should just change the board name to skriegerjr world, since you know all.

 

[MommaBerd]

So, I know I'm taking the bait here BUT we stay off-site because we have a family of six. That means the cost for us to go to Disney and stay on property would be, at best, twice the amount of a family of four or less. I'd MUCH prefer to go to WDW than not, and so that means we stay off-site.

Additionally, to stir the pot a little more, I have to say I don't think staying on-site is "all that." My DH and I did a trip together in May and we did a split-stay at CSR and CR. I was afraid that I might get "spoiled" and feel badly that we wouldn't be staying on property when we go back in November.

In fact, it was just the opposite. I was really, really disappointed in the room at CSR, especially for the price! I had such high hopes and expectations. I have stayed in significantly nicer places for the same amount or less. CR was, admittedly, much more wonderful but, by golly, it better have been!!! But again, did I feel that it was worth what we paid? Mmmmm...not really.

Maybe if we had had more time to enjoy just being at the resort, we'd feel differently, but we're in no rush to stay onsite at WDW anytime soon.

Am I worried about how FP+ will impact our ability to tour the Parks? Sure, I am. But, it's all about adjusting our expectations. I'm just happy that we can go in the off-season...for as long as that lasts!

 

[Sparkly]

I don't think there's a reason to be snippy. The Deluxe and Moderate resorts aren't bowling pin themed, most of them are gorgeous, and unless you are staying somewhere like Bonnet Creek, there is no way you are back at your resort before someone taking a monorail or bus. Sorry.

I beg to differ. Our offsite condo took all of about 10-15 minutes to get to. In a car not packed full of tired people. Don't try and tell me you seriously prefer packing into a bus then just getting into your own car and going straight back home. I just love it when people think it takes 30 minutes to get back to offsite.

 

[Postal68]

I wouldn't ever stay off-site, because I like to be on vacation when I'm on vacation. No driving, no parking, no hassles. But I don't care what anyone else does, especially when it gives me an advantage in terms of PF+ and park hours.

See, I don't consider crowded buses and slow transportation vacation. I find it is quicker and easier just to drive from my house/hotel to the Park, or from Park to Park.

15/20 years ago, I ABSOLUTELY LOVED Disney transportation then they started adding more and more resort hotels and then it became slow and overcrowded.

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

I beg to differ. Our offsite condo took all of about 10-15 minutes to get to. In a car not packed full of tired people. Don't try and tell me you seriously prefer packing into a bus then just getting into your own car and going straight back home. I just love it when people think it takes 30 minutes to get back to offsite.

As opposed to a 5-10 minute boat ride, 15 minutes is longer and much more of a hassle. Plus the walk to the parking lot, especially at EPCOT, could bring you close to a half hour.

 

[Sparkly]

As opposed to a 5-10 minute boat ride, 15 minutes is longer and much more of a hassle. Plus the walk to the parking lot, especially at EPCOT, could bring you close to a half hour.

Hardly. Most people staying onsite aren't at the deluxe resorts remember. I don't consider 15 minutes a slog.

30 minutes to walk to your car at EPCOT? REALLY? That's why they have trams! We've never been more then about 5 mins away from our car.

 

[Postal68]

I beg to differ. Our offsite condo took all of about 10-15 minutes to get to. In a car not packed full of tired people. Don't try and tell me you seriously prefer packing into a bus then just getting into your own car and going straight back home. I just love it when people think it takes 30 minutes to get back to offsite.

Depending on the lines at the monorail or ferry, I can get back to our house at Emerald Island or Wyndham in about 15/20 minutes. The only resorts that I would get back to quicker than that are the 3 monorail resorts.

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

Hardly. Most people staying onsite aren't at the deluxe resorts remember. I don't consider 15 minutes a slog.

30 minutes to walk to your car at EPCOT? REALLY? That's why they have trams! We've never been more then about 5 mins away from our car.

No, I meant 5-10 minute walk plus the car ride. Either way, yes, I would much rather be on an air conditioned bus than walking to a car and then sitting in traffic. But I also like staying on site and wouldn't stay off site for anything to begin with.

 

[Sparkly]

Depending on the lines at the monorail or ferry, I can get back to our house at Emerald Island or Wyndham in about 15/20 minutes. The only resorts that I would get back to quicker than that are the 3 monorail resorts.

Exactly!

 

[Postal68]

So, I know I'm taking the bait here BUT we stay off-site because we have a family of six. That means the cost for us to go to Disney and stay on property would be, at best, twice the amount of a family of four or less. I'd MUCH prefer to go to WDW than not, and so that means we stay off-site.

Additionally, to stir the pot a little more, I have to say I don't think staying on-site is "all that." My DH and I did a trip together in May and we did a split-stay at CSR and CR. I was afraid that I might get "spoiled" and feel badly that we wouldn't be staying on property when we go back in November.

In fact, it was just the opposite. I was really, really disappointed in the room at CSR, especially for the price! I had such high hopes and expectations. I have stayed in significantly nicer places for the same amount or less. CR was, admittedly, much more wonderful but, by golly, it better have been!!! But again, did I feel that it was worth what we paid? Mmmmm...not really.

Maybe if we had had more time to enjoy just being at the resort, we'd feel differently, but we're in no rush to stay onsite at WDW anytime soon.

Am I worried about how FP+ will impact our ability to tour the Parks? Sure, I am. But, it's all about adjusting our expectations. I'm just happy that we can go in the off-season...for as long as that lasts!

That's how I feel.

Unless you are are a DVC member or paying to stay in a couple bedroom booking at $1,000 a night, you get basically the same room at the All Star Resort that you get in the moderate and deluxe resorts. The only difference are the amenities at each particular resort.

90% of the rooms on Disney property are overpriced Holiday Inn comparable rooms.


Honestly, my favorite place to stay on property is at Fort Wilderness. I feel like I am at Disney in this resort more than any other.

 

[crazyventures]

As opposed to a 5-10 minute boat ride, 15 minutes is longer and much more of a hassle. Plus the walk to the parking lot, especially at EPCOT, could bring you close to a half hour.

You're right. 10 more minutes a day would positively ruin my vacation.

Though I could see how that could be a dealbreaker for some people. You've just got to weigh the costs/benefits like everything else. Not everyone is the same

 

[MommaBerd]

That's how I feel.

So as to be clear Postal68, your op seemed to be advocating for staying on Disney property - why would anyone stay off-site? But you, yourself, don't think it's worth it to stay on property? So, is your position that if you are going to WDW, you'd better stay on property, otherwise it's not worth it to go to WDW at all? (eg, all or nothing?)

Sent from my iPhone using DISBoards

 

[TreeSapp]

We just came back 2 weeks ago, it's a mess now. Very soon if you are unable to make your FP+ reservation online weeks before you go, you will be unable to get one. Technically, yes, offsite guest can use their park tickets at the kiosks to get a FP, realistically almost 95% of them will be gone before you even walk through the gate. And stand by lines will move at a crawl because the attractions will be busy being loaded with FP holders

Untrue.

Disney World parks see about 48million visitors per year. So an average of 130,000 per day. Even if every person did ONLY 3 attractions per day then just under 400,000 attraction-seats would be utilized.

If everyone of Disney's 25,000 resort rooms was booked to a family of 4 that's 100,000 resort guests. If they get 3 FP+ each that's 300,000 attraction-seats booked up.

This makes it seem like 300,000/400,000 or 75% are eaten up by resort guests... But lets be rational. How many resort guests go to the park every day of their stay, use exactly the 3 most popular rides, and choose to pre-select FP in advance? That means fewer that the 300,000 for sure.

Plus the very real fact that a guest who accomplishes only 3 attractions per day is the exception not the rule. So if resorts are completely booked, the. Resort guests are taking fewer that 300,000 seats from well over 1,000,000 attraction-seats. Or less than 30%

 

[skriegerjr]

So as to be clear Postal68, your op seemed to be advocating for staying on Disney property - why would anyone stay off-site? But you, yourself, don't think it's worth it to stay on property? So, is your position that if you are going to WDW, you'd better stay on property, otherwise it's not worth it to go to WDW at all? (eg, all or nothing?)

Sent from my iPhone using DISBoards

Maybe we should name this board Postal68, since your opinions are not only always right, and never wrong, but apparently you get to have opposing opinions advocating both sides of an argument. Why bother to go to Disney if you aren't staying on site/but then again, you would never ever stay on site. And anyone that disagrees with you is immediately deemed the most annoying person on the boards!

Sent from my rooted Samsung Galaxy SIII using the DISBoards app

 

[disnut8]

I'm the original poster and we ALWAYS stay offsite, every year, for the last 30 years(only 3 times on site). It's not comfortable or cost effective to stay in a Disney room. For 4 or 5 nights at the All Star resort I can get an entire house with it's own pool and a full kitchen.


We just came back 2 weeks ago, it's a mess now. Very soon if you are unable to make your FP+ reservation online weeks before you go, you will be unable to get one. Technically, yes, offsite guest can use their park tickets at the kiosks to get a FP, realistically almost 95% of them will be gone before you even walk through the gate. And stand by lines will move at a crawl because the attractions will be busy being loaded with FP holders

I think you might be missing something here. What you experienced is not a final product. I see "very soon" and a few "will be"s but nothing is the real deal as of today, or in your case, two weeks ago.

I have not tried out FastPass Plus or Magic Bands. I'm not even reading posts about them yet until Disney officially announces the final results and institutes their new system. I thought this post was about on-site versus off-site but it's another complaint about something that is probably going to change between now and Day One.

Now I'll post my thought. Does anyone really think Disney is going to screw over offsite guests so much that it's going to be that much of a nightmare for locals (who stay in their own homes), non-Disney timeshare owners, campers who can't get into Fort Wilderness, or people who want to stay at a non-Disney hotel, that all those people will stop going to Disney World? What business would ever do that?

 

[dayvewc]

I've always stayed off-site. Until next Wednesday, anyway

So, until next week, I don't have a comparison to make, other than having seen the resort rooms on the DVC tour. I will say that every trip, I've been in much larger rooms, all the off-site resorts I've stayed at had more amenities than I cared to try, and I have always spent more time waiting in line to get out of the parks than it took to drive back to my resort.

The biggest advantages I can see to staying on-site and using Disney transportation is 1) not having to try to remember where I left my car (but I have an app for that. ) 2) not having to pay for parking every day (but I have an AP for that ) and not having to worry about making a wrong turn leaving the parks (yeah, I got to know the parking lot at AK pretty well last year, kept taking the wrong road).

I am sure that there will be other advantages to staying on-site that I will discover when I go next week, but not having done that previously I haven't missed them.

 

[Postal68]

So as to be clear Postal68, your op seemed to be advocating for staying on Disney property - why would anyone stay off-site? But you, yourself, don't think it's worth it to stay on property? So, is your position that if you are going to WDW, you'd better stay on property, otherwise it's not worth it to go to WDW at all? (eg, all or nothing?)

Sent from my iPhone using DISBoards

No, I actually I prefer off site. Especially for a family of 4(with teens) or 5+.
For the money you pay for a value resort for a week, you can rent a 4 bedroom home with it's own pool and you will have a full kitchen and not be tied to paying crazy food prices for EVERY meal.

But with the way off site guests are currently getting screwed by FP+ I wouldn't recommend going unless you are staying on site(and in my mind, wasting a bunch of money)

I'll be staying away until off site guests are given the same privileges as on site guests.