Please raise hand if on-site only......

[Mom of Sleepy Bashful and BabyDoc]

I believe the 'magic' --whatever that is-- is what you make of it. You will have a terrific trip. The only problem I have with the fervor of the 'onsite-only-or-bust' (OOOB) group is the suggestion that a person could not possibly have an enjoyable experience if they are not staying in WDW accomodations. In my experience, that is just not the case. One can have an enjoyable, terrific vacation, whether onsite or offsite.

NO!!NO! IT HAS TO BE ON-SITE!! OTHERWISE OUR VACATION WILL STINK! Everyone should try their best to stay on-site and have that magical vacation that they've been dreaming about. Heck! Go for concierge! Lagoon View.........what would a vacation be without being able to look at the water or the CASTLE! Please, please........everyone! you must stay at Disney Resorts!

(ok, ok. I admit it. I just want the good places off-site to be available for my family when we want them. Shameful, shameful plug........ )

 

[flagdaytwins]

One of my "silly" reasons to stay off-site is: coffee. I survive on strong, dark roast coffee -- and I felt the only way to get it is to make it myself in a rented townhome. And with two toddlers, we need the room for them to unwind (1400 square feet of it).

However, when they are teenagers and able to take Disney transportation alone, we will stay on-site.

 

[spiceycat]

this year because WDW has raise their prices - WDW resort regular season - will be when DVC value (adventure) season is....

it will be cheaper to stay at DVC on rental points than the value resort. Now that is down right silly.

You can stay at OKW for $80 and BWV for $90 - during this time - Sept, Oct, Nov (most of it) and Dec (most of it).

I don't think this has ever happen before.

that say - I also love offsite - lots of place to stay at - I love to try new things - and it is great to be able to visit other places walking from your resort....

but sometimes the deals you get for offsite makes me feel like a ....

 

[disneysteve]

Hey spiceycat - CLEAR OUT YOUR PM BIN.

 

[robinb]

Add me to the "on-site" only list.

I have stayed off-site plenty of times at all different levels: Wyndham Orlando, Wyndham Palace, Marriott Orlando World Center (MOWC), DTD Hilton, Sheraton World Resort (near Sea World), Summerfield Suites, Travelodge, Days Inn, Renaissance Worldgate (on 192, near back entrance to WDW near AK, now a Radisson), Hyatt (on 192, now abandoned), Residence Inn (since torn down for a time share), Parc Corniche (condo) and a Comfort Inn.

I can honestly say that I would prefer staying at Pop Century over all but maybe the MOWC. The MOWC's pool really rocks .

Why? I really do feel the Disney Magic staying onsite. I like the refillable mug program, I like the food courts in the values and the moderates, I like the pools in the moderates and the deluxes. I like having the option of taking a quick, reliable bus to the entrance of the park.

I knew I was hooked on staying onsite when my DH had to go down to Orlando for business in 11/01. It was an impromptu trip, so I booked All Star Sports for a couple days, then we moved to the DTD Hilton for a few days and then back to All Star Sports. I was looking forward to the Hilton since my DH was HHonors Gold and we had a free breakfast. Even though my DD and I ate in the restaurant for free every morning and the room was comfy and DTD was very close, I hated the Hilton. I could not wait to get back to the All Stars!!

My last off-site experience was similar. We had been staying in a DVC 1BR for 5 days and we wanted to move for the weekend to conserve points. I thought I didn't want to go from a huge unit to a small hotel room so I got a great rate at the Summerfield Suites. 2 rooms, free high speed Internet, free breakfast, nice pool. Hated it. It seemd to take forever to get to the Purple Gates and into the parks. I felt cut off from the Disney Magic.

All the off-site hotels I have stayed at (except the Comfort Inn, Days Inn and Travelodge) have all been quite adequate. They are just not Disney .

 

[spiceycat]

Robin I have owned DVC since 93 - and now I feel the need to explore the rest of Orlando. To do that it is easier to stay offsite.

Orlando has a ton of stuff to do that doesn't include WDW....

boy I better stop now before I can never post on the DVC board again....

 

[robinb]

Robin I have owned DVC since 93 - and now I feel the need to explore the rest of Orlando. To do that it is easier to stay offsite.

Orlando has a ton of stuff to do that doesn't include WDW....

boy I better stop now before I can never post on the DVC board again....

No worries. We have owned DVC since 1997 and we do the Disney parks 98% of the time. My DD is too young for Universal, but we go to Sea World every once in a while. We also eat off-site once or twice a trip. I agree that if we were to do more non-Disney things, then I would probably split my stay between a Disney resort and a non-Disney resort, maybe one of the Universal Hotels so I could get FOTL privileges. We won't be doing that until my DD gets taller and braver .

I can see how other people feel the value of the large accommodations outweighs what I find to be the onsite magic. Or people like you who want to tour more than just WDW. For the foreseeable future, I'll be staying 100% onsite. Staying off-site and "commuting" into WDW isn't for me. I've tried it and I don't like it. If that makes me a "snob" (according to Grog), then so be it .

 

[PatsGirl]

I think I got caught up in the "have to stay onsite to get the Magic" wave. I was beginning to wonder what we've been missing by staying offsite so we've booked POP/CSR for 9 days in December. I think it's the ability to walk around the resorts, take our time at the parks by leaving for a rest in the afternoon or going late in the day rather than commando at 7 a.m., and seeing/experiencing some of the other onsite things like water mice, campfire singalong and that stuff. I was pleasantly surprised to learn that AAA prices were reasonable for off-season but even at that the food (dining plan or not) will be considerably more than offsite. We tend to eat at the chains like Uno's, Olive Garden, etc., which although not gourmet, fits our wallets. I did stay onsite at Universal a few years ago and because of the pass you get that limits waiting in lines would always consider staying onsite if affordable. So, when all is said and done, I'll be able to make an educated decision late in the year, lol.

 

[doodlebugs-mom]

I am new, but would only comment on staying off-site. Well because that is all I have ever done. At In-Laws, Resorts, or Private Rental Homes. I plan to check out what a Disney stay is like one of these days, but personally think I would more enjoy the space I get from home rental at the end of the day. As for now I only comment on off-site posts.

 

[ladysoleil]

I got a lot of the "your vacation will be awful if you stay offsite" vibe, too.

I've done both, so I wasn't terribly put off by it- it's an opinion and some of the really hardcore folks feel they need to stay onsite to really enjoy their trip. If I was a newbie, I might have felt discouraged by that.

I had to wrestle with this just today, actually- DH and I won an Orlando vacation that included airfare but no hotel. I ran the numbers, and after some thought, we decided that we'd had a great time offsite last time, and we'd appreciate staying in a nicer hotel in the Downtown Disney area instead of at one of the Values.

Nothing against the Values, I've stayed in them before and was just fine, but we don't have kids, don't feel a need to stay late at the parks, and would rather be a bit more pampered. I like the ambience in the parks, but I don't feel a need for the theming to continue in the hotel. And besides, I'm still scarred for life after having Mousekeeping walk in on us while doing the wild thang that one time...

The Values, IMHO, aren't measurably nicer than some of the better quality chains off-site. You're paying for the proximity, and that's fine, but since this was an unplanned trip and we've been recently, we thought we'd unwind at the Grosvenor or Hilton instead.

If we have kids, that may very well change, since I don't think I'd want to be wrangling younguns offsite, but for just the two of us, unless we can really splurge for a Deluxe, I don't see any need to stay onsite at present.

 

[DMRick]

Some people actually stay at WDW to go to US/IOA and SW - sorry - I think that is silly.

Why pay WDW prices then not do WDW???

Depends on what you are paying. We stay at POP for $59 or POR for $79 (we'll be at POR in three weeks). We'll venture out, including US/IOA. I comment on staying off, because we have done both. I prefer onsite, even if we aren't doing parks (this will be our 28th trip, so sometimes we may only do a day or two of parks), but I don't think offsite is bad, I just like knowing just what I'm getting...seems like often times the off site hotels are a crap shoot. Sometimes we loved them, other times it seems they skipped our room at cleaning time. One time we'll go and the hotel would be all freshened up, other times it looks like the pool hadn't had anyone as much as sweep around it in a month. If you have a hotel you like that is consistantly nice, and you don't mind the morning and night drive in, then off site sounds perfect for you.

 

[disneysteve]

If we have kids, that may very well change, since I don't think I'd want to be wrangling younguns offsite, but for just the two of us, unless we can really splurge for a Deluxe, I don't see any need to stay onsite at present.

This is a perfect example of "different strokes for different folks." This is exactly opposite how we feel. If just DW and I were going, we would be willing to consider onsite if the price was right. However, going with DD onsite is not a consideration because of the limited space and amenities. With her along, we want the offsite advantage of 2 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms, a kitchen, etc. We don't want to be stuck sleeping 2 feet away from her and having to wake up when she wakes up and turn the lights out when she goes to sleep. With kids, we feel it is far easier and more convenient to be offsite.

As I've said here many times, Disney area is great because there is something to fit every taste and every budget.

 

[spiceycat]

I forgot one more thing off site - if you want to bring your pet and have it sleep with you. Forget WDW.

Offsite there are several places - and a couple of timeshares so you get the 2-bedroom. the place my brother is staying in this Sept is one. Celebration World Resort will allow you to bring your pet for a $50 one time charge.

this is very reasonable and the resort is nice - not great, yet!!!! they are still building.

 

[sweet maxine]

We've become big offsite fans since discovering the value of the condo rentals. I have been to a couple of them so far (Silver Lake, and CPGV), and I have to say, I'd do it again in a heartbeat! We've even been during the busy season (week of Christmas), and I didn't notice any difference in the feeling we got from our vacation. We loved having room to stretch out in, a nice table to play dominoes or cards on, a relaxing jacuzzi to come back to, and also the proximity to Disney. Now, if I got a great code for onsite, we'd gladly stay there for a few nights. In fact, we're mixing it up a bit with our next trip with a discounted room for a value resort, and then moving over to a condo rental. I'm going to really enjoy having a washer/dryer unit, and also a kitchen to store and cook snacks in. This is the only way we can afford to do Disney trips. Of course I would love to stay at the Poly for a week, but it's just not in the cards for us at this time. So we just do our best on getting deals, and we're always happy just to have the chance to make the trip. I have to stop and think about those people who aren't going or may never have the chance to go, and take that to heart. I consider myself a very lucky and blessed soul to have the chance for my family and I to make those happy memories.

 

[Grog]

If that makes me a "snob" (according to Grog)

Nope. Doesn't make you a snob at all.

To be a bit more clear, my definition of an on-site snob is someone who tells an off-site person "You're having a miserable time off-site, but you just don't realize it...allow me to set you straight and tell you how bad your vacation really was". A snob is someone who believes in the Tooth Fairy, but won't believe that anyone can possibly have a great off-site trip. People do that all the time here on the DIS, sometime more subtle, sometimes not.

As I've said before, I've done both, and can have a magical time doing both. We enjoyed our recent off-site trip, but next time will be on-site. The only drawback that we found to our recent trip was not being able to have purchases sent to our hotel, but we worked around it

 

[robinb]

Nope. Doesn't make you a snob at all.

Thanks for the clarification .

A snob is someone who believes in the Tooth Fairy, but won't believe that anyone can possibly have a great off-site trip.

I believe in both . I know that people can have a good trip offsite. Heck, I've had good trips offsite. If it were between staying offsite or not going, you better bet I'll be saying "aloha!" to the Purple Gates every morning .

Oh yeah ... My 5 year old is thisclose to losing her first tooth. The Tooth Fairy is very real in our house right now.

 

[disneyfanfamily]

We wanted to stay at the All Stars, but could not afford 2 rooms (we are a family of 5), so we are staying at POR. Mainly because I INSISTED on staying on-site because people told me it was better. However, I have been pricing off-site hotels and realize how much money I could have saved. We rent a car anyway, so transportation is not an issue. Next time I will consider off-site. I am a penny pincher, and we do not spend much time at hotels anyway, so why not save at an off-site. Hey...Your still at Disney!!! 56 days left!!!

 

[Mom of Sleepy Bashful and BabyDoc]

Add me to the "on-site" only list.

I have stayed off-site plenty of times at all different levels: Wyndham Orlando, Wyndham Palace, Marriott Orlando World Center (MOWC), DTD Hilton, Sheraton World Resort (near Sea World), Summerfield Suites, Travelodge, Days Inn, Renaissance Worldgate (on 192, near back entrance to WDW near AK, now a Radisson), Hyatt (on 192, now abandoned), Residence Inn (since torn down for a time share), Parc Corniche (condo) and a Comfort Inn.
I can honestly say that I would prefer staying at Pop Century over all but maybe the MOWC. The MOWC's pool really rocks ..

I was going to say!! The POP over MOWC???? I've never stayed at MOWC but have heard how nice it is. I would never choose POP over that, but that is just me.

Ofcourse, I couldn't choose most of those places because we are a family of 5. I was just wondering, if you had to have 2 rooms at the values, would you pay for those instead of a 2 bedroom condo offsite for half the price? Just wondering. I know many people do.........but most families can fit in one room at WDW. I just always wondered if their loyalty would be as strong if they had to pay for 2 rooms. That is what actually made us try offsite at the nice condo places. We didn't fit in one hotel room anymore and I wasn't about to pay those prices for 2 rooms. Again, just wondering.........

 

[Mom of Sleepy Bashful and BabyDoc]

disneyfanfamily.............that's too funny. I was constructing my post when you posted about the same thing.

I just had a feeling that more families were in our situation.

 

[Mom of Sleepy Bashful and BabyDoc]

This is a perfect example of "different strokes for different folks." This is exactly opposite how we feel. If just DW and I were going, we would be willing to consider onsite if the price was right. However, going with DD onsite is not a consideration because of the limited space and amenities. With her along, we want the offsite advantage of 2 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms, a kitchen, etc. We don't want to be stuck sleeping 2 feet away from her and having to wake up when she wakes up and turn the lights out when she goes to sleep. With kids, we feel it is far easier and more convenient to be offsite.

As I've said here many times, Disney area is great because there is something to fit every taste and every budget.

Yep. Totally agree. We've done both with three young children (two in a stroller at the same time) and I must say, driving ourselves was easier, even when we were on-site with WDW transportation. But then, if you are driving yourself, that perk goes away with staying on-site.

The only way I can see the transportation being better on-site is if you ride the monorail. But that doesn't help you with MGM or AK. So it's not much better.

But, I also agree...........different strokes........ If everyone wanted to stay off-site, I wouldn't find any rooms available.

edited to add: And to Robinb and Spicey..........owning a two bedroom DVC is my dream. Unfortunately, a dream that will probably never come true. but still, I can have my dreams, right? We could only do it if we won the lottery, and being that we don't play, that's impossible. Oh, well. I'll live my dreams through the Disboards.