Stay in park or out??

[edie w]

I've never stayed on site, and while I'd consider doing so for a few nights if money really was no object (I can dream, can't I?) I think I'd go stir crazy after a fortnight.

We always rent a villa and have plenty of space to spread out. We do what we want, whenever we want, and, despite the sore feet feel completely de-stressed by the end of the holiday.

And that's not to mention the savings!

We also love Universal and Sea World and wouldn't dream of not visiting them, and also I suspect I'd find the Magic less Magical if we didn't experience it afresh each morning.

Just a thought, though - we find shopping in Publix, driving and the Weather Channel quite exciting because it's different to home.

 

[WIcruizer]

I agree, and I hope this doesn't sound like we're bashing people who choose to stay on-site. But the only logical reasons I can come with WHY someone would stay on-site:

1) WL or AKL and money is no object. I love those resorts, but there's no way I would pay that much for a room when it's only a place to sleep at night. As someone said, we're at the parks, dining, etc. until midnight, go to the hotel to sleep then at it again the next day. I'm not paying $200 or more per night for that.

2) People just want to stay at WDW for the sake of it. Because there's no way the mods or All Stars are a good value.

Just a thought, though - we find shopping in Publix, driving and the Weather Channel quite exciting because it's different to home.

I agree. Friends think we're crazy driving to WDW, but it really is half the fun. Putting on the Weather Channel first thing in the morning....shopping and dining at new places. The parks are great, but come to think about it years later it's all the other stuff that our children remember. I just can't imagine dining in the same WDW restaurants every night and never leaving the resort.

 

[WIcruizer]

Oh, I forgot one more benefit of off-site. This board is filled with people asking how much it costs to rent a fridge on-site...should we havea cooler..etc.

Hey...I rather have a full kitchen including a fridge and FREE breakfast which are usually pretty good...along with FREE coffee and juice all day...and a FREE newspaper.

 

[emmalgin]

is the people on the budget board staying on site and scrounging on every meal, sneaking in food and coolers to rooms, overcrowding and slleping on floors to stay there.

My $100 savings/day pays for much of the above. The $7 paking includes in/out priviledges and no specific times to catch a bus.

To be honest if I had an indisposible income I'd stay at the GF too for 3-4 days and then probably limousine over to the Hard Rock for another few days.

 

[disneysteve]

I'm an off-site devotee and I've done both many times so I have a good experience base to make that call.

My reasons are pretty much the same as those already stated.

Off-site is way cheaper for far better accomodations, much more space, seperate bedrooms, full kitchen, private pool if we rent a house, and the freedom to come and go as we please with our own car. We don't sleep with our daughter at home and don't care to do it on vacation either. Onsite, a multiroom suite would be extremely expensive. Offsite we can do it for as little as $40/nite.

As for the onsite dining, we still enjoy that even though we stay offsite. Last trip, for example, we ate at Boma at AKL, Beaches and Cream at Yacht and Beach Club, and others. You don't have to stay onsite to eat at those places. Anyone can eat there.

Onsite transportation isn't a selling point to us. I want to be able to come and go freely, not wait for buses, not have to make 1 or more connections to get from one place to another.

I can honestly say that even if money were no object, I don't think we would choose to stay in a regular room onsite, though I would do a villa or other 2 bedroom unit that had a kitchen.

Steve

 

[TonyS20]

My DH and I have always stayed off site just for the simple fact of saving money. My DH doesn't really like the idea of using Disney transportation (especially waiting for a bus!), so we would be renting a car regardless. We don't have kids and like the idea of coming and going as we please.

However, for our upcoming trip, I'm researching the idea of renting DVC points. I'm hoping after staying in a villa, he'll want to buy into DVC! (But don't tell him!!) We have decided that we are going to stay on-site and see if it is really is better for us.

I think that is the key - you need to find what works best for your family. I think others have done a good job outlining the pros and cons. We weighed the alternatives last time and decided we would rather stay off-site and enjoy better dining and other extras instead. We had to examine our budget and determine how to allocate the money!

 

[Lisa P.]

For a family with a budget (and access to a car!), offsite wins, hands down!!! Plenty of really nice places with spacious rooms and nice pools, some with free breakfast or a full kitchen, some with separate sleeping rooms for the parents... usually for less than anything similar onsite. And for their first trip there, they'll likely spend most of their time enjoying the theme parks. That provides all the fun!

Have them choose a place that's located within a mile or so off-property and they'll reach the parking lots within 10 minutes. If they're visiting during cool weather, make sure the hotel or resort has a heated pool and hot tub. Hope they have a blast!

 

[Sammy]

After staying onsite for the first time 3 years ago, DH says he'll "never" stay offsite again! He loved not driving anywhere and says that's a big part of his WDW "vacation"! I seriously considered offsite at one of the DTD hotels for this trip in September, but I wasn't sure how much of a hassle the transportation was. Actually booked at Royal Plaza, but then was able to get the gov't rate at the Dolphin...we'll be right inthe heart of the Epcot area (our favorite!)

As far as $$ savings go, my Yankee frugality still wonders if I made the right decision changing to the Dolphin!! Even with the special rate, it's still more than I usually spend on a hotel room.

Our kids are still young, so we do spend most of our time in the parks and on Disney property anyway, so for now, onsite works best for us. That's the ticket anyway, isn't it.........?? You need to do what works best for you and your family!

 

[kashkdz]

Wow this is a great topic ! As I stated earlier, I personally prefer to stay on-site. Yes I have stayed offsite and that was a fantastic trip too. However, my point is that we're taking a vacation to Disney World, and because we've been fortunate enough to do that, why would I want to stay at a Holiday Inn (or similar to save a few bucks) which I can stay in near our home, or go to a Friday's restaurant (or similar to save a few bucks) which we can dine at near our home, and go shopping in some outlet stores (also something I can do at home). Also I drive all the time, and to me Disney transportation is convenient enough that if we need to move around throughout the parks and hotels we can do that. I don't want to deal with the hassles of traffic, I'd rather have someone else drive.

Of course it is obviously personal opinion, and both sides are valid. But I must say that I feel that what we spend to stay on-site with the discounts that we get, price-wise is VERY comparable to staying offsite. My wife and I planned a Disney vacation to so that we can spend time enjoying Disney World and all that it has to offer with the kids and build memories. Sure there is more to do outside, but Disney is the focus of our vacation. And if it costs a few extra dollars, well so be it !

Now what I think is very silly, (I digress here...) speaking specifically about some of my bone-head neighbors is the fact that they brag about being able to stay at AKL (and similar deluxe hotels), whereas they literally save every nickel all year for their only trip of the year, and are only able to afford to stay at most 4-5 days because the trip ends up costing them a small fortune. And when they are there, they usually brown bag every day, or credit card their expensive meals because they ran out of $$$. To me that is silly. But hey, they get to brag about it and that's the price to pay. I can't see spending 250+ for a hotel room only, and eating at expensive restaurants each day. We budget maybe six months out and even with our Disney vacation, we are able to go on numerous vacations throughout the year. This trip was on the FTP, and price wise it came out the same as staying in the value resort, and we also have another child with us. (Digression ends here)

Either way you'll enjoy your vacation.

 

[WIcruizer]

However, my point is that we're taking a vacation to Disney World, and because we've been fortunate enough to do that, why would I want to stay at a Holiday Inn (or similar to save a few bucks) which I can stay in near our home, or go to a Friday's restaurant

I think you may be missing the point most of the off-siters are making. They are saying just the opposite of your point above. The hotels off-site are nicer than the ones on site. And the restaurant choices are a great deal morethan Fridays and KFC.

I'm beginning to think many people simply don't know where to stay, and they think off-site= Holiday Inn on I Drive. There's a whole other world out there...

I guess it comes down to this. If NOT driving is the only reason to stay on-site, why not just take a cab to the parks? Otherwise why would you pay MORE for a worse room, worse food, worse pool, etc. by staying on-site?

 

[disneysteve]

Originally posted by WIcruizer
I think you may be missing the point most of the off-siters are making. They are saying just the opposite of your point above. The hotels off-site are nicer than the ones on site. And the restaurant choices are a great deal morethan Fridays and KFC.

If NOT driving is the only reason to stay on-site, why not just take a cab to the parks? Otherwise why would you pay MORE for a worse room, worse food, worse pool, etc. by staying on-site?

I think you're being a bit harsh here. Disney hotels are all very nice, and there is little offsite to compare to the luxury and theming and dining available onsite. That said, however, what Disney charges for that luxury and theming is just way too much in our opinion. We can stay at a nice budget hotel offsite and still enjoy the onsite theming, dining, shopping, etc.

To us, the vacation is all about the parks, Downtown Disney, hotel hopping, etc. Its not about staying in a Disney room. That is just our personal opinion and preference and as several others have said, you have to do what works for you and your family.

Steve

 

[WIcruizer]

We can stay at a nice budget hotel offsite

Frankly...and I hope I don't upset anyone..I consider the All Stars to be a budget hotel. People keep using off-site and budget hotel as if those terms are interchangeable. There are many, many moderate hotels off-site, suite hotels, upscale, town homes, condos, etc.

I reviewed my comments and they do sound harsh. They weren't intended to be "flaming" type posts, I guess that's just the way I talk to my good friends...very direct and bold when debating a subject. (And we're all friends here)

So...I must say first of all that we HAVE stayed on-site before- twice. Both were mods, and it was pretty cool to be right on the grounds. But we rarely used the Disney Transportation, and got sick of the "caferia" they have at the resort. We tried a fine restaurant at each resort and didn't think it was that great. We've been down there enough to know the area restaurants pretty well, and we know where to get a great meal for less than an average meal at many of the on-site restaurants. And if you don't like the choices at your resort, you're traveling around WDW to a different restaurant anyhow. So I'm not sure what the advantage is.

 

[edie w]

I agree with the earlier posts - it definitely depends what you are wanting from your holiday.

For we Brits, the "otherness" of staying in a pool villa in Florida is a holiday in itself. No-one has pools in their back gardens here except the ridiculously rich - possibly because you'd need a heated conservatory to put it in!

Also, we are going to Orlando for US, IOA, Sea World and to ride the Busch Gardens rollercoasters with just as much enthusiasm as we are going to WDW.

If however, the original enquirer's family are mostly Disney-focused, then staying on-property might be the thing.

Maybe making a list of all a holiday might have to offer, and then rating the list in terms or priority, would be the best way to find out what suits. For example, mine would go something like:

Private pool - high
No driving - low
No cooking - low
Somewhere to keep snacks and drinks cool - high
Somewhere to do laundry - medium
Kids have own rooms - high
Lots of bathrooms (showers) - high
Somewhere for adults to get together after kids have gone to bed - high
No need for babysitter - high
Disney theming - low
Economy - high

etc. etc.

.... which explains why we're staying in a villa!

 

[disneysteve]

Originally posted by WIcruizer
Frankly...and I hope I don't upset anyone..I consider the All Stars to be a budget hotel. People keep using off-site and budget hotel as if those terms are interchangeable. There are many, many moderate hotels off-site, suite hotels, upscale, town homes, condos, etc.

I agree. All Stars is a budget hotel, but only in comparison to the other Disney offerings. But that doesn't make it a good value. I can get a 3-bedroom condo offsite for the same or less than a tiny room at All Stars.

And certainly there are moderate and luxury accomodations offsite that are not budget hotels. Hotels like the Peabody, Gaylord Palms, Marriott World Center, etc. have plenty to offer those guests looking for more upscale accomodations.

Onsite, in my opinion, there just isn't nearly the range of options that exists offsite. I would love to see Disney build an all suite hotel like a Residence Inn, but only if they would price it reasonably which I know they wouldn't.

Steve

 

[WIcruizer]

I would love to see Disney build an all suite hotel like a Residence Inn, but only if they would price it reasonably which I know they wouldn't

We've been preaching that for years. If they had a suite hotel for $100 a night or so, we would stay there. Not every trip, but we would stay there every other year or so. Requirement #1 for our accomodations....separate bedroom.

 

[C.Ann]

Originally posted by WIcruizer
We've been preaching that for years. If they had a suite hotel for $100 a night or so, we would stay there. Not every trip, but we would stay there every other year or so. Requirement #1 for our accomodations....separate bedroom.

---------------------------

If you can't even get a fridge without paying extra per night for it I doubt that they'll ever go with the "suite" concept.. Think of all the money they would lose in their resort restaurants.. I'm still amazed that they even have cabins in FW with kitchens..

 

[tinaluis]

We stay off-site because it costs less. We are able to go to WDW 2 times a year for 2 weeks at a time for less than it would cost to do 1 week at the All-Stars courtesy of Priceline and the fantastic rates we've gotten through them. The magic of WDW for us is being at the parks, not spending time at our hotel. Another vote for off-site.

 

[FonFon]

I think it all kind of depends on the type of vacation you're planning to have.

We did 1/2 onsite, 1/2 offsite for a week and a half earlier this year, and had a MUCH better time being onsite. I am the cheapest person alive (we are military, I kind of have to be cheap!), and we stayed at the Contemporary with the SOG rate. We loved being able to jump on the monorail to come back to the hotel to swim or take a nap. We loved not touching the car for the four days we were there, not having to pay parking fees, not having to remember where we parked the car, or waiting for a tram to take us out to the car.

Then we stayed at a Holiday Inn Express to do our Universal portion of our trip, and while it wasn't BAD (maybe a 5 minute drive from the hotel to the park, free cont. breakfast), it didn't even compare.

This December, we've saved up, and since we can't beat the military ticket rate, we're going to go concierge, at a military rate of about $200/night (includes tax) at the Wilderness Lodge. We don't know if it will be as convenient as the Contemporary was on the monorail, but not having to deal with the car for a week is worth it to us. We might spend the first two nights at the Celebration Hotel, because we can spend 2 nights there for the price of one at WL, and that will be my only cheap-out.

Once we have kids to bring along, I'll probably change my mind. But when I'm on vacation just with my husband, I want to be on vacation. I want to buy my tickets once, I want to only have to carry around my room key to charge souveniers/food, I don't want to have to touch the car.

And just for the record, if it wasn't for the military rates, I'd probably change my tune.

 

[WIcruizer]

I guess I can understand the "no car" argument to a certain extent. I don't mind it at all, so it's not an issue for me. WDW is an active vacation though, so I'm not sure how driving a car is any more hassle than waiting in lines, eating lunch in a crowded dining area, and wedging your way in to see a parade. It all goes with the territory. I find it very relaxing to get in the minivan after a long day in the parks....throw on the AC and some good music.

Then we stayed at a Holiday Inn Express to do our Universal portion of our trip, and while it wasn't BAD (maybe a 5 minute drive from the hotel to the park, free cont. breakfast), it didn't even compare.

This December, we've saved up, and since we can't beat the military ticket rate, we're going to go concierge, at a military rate of about $200/night (includes tax) at the Wilderness Lodge

Well, I hope you're not comparing the HI Express with the Wilderness. As an off-site person that would be like me comparing the Vistana to the All Stars.

 

[angiebaby91]

Well, I haven't stayed yet, but leaving in a week (can't wait). We started to stay at a Disney resort (All Stars was all we could afford), but found using the tips in the Unofficial Guide to Disney to be a great savings. We're staying at the Best Western at Lake Buena Vista (which is termed "in" the resort, just not a WDW resort) and is 10 min walk to Downtown Disney - cost of $55 per night. Did that by getting the price off Expedia then calling the hotels direct to see if they would match it - which every hotel on our trip did!!

By doing this I saved almost $1,000 on our whole trip - which to me was worth it - since otherwise we wouldn't be able to go at this time. I do plan on using transportation provided - so we will see how that goes.

It took me a while to plan out our trip. But by using the internet, the Unofficial Guide and the Offical Guide to Disney I found great tips that helped me save money. I've heard pros and cons - even on this board - and it depends on what's best for you - what you can afford and what your preferences are.

Just go - it will be worth it whichever way you choose!