When did Disney become so hostile to offsite guests?

[B-Ride]

When did Disney decide to start treating offsite guests as third class? We stayed onsite for our first 9 trips but decided to stay offsite this trip because we needed two rooms and didn't want to take out a bank loan.

With the 30 day window we had to forgo a FastPass for Flight of Passage so we showed up an hour before opening and were able to ride with a short wait. We planned to do the same next week until my son noticed that Disney had changed the Extra Magic Hour schedule and now AK has early morning hours for the rest of our trip and almost every day in May. We just got lucky today because when I made our plans I carefully avoided what was at the time only 2 EMH mornings.

So no second ride on FOP because if we show up an hour after the Extra special resort guests we'll have a 2 hour wait.

 

[SaintsManiac]

Hyperbole aside...

Disney wants you on their property. They will do as much as they can to make you want to stay onsite.

The end.

 

[mom2rtk]

They're actually treating some offsite guests pretty well by offering 60 day FP access (maybe EMH as well?) to the good neighbor hotels.

Rather than try first thing, get in line just prior to park close. There are no FPs during that time, so the standby line moves far faster. Just don't believe posted wait times. They try to discourage you from getting in line by inflating the numbers.

 

[FCDub]

Yeah, a bit hyperbolic, huh?

Also, there are a lot of people on here who have reported being able to get a FP for Flight of Passage inside of 30 days (some even same day!) with some dedicated checking and refreshing. It's not impossible.

 

[MamaBelle4]

There are benefits to staying off-site, just as there are benefits to staying on-site. Plenty of people couldn't nab FP for FOP within their 60 day window, so I think the EMH were a nice touch for those guests.
Off-site - pay significantly less, usually nicer accommodations, larger accommodations, etc.
On-site - 60 day FP, EMH, free theme park parking/transport, option of dining plan.

You have to weigh the benefits versus the losses and determine which is right for you.

There is absolutely no reason Disney SHOULDN'T bend over backwards for the guests that stay onsite, it encourages them to keep coming back and spending thrice what they could otherwise on accommodations.

 

[jmv223]

I got a 12:45 FOP within 30 days. I did check obsessively to get that though. We also got a same day for 7:15 PM while refreshing during dinner, around 6:30. It can be done!

 

[maxsmom]

This was the 1st time I’ve made FP w/ the 60 day window open to off property hotels. It was not a pleasant experience and I was on right when it opened up. So not so much a perk anymore along with having to pay for parking now also. They are chipping away at all benefits of staying on property.

 

[Babe the Blue Ox]

There have been plenty of recent reports of 20 minute waits near the end of the evening.

This is much simpler than fighting the morning crowd.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Is this more that EMH was added throwing a wrench in your plans? Seems you were ok with it before, especially as you got to ride FOP once with a minimal wait, but now all of a sudden it's a big issue.

I'm honestly not seeing Disney be 'hostile' towards offsite guests. I can however understand if what you feel is that onsite guests are getting perks that you feel interfere with your travel style but I wouldn't say that makes Disney hostile.

 

[DaisyDuck001]

I have not found them to be hostile to offsite guests. The thread title led me to expect a list of examples of hostility, but instead it is only about morning extra magic hours at AK, which is not what I would consider to be "hostility" at all. And this one aspect is a drop in the bucket compared to overall treatment of offsite guests.

 

[gharter]

i would argue the exact opposite. When did Disney become so FRIENDLY to offsite guests?
Paying more to stay onsite, I DO expect some perks for doing that. Now Disney has added some off site hotels into the perks of staying onsite. If you stay at certain off site resorts, you can reserve FPs at 60 days (instead of 30 days) and participate in EMH(instead of being excluded) just as onsite guests can.
Clearly, Disney is getting paid well for adding those resorts to the list. but as someone who stays onsite, it is very irritating to give the same perks to somebody not staying in an onsite Disney resort.

 

[StageTek]

Is it hostile to off-site guests or encouragement and rewards for on-site guests?

Seems to me that perks for staying on-site is a good thing.

 

[alan68]

I chose to stay offsite, knowing what all perks I would be giving up. We are renting a car and paying to park every day, but it's still cheaper than staying onsite in a room big enough for the 4 of us to stretch our legs in. No FPs till 30 days out. Fine. I still got about 75% of what I wanted. Not much worse than I fared 3 years ago when we did stay onsite. So we got denied a few perks. I would not call that hostile.

On their honeymoon, my brother and his then-wife took advantage of a vacation package to South Padre Island, TX. They got an unbelievable deal which included $100 in local shopping, but the catch was that they had to attend a timeshare sales presentation. They dutifully sat through the spiel, fully intending not to buy anything. When they went to the designated place to collect their $100 (not sure if was cash or some kind of gift certificates,) the guy asked them questions about their interest in buying a timeshare. When they said they were not interested, the guy gruffly shoved the $100 toward them and very rudely said, "Oh, you just came here for the hundred bucks, didn't ya?"
THAT I would call hostile.

 

[Jadyreen1282]

With the cut back on magic hours the last couple of years I'd say off site are catching up.

 

[StacyStrong]

Nope. I'm spending hundreds if not thousands more. Consider the 60 day FP and EMH what I'm paying for. Feel free to buy the benefit.

 

[kathy884]

I have a different opinion despite being someone who always stays offsite and who can't get fastpasses for popular rides like 7DMT or FOP. I think that the onsite lodging options are really overpriced (or perhaps it's more that offsite Orlando is so overbuilt and there are so many good deals offsite -- has been that way since 1971 when Disney opened and is still that way.) It seems very reasonable to me that Disney might offer at the least a few perks for those paying those higher rates accommodations -- some sort of incentive to fill the 40,000 or so onsite rooms. I am utterly amazed that their occupancy rates are as high as they are, but glad they aren't too bad as a Disney stockholder.

We have a group of 12 coming in March and are renting a water view house in the Windsor Hills with private pool, hot tub, six bedrooms, four baths, grill, pool heat, access to community pool area, tennis courts, etc. and are pretty darn close to Disney. With taxes and cleaning fees plus paying extra for pool heat we are paying $330 a night. There were lots of homes we could have gotten for less too, but we picked this one for the views, nice outdoor tables and chairs in the shade, cushy nice pool furniture, décor we liked better than other similarly sized properties, etc. Do you know how much it would be for our group in contrast to stay at a value property? Have you priced out moderates, deluxe rooms, or looked even at the cost of renting vacation points for the studios, two bedroom places, and larger places that are part of Disney Vacation club? Sounds like you have as you usually stay onsite and picked offsite to keep from breaking the bank, but OMG.

I don't know if this is still an allowed way to circumvent the intension of perks any more, but there used to be people booking throw away campsites at Fort Wilderness, a one night throw away value room or things like that to get earlier fastpass selections. I think there is a whole thread about that. Even that was never worth the cost to me, so I have never investigated. But that might be something to look into if you want the fastpass perks and want to stay offsite on a future trip.

I do understand your disappointment and am not meaning to be unsympathetic. It's wild how long the lines are for the newest and most popular rides, and how quickly fastpasses get picked up for those. Long lines are a pain and like you I would skip that attraction vs. lining up that long. Who knows, maybe the popularity of some of the new rides and limited fastpass availability might be a way that some of us hard core offsite visitors might fork over for Disney room rates. I'm not close to being there yet, though, and have only stayed onsite when I had a conference for work and my company was paying for my accommodations.

 

[Delirium]

They are made at you for not paying $25 a night to park at their resorts.

 

[Mickey's Best Girl]

To be honest, as someone who stays onsite for the perks (and pays way too much for a glorified Motel 6), I was incredibly annoyed that Disney began to offer the 60 day FP window to many offsite resorts.

IMO staying offsite is quickly looking better and better. If we drove that would seal the deal.

Just my .02

 

[slpeters]

Nope. I'm spending hundreds if not thousands more. Consider the 60 day FP and EMH what I'm paying for. Feel free to buy the benefit.

That's about what I think--we spent a couple hundred dollars a night for a very nice, but rather basic hotel room at the Swan (because I wanted the proximity, the 60 day window and the EMH)--they're selling a set of perks and people are buying.

 

[Klayfish]

We're dedicated off site people and we never, ever feel like WDW is against us. Sure, they want guests to stay onsite, if I ran WDW I would too. But they go out of their way to welcome off site people, IMO.

I know most won't agree with me, but I think the 60 day window thing is dramatically over rated. FoP is a challenge still, but I can get any other ride in any other park at 30 days. EMH is also meaningless to us, so there really isn't any perk for us to stay onsite.