Why are Disney cruises still so expensive?

The chart is simple enough to be pretty misleading. For example, it subtracts taxes and social insurance contributions from salary but doesn't substract the cost of health insurance. Since most other countries cover much/most of their health care costs though insurance, it accounts for that in those countries but not for most Americans.
The chart also considers transfer in-kind, such as the value of "free" health insurance and education. So, it's more balanced than you suggest. Even if we went with your description, the disposable income in the US is nearly 150% of disposable income in Germany, which leads the EU (except for the tiny state of Luxembourg), and 176% of the EU average. After paying for health insurance, the US would probably still lead. But, again, I'm not sure that your description of the chart is accurate.

Keep in mind, too, that these are average values. In reality, people making average salaries or less probably aren't the ones traveling to Europe for a Disney cruise. But, the population of the US is about 335 million. So, even if only the top 25% of Americans can take such a trip, that's still a lot of travelers. About the population of Germany! If it's really the top 30% or 40%, then you have even more Americans invading European Disney cruises. (Obviously, not everyone wants to take such a trip. I'm just saying that the large population is going to skew the numbers, regardless of how accurate that chart is.)
 
Anecdotes aren't data. I didn't say that all skilled workers get more vacation time, just that most do. The BLS statistics back me up on this since the average vacation time in the US is 10-14 days, increasing to 15-19 days after 10 years of service at a company. Of course, my 25 days is above average. But somewhere in the 3-5 weeks range is probably representative once you average in the 0-2 weeks that low-skilled jobs usually offer. So, I stand by my statement and I hope that your time off improves in the future.
You're missing the reason for the issue we're having. You're attempting to describe how employment is in the U.S. with the line as skilled vs unskilled and low-level vs high level and using yourself as an example. The way that U.S. workplace culture is for vacation time (and some other benefits) is not formulated that way. So when people are talking about how much vacation time they get in relation to how much they can use it on cruising it's just inaccurate to portray it as the more you get the more skilled you are and the less you get means you're not as skilled as someone who gets more.
 
but that great policy is over 20 years old now you basically have PTO, which I think is the biggest way to screw employees. So basically you’re saying your off time from work is the decision you make. Would you rather go into work sick or take vacation?
I've found it's a bit of a good bit of a bad by having it all lumped into PTO.

When I was at the insurance company I had PTO which was to be used for any and all things. On the one hand it meant I had to plan vacations and appointments carefully to be able to keep a few to be used for sickness. On the other hand it meant they couldn't deny me time off so long as it was available. It was a don't ask don't tell policy. If I needed a day to just chill at my house and the time was available then so be it. The company wasn't allowed to really ask why you were requesting it off. In that respects for employees it was nice because some days you just needed or wanted a break but in our culture here calling off for work for a "chill day" is frowned upon.

But in reality the biggest flexibility really was how it was and is for my husband. Despite having PTO banks rather than separated out time for sick and vacation he doesn't necessarily have to take PTO for appointments or even vacation. We just got back from 8 days in Cancun but because of how he was able to slide time here and there and work a bit more this day and that day he only took 5 days of PTO rather than 7 days that would have been. Him being salaried and having the industry culture of fluidity makes an all PTO policy not really all that punitive in realities.
 
Anecdotes aren't data. I didn't say that all skilled workers get more vacation time, just that most do. The BLS statistics back me up on this since the average vacation time in the US is 10-14 days, increasing to 15-19 days after 10 years of service at a company. Of course, my 25 days is above average. But somewhere in the 3-5 weeks range is probably representative once you average in the 0-2 weeks that low-skilled jobs usually offer. So, I stand by my statement and I hope that your time off improves in the future.

@mousefan73: Thanks for that information! You're right that PTO sucks. They try to sell it to us as "more flexible", but it's really just a way to eliminate sick days. Fortunately, I can work from home whenever I'm sick. Unfortunately, not all jobs allow for that arrangement. Some jobs still offer real sick time, though.
You said you get 5 weeks plus 11 paid holidays and that’s “fairly typical“ for skilled jobs. I’m saying that’s not what my experience is nor is it for people I know with various professional jobs. Why do you assume my experience is the wrong one and yours is right? Maybe your experience is the anecdotal one that should not count as data instead of mine? And you are assuming that 3-5 weeks is “probably representative” once averaging other low skilled jobs, but thats you personally assuming that. Do you have statistics that back up that assumption? And you also state the average is 15-19 days after 10 years…there are plenty of skilled workers who don’t stay 10 years in the same company, so they get less.
 

You're missing the reason for the issue we're having. You're attempting to describe how employment is in the U.S. with the line as skilled vs unskilled and low-level vs high level and using yourself as an example. The way that U.S. workplace culture is for vacation time (and some other benefits) is not formulated that way. So when people are talking about how much vacation time they get in relation to how much they can use it on cruising it's just inaccurate to portray it as the more you get the more skilled you are and the less you get means you're not as skilled as someone who gets more.
When I say skilled or unskilled, I'm using the technical definitions as commonly used when talking about a labor force. Jobs that require credentials and extensive training (e.g. doctors, lawyers, engineers) are skilled. Jobs that require little training (e.g. retail clerks, waiters, agricultural hands) are unskilled. There is no judgement about whether any particular person is skilled at anything based on their vacation time. And, I'm not wrong about this.

Here are some charts, again from BLS. They show that workers in the "leisure and hospitality" (generally unskilled) trades have far less access to paid time off than workers in other industries and that workers in the "information", "manufacturing", and "financial" (generally skilled) industries have above average access. Unfortunately, BLS breaks down the average PTO days separately from the access statistics, so I can't easily show that "the average PTO for a worker in the finance industry is X". If you insist on pressing this point, then I'm sure that either of us could Google up some more information.

@Mango7100: See above! And, note that many companies are willing to let you transfer PTO when you take a new job. Not that actual time off that you've saved, but the amount that you're allowed. It doesn't always work, of course. And, maybe that varies by industry, too. I only used the 10-year mark because BLS did.

I actually did find something that breaks out PTO by industry: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ebs.t05.htm

But, it says that it's from 1996 and that's too far in the past to be very useful, I think. It does show the pattern that I describe, though.
 
Why are Disney cruises so expensive and why are they not offering discounts like the other major cruise providers? My son just booked a 7 day European / Mediterranean cruise for $900 a person. This is a Norwegian cruise at that, on a fairly new boat. Disney is not offering anything close to those rates. I was looking to book for my family of 4 and it was going to cost over $10,000 since both of my children are adults and I would need two staterooms or a deluxe family stateroom. I decided to decline at this time
Uh, because of supply and demand?
 
When I say skilled or unskilled, I'm using the technical definitions as commonly used when talking about a labor force. Jobs that require credentials and extensive training (e.g. doctors, lawyers, engineers) are skilled. Jobs that require little training (e.g. retail clerks, waiters, agricultural hands) are unskilled. There is no judgement about whether any particular person is skilled at anything based on their vacation time. And, I'm not wrong about this.

Here are some charts, again from BLS. They show that workers in the "leisure and hospitality" (generally unskilled) trades have far less access to paid time off than workers in other industries and that workers in the "information", "manufacturing", and "financial" (generally skilled) industries have above average access. Unfortunately, BLS breaks down the average PTO days separately from the access statistics, so I can't easily show that "the average PTO for a worker in the finance industry is X". If you insist on pressing this point, then I'm sure that either of us could Google up some more information.

@Mango7100: See above! And, note that many companies are willing to let you transfer PTO when you take a new job. Not that actual time off that you've saved, but the amount that you're allowed. It doesn't always work, of course. And, maybe that varies by industry, too. I only used the 10-year mark because BLS did.

I actually did find something that breaks out PTO by industry: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ebs.t05.htm

But, it says that it's from 1996 and that's too far in the past to be very useful, I think. It does show the pattern that I describe, though.
That is still not how the workplace culture is (both corporate and not). If you're talking about salary compensation there's a difference there. But you're talking about benefits of vacation time. There's not really vacation time protections like some other non-U.S. countries where they have a basic level provided.

It doesn't matter how skilled (even using your definition) you are, companies don't en masse use that. They clearly don't.

I already told you my husband is a mechanical engineer. The present company he is at starts new hires regardless of their status at 3 weeks. You can attempt to negotiate for more but it's not guaranteed. Him getting an additional week is because he was at his prior company for 15 years. Not because of his P.E. license credentials. This company maxes out at 5 weeks by which you would need to work 10 years before getting there. For my husband it will only be 5 years due to the negotiation. This is not uncommon in the industry either.

In a way you're exemplifying the issue with your statements..they are steeped in past ways of thinking. Other countries have gotten more with the program and the U.S. is still viewing things from old ways regarding employment. Especially using the 5 year mark as a way to gain extra time as the old way of doing things was stay with a company until you retired with a pension.

ETA: And to be noted it wasn't about how skilled or unskilled you were. There was nothing I needed to do when I worked at the insurance company to gain extra time other than continue being employed there. Things like a college degree, customer service skills, etc were what got me hired, not what got me health insurance, or a PTO bank. This is what I was trying to get across to you with you referencing skilled vs unskilled, low-level vs high level.
 
Last edited:
That is still not how the workplace culture is (both corporate and not). If you're talking about salary compensation there's a difference there. But you're talking about benefits of vacation time. There's not really vacation time protections like some other non-U.S. countries where they have a basic level provided.

It doesn't matter how skilled (even using your definition) you are, companies don't en masse use that. They clearly don't.

I already told you my husband is a mechanical engineer. The present company he is at starts new hires regardless of their status at 3 weeks. You can attempt to negotiate for more but it's not guaranteed. Him getting an additional week is because he was at his prior company for 15 years. Not because of his P.E. license credentials. This company maxes out at 5 weeks by which you would need to work 10 years before getting there. For my husband it will only be 5 years due to the negotiation. This is not uncommon in the industry either.

In a way you're exemplifying the issue with your statements..they are steeped in past ways of thinking. Other countries have gotten more with the program and the U.S. is still viewing things from old ways regarding employment. Especially using the 5 year mark as a way to gain extra time as the old way of doing things was stay with a company until you retired with a pension.

ETA: And to be noted it wasn't about how skilled or unskilled you were. There was nothing I needed to do when I worked at the insurance company to gain extra time other than continue being employed there. Things like a college degree, customer service skills, etc were what got me hired, not what got me health insurance, or a PTO bank. This is what I was trying to get across to you with you referencing skilled vs unskilled, low-level vs high level.
I posted links to my data. Where's yours?
 
I posted links to my data. Where's yours?
This thread started about being why Disney cruises are more expensive, when the topic about vacation time was brought up it was noted that citizens of other countries tend to have more vacation time to use to take longer vacations.

Are you arguing about days on average a person gets? Because that's not what I'm discussing. I'm discussing making a line about vacation time being based on skilled vs unskilled and low-level labor. When it comes to how the U.S. over the decades has structured this particular aspect to employment it is less about what you're bringing to the table and generally more about how little an employer includes (or wants to include to keep costs down).

My husband's salary is more than compensated for his credentials and longevity in his career but the benefits of vacation time doesn't fit into the definition of using skilled vs unskilled nor am I aware of anyone in employment whose company says you get more because you are considered skilled under the Bureau of Labor and Statistics. To make that more clear I had more vacation time as a call center employee than some people here on the DIS who had masters and worked in their field. They clearly had more credentials than I did but their employer structured things differently.

Harkening back to your comment that started this tangent:
I get 5 weeks + 11 paid holidays (including the week off between Christmas & New Year). I guess that's not typical for the US overall, but it's probably fairly typical for skilled jobs. It's mostly unskilled and lower-level jobs that don't get paid time off, unfortunately.

If we were to break down your comment you getting 5 weeks would likely have little to do with your status as skilled and more to do with your longevity with your company (or industry if you stayed in it but moved around) and no 5 weeks isn't typical for skilled jobs. I know enough people whose vacation maxes out at 4 weeks or less. And if you're getting 5 weeks the likely case if you've been working for the company for quite a while. My mom worked for the same company for nearly 40 years, her PTO was only measured and only ever had been measured by her time spent at the company, she had more vacation time than I did but didn't have a college degree. Our salaries were more close together relatively speaking due to that but not the PTO aspect.

You may start at having more time if say you're in the corporate world but the increasing days you're discussing aren't because you're skilled vs not..it's because the company structures it so that the more you stay the more you get to a point. Other countries think we have a ridiculously low amount of vacation time because there's no real protection for it, no real standard that companies are held to, they make the rules.
 
Our in-laws find all the walking at the parks onerous. By cruising they still enjoy Disney, with all the Disney customer service. Plus it is all inclusive for them as drinking is pretty much off the table at this point also.
 
Are you interested in a conversation or not because I honestly can't tell? This thread started about being why Disney cruises are more expensive, when the topic about vacation time was brought up it was noted that citizens of other countries tend to have more vacation time to use to take longer vacations.

Are you arguing about days on average a person gets? Because that's not what I'm discussing. I'm discussing making a line about vacation time being based on skilled vs unskilled and low-level labor. When it comes to how the U.S. over the decades has structured this particular aspect to employment it is less about what you're bringing to the table and generally more about how little an employer includes (or wants to include to keep costs down).

My husband's salary is more than compensated for his credentials and longevity in his career but the benefits of vacation time doesn't fit into the definition of using skilled vs unskilled nor am I aware of anyone in employment whose company says you get more because you are considered skilled under the Bureau of Labor and Statistics. To make that more clear I had more vacation time as a call center employee than some people here on the DIS who had masters and worked in their field. They clearly had more credentials than I did but their employer structured things differently.

Harkening back to your comment that started this tangent:


If we were to break down your comment you getting 5 weeks would likely have little to do with your status as skilled and more to do with your longevity with your company (or industry if you stayed in it but moved around) and no 5 weeks isn't typical for skilled jobs. I know enough people whose vacation maxes out at 4 weeks or less. And if you're getting 5 weeks the likely case if you've been working for the company for quite a while. You may start at having more time if say you're in the corporate world but the increasing days you're discussing aren't because you're skilled vs not..it's because the company structures it so that the more you stay the more you get to a point. Other countries think we have a ridiculously low amount of vacation time because there's no real protection for it, no real standard that companies are held to, they make the rules.
I've posted a whole lot of discussion, backed up by data. You've posted personal anecdotes and no data to back them up. What else is there to say? I don't care about your personal situation any more than you care about mine. Neither one of us matters when we're talking about averages and the overall situation. There's no point in reiterating that information.

The reality is that the American economy and labor force, like that of other developed nations, provides more benefits to skilled workers than to unskilled workers (again, using the technical terms) and those benefits include increased paid time off. The BLS backs me up on this. You've provided no data to counter this reality. So, what's the point, here?

Some specific responses.

1. No, of course a company doesn't classify workers as skilled or unskilled and then assign them benefits based on that classification. No, of course there isn't a solid line between the two groups of workers. No, there's no legal mandate for anything. But, on average, skilled workers get more PTO than unskilled workers. All of the data that I could find supports this.

2. Since you mentioned it, my company starts at 3 weeks of PTO and adds two days per year so that after five years, you get 5 weeks of PTO. There are no further increases. Non-exempt employees, who often work "unskilled" jobs, or are part-time workers, receive less PTO, but they still start at two weeks.

3. I'm not trying to argue that Americans get as much PTO as Europeans. Of course, that's not true for most people. I was simply trying to show that the gap isn't as drastic as the initially quoted post implied.

4. When you consider the large population of the United States (more than France, Germany, Spain, Italy, and the UK combined), it doesn't really matter if the bottom 50% of workers (ranked by available PTO) don't have enough PTO. There are still tons of Americans with plenty of PTO to take European Disney cruises.
 
Last edited:
The chart also considers transfer in-kind, such as the value of "free" health insurance and education. So, it's more balanced than you suggest. Even if we went with your description, the disposable income in the US is nearly 150% of disposable income in Germany, which leads the EU (except for the tiny state of Luxembourg), and 176% of the EU average. After paying for health insurance, the US would probably still lead. But, again, I'm not sure that your description of the chart is accurate.

Keep in mind, too, that these are average values. In reality, people making average salaries or less probably aren't the ones traveling to Europe for a Disney cruise. But, the population of the US is about 335 million. So, even if only the top 25% of Americans can take such a trip, that's still a lot of travelers. About the population of Germany! If it's really the top 30% or 40%, then you have even more Americans invading European Disney cruises. (Obviously, not everyone wants to take such a trip. I'm just saying that the large population is going to skew the numbers, regardless of how accurate that chart is.)
Finally, scale of population and social economic demographics are key variables - which makes many of these previous charts and other assertions of "data" or "opinions" out of context largely "anecdotal" ...
 
4. When you consider the large population of the United States (more than France, Germany, Spain, Italy, and the UK combined), it doesn't really matter if the bottom 50% of workers (ranked by available PTO) don't have enough PTO. There are still tons of Americans with plenty of PTO to take European Disney cruises.
and worth reinforcing - and largely the "real" data point - scale of the US population. And anecdotally, my company offers unlimited vacation in addition to a preset number of paid days off for US holidays ...
 
I've posted a whole lot of discussion, backed up by data. You've posted personal anecdotes and no data to back them up. What else is there to say? I don't care about your personal situation any more than you care about mine. Neither one of us matters when we're talkin about averages and the overall situation. There's no point in reiterating that information.

The reality is that the American economy and labor force, like that of other developed nations, provides more benefits to skilled workers than to unskilled workers (again, using the technical terms) and those benefits include increased paid time off. The BLS backs me up on this. You've provided no data to counter this reality. So, what's the point, here?

Some specific responses.

1. No, of course a company doesn't classify workers as skilled or unskilled and then assign them benefits based on that classification. No, of course there isn't a solid line between the two groups of workers. No, there's no legal mandate for anything. But, on average, skilled works get more PTO than unskilled workers. All of the data that I could find supports this.

2. Since you mentioned it, my company starts at 3 weeks of PTO and adds two days per year so that after five years, you get 5 weeks of PTO. There are no further increases. Non-exempt employees, who often work "unskilled" jobs, or are part-time workers, receive less PTO, but they still start at two weeks.

3. I'm not trying to argue that Americans get as much PTO as Europeans. Of course, that's not true for most people. I was simply trying to show that the gap isn't as drastic as the initially quoted post implied.

4. When you consider the large population of the United States (more than France, Germany, Spain, Italy, and the UK combined), it doesn't really matter if the bottom 50% of workers (ranked by available PTO) don't have enough PTO. There are still tons of Americans with plenty of PTO to take European Disney cruises.

Your data isn't any different than my comments. Your data you're using is saying the more you work in terms of years the more vacation time you get. That's what I've been saying all along.

Where we've been disagreeing is a blanket assertation that being considered skilled labor under the Bureau of Labor and Statistics means you are getting more PTO than someone who is not. And your data set is "Average paid holidays and days of vacation and sick leave for full-time employees in small private establishments, 1996"

You've already mentioned the time gap of 1996 so that doesn't need repeating but the part you're missing here is also how PTO has evolved. With my husband's prior company I forget when (within the last 7 or so years) they merged sick time into PTO. The old sick days remained but carried heavy restrictions on when it could be used. Small private establishments is a limiting factor too. Looking at the cliff notes it was for companies that had less than 100 employees via a survey. Only using what you've posted it's hard to extrapolate that out to what is today's standards with what goes on with small, medium, and large companies.

None of the conversation was about population it was about how other countries view employee protections and structure that into their laws because while this is a Board that has a lot of Americans there are other posters who are citizens of other countries who frequently remark how it is for their country and how they view ours.

The issue I took with your original comments is because of how you 1) Talked about yourself 2) presented it in such as way that less skilled would get less. The key problem with you pushing only a data set but interjecting your personal situation as well as remarking that skilled typically would get the same as you is you open yourself up to the antidotes you are annoyed about hearing. So if you don't want to hear about how it actually IS for other people then don't talk about how it is for you and extrapolate that out to others. It's going to open the conversation for people to say "wait a minute that's not how it is" and you've got several posters describing their lives with other people included in that.

Here's a recent discussion from Forbes https://www.forbes.com/advisor/business/pto-statistics/#:~:text=The average American worker gets,service increases to 15 days.

I've copied the more relevant part:
When it comes to annual vacation days, numbers vary greatly. There is no hard and fast number employers in the United States must follow. The underlining is mine and was what I was trying to get at.

The average American worker gets 11 days of paid vacation per year​

In the private sector, the average number of paid vacation days after five years of service increases to 15 days.4 After 10 years of service, it rises again to 17 days. For employees with 20 years of service or more, the average number of paid vacation days is 20. Keep in mind that these are strictly averages as there is no guaranteed PTO in the U.S.

On average, U.S. workers get eight days of sick leave per year​

There is often a connection between how many sick days an American worker gets and their employment status. In general, the more often they work and longer they’ve been in their position, the more sick days they receive. The average number of paid sick days is as follows:4

  • Eight days per year for full-time workers
  • Six days per year for part-time workers
  • Eight days per year for workers who received a fixed number of paid sick days after one year of service
  • Ten days per year for union workers, after one year of service
  • Seven days per year for nonunion workers, after one year of service

The average employee in the U.S. receives an average of 7.6 paid holidays​

Though the national average is 7.6, statistics show that 21% of U.S. employees receive six paid holidays per year.4 The most common paid holidays in the United States are Thanksgiving, Christmas, Independence Day, New Year’s Day, Memorial Day and Labor Day. Of course, some employers give their workers more or less paid holidays. They may even offer floating holidays, which are paid days off that workers can take at any time during the year.

Federal employees have 11 annual paid holidays​

While PTO is optional, there are certain paid holidays that are legally required for federal workers in the U.S. These holidays for federal employees include:5

  • New Year’s Day (January 1)
  • Birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr. (Third Monday in January)
  • Washington’s Birthday (Third Monday in February)
  • Memorial Day (Last Monday in May)
  • Juneteenth. National Independence Day (June 19)
  • Independence Day (July 4)
  • Labor Day (First Monday in September)
  • Columbus Day (Second Monday in October)
  • Veterans Day (November 11)
  • Thanksgiving Day (Fourth Thursday in November)
  • Christmas Day (December 25)
To give you info from my husband he does not get MLK off, does not get Washington's birthday off, does not get Juneteenth off, does not get Columbus Day off, does not get Veterans Day off. His prior company opted to add Good Friday off, his present company removed Good Friday off but added a floating holiday instead.

Average Paid Leave by Years of Service​

The amount of time a worker has been with a company often impacts how much PTO they receive. In general, paid time off increases with years of service with a business.4
The average paid time off for full-time employees in the United States is as follows:
1682190063997.png

The article did discuss that in the tech industry the move has been more to unlimited PTO and antidotally I can say that seems to pan out to be true. As an example Perceptive Software was headquartered here and they were one of the first companies in my area I remember hearing making the switch to unlimited PTO.
 
I haven't read all the posts, but is it possible gambling money helps support the cost of non DCL ship travel?
It sure does, also a reason why on other ships single room occupancy is so much more expensive, because you have to make up for the drinks package, the gambling etc. the other person in the room would have bought.

And I think we can conclude, it's a combination of factors why Disney is so much more expensive in Europe than other lines. ;-)
 
Last edited:
It sure does, also a reason why on other ships single room occupancy is so much more expensive, because you have to make up for the drinks package, the gambling etc. the other person in the room would have bought.
Single occupancy on DCL is priced pretty much at 200% except only one set of taxes. It's no bargain.
 
I haven't read all the posts, but is it possible gambling money helps support the cost of non DCL ship travel?
that has been an argument here many timeson Disboards. Honestly when I think about it, I have never read any facts on this. A quick Google just gave me this

“On average, tickets account for 62% of total revenue and onboard purchases make up the remaining 38%.” I had also seen some initial reports were all up to 70% revenue are tickets.

Onboard purchases is everything from special meals, alcohol, sales, stores, spa services, excursion, and casino.

Now just for my own personal experience on the non DCL Cruises I have been on that had casinos they were surprisingly not so packed. Many ships are designed where you have to walk through them so even though i dont gamble I’m in them.

And keep in mind Disney does have gambling. Bingo and I’ve honestly seen more people playing bingo on Disney ships vs I have seen on other cruise lines casinos.

Granted, I’ve never done a three night booze cruise on carnival or one would assume perhaps on these type of Sailings people do more gambling and drinking.

Disney also doesn’t do drink packages so I’m pretty sure they’re making a pretty penny on alcohol sales as I would think that they’re making more an individual purchases versus packages

And I would also assume that Disney is making tons of money on their gift shops no other cruise lines have people waiting in line before they open on day one to spend literally hundreds on branded stuff

So my point is, I can’t see the lack of casino revenue equaling the price difference in fares.
 
Last edited:
You would have to compare a concierge on Disney to Yacht Club for the closest equivalent. Comparing a Yacht Club room to a deluxe verandah on DCL isn’t accurate. Yacht club also includes all beverages (liquor, premium coffees, sodas, etc), wi fi, and gratuities. Not to mention butler, private restaurant, etc

It’s totally fine to pay the extra for a Disney cruise because you want to or it has different aspects that you value more. We are going to book a Wish cruise even though we can go cheaper on another line because we want try it before DD10 is out of kids club range. But sometimes people use some really fuzzy math to convince themselves Disney isn’t pricier for a lot of iterinaries compared to other cruise lines…
To me the service on DCL, the cleanliness, quality of food (we are vegetarians), ability to create meals just for us, and the Disney feelings are all reasons to pay more for similar type stateroom on DCL vs other cruise lines. I think of cruising Disney as cruising first class. Still going to same place but just a nicer set of amenities to get there and I know I will pay more along the way and that is okay with me today.

When my being okay to pay more changes I will need to find another cruise line or change my stateroom category from mostly verandahs to insides.

In the end, it’s a very personal decision. No right or wrong decision on which line to sail, but rather just a decision.
 
To me the service on DCL, the cleanliness, quality of food (we are vegetarians), ability to create meals just for us, and the Disney feelings are all reasons to pay more for similar type stateroom on DCL vs other cruise lines. I think of cruising Disney as cruising first class. Still going to same place but just a nicer set of amenities to get there and I know I will pay more along the way and that is okay with me today.

When my being okay to pay more changes I will need to find another cruise line or change my stateroom category from mostly verandahs to insides.

In the end, it’s a very personal decision. No right or wrong decision on which line to sail, but rather just a decision.

I understand your sentiments and agree that DCL is for you now and may forever be because DW and I were there once; however, since our desired *Disney Fix* no longer exists and then doing the math, sailing a DCL Verandah at virtually the same cost of Yacht Club makes no financial sense nor provides a greater emotional satisfaction and certainly paying the thou$and$ more for a lesser Concierge experience is simply not wise.

Enjoy your future cruising :thumbsup2:thumbsup2 whether DCL or another line.
 

GET UP TO A $1000 SHIPBOARD CREDIT AND AN EXCLUSIVE GIFT!

If you make your Disney Cruise Line reservation with Dreams Unlimited Travel you’ll receive these incredible shipboard credits to spend on your cruise!





New Posts















New Posts







DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest

Back
Top