Why do you stay off site?

[gracie1]

I noticed that most people stay off site due to needing more room for their families. But does anyone stay off site just due to it being cheaper?? We are currently booked at pop century...and yes we are getting a good deal but if you were able to stay off site and save $600 would you do it?

We are first time visitors....and I know we would have to give up emh's, which we don't even know if we would be using them or not anyways. There weren't too many emh's to start with.

Just wanted opinions of other disboards!

 

[4Seasons]

Absolutely!!! $600 could buy me alot of "magic" elsewhere.

Make sure you factor in the cost of a rental car though, you really should have one if you stay offsite. But some of that can be offset by the meal savings you'll probably have, not having to buy every single meal at park prices.

 

[The Hendies]

$600 is alot of money! Are you booking more than one room, going during peak season, or are you staying a long time? Any combination of those could be a substantial savings. Just a few other things to think about, you would have to pay for parking ($12.00) per day. Depending how far from WDW you will be staying, you could be losing time traveling. We stay off property at our condo most of the time because it has more space, and is literally, less travel time than taking the bus from POP to the parks. Whatever you decide, have a great time!

 

[swilshire]

We spent three or four days at Pop Century a few years ago to get in on free dining before moving to our off-site timeshare. Pop Century was fun, but there is just no comparison. We were two adults and two kids crammed into a hotel room. No sofa to sit on. No refrigerator. Very tight quarters. Long walk to our car.

We left the Pop and moved to a three bedroom pool house with a garage. Full kitchen, three bathrooms, huge living room, four televisions. Cost was about the same as the Pop or just slightly more.

EMH would be nice, but DH doesn't like to go real early or stay real late anyway. The Disney transportation often required waits, so we drove our own car to the parks most of the time. This year we have APs, so parking costs don't factor in.

It's a no brainer for us, even when there are only four of us. When the whole family goes along, there is no way we'd stay in a hotel room again. We have a 4-br condo booked for December 12. I think we'll have plenty of room to spread out.

Sheila

 

[gracie1]

$600 is a lot of savings. But after reading trip advisor the hotel has very, very poor ratings. So I think I will just keep my current ressies. It was a nice thought while it lasted

But I would rather know that I have a clean room to stay than get there to a run down hotel that is not clean!

 

[Lost in Wonderland]

This will be our first trip to WD, too. My MIL has a timeshare so including the fee to transfer it to my DH's name the total is $268 for a week. Once we heard that staying on disney property wasn't even an option
If you could save $600 I would stay off property. You aren't going too spend too much time there and alot of the hotels seem to be nice and with pools. You could use tht $600 to buy more souvenirs, a character meal, or even see something else in Orlando like SW.

 

[carrie1626]

My kids are older now so the convenience of a food court isn't a big draw, nor a themed pool. Previously when I've stayed off-site there were: a) just my sister and I and b) a family vacation with the DH who isn't into "all things Disney" like the rest of us.
I rent a car whether on site or not but the reason I would stay off-site is: comparison of $$ to the kind of atmosphere I'm getting and the location of off-site dining.

 

[Katie Dawn]

But does anyone stay off site just due to it being cheaper??

Yes!!!

Different people want different things. I am a bargain shopper regardless of the vacation. It has worked so far, we've never ever had "vacationer's remorse" after the trip is over! In addition, we will be adopting soon so every penny we can save on this "dream trip" does our heart good!

 

[Elfstar]

Yes, if I can get a good deal at a decent hotel, I do it to save money. In December I'm going for four days because the DTD Holiday in is reopening and having a special - $57 a night for rooms. So I'm taking a trip I hadn't planned on because of that. And I'm driving this time, so I can stock up at the liquor store on the way home (it's much cheaper in Florida than in NC) and pick up some last minute gifts in DTD. And for the first time, I'll get to see the Christmas decorations!

 

[dgr1973]

We stay off-site because it is sooo much cheaper! We are going to the Comfort Inn Lake Buena Vista the first week of Nov for 233.00 for the whole week. We are only in the room to sleep and shower so why spend more than that for a room? I understand the whole Disney magic thing with staying onsite, and I would really love to do that one day but for now it's off-site for us. We are renting a car which we would do anyways even if staying on-site, but that's just us we like to be on our own schedule.

 

[castanhope]

Yes!! For me, the initial decision to stay offsite the first time was based on having a full kitchen to save money on food! I have three hungry kids who want full meals plus all the yummy snacks they see at Disney, not to mention a husband who is hungrier on vacation than he even is normally...it was just too expensive without free dining to even consider buying all that food onsite for 10 days. Once we stayed offsite once, it was not only the cost, but the convenience of not having to wait in line at every meal or wait for a table. We could just give the kids breakfast at the rental house like usual, pack a lunch and sit down anywhere in the park to eat at any time, and then either get a nice dinner at the parks or drive somewhere else. It was much more relaxing than having to be at a reservation or try to agree on a counter service three times a day, and it saved a ton of money.

 

[My2Angels]

Well, unfortunately, I will be the disagreeing one here. We tried staying offsite in June to save money. The room was MUCH cheaper, got a great rate on Hotwire, the hotel was very close, only 1 mile from Disney. Room was ok, and my kids even loved the pool, BUT I will never stay off site again.

There was the hassle of parking and paying to park, especially at MK, where we still spend the most time, the length of time it took to get back and forth to the hotel, and most of all, the lack of having the dining plan sealed it for me!
We spent $125 on ONE meal at Wilderness Lodge, no desserts, drinking water when I could have bought the dining plan for my whole family for $113 per day. I could have had drinks, dessert, a counter service meal and snack for everyone that day for less money! One counter service for us at Sunshine Seasons at EPCOT was $48.00! And my kids do not eat a lot (kids meals)!
Had we taken the time to leave the park, go back to the room and eat, it would have cost us several hours out of our day, and we could not do EMH.

I totalled it up at the end and if we would have paid for our room at POR with the summer discount code and bought the dining plan, we would have gotten more table service meals, greater convenience, my son would have had a trundle bed instead of sleeping on the floor, and it would have cost me very close to the same, if not less money.

 

[littlbugmom]

We go for more room that will save us money!


We have stayed on site and off.
We will not stay on site again.


My DS5 has mild sensory and OCD issues that make it very important for us to have a large area that we can spend a lot of downtime in. One room for a week would be impossible for us. For us, the price difference between an off site house and an on site villa is simply, huge. HUGE.


With a full kitchen, we spend very little on food. $200 stocks the kitchen for our stay. Even when we factor in our ADR meals (and we DO enjoy ADR meals) and snacks bought in the parks, the cost doesn't come anywhere near the amount we're saving by not having to pay for a Disney property. Not even close.


The convenience issues that people bring up are not issues for us. We don't like Disney transportation. We feel it takes too long and is not convenient at all. We will always rent a car. We have AAA preferred parking, so we don't walk far to get to our car.


Going back to the room to eat and then returning is not a hassle because we have to go back for my DS's downtime, anyway.


We still have a great resort to enjoy.


My sister visits us during part of our trip each year. With a house, she has her own bedroom, instead of a sofa sleeper.


All in all, I find nothing inconvenient about staying off site. We save money and get exactly what we want.

 

[Magalex]

We are planning our first "off-site" trip next year. We have always stayed on WDW property. For 2010 we are visiting Universal, Sea World and 2 days at WDW parks. So we are staying at these choices that I have been researching:
Doubletree DTD, Embassy Suites LBV, or Residence Inn Sea World. There is only 3 of us but we want a small suite and breakfast included.

 

[vegas_mickey]

We stay off-site to save money. For us, a party of 5, to stay on site in a low end hotel is $1900 for a week, whereas off-site we can do it for less than $600 and have a kitchenette and plenty of room for everyone. The difference between the two pays for our tickets for the week. The driving around does not bother us at all, it is MUCH faster than Disney transporation. Who wants to wait a half hour for the bus or monorail at the end of the night, plus ride time, when you can drive to your hotel in just a few minutes. For us the magic is in the parks, the hotel is just a place to sleep while the parks are closed.

 

[GetGlowing]

If it were just my husband and I, we would probably stay on-site for the "magic." But we are traveling with family and we're getting a two-bedroom condo for a week for just $500, plus we're taking advantage of the military tickets this time. Staying off-site is a no-brainer for us. And we're driving, so a rental car isn't an issue.

 

[jam217]

My son and I just returned from five nights at Doubletree in DTD. I picked it for the price -- $400 -- for five nights. That includes all taxes and fees. I also decided on Doubletree because all rooms are suites. My son stays up later than me and I'm up earlier than him. If we stayed in a Disney hotel, then I know we both would have been inconvenienced by only having one room.

I also liked having the small refrig and microwave. The shuttles ran every 30 minutes to and from the parks. Beds were very comfy and the room was clean. The hotel also had Neutrogena shampoo, conditioner, lotion and facial wash. I think when I stayed at POFQ in January I only got shampoo.

Doubletree and Best Western are the farthest from Downtown Disney (but there are shuttles as well)....about a 12 minute walk....a little over a half mile according to my Garmin. We really liked the Doubletree and would recommend it to others. For the money, we got a great deal.

 

[mdinme]

Its tough to compare apples to apples as it were...

We're obsessive about "knowing it all" and "figuring it out" if you'll allow me. So we really tried to look at it in a variety of ways. We took out the rental car piece of the trip since we'd rent weather on site or not, so the only items to look at are room and food.

Six nights is Kidani via renting points from a dvc member is costing us $1550.I had a quote of $1070 for NINE nights in a four-bed villa at vrbo.com; had its own pool and hot tub and thr price included pool heat. We budgeted 150 for the other three nights off site (actually got them free thru starwood cc) so on site was about $650 more.

Food? Well dining plan will be $800. COuld we eat for less than $800 offsite over six nights? Yes, likely for half that if we ate in the villa but here's the really tough piece to discern:

What's our time worth? Cooking, shopping, planning is something we do each day here at the house. Is it really vacation to deal with that? What the six night / seven day value of not dealing with lunch and dinner (we'll have breakfast in the kidani room to keep the ts's for high end meals and to save)?

Is it worth the $1k Difference which is what we could likely save if we did the whole 9 days off site? 1000/6 nights = 167 if I divide it by 4 since there is 4 of us it amounts to about $42 a day. But maybe its only the time spent dealing with and cooking meals and cleaning up after them that should count... maybe 90 minutes per meal plus shopping time? 270 X 6 = 1620 minutes? 16 or 17 hours over six nights dealing with food? Sound right? High?

Now factor in the "park time issue" (at least a 10 mile commute to parks each day) and pay for parking issue and we realized that it might be a wash even though more money will, in fact leave our wallets...

This doesn't make a darn bit of sense does it...

 

[btcrane]

Well, unfortunately, I will be the disagreeing one here. We tried staying offsite in June to save money. The room was MUCH cheaper, got a great rate on Hotwire, the hotel was very close, only 1 mile from Disney. Room was ok, and my kids even loved the pool, BUT I will never stay off site again.

There was the hassle of parking and paying to park, especially at MK, where we still spend the most time, the length of time it took to get back and forth to the hotel, and most of all, the lack of having the dining plan sealed it for me!
We spent $125 on ONE meal at Wilderness Lodge, no desserts, drinking water when I could have bought the dining plan for my whole family for $113 per day. I could have had drinks, dessert, a counter service meal and snack for everyone that day for less money! One counter service for us at Sunshine Seasons at EPCOT was $48.00! And my kids do not eat a lot (kids meals)!
Had we taken the time to leave the park, go back to the room and eat, it would have cost us several hours out of our day, and we could not do EMH.

I totalled it up at the end and if we would have paid for our room at POR with the summer discount code and bought the dining plan, we would have gotten more table service meals, greater convenience, my son would have had a trundle bed instead of sleeping on the floor, and it would have cost me very close to the same, if not less money.

This sounds like us. DH and I just said this past week, while we loved the All-Star Vacation house we rented one year with another family, unless we ARE traveling with another family, the convenience of staying on-site does it for us. No worrying about traffic and directions, going the right way, etc. We deal with that enough in "real life." Plus, we always do breakfast in the room and take sandwiches, fruit cups, water, etc. into the parks for lunch so save money that way. When we do have a full kitchen we end up not using it to it's full capacity because I don't do major cooking when I'm on vacation.

There are definitely benefits to on and off-site, just what is most important to you. For us, no transportation stress is worth a few minutes of standing in line (which has NEVER been very long) for the monorail or a bus. And finally, we can have a beer or glass of wine with dinner without having to worry about driving later....

 

[StuckInKS]

I think it depends on WHERE I would have to stay to save $600. We also rely a lot on EMH, since we tend to get to the parks late (sometimes not until 3pm).

Last trip I felt we really had the best of both worlds. Got Hilton in DTD for cheaper than a Disney Value hotel and it was very clean. We also got EMH and Disney transportation. However, the cost of eating was very high for us, so this time having free dining outweighs the savings of staying off-site. Plus, we will get to enjoy several TS meals, instead of just one (which cost us $150, something we can't do every day of our vacation). This also eliminates the need for a kitchen, therefore that wouldn't be a 'perk' to stay off-site this time.

So, I think it really depends on the situation. Last time, the savings and circumstances were right for us, this time they aren't. If we go without free dining again, we will likely stay off-site, but it will have to be in a DTD hotel that does EMH if it is during value season. Otherwise, the parks close way too early for us.