Worth the money to stay on property?

[laurainsem]

So I haven't been to DLR since I was a child and am taking a group of 4 in October. I'm having a heck of a time deciding on where to stay. It is a lot more money to stay on property i've noticed and am wondering: is it really worth it?

 

[DisneylandDarling]

To me personally, it isn't worth it. The hotels are all easily $200+ a night more than the hotels across the street. The only upgrade that you get by staying onsite is the extra hour. An extra hour in the park isn't worth $200/a night or more, in my opinion. The hotels across the street are, in many cases, closer than the actual onsite hotels.

If you are trying to pick a hotel, try to choose one on Harbor across from Disneyland. This includes Fairfield, Camelot Inn, Tropicana Inn, Carousel Inn, Best Western Park Place Inn, Desert Inn and Suites, Best Western Anaheim Inn, Park View Inn, Candy Cane Inn, Courtyard by Marriott Theme Park, Desert Palms Hotel and Suites, and Del Sol Inn. There are a few others that are pretty close on Harbor that I'm just spacing out right now. Out of all of those, I would recommend Desert Inn or Camelot Inn. These two are no frills, but are clean, safe and are less of a walk than onsite hotels. Desert Palms is a pretty nice hotel that is just a little further away.

If I were you, I would take the savings by staying off-site and use it for restaurants inside the park, Mickey's Halloween party, souvenirs, etc.

 

[Imdboss]

There is no way I can justify the additional cost of staying onsite, we can afford to but just don't see the value. That being said a lot of people can justify it. In the past we were Worldmark timeshare owners so would always stay there but we've since sold and are now Hilton loyal due to DH's diamond status. We stayed at the DoubleTree Suites which is 1 mile to DL and loved it. The walk in the morning was very doable for us and we'd take ART back at night which we find very easy to use. Last trip we stayed at Embassy Suites S, which is further away, not walking distance, but they had their own shuttle, we didn't like the hotel so won't go back (too outdated for us). For our upcoming trip we are currently booked at DoubleTree again although I'm trying to get us into the new Homewood Suites.

A lot of people like onsite for the Disney bubble aspect. We find that just being in Anaheim we get that feeling. Also the other big draw of EE every day isn't a factor for us since we aren't rope drop people, we are more close the park down people. Even if we wanted to go to EE each day I still wouldn't consider that enough value to justify the added cost of onsite hotel. We also always stay for a week, arrival day to get settled, 5 park days plus a day off in the middle to relax so hotel costs can add up quickly.

Every family finds value in different things so you just need to decide what's most important to you! Have fun planning

 

[frankyray]

It depends on the people in your party. We have stayed at the Grand Californian 5 times in the past few years because our children (10 and 7) like to go back to the hotel to rest in the afternoon and it has a separate entrance to DCA. The other hotels (Disneyland and Paradise Pier) are farther and it is true that some of the offsite hotels are closer than DH and PP. The other perk as mentioned above is the extra magic hour, where you can get a number of rides in before the park opens to everyone else. If you are willing to get up early to be the first ones in the park, then it may be worth it. I don't think the other amenities or the rooms in the hotels are nice enough to justify the price, but we would never stay anywhere but GCH solely because of the proximity and the EMH

 

[disneyxica20]

while we would love to be able to stay on property, we never have. we always spend most of our time at the parks, so paying hundreds of dollars just for a place to sleep is outrageous to me. maybe one day we will splurge and spend one night on property and motel 6 the others, haha. but right now it's a no go.

 

[Iceman93]

This question gets asked a lot on this board, and most of the responses mirror those given here. I have a different view, in that I *do* find the onsite hotels to be worth the premium. It's obviously a personal decision, but I will point out that the Disney hotels are pretty much sold-out all year round, so I guess I'm not the only one who thinks they are worth the price.

 

[ParkHopper1]

No it is not worth it...tell everyone...that way demand will go down and prices will drop for those of us that like to stay on site...wait...but when prices drop then it will be worth it to stay on site, thus driving demand back up...dang you logic!

If all you want and/or need is a bed and a shower, then no...it may not be worth it. It becomes worth it for those that want a full immersive vacation retreat away from reality from the time you step on property till the time you leave.

To me there is value in once I arrive to not have to/want to/need to leave the "bubble" that has been meticulously engineered to keep me in a suspended state of reailty away from the "outside" world.

 

[ludari]

Personally I like to stay on property just to be closer to the parks and get those extra magic hours. If those things are not important to you I would say save the money and stay off property and use the money you saved for something else.

 

[sherilaine]

Worth is a very subjective term. If someone were to do a serious cost/benefit analysis on how much you pay for each early hour into the park, which is pretty much the only perk you can account for financially, it would probably support what everyone else is saying. Staying onsite it not that much closer - but most people who justify do it for the 'bubble experience'. Going at a very busy time though, that extra hour becomes more valuable but it's only of any value if you know for a fact you'll be there in time and ready to use it, every day of your stay! Otherwise you really are paying a lot of money for what most would consider a pretty regular hotel room anywhere else.

We can afford to stay onsite but we haven't yet. Just because you have the money doesn't mean you are always going to spend it. I have read comments about people who are struggling with their credit card payments who are staying onsite, which boggles the mind, so it's clearly like an expensive purse or shoes - the value is hard to explain but that doesn't stop people from handing over the money!!

 

[TheZue]

I think it depends on your party, what is new and in demand in terms of the extra magic hour, how much you like downtown Disney, and what your budget looks like frankly. The time we did it that was totally worth it was the year Carsland opened. At that point the extra magic hour was absolutely worth that money. I also loved it when we had little kids. The big thing nobody talks about is when you are onsite Downtown Disney is right there, you don't have to go through security. It's great.

 

[cruisehopeful]

Think about how you spend your days there and they will tell you if it is worth it. We usually only use our rooms to shower and sleep. I never use hotel pools. I'm busy at the parks. Spending $400/night to shower and sleep isn't worth it to me. I love Trader Sam's and the lobby bar in Grand Californian. I still go to those and then go back to my cheaper place to sleep.

I will once in a great while stay on property, but I wouldn't say it was "worth it."

 

[Laz]

When we visit DLR, we stay onsite for the total Disney experience. Having said that, don't let the trip break your bank account. You may be able to use the hotel savings on a something special for the family like a WOC dinner package or a behind the scenes tour. Or, put the saved money away for another Disney trip. Happy planning!

 

[AustinTink]

Totally worth it if you want to stay in the "the bubble". We love popping into the GCH for little mini-breaks throughout the day.

 

[Pakey]

I've stayed onsite and I've stayed offsite--the Disneyland Hotel is my favorite of the 3. While at WDW, I feel that "bubble" from staying onsite, I don't get that same experience at Disneyland. Everything is so close and the hotels directly across on Harbor Blvd are almost as close as staying at the Grand Californian, which is the closest of the 3 Disney hotels. We dine at the Disney hotels, enjoy the lobbies, etc. but we pay to sleep across the street for a fraction of the price. It's an easy walk, even for a midday break. The parks are smaller, we don't feel the need for as much downtime as is needed at WDW and we tend to stay out from park opening to park closing. IMO, that one hour of extra time in the morning isn't worth the price for those hotels. This is coming from someone who enjoys staying Grand Floridian club level in Florida.

 

[To Disneyland and Beyond]

This year, 2016, was our first family trip to Disneyland. We went in March and stayed at the Camelot and had an amazing time. The room was great, spacious and close. Then, because we bought annual passes and because we found a great deal on the Disneyland Hotel, we went again in May. We also had an amazing time at the Disneyland Hotel and it was a different experience. I don't believe the experience, for our family, is worth the typical cost of those rooms, but I was actually quite surprised how much more relaxed I felt and how luxurious it felt to stay there. We aren't fancy people, but the beautiful grounds, the resort feel, the level of service (including room service which we used more than I thought we would out of sheer exhaustion some days) characters roaming around, all the restaurants on the property - it was really nice. That hotel, to me, is like being inside Disneyland. So for us, the Disneyland Hotel was a nicer experience in ways that genuinely surprised me. It felt really sparkly and special. When my son turned on the lights on the headboard and the music played he said, "I knew this was a magical place." Having said all that, we are going again this summer and staying at the Camelot because it is great, clean, close and affordable.

 

[SCRAPBOOKQUEEN]

I just got back from Disneyland. We stayed off-site at the Desert Inn and Suites. It was PERFECT!!! It was just me and my DD so a standard room was fine for us, however they do have suites that have more than one room I believe. I looked into one room that had a separate bedroom and then another room with a pull out couch. The room was clean, bathroom was clean and I felt is was spacious. The beds were comfortable. They have an indoor pool that is small but big enough for kids to play plus a hot tub. There is also a continental breakfast that I felt was great. It was enough for us to fill our tank until we could decide to have something else or have lunch. It was so close. Just across the street. If you were to stay on-site, except for the Grand Californian, you would end up walking much farther and I tell ya by the end of the night when my feet were screaming, that short walk was heaven. I had read various reviews, on here and other sites and of course everyone has an opinion, but I thought it was perfect and would definitely stay there again. The price was right too. There are other hotels just as close and they too seem nice. While you have to pay for parking as with most of them and we didn't have a car, we did have free WiFi. I hope you have a wonderful time.

 

[rentayenta]

I think it's totally worth it. We have stayed both on and off site many times we prefer on site. We aren't fancy people either, actually quite casual, and love the GCH/Villas. Staying on site adds to the vacation experience. Sadly we never have enough points to stay on site every trip. I find our on site trips much more relaxing than our off site ones.

 

[kastfan]

If you want a "Resort" experience, and will take advantage of the pools and extra morning hour, and it is within your budget, then definitely stay on site.

If you care more about maximizing your time in the parks, and will use the hotel primarily to sleep, then stay offsite.

 

[hlbtimes2]

For us, no, not worth it. We could stay one night on site or 4 nights off, for the same price. We are "bed and shower" people. We rarely use the room during the day.

 

[5forMickey]

I agree with ParkHopper1 -- no not worth it, don't stay there hehehe......the less people that like the DLH the better for me.

If you are of the camp that " just wants a shower and a bed"you should for sure stay at one of the other places on Harbor.

However, if you are neither wanting to pay the onsite prices but want more than "just a place to sleep and shower" you might try the new Marriott right across the street. I'm an onsite girl all the way, it's the only way I'll do the park. I love the DLH and find the extra hour more than worth it, I LOVE that time of the morning in the park with so few people. Then again, I also willingly would pay extra for priority seating at the shows, parades, etc., just to not have to fight crowds. On our last trip we arrived a day earlier than expected and the DHL was booked. We tried the new Marriott across the street on Harbor and I found it to be very nice Hotel. I still will stay exclusively on site, but you might check into that hotel and maybe find a middle of all the points.

Also, just know that most of the places on Harbor are "Motels" not "Hotels" so if that is important to you double check that.

Have a great trip!!!