And The Beat Goes On!

[prestoncaldwell]

I was just reading some comments on Facebook and someone mentioned that they don't pay travel agent commission on the resort fee. So that's where the difference is.

I don't believe the purpose of this move would be to beat travel agents out of $2.25 per room night. It's another potential revenue stream for Disney. A way to increase their revenue per room without posting increased room rates. More accurately, they can charge the $15 bucks and increase room rates $5, effectively getting $20 more per room night.

And, of course, if guests accept the $15, then it will go up to $20, then $25. 10 years from now you will be paying a $35-$40 resort fee.

 

[Dis703]

you can get similar pools and restaurants at offsite hotels. But you can't walk to MK or Epcot or take a monorail or boat or even a bus that takes you right to any park.

Well from the Swan and Dolphin you most certainly can walk to Epcot as well as HS. And they have bus service to all of the parks. Other offsite hotels have pretty decent bus service to each of the parks as well. Not all of those bus options are great but some are pretty decent especially when comparing costs.

ETA: And I realize S&D does charge a resort fee but their cost for location is still far better than the other deluxes in those areas.

 

[Dis703]

What would also be annoying about paying a resort fee would be that the general public not paying it can come to the resort and use the facilities apart from the pool.

You can watch the movies or make smores etc. And what about car parking problems at the monorail and Epcot resorts where you have paid a resort fee.

The fee stinks in my eyes.

I was definitely thinking about this as well. If we're going to be asked to pay extra for all of those amenities they really better be exclusive to just resort guests.

 

[mom2rtk]

you can get similar pools and restaurants at offsite hotels. But you can't walk to MK or Epcot or take a monorail or boat or even a bus that takes you right to any park.

And that's precisely why the room rates are so much higher at Disney. It's not some extra you just "get" by staying onsite. You definitely pay for it.

 

[Dis703]

What worries me is the availability for Soarin and Frozen Ever After, but we aren't going until late 2017 so maybe things will calm down by then LOL

Soarin' wasn't an issue for us last year even at under 30 days. And since they are adding another theatre I would think that would allow for even more FP. As for Frozen it may or may not run out early but if you keep checking even the really hard ones pop up available right up to and including the day you are there.

 

[jbharr1]

another potential motivation for a resort fee is they could float the room rates based on availability like every other hotel in the country and know they are still collecting a base amt that covers hard costs. As demand for rooms goes up, price goes up. currently the rack rates are set and fluctuate with the time of year and perception of the demand for that time of year. Using Vegas for an example, anyone here look at room rates when there is a major event in town? If disney found that 6 months out that YC has 30% availability. Maybe instead of sending out pin codes or special offers, they just start to lower the rate to make it more attractive? Still get the resort fee to cover hard costs.

 

[MakiraMarlena]

It's not "cutting them out." It's an accounting trick to have the income from the fees separate from the income for the rooms. So in other words they can pay the travel agent and still have that income stream untouched. They can discount the cost of the room should they need to boost occupancy - but that resort fee still stands. They can give away the rooms like they do in Vegas - but the guest still pays the resort fee. So they get some basically "untouchable" income on every room. I can see why hotels do it, and why Disney wants to. But will it make guests move offsite (not so much quit going, but quit paying some of their cash directly to the mouse).

 

[Jcon]

It's not "cutting them out." It's an accounting trick to have the income from the fees separate from the income for the rooms. So in other words they can pay the travel agent and still have that income stream untouched. They can discount the cost of the room should they need to boost occupancy - but that resort fee still stands. They can give away the rooms like they do in Vegas - but the guest still pays the resort fee. So they get some basically "untouchable" income on every room. I can see why hotels do it, and why Disney wants to. But will it make guests move offsite (not so much quit going, but quit paying some of their cash directly to the mouse).

It is cutting them out because right now the costs (fees) are included in the price of the room


Ultimately, this is supply and demand. As long as the price elasticity of demand remains in Disney's favour, they can raise prices all they want.

 

[RedAngie]

I mean .. when it comes down to it .. why not go to the extreme?
Disney Value Resort! Only $10/night!
Plus $10/bed fee
Plus $10/sheet fee
Plus $10/lock on your door fee
Plus $50/Air Conditioning fee
Plus $30/Hot Water Fee

ETc. etc. etc.

Sounds like Spirit Airlines biz model.

Well, why not? Spirit is very profitable, and Disney has never been shy about copying successful aspects of someone else's business.

I heard there were other survey questions that addressed a la carte pricing for items. I hear it's also awfully easy to get kicked out of the survey. If one answers yes to a question about participating in social media, blogs, etc." they are done with the survey. If one answers that they have had multiple stays in the same year, their survey was ended. Someone even reported that they answered yes to a question about using their iPhone to answer the survey and it kicked them out. Seems awfully targeted.

Sounds like their goal is to be able to report that 95% of survey takers are in favor of resort fees--no--95% of respondents DEMAND resort fees.

 

[DisneyPiPhi]

As budget travelers, we would probably not pay this fee if it was optional. Therefore, at Disney, I would feel like a second class citizen, not allowed to participate in activities at my own resort where I am paying to stay. That would not contribute to the magical feeling I usually get with Disney's level of customer service.

Also, when I'm booking travel to any hotel or resort, resort fees annoy me. Even if the hotel is very upfront about having a $10 or $15 resort fee, I still feel like it's a "hidden fee." It gives me a negative impression of a hotel or resort and makes me not want to stay there. I am probably alone in this, though

If this begins, we will stay off-site. I am already attracted to the idea of spreading out in an off-site condo, but the $20 parking fee keeps me on-site. A resort fee would negate that, and on our future trips, I imagine we would become very familiar with the townhomes at Windsor Hills.

 

[PghPixie]

I heard there were other survey questions that addressed a la carte pricing for items. I hear it's also awfully easy to get kicked out of the survey. If one answers yes to a question about participating in social media, blogs, etc." they are done with the survey. If one answers that they have had multiple stays in the same year, their survey was ended. Someone even reported that they answered yes to a question about using their iPhone to answer the survey and it kicked them out. Seems awfully targeted.

I wish I had thought to take a screenshot of my survey!! I got one about the a la carte pricing. It listed the nightly rate at $350 and then listed "Optional Add-Ons" of $5 per person for Magic bands, $20 per person for "Priority FastPass Selection at 60 Days", Extra Magic Hours fee, a per person cost for MDE, etc. The prices for Magic Bands and Fast Passes are the only prices I can remember, but it had 5 or 6 different items - all of which are currently included as the perks of staying onsite.

The only that really got me was charging for Extra Magic Hours. So you want me to pay your high ticket prices + your ridiculous hotel price AND even more to be able to stay an extra hour or two and ultimately end up spending more money on food, drinks, etc.??? No, thank you.

 

[prestoncaldwell]

As budget travelers, we would probably not pay this fee if it was optional. Therefore, at Disney, I would feel like a second class citizen, not allowed to participate in activities at my own resort where I am paying to stay. That would not contribute to the magical feeling I usually get with Disney's level of customer service.

Also, when I'm booking travel to any hotel or resort, resort fees annoy me. Even if the hotel is very upfront about having a $10 or $15 resort fee, I still feel like it's a "hidden fee." It gives me a negative impression of a hotel or resort and makes me not want to stay there. I am probably alone in this, though

If this begins, we will stay off-site. I am already attracted to the idea of spreading out in an off-site condo, but the $20 parking fee keeps me on-site. A resort fee would negate that, and on our future trips, I imagine we would become very familiar with the townhomes at Windsor Hills.

I don't think I've ever seen optional resort fees. I'm sure someone has one, but I've never seen it.

 

[HM]

I want to know who is actually going to take the survey and answer yes to this question.

Why yes, Disney, I would like to pay an additional $15 fee for services that are already included in my stay, thank you for asking.

Someone that hasn't stayed onsite and hasn't researched, may think this is a good thing.
When are they doing these surveys? In the park? (possible chance to get a yes here) After a resort stay? (less likely)

 

[Redcon1]

This past weekend I purchased 3 day tickets to Universal for some future trip. What I noticed right away is the tickets were over $600 cheaper for us four. That's a big savings.

Yeah, now you can afford to stay one night in a Disney Deluxe.

Oops. hopefully you saved $615. Forgot about the $15 resort fee.

 

[crazymomof4]

So true but even if we can afford to continue to go we have been so much that the 60 day access doesn't matter to us anymore. We've seen it all. If we do it we do it if we don't we don't. I'm over it!

This is my take on it as well. If WDW continues to raise prices and add fees at the rate they are (which I think is faster than the usual pace we've grown accustomed to) then I see our family in a place where we will def have to make adjustments to how we "do Disney". We've been onsite guests for trips recently. We may have to save $ (to afford the increases) by staying offsite. We've done it before, we can do it again. We can get a 3 bedroom house 10mins from the parks (umm door to gate, faster than disney buses) for $89/night. Even tacking on car rental, thats a huge savings over WDW onsite rooms! And yes, a drawback is getting the leftovers of FP+s but we can deal with that. Many many current offsite guests do!
I think WDW is steadily "pushing the hand" of many in a certain income level, forcing them to shift their vacation spending dollars. Many might begin packing snacks so as to skip buying lunch or dinner in the park. We are a family of 5 "adults"- doing this could save us $100/day! Maybe having 1 character meal instead of the usual 2? Offsite rather than onsite. Lower limits on sovenier spending. Adding less extras like dessert parties or golfing.

Yes, I do believe WDW will see a time when their increases and fees will NOT be showing in increased overall profits bc of this shifting and vaca adjustments being made by guests. People will still do WDW but they will change HOW they do it.

 

[MakiraMarlena]

it won't be optional. The entire point of a 'resort fee" is that it is NOT optional. this money is going into an income stream separate from the room fees themselves, and will be accounted for differently.

It is also not specifically about denying income to travel agents. That's just an effect.

 

[mom2rtk]

I wish I had thought to take a screenshot of my survey!! I got one about the a la carte pricing. It listed the nightly rate at $350 and then listed "Optional Add-Ons" of $5 per person for Magic bands, $20 per person for "Priority FastPass Selection at 60 Days", Extra Magic Hours fee, a per person cost for MDE, etc. The prices for Magic Bands and Fast Passes are the only prices I can remember, but it had 5 or 6 different items - all of which are currently included as the perks of staying onsite.

The only that really got me was charging for Extra Magic Hours. So you want me to pay your high ticket prices + your ridiculous hotel price AND even more to be able to stay an extra hour or two and ultimately end up spending more money on food, drinks, etc.??? No, thank you.

So if I chose to pay the add on for EMH, does that mean Disney can't cut back the schedule unexpectedly right before my trip.

Wait.... don't bother. I already know the answer.

 

[SaintsManiac]

Well from the Swan and Dolphin you most certainly can walk to Epcot as well as HS. And they have bus service to all of the parks. Other offsite hotels have pretty decent bus service to each of the parks as well. Not all of those bus options are great but some are pretty decent especially when comparing costs.

ETA: And I realize S&D does charge a resort fee but their cost for location is still far better than the other deluxes in those areas.

I hear they have fantastic beds, also. I'm seriously going to look into their prices. I just want to walk to Epcot

 

[prestoncaldwell]

when you stay at Disney resorts, you are staying there for proximity. That is ALL you stay there for, not resort amenities. They may be changing their pricing structure (maybe) but they will not change this. Apparently they are trying to figure out what kind of customers would still pay for the proximity over resort amenities, when they could just go to a similarly priced offsite for more traditional hotel amenities.

I disagree. I think people stay at Disney for proximity, but also for 180+ day ADR, 60+ day FP+, EMH, and free parking or transportation. And, of course, because of brand affinity.

 

[Jennasis]

Wonder if DVC is exempt?