Why do people stay off-site?

[Funky Chicken]

While I can't say I would neverstay offsite again, here are a couple of reasons I prefer to stay onsite that haven't been mentioned yet.

I am a firm believer in the touring plans way-tour in the AM, break midday for swim/nap, head back to the parks for evening touring/Wishes/Illuminations/what have you. Staying offsite makes that very difficult to do without it costing you a couple of hours of valuable park time every day. You pay for your park admission by the day, with shorter tickets costing more than longer ones on a per day basis-
That makes time even more costly during shorter stays. I can make the most of my valuable vacation time by staying onsite.

Part of what you pay for onsite is theming and immersion. Some people find little value in that, but my favored Disney Resorts (AKL and WL) are destinations unto themselves. Some of my best recent memories of WDW trips involve just hanging out at the resort-sitting in a rocking chair or out behind the AKL lobby. The resort is just as big a part of our vacation experience as are the parks themselves.

I guess the last thing is the weirdest.
There is something intangible about staying onsite that means something to me. I can remember going as a kid in the '70s and early '80s and staying out on 192 in dumpy hotels. At the time the "world" was smaller-you had CR, Poly, and the Golf resort (now Shades of Green) plus the 4 original Lake Buena Vista properties. You would drive in on World Drive from 192 and there was nothing around for a couple of miles-most of the current road network didn't exist. The old MCO airport was tiny, like you would expect to find on an island. Eventually Dad sprung for the Polynesian and it was just as great as we thought it would be to be "inside" of things.
Now I am the one who needs to make the financial decisions about our family's vacation budget. I always think back to how how much it meant to me as a kid to stay on property and that's what I want my family to experience. Our budget is far from unlimited but I don't have any problem justifying staying onsite.We are not resort snobs either-we have done super cheap trips in Values with free dining and nicer stays in deluxes and enjoyed all of them for different reasons. I just booked one night at WL in January for a post-cruise trip to MK, and there were certainly cheaper options, but given the time constraints the extra money is really well spent IMO.
I have always been totally fascinated about how WDW basically grew out of a swamp and expanded outward from Bay Lake, and the progress and expansion that WDW brought to the surrounding area is just amazing to me. I feel differently when I stay onsite-it really is a different trip for me.

 

[nessz79]

I prefer onsite, but sometimes off-site is the only way we can afford a trip...and an off-site Disney trip is better than no Disney trip, any day!

There are good values to get, especially from a vacation rental.

 

[disnut8]

OK, I'm looking at several trips to WDW in 2013 and, although I've only stayed on-site before, I thought I'd look into trying off-site options as well.

I'm not sure it's ever going to make much sense for us. By the time you add up the airport transfer fees for off-site hotels, daily internet fees and losing on-site benefits, there are only 2 times it seems like it would make sense for somebody to stay off-site:

- people traveling with hotel points
- larger families that need more space

Am I missing something here? Are there people outside of those 2 groups that stay off-site and can help convince me to give it a try?

For you, it might not make much sense but for my husband and I, it does. We do stay onsite a lot but for Thanksgiving, there are no Disney discounts and I can't see us paying more than double for what a good room offsite would cost. We are in at a Ramada for less than $50/night with free internet. We drive down so no airport transfer fees. We have annual passes so no parking fees.

I do belong to Wyndham Rewards but don't have enough points for a free stay so I am outside your two criteria.

 

[nan1217]

I do belong to Wyndham Rewards but don't have enough points for a free stay so I am outside your two criteria.

In my reply above, I added a third group: people with a car. You fall into that one.

 

[BuzznBelle'smom]

We prefer offsite, but we're a larger family. To me, stuffing ourselves into two hotel rooms isn't exactly a vacation--more like a cage match! There are pros and cons to both:

Onsite is best if your party is 5 or less (some would say 4 or less), you utilize ME and EMH, you like to eat at Disney retaurants, your vacation style is theme parks from rope drop to fireworks, and "Disney immersion" is important to you--i.e., you like the Disney touches, you have no interest in Universal or Seaworld, etc.

Offiste is better if you like to have chill time, like to spread out, would consider using a kitchen or washing machine on vacation, might want to hit something outside of WDW, and have a larger party.

I'm not saying one way is better than the other, although for some people, there's a clear choice. We go down for 2 weeks, every other year, and rent a house. My family values its down time--theme parks are great, but they like hanging out, too. We do Universal and Seaworld as well as the Disney parks. The private pool is a hands-down favorite with all four of my kids. I don't mind cooking a few simple meals, and it doesn't bother me to do a load of laundry here and there. Even if money were no object, my gang would want to stay in the house.

OTOH, I can totally understand not wanting to touch a stove or washing machine on vacation, and Disney does create an amazing experience.

BTW, Bumber, I think was confused on Windsor Hills and Windsor Palms. WH is closer, newer, and has more resort-type amenities. Windsor Palms is a touch farther away, a little older, and less expensive. Both are really lovely gated communities. There are many communities with rentals (not to mention 8000 hotels), but these two get mentioned a lot because they're very nice.

 

[LoveMyMoos]

We've stayed offsite once. Not everyone flies. We live in NC so it's much cheaper and easier for us to drive instead of fly, as a family of 5. So we don't have to worry about airport transportation or even transportation to the parks. Even when we stay onsite, we drive to parks and such. So for some people, it is much cheaper. I know the one time we stayed offsite we spent what we'd spend for one night at Disney resort, for the two nights that we were there.
That being said, we much prefer Disney resorts, so even though we have our own transportation, we usually stay onsite.

 

[ccgirl]

While I can't say I would neverstay offsite again, here are a couple of reasons I prefer to stay onsite that haven't been mentioned yet.

I am a firm believer in the touring plans way-tour in the AM, break midday for swim/nap, head back to the parks for evening touring/Wishes/Illuminations/what have you. Staying offsite makes that very difficult to do without it costing you a couple of hours of valuable park time every day. You pay for your park admission by the day, with shorter tickets costing more than longer ones on a per day basis-
That makes time even more costly during shorter stays. I can make the most of my valuable vacation time by staying onsite.

Part of what you pay for onsite is theming and immersion. Some people find little value in that, but my favored Disney Resorts (AKL and WL) are destinations unto themselves. Some of my best recent memories of WDW trips involve just hanging out at the resort-sitting in a rocking chair or out behind the AKL lobby. The resort is just as big a part of our vacation experience as are the parks themselves.

I guess the last thing is the weirdest.
There is something intangible about staying onsite that means something to me. I can remember going as a kid in the '70s and early '80s and staying out on 192 in dumpy hotels. At the time the "world" was smaller-you had CR, Poly, and the Golf resort (now Shades of Green) plus the 4 original Lake Buena Vista properties. You would drive in on World Drive from 192 and there was nothing around for a couple of miles-most of the current road network didn't exist. The old MCO airport was tiny, like you would expect to find on an island. Eventually Dad sprung for the Polynesian and it was just as great as we thought it would be to be "inside" of things.
Now I am the one who needs to make the financial decisions about our family's vacation budget. I always think back to how how much it meant to me as a kid to stay on property and that's what I want my family to experience. Our budget is far from unlimited but I don't have any problem justifying staying onsite.We are not resort snobs either-we have done super cheap trips in Values with free dining and nicer stays in deluxes and enjoyed all of them for different reasons. I just booked one night at WL in January for a post-cruise trip to MK, and there were certainly cheaper options, but given the time constraints the extra money is really well spent IMO.
I have always been totally fascinated about how WDW basically grew out of a swamp and expanded outward from Bay Lake, and the progress and expansion that WDW brought to the surrounding area is just amazing to me. I feel differently when I stay onsite-it really is a different trip for me.

I just want to add to this. When my children were smaller and napped, we would return to the off site timeshare for a mid afternoon break and actually got there quicker than my friends staying onsite and relying on the bus system. By the time a bus even came, we were in our car and on our way. There are so many places near WDW (Bonnet Creek) for example that you can get to very quickly if you have a rental car.

The whole immersion thing....some people love it, such as you. You definitely don't get that when you stay off site.

Luckily, there are so many different kinds of accommodations that really fit everyone's "style".

 

[afcgirl]

I almost just booked an off-site hotel for the first time ever but I just couldn't do it! The prices for Disney resorts for our upcoming spring break are outrageous so I decided to look around. But I ended up with the Swan. Although it is not Disney-owned I do love to be surrounded by everything Disney.

 

[Planogirl]

We've stayed both onsite and offsite over the years and we enjoy either one. It is nice to get access to EMH and use internal transportation occasionally but it's also nice to have more space, save money (I bargain shop) and sometimes we're in the area to do other things too and Disney hotels can be inconvenient. We don't feel any need for constant Disney when we travel plus I prefer to drive a car and that makes a difference too.

 

[MinnesotaMouseketeers]

The first trip to WDW was for our honeymoon, a combo WDW/Big Red Boat (then official cruise line of Disney) vacation. We were off site because we didn't know any better back then. Than we stayed on site and loved it. But we decided to save money and stayed off-site and really, really wished we were back on-site.

We love having the 24/7 Disney feel, the fantastic resort choices, the beautifully landscaped grounds, the great service from the WDW cast members, Disney transportation, and many, many more reasons for never staying off-site again.

We decide which resort we want to stay at next, start saving up for it and when we have enough money book it.

 

[disneyshan]

We are staying off-site for the first time in April. However, we are going because my husband has a conference in Orlando and the hotel and car rental are paid. I never would have considered off-site before, however, I'm very excited about it. We have two children under 3, so it will be nice to have a suite and a whole kitchen (making baby food and bottles and cleaning up after)! But, next year, when the kids are a bit older - I'm thinking that it's onsite all the way! (unless we absolutely love the offsite way...)

 

[DznyCrzy11]

My husband and I have stayed offsite and onsite and we have found that for us we prefer onsite. When we stayed offsite, we found it to be a hassle dealing with traffic, driving to the parks, etc. One of our trips to WDW we decided to use ME and stay at a WDW Resort and that ended up being the best option for us. We fly down so for us it's more convienent and relaxing to use ME and stay at a WDW Resort, that way we don't have to bother with renting a car or dealing with traffic.

 

[Cindironi]

I know everyone has an opinion about this, but this is my opinion. In July my children and myself went to Disney with my sister's family and my mom, staying at the Bonnet Creek Resort. I had read mixed reviews about the resort, but we decided to give it a try. The facility was nice and the room was spacious, but the bus service was the worst that I have ever experienced during any stays in the Disney area. I am accustomed to Disney Resorts and this was not a great experience at all for us. I ended up driving the last day, because of the bus schedule. I hope this helps in your decision making.

 

[BubMunkeyBles]

To save money. Especially if you have passes which cover free parking and want to have a car anyways.

 

[SouthernTaz]

We have done both on and off.. The off-site has come down to space and cost... We are staying 8 nights off site (week of thanksgiving) in a 6 bedroom house for $1000 for the week! Private pool and its in Windors Hills.... We had to stay off site this time as we are a family of 5 and taking my SIL and her husband and kids, and My MIL and a friend.... To stay on site for the week for all of us was well over 6000 for just rooms!!!

I opted to do APs for my crew of 5, so parking is free and will pick up a TIW card... We are headed back next spring and next summer... We are debating on-site for one of those....but really when i have been quoted $1300 for a week a WBC for the spring trip vs $3800 at AOA.... Its going to be pretty easy...

They only thing we will miss is last trip we did 10 nights at CL CR.... We only used EMH 2x and that was on two sunday nights at MK unitl 3am and the time from 1am -3am the park was EMPTY and so much fun...

So its really what you want and can do... if it came to cutting my trip SHORT and staying on site vs a nice long leisure trip off site... I am taking the room and extra time....

 

[FantasiaMagic]

Usually people will stay offsite to save money. People might also want to visit Orlando's other theme parks such as Universal or Seaworld. You could do that staying at a Disney hotel but you might be in a more central area for everything offsite.

I always stay onsite! I would never think of doing anything else!!

 

[jm0925]

OK, I'm looking at several trips to WDW in 2013 and, although I've only stayed on-site before, I thought I'd look into trying off-site options as well.

I'm not sure it's ever going to make much sense for us. By the time you add up the airport transfer fees for off-site hotels, daily internet fees and losing on-site benefits, there are only 2 times it seems like it would make sense for somebody to stay off-site:

- people traveling with hotel points
- larger families that need more space

Am I missing something here? Are there people outside of those 2 groups that stay off-site and can help convince me to give it a try?

In my opinion, staying off-site is more beneficial if you are going with a large group all because you can get a room with more space to accommodate more people for less money than staying on-site. You can also find a place with more than one bathroom, a kitchen and a laundry space as well. Now, if you don't have your own car, it could be a pain to get around although most of the hotels in the Lake Buena Vista area offer shuttle service to the major theme parks.

For my family, sometimes off-site is just cheaper for us especially if we are going at a time when there are no discounts for Disney Resorts. For our next trip we are staying on property because we got the resort discount this time and also I wanted to take advantage of their transportation service. In the past, we always had to pay to park at the Disney Theme Parks so being able to use the resort transportation this time around is a nice thing. The other convenience I love about staying on-site is if I buy items in the parks, they can deliver my bags to my resort. This way I don't have to carry my souvenirs around. I like to shop!

 

[PlutosMommy]

It depends of when we go and who we go with.

When we go with my parents for example, they strictly want to stay in one of the Disney hotels on the monorail track. And there's only 5 of us total. It's convenient to have the option of the dining plan and to have disney transportation available if you want to use it. There's the "Disney Immersion" that people so commonly speak of too.

When we travel with my husband's family, there are 9 of us. And his parents have access to resort points so our accommodations are free, but not on property. The adults all have their own rooms as do the kids, and we have our own washer/dryer and full kitchen. On off days the kids swim just like they would on property. Their vacation is still great.

Either way, we are close enough that we drive.

 

[VickiVM]

We are a family of 5 and have stayed onsite 7 times...from Yacht Club on down to AS. We have almost always had a room-only discount and have driven 4 times out of the 7. Then in 2010 we stayed in a 2 bedroom @ Wyndham Bonnet Creek for $110 per night...I decided right then and there we would never stay on-site again. Door to door, driving, our 9 day vacation cost approx $2200 and with 3 teens, the extra space was priceless.

Now my oldest is in college and likely will not go with us back to WDW again for a few years...he's over it (for now...).

So hello Family-of-Four options!!!

If you're more than a family of 4, then you can get way more bang for your buck off-site and still enjoy an awesome vacation.

Now that I've received a PIN for a room-only discount, I could be swayed to thinking on-site would be wonderful for all the reasons already stated

 

[eliza61]

OK, I'm looking at several trips to WDW in 2013 and, although I've only stayed on-site before, I thought I'd look into trying off-site options as well.

I'm not sure it's ever going to make much sense for us. By the time you add up the airport transfer fees for off-site hotels, daily internet fees and losing on-site benefits, there are only 2 times it seems like it would make sense for somebody to stay off-site:

- people traveling with hotel points
- larger families that need more space

Am I missing something here? Are there people outside of those 2 groups that stay off-site and can help convince me to give it a try?

Ok here is why we some times stay offsite.



1)first, What on site benefits? Even if I didn't hate disney buses which I do you don't have to be a on site guest to use them. find them slow, If you have to go resort to resort which we do for dinner it takes a full hour to get anywhere. so I always have a car. Don't even get me started on the mass exodus, wait 3 buses to be able to board drama. I don't do rope drop nor the ddp. so outside of emh what are the on site benefits?

2) way overpriced. We only stay deluxe and sorry the quality for the price point imo is sadly lacking. I stayed at the waldorf for 189/night last year as opposed to 550 for the Grand floridian. Resort was better, service was better and I saved over 1000 dollars. that's a lot of internet fees.

The only reason I stay onsite is when I use my dvc points or if I get a 40% off room rate pin, which I haven't gotten in years.