Does it get old arguing with the "Onsite Only" crowd?

[TamaraQT]

Ok...here is my two cents.....

The reason why people become so argumentative is because deep down THEIR WAY is what they truly want to defend. The funny thing is, many people have only had either ON-SITE stay OR an OFF-SITE stay. Not MANY have done both because they already conceived in their minds one over the other. In my case I am in favor of Off-site because I go to ORLANDO not just to DISNEY. So I will rent a car to get around ORLANDO. Yes, I will pay to park per day if I go to Disney but who cares. So one year we went to Orlando for 11 days. We stayed ONSITE for 4 days and did ONLY DISNEY. Then we spent 7 days offsite and did other stuff. My DD8 enjoyed onsite ok...BUT....she kept mentioning she couldnt wait to check-in to our offsite resort and participate in poolside activities and do other stuff. My DH was so OVER Disney transportation. By the end of day 1 he DESPISED it to the point that we started using the rental car to get around instead of a bus. We did ok with the Monorail because it was faster...but BUS transportation was NOT our favorite. One kid got sick on the bus and that was the LAST straw for my DH. He kept asking "Why are we doing this with a perfectly good rental car in the parking lot??" Getting from a park back to AOA was an adventure but it wasn't FUN at all. Having to leave the park to get to ADRs on time was ridiculous. Now keep in mind we went in JULY so it may be different than someone going in October!! Bottom line is we discovered, that given the experience we are definitely OFF-SITE people. But we determined that AFTER experiencing both ON and OFF site stays. So technically UNLESS you have experienced both, you can't say which one is better for YOU or YOUR FAMILY because you have nothing to compare it to. But in the end, people will STILL ARGUE. It will be a NEVER ENDING DEBATE. But I RESPECT the opinions of others even if I don't agree. I felt I could NOT compare one to the other UNTIL I experienced BOTH. Yep...we are DEFINITELY an OFF-SITE family and PROUD of it !!!!

 

[jsmla]

I almost never get into argument type threads, hate them, but.....

While this board is fun for WDW regulars it is also a forum where people come for help with planning. I can't express how small of a rat's behind I care about who stays where or what you think about my choices but I do enjoy helping out. As someone who regularly pulls off budget trips I enjoy assisting those who are afraid they can't afford it to do so.

I know I sound like a broken record but it doesn't matter how great your vacation style is and I'm not debating that it is absolutely awesome and totally worth it. (That's a different topic altogether!) But if your preferred style is out of reach for the person needing the help it doesn't matter how great it is. If someone only has a hard saved $3K for a once in a lifetime family trip it really isn't helpful when someone comes aboard to go on and on about their $10K vacation-how great it was and how much the budget plans are going to suck-it's unneccessary, unhelpful and often plain old obnoxious. This is a huge board, plenty of other places to discuss your higher end vacation.

 

[jsmla]

You do know you aren't on the budget boards right now right. I didn't take the budget board aspect to it because this is the Orlando Hotels and Attraction section of the boards. It is just the offsite vs onsite factor and not all about the budget. I agree it is wrong for someone who has a very set budget and trying to make it work to get talked into an onsite deluxe stay on the budget boards when offsite or value would have been a better suggestion for their budget. Now if someone says I'm on a budget and can spend XXXX amount and people are telling them well the off site hotel doesn't actually cost less because you said you'll have to rent a car and then pay the $20 a day to park at a Disney hotel so you can actually save by staying onsite if you forgo the rental car then I don't see that as bad advice. If the person says they want the car then I leave it alone and say then offsite is a great option.

I didn't respond to this as an off site vs on site thread, it read as a vent about other people on the DIS to me so that's what I did, vent.


I could argue endlessly the cost savings of staying offsite. They are real. Citing parking fees is an old standby for those who, IMHO, don't get it. A condo that sleeps 6/8 is easily had for less than 700/week in the summer. Throw in $100 for parking and you're at $800 Please direct me to a Disney resort that will sleep 6 at even twice that during the school holidays. From experience, I know that most larger families with a limited budget will be driving, airfare being out of reach, no need for a rental car. I won't even go into the savings you see on food.


Nitpicking about board areas aside (because no one ever goes off topic here, do they?) budget is a valid and and real (and I suspect primary) reason people do debate staying outside of the Disney resorts.


If you look at my join date and post count you can see that I'm not a person who spends a lot of time arguing with strangers on the internet. This one just hit close to home. It is beyond annoying to have others constantly belittling well meant and sincere attempts to help someone while offering nothing in return.

I would truly like to know why they do it.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Ok...here is my two cents.....

The reason why people become so argumentative is because deep down THEIR WAY is what they truly want to defend. The funny thing is, many people have only had either ON-SITE stay OR an OFF-SITE stay. Not MANY have done both because they already conceived in their minds one over the other. In my case I am in favor of Off-site because I go to ORLANDO not just to DISNEY. So I will rent a car to get around ORLANDO. Yes, I will pay to park per day if I go to Disney but who cares. So one year we went to Orlando for 11 days. We stayed ONSITE for 4 days and did ONLY DISNEY. Then we spent 7 days offsite and did other stuff. My DD8 enjoyed onsite ok...BUT....she kept mentioning she couldnt wait to check-in to our offsite resort and participate in poolside activities and do other stuff. My DH was so OVER Disney transportation. By the end of day 1 he DESPISED it to the point that we started using the rental car to get around instead of a bus. We did ok with the Monorail because it was faster...but BUS transportation was NOT our favorite. One kid got sick on the bus and that was the LAST straw for my DH. He kept asking "Why are we doing this with a perfectly good rental car in the parking lot??" Getting from a park back to AOA was an adventure but it wasn't FUN at all. Having to leave the park to get to ADRs on time was ridiculous. Now keep in mind we went in JULY so it may be different than someone going in October!! Bottom line is we discovered, that given the experience we are definitely OFF-SITE people. But we determined that AFTER experiencing both ON and OFF site stays. So technically UNLESS you have experienced both, you can't say which one is better for YOU or YOUR FAMILY because you have nothing to compare it to. But in the end, people will STILL ARGUE. It will be a NEVER ENDING DEBATE. But I RESPECT the opinions of others even if I don't agree. I felt I could NOT compare one to the other UNTIL I experienced BOTH. Yep...we are DEFINITELY an OFF-SITE family and PROUD of it !!!!

And you know what's interesting is as an adult I go to Orlando to go only for WDW and USO regardless of onsite or offsite; like I mentioned before this upcoming trip will be my first onsite (years ago when I was young my parents took me to Sea World and Busch Gardens but I haven't been back since). I go to the rest of Florida for other reasons-at lot has to do with I'm in the middle of the country so when I'm in Florida it's basically beach vacation but when I'm in Orlando it's a theme park vacation. I could see if I was doing a beach vacation I could add a day or two for Busch Gardens though but that's way down the list of priorities if doing a beach vacation and would be completely dependent on where in Florida I'm at.

Time off allowances and finances are going to limit my ability and desire to take away from WDW and USO days to do other things--this wasn't as big of an issue when I was visiting my step-grandmother an hour or so from Orlando during the summertime (one year we visited her for 3 weeks) when I was in elementary/middle/high school.

Someone can compare and say which is better for their own family without actually having done both. I mean it doesn't take one to stay in a smaller sized hotel room to get that it won't work for their own family for example.

As a whole I get what you are saying but even then you're still offering up what your viewpoint/opinion is in a way where another side would still be presented as wrong.

*As a weird side note whenever I see your posts I sometimes have a hard time following because of the heavy caps usage and where it's being used at*

 

[TamaraQT]

And you know what's interesting is as an adult I go to Orlando to go only for WDW and USO regardless of onsite or offsite; like I mentioned before this upcoming trip will be my first onsite (years ago when I was young my parents took me to Sea World and Busch Gardens but I haven't been back since). I go to the rest of Florida for other reasons-at lot has to do with I'm in the middle of the country so when I'm in Florida it's basically beach vacation but when I'm in Orlando it's a theme park vacation. I could see if I was doing a beach vacation I could add a day or two for Busch Gardens though but that's way down the list of priorities if doing a beach vacation and would be completely dependent on where in Florida I'm at.

Time off allowances and finances are going to limit my ability and desire to take away from WDW and USO days to do other things--this wasn't as big of an issue when I was visiting my step-grandmother an hour or so from Orlando during the summertime (one year we visited her for 3 weeks) when I was in elementary/middle/high school.

Someone can compare and say which is better for their own family without actually having done both. I mean it doesn't take one to stay in a smaller sized hotel room to get that it won't work for their own family for example.

As a whole I get what you are saying but even then you're still offering up what your viewpoint/opinion is in a way where another side would still be presented as wrong.

*As a weird side note whenever I see your posts I sometimes have a hard time following because of the heavy caps usage and where it's being used at*

Looks like I started a fan club because I have no idea who you are to mention following my posts so closely....

 

[wilkeliza]

I didn't respond to this as an off site vs on site thread, it read as a vent about other people on the DIS to me so that's what I did, vent.


I could argue endlessly the cost savings of staying offsite. They are real. Citing parking fees is an old standby for those who, IMHO, don't get it. A condo that sleeps 6/8 is easily had for less than 700/week in the summer. Throw in $100 for parking and you're at $800 Please direct me to a Disney resort that will sleep 6 at even twice that during the school holidays. From experience, I know that most larger families with a limited budget will be driving, airfare being out of reach, no need for a rental car. I won't even go into the savings you see on food.


Nitpicking about board areas aside (because no one ever goes off topic here, do they?) budget is a valid and and real (and I suspect primary) reason people do debate staying outside of the Disney resorts.


If you look at my join date and post count you can see that I'm not a person who spends a lot of time arguing with strangers on the internet. This one just hit close to home. It is beyond annoying to have others constantly belittling well meant and sincere attempts to help someone while offering nothing in return.

I would truly like to know why they do it.

Of course a family of 6 is going to have a much different experience then they single mother of 2 you mentioned earlier which is what I was using as my base for saying onsite vs offsite may cut much more closer in some situations. Again it is all about the situation being presented and no answer will be one size fits all for every budget and travel group. Yes if you have a family of 6 and a low budget a condo rental will probably be your best bet. I also might suggest they eat breakfast at the condo. A family of 3 and only 1 of them being adult and the value resorts start to cost about the same as an offsite rental if you add in the parking fee and rental car needs if not using the shuttle. If they family of 3 is okay using the hotel shuttle that may have a bad schedule then that works for them. Like I said I've couched surfed before to make it more affordable when I was coming down all the time so I know that all trips can be different. For me it doesn't make that much difference where I stay but I do like being in the Disney bubble but would stay off site if it was the make or break decision I needed to do for a trip.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Looks like I started a fan club because I have no idea who you are to mention following my posts so closely....

A fan club?? Nope not at all...it's called having a memory. Are you seriously telling me you don't remember anyone or their commenting style you've ever read in any of the threads/posts/comments here on the discussion board?

My goodness interesting that you've got no other response than that.

I mean sure fine whatever if you don't remember or pay attention but just because I can doesn't make me your "fan club" good lord what are we tweens now?

 

[HopperFan]

I understand and completely get what the onsite only people say. I was definitely like that. But some of them are so adamant, that they will argue no matter how wrong they are.

I get it all the time when people ask where we are staying at WDW. When I tell them we are staying offsite, they almost gasp. When I tell them how much I pay, they simply say Disney is better. Honestly, Disney resorts are not better than offsite. At best, they are an even comparison. When you make completely valid discussion points, they go off on the "It's Disney". It's not, it is a $5,000-$7,000 savings for a week long vacation. Then they say they paid no where near that when they spout of they spent only $3,000 at the GF in a studio room. When you ask they the price of a 2BR unit, they say they didn't need that much space.

I don't know. It just gets to me. I know some of these people have far more money than I do. So much so that $3,000 to them is like me spending $250. But still, it gets old.

See below to my signature .............

"There is no right way or wrong way to do Disney, just what is right for you!"

I have over 120+ onsite stays and probably half that offsite. This year so far, 2 onsite and 2 offsite. Stays range from 2-12 nights. Every trip is different, every lodging need is different and every budget is different. I look at myself as something like a large combination of many different types of guests and I understand many point of views.

Bottom line .......... those who say onsite is the ONLY way are right and wrong. It is right in terms of their family, they are wrong in terms of every guest. Those who ONLY stay offsite, or in hotels, or in condos or in houses and say it's the only way are right and wrong. Right for them, wrong for others. If someone is only willing to discuss and see their view ............ as far as I'm concerned conversation is over because there absolutely is not just one way, there are many ways to enjoy Disney.

Here is my advice to those who ask me .... for the most part you have no control over your ticket costs ..... or park food costs (unless you are willing to pack) but you have alot of control over your lodging costs. Pick a price that you are willing to pay, then look within that range on/off along with what you get for that price then narrow down your lodging first. Build your trip from there.

I completely agree that I hate when someone comes on for advice; they give the parameter they are looking at; ask about onsite or offsite issues that they would like ... and then there are those posters who jump on ... not to actually answer THEIR question and give answers to THEIR question but to tell them how they do it and how they think OP should look at their way as it is so much better. I think that is where some of this comes from, threads that vere away from OP's question but to posts about how they "should do it."

 

[jsmla]

So, I'm guessing I'll never find out why!

I do both, all the time and do feel like my experience is relevant. It may be very easy to decide if a certain room size is adequate or not but things like commuting times, ADRs and FastPass bookings are better considered if you have experienced both on and off.

Take getting to the parks. From Silver Lake I know from experience (I've timed it.) that I can commute to every park except for Magic Kingdom (and MK is debatable depending on the Disney Resort and time of day) much quicker than I can via the WDW buses. I've done both many, many times. That's the sort of thing where experience with both on and off is helpful.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

So, I'm guessing I'll never find out why!

I do both, all the time and do feel like my experience is relevant. It may be very easy to decide if a certain room size is adequate or not but things like commuting times, ADRs and FastPass bookings are better considered if you have experienced both on and off.

Take getting to the parks. From Silver Lake I know from experience (I've timed it.) that I can commute to every park except for Magic Kingdom (and MK is debatable depending on the Disney Resort and time of day) much quicker than I can via the WDW buses. I've done both many, many times. That's the sort of thing where experience with both on and off is helpful.

Those are good points for sure.

 

[TamaraQT]

Ok...here is my two cents.....

The reason why people become so argumentative is because deep down THEIR WAY is what they truly want to defend.

I think from the start I made it CLEAR this was my OPINION....

And you know what's interesting is as an adult I go to Orlando to go only for WDW and USO regardless of onsite or offsite; like I mentioned before this upcoming trip will be my first onsite (years ago when I was young my parents took me to Sea World and Busch Gardens but I haven't been back since). I go to the rest of Florida for other reasons-at lot has to do with I'm in the middle of the country so when I'm in Florida it's basically beach vacation but when I'm in Orlando it's a theme park vacation. I could see if I was doing a beach vacation I could add a day or two for Busch Gardens though but that's way down the list of priorities if doing a beach vacation and would be completely dependent on where in Florida I'm at.

So what was the question?? The arguments about onsite and offsite right?? what is your response??? I digress...moving on.....

Someone can compare and say which is better for their own family without actually having done both. I mean it doesn't take one to stay in a smaller sized hotel room to get that it won't work for their own family for example.

Re-think this statement because technically the arguments are they already have it preconceived to make small hotel rooms work before they would even consider staying offsite. Sleep and shower is all they need...space doesn't matter. But unless they compared staying in a larger space how do they know how much of a difference it makes. That is my point...they assume before they even try something different.

As a whole I get what you are saying but even then you're still offering up what your viewpoint/opinion is in a way where another side would still be presented as wrong.

So now you are the expert to tell me that my opinion is wrong?? It's my opinion....you may disagree but it doesn't make it wrong. I dont expect everyone or anyone to agree with my opinion.....so where does that assumption come from. Sounds to me like you already have in your mind that your way is the right way....so go back and read my opening sentence again......the part where I say their way is what they truly want to defend....and here you are proving my point....

*As a weird side note whenever I see your posts I sometimes have a hard time following because of the heavy caps usage and where it's being used at

I have a VERY SIMPLE solution to YOUR PROBLEM of following my posts........how about you stop following them.....then you won't have a "hard time".......I will be the least offended to be blocked by you or anyone else. In fact do me the honor !!!!

 

[jsmla]

Of course a family of 6 is going to have a much different experience then they single mother of 2 you mentioned earlier which is what I was using as my base for saying onsite vs offsite may cut much more closer in some situations. Again it is all about the situation being presented and no answer will be one size fits all for every budget and travel group. Yes if you have a family of 6 and a low budget a condo rental will probably be your best bet. I also might suggest they eat breakfast at the condo. A family of 3 and only 1 of them being adult and the value resorts start to cost about the same as an offsite rental if you add in the parking fee and rental car needs if not using the shuttle. If they family of 3 is okay using the hotel shuttle that may have a bad schedule then that works for them. Like I said I've couched surfed before to make it more affordable when I was coming down all the time so I know that all trips can be different. For me it doesn't make that much difference where I stay but I do like being in the Disney bubble but would stay off site if it was the make or break decision I needed to do for a trip.

Again, I had no intention of, in any way, saying one option is better than another in all cases and still don't. I was simply trying to ask the onsite-only people to show a little consideration for those who absolutely cannot afford it. Since this is Disney World, large families make up a large proportion of that demographic. I am fully aware that a different party will see different savings.

I just find it strange that there are so many people on the DIS will fall all over themselves to help out with almost any other issue but often treat extreme budget Mouseketeers like they have no right to even go.

 

[TamaraQT]

A fan club?? Nope not at all...it's called having a memory. Are you seriously telling me you don't remember anyone or their commenting style you've ever read in any of the threads/posts/comments here on the discussion board?

My goodness interesting that you've got no other response than that.

I mean sure fine whatever if you don't remember or pay attention but just because I can doesn't make me your "fan club" good lord what are we tweens now?

Again I ask why do you follow so closely....now you find it interesting that maybe others may not comment on my posts in the way you feel is relevant. Yes....you are a fan....borderline GROUPIE!!!! How is that for CAPS!!!! It's funny that you should point out how my posts in particular gives you such a hard time....Is it really that serious??? Really???

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I think from the start I made it CLEAR this was my OPINION....

So what was the question?? The arguments about onsite and offsite right?? what is your response??? I digress...moving on.....

There wasn't a question in that statement. Are you unable to discern someone speaking conversationally and someone asking a question?

Re-think this statement because technically the arguments are they already have it preconceived to make small hotel rooms work before they would even consider staying offsite. Sleep and shower is all they need...space doesn't matter. But unless they compared staying in a larger space how do they know how much of a difference it makes. That is my point...they assume before they even try something different.

I think you're thinking too narrowminded in that sense or you misunderstood what I was saying. A person knows that a 260 sq foot hotel room is going to be too small for them especially given 2 double/full sized beds with their traveling party. Should they stay onsite in that 260 sq foot hotel room just for the sake of comparison? I'm also speaking in regards to costs. It tends to be larger rooms=more costs. If the options are larger room but offsite versus smaller room and onsite, etc. Most people have stayed in a hotel room at some point in their lives (and sure for those who have they have zero spatial imagination in this sense) and at least have a general sense of layout

So now you are the expert to tell me that my opinion is wrong?? It's my opinion....you may disagree but it doesn't make it wrong. I dont expect everyone or anyone to agree with my opinion.....so where does that assumption come from. Sounds to me like you already have in your mind that your way is the right way....so go back and read my opening sentence again......the part where I say their way is what they truly want to defend....and here you are proving my point....

Did I say I was an expert? There were ways you said things that were in a way where your way was the right way and others were the wrong way..which was in contradiction to your first part of your post. It's entirely possible that due to the caps being used in the way they were used that I misunderstood your points. Generally speaking one uses caps to show emphasis. That was actually part of the reason I even mentioned having a hard time reading your posts.


-------------------------------------------

I have a VERY SIMPLE solution to YOUR PROBLEM of following my posts........how about you stop following them.....then you won't have a "hard time".......I will be the least offended to be blocked by you or anyone else. In fact do me the honor !!!!

Again I ask why do you follow so closely....now you find it interesting that maybe others may not comment on my posts in the way you feel is relevant. Yes....you are a fan....borderline GROUPIE!!!! How is that for CAPS!!!! It's funny that you should point out how my posts in particular gives you such a hard time....Is it really that serious??? Really???

Where in the world did you get the idea that I was following you...seriously..I said whenever I see your posts...you know on threads...you know on the discussion board we are on. My goodness I don't go out seeking you geez sorry you're not that important. It's called observation skills. Sorry you don't pick up I guess on these things.

I really don't understand how your defense mechanism is someone points out your writing style and you respond with "oh you must be following me" as if that's the only reason possible...do you have this same reaction in your real life?

ETA: Leaping to use the word 'groupie' when someone points out they recognize your writing style on an internet discussion forum...mmmkkk

*I think you just want to argue and paint the situation in a certain way......yeah nah not feeling really up to it today. You go on your merry way then and we'll agree to disagree and move on*

 

[Westcoastwild]

It's not about right or wrong-that's waaaay too subjective.

Totally made up scenario:

Budget Board

Newbie posts:
First time at WDW
Must go in summer (Dad's a high school teacher)
4 young kids
Limited income (Mom stays home with the kiddos)

This family cannot afford onsite without serious financial consequences. It would be seriously irresponsible for them to spend that kind of money. My reply is:
-Drive
-Offsite condo
-Stay away from the Disney eateries as much as possible-spend your $ on special treats like Mickey bars, not extravagantly overpriced* theme park food.

This sort of thing is inevitably followed by a barrage of posts telling the OP all about how crappy it will be if they head down such a crazy path. Often there will be replies insinuating that this family has no business going to Disney at all if onsite is not in the budget. This family should wait and skimp on every other aspect of their lives to save until they can afford a Disney resort and 3 meals a day in a WDW restaurant. Forget that the oldest is now 32, you got to stay at Riverside!

Yep. Absolutely. My problem is with the people who basically imply offsite is an inferior experience to the newbies.

This board- the onsite fanatics especially- tend to make the whole Disney vacation planning thing seem a lot more complicated than it really is.

Everyone's priorities are different, that's the thing. I don't really understand the people who claim onsite is necessary because of the "bubble" and then rent a car because they think the buses are inefficient. I also don't understand the people who stay that the deluxe hotels and actually think they are deluxe. That the price matches up to the amenities.

However, I "get" the people who stay onsite and rent a car because they like having a car. I get the people who stay at Animal Kingdom lodge or the Contemporary for the theme and location respectively.

if a newbie has a completely unworkable plan, then sure, point out the problem. But telling your hypothetical family that they should go any time other than summer break is not useful or practical. Logistics, folks!

 

[jsmla]

@Westcoastwild

Now, me, I love staying on site and if I could afford my ideal room (DVC 1BR) I probably would never step outside of the bubble. As a solo (kids are grown, DH is NOT a fan) I can afford Pop Century. Pop Century gets old. I love the transportation and FP/ADR perks but hate the pool and teensy room. Food sucks too. That's when I book off site, nice pools, huge condo and total control over my meals.

 

[Brian Noble]

they will argue no matter how wrong they are.

They are not wrong. They just have different priorities and/or circumstances.

I say this all the time, but it bears repeating. There are three things you might want in your WDW vacation lodging:

1: To stay onsite.
2: To have a reasonable amount of space.
3: To spend a reasonable amount of money.

For most people, and for most definitions of "reasonable," it is not possible to have all three of these at the same time. So, the exercise of choosing lodging for a Disney trip centers on deciding which one of those you are most willing to live without. That's going to be different for different people, and for the same family it may be different for different trips.

Using my own family as an example: when all four of us travel, #2 is non-negotiable. If I have to choose between #1 and #3, I will probably take #3. But, if I am soloing, or it is just my wife and I, #2 is no longer much of an issue.

 

[bluezy]

They are not wrong. They just have different priorities and/or circumstances.

I say this all the time, but it bears repeating. There are three things you might want in your WDW vacation lodging:

1: To stay onsite.
2: To have a reasonable amount of space.
3: To spend a reasonable amount of money.

For most people, and for most definitions of "reasonable," it is not possible to have all three of these at the same time. So, the exercise of choosing lodging for a Disney trip centers on deciding which one of those you are most willing to live without. That's going to be different for different people, and for the same family it may be different for different trips.

Using my own family as an example: when all four of us travel, #2 is non-negotiable. If I have to choose between #1 and #3, I will probably take #3. But, if I am soloing, or it is just my wife and I, #2 is no longer much of an issue.

Yes, this!!!! Thank you for saying what I was trying to say in far fewer words.

 

[BigredNole]

They are not wrong.

I should have explained this in more detail. It wasn't based on staying onsite or offsite directly. The recent discussion I got on this very subject was with a person that insisted that 2BR DVC villa cost the same as an offsite 2BR suite. I asked them to pick any dates they wanted for 7-nights. I took those dates and compared the price with similar, offsite accommodations. The dates were Sept 9th - Sept 16th. For the cheapest (least points) DVC was SSR for 218 points. This would be $2,834 at $13/pt. Wyndham Bonnet Creek 2BR for this same period would run $782 (112,000 points @ $7/1,000) on the highest end. The argument went that there is no way SSR 2BR would cost $2,834 even though Disney's own site shows the best discounted rate to be $3,555. Then they argued that you could rent for less points than $13/pt. I asked how much they think they could get per point? I told them that it would have to be $3.60/pt to be at the same price. They argued they could get DVC points for $3/pt. Why would any DVC owner rent to you at $3/pt when David's is paying $11/pt already. Then, when I said I could probably get the 2BR at WBC for closer to $400, they argued that it is impossible. Definitely not impossible and maybe a little harder than before.


In the end, the "discussion" went on to argue what the cost of a Disney 2BR villa cost even though the price is right there on the screen with the best discount available. No matter what factual data was available, none of it is valid because they say so.

 

[DVC_Dad_Canada]

Unfortunately, there are some that will judge a person's entire lifestyle based on where they stay at WDW without knowing a single thing about that person. Everyone staying at a "higher level" of on site resort than you is "uppity", and everyone staying at a lower level resort, or in the worst case "off-site" is obviously a lower class of person than you are, and maxed out their twelfth credit card just to get there.

I own and stay in DVC resorts, but only because I used the last of my wife's life insurance to buy into it. In a previous job, my boss' boss went to WDW every year and stayed in value resorts. Where you stay has no bearing on who you are as a person or how much you will enjoy your stay. They are all different, not better or worse, and it's an individual choice on how your money is spent and how your vacation is planned.