off site or on site!

Driving from an off-site resort to a theme park does take a while. From our resort outside of Downtown Disney to MK was about an hour. You have to drive to the TTC, then shuttle to the front. Then monorail/boat to the MK entrance. Kind of time consuming.

So, is the only place to park at the TTC if you stay off-site? Why can't you park at any of the parks' lots? Sorry to get OT on this thread. It is budget related though with the parking fees and such.
 
So, is the only place to park at the TTC if you stay off-site? Why can't you park at any of the parks' lots? Sorry to get OT on this thread. It is budget related though with the parking fees and such.

you can definitely park in the park's lot.

but for the MK - the TTC is the parking lot. It is one reason why - lots of us recommend staying onsite if the MK is the main reason for visiting WDW - because it is a pain and half to get too - unless you are using WDW transportation.

WDW transportation - put you up front a small walk to the MK.

offsite - first you have to be in a long line of others cars, vans, etc waiting to get inside - then you have to park the car - then walk to the tram - then decide monrail or ferry - get on your choice - and then get off your choice - and you are finally where the WDW buses start from.

so on the whole - avoid this park if you can - while staying offsite.

it is just as difficult to leave. If the park is closes - it can be really, really difficult - because of the limited number of trams while the parks is closing.\

I waited once for over an hour for a tram. Never want to repeat that one.
 
So, is the only place to park at the TTC if you stay off-site? Why can't you park at any of the parks' lots? Sorry to get OT on this thread. It is budget related though with the parking fees and such.

Every park has it's own parking lot but MK's is just further from the MK entrance. You park, take a shuttle or walk if you're close enough to the TTC then go in by monorail or ferry boat. We don't find this bad at all. We stayed at Windsor Hills and was walking down Main Street at the MK in 30 minutes.
I've never been in a long line of cars waiting to get inside but we don't go during the very busiest times. Usually end of Feb - March.
I've heard that people wait just as long to get a bus back to their on site resort.
And I wouldn't avoid this park because I'm staying off site. We always go to MK and never stay on site.
As far as leaving goes wait around in the park for a while instead of heading out when everyone else does. Disney is very good at moving people. It's no big deal.
 
you can definitely park in the park's lot.

but for the MK - the TTC is the parking lot. It is one reason why - lots of us recommend staying onsite if the MK is the main reason for visiting WDW - because it is a pain and half to get too - unless you are using WDW transportation.

WDW transportation - put you up front a small walk to the MK.

offsite - first you have to be in a long line of others cars, vans, etc waiting to get inside - then you have to park the car - then walk to the tram - then decide monrail or ferry - get on your choice - and then get off your choice - and you are finally where the WDW buses start from.

so on the whole - avoid this park if you can - while staying offsite.

it is just as difficult to leave. If the park is closes - it can be really, really difficult - because of the limited number of trams while the parks is closing.\

I waited once for over an hour for a tram. Never want to repeat that one.

While everything you said is technically correct...I couldn't disagree more!

I don't find MK difficult to get into or out of at all. I have never stayed onsite, and I would never counsel somebody to avoid MK if they were staying offsite! The parking lot attendants do such a great job parking everybody, and the trams run so frequently that it really has just not been any sort of issue for us at all. We think of the People Mover as the first and last rides of the day.

Leaving the parking lot at the end of the day is no problem, either. We exit the park and get to our car pretty quickly. I am sure we are half way home before the people on the busses get to their resorts!
 
Thanks for the heads-up. On our last trip (which was our 1st family trip to WDW), we stayed on-site and took the buses. It was fine until Memorial weekend. Then, we had to wait in lines for buses which was a pain. We will be there again over the Memorial weekend arriving that Saturday), but will have 10 days, so we can take our time. We have opted to stay off-site this time. On our last trip we never even got to see Orlando! Disney World could have been in any state and we would not have known the difference. This time we'll get to see more of Orlando, visit Universal, and maybe the Kennedy Space Center.
 
We NEVER waited AT ALL to get into/or out of any of the parking lots. :confused3 However, the year before, we waited for an hour plus to get on a bus to our hotel, mulitple times. (We were there in Sept/Oct) We ended up giving up on WDW transport and driving the last half of our trip, I find it 100 times easier to drive, even to the TTC. At the end of the night, sometimes the tram lines get a little long.....but atleast there is the possibility of walking to your car, not so with the busses. You stand, and you wait. We only had an issue with this once, on an MK night. We just lingered and walked slowly out of the park. Then we just walked over to the Contemporary, got on the monorail and back to the TTC. Tram lines were almost done, but we were close, so we just walked to the car. All other days, we had no problems at all. :confused3
 
I have done both, and generally we prefer onsite - UNLESS - unless you are going to do stuff in the other Orlando, or you want an inexpensive room for your arrival and departure days, or you have a spouse that is in Orlando for work and you can freeload in the same room ;) A free room is always a no-brainer.

What I found was, this:

1. Most of the offsite eateries are chains. I'm not so into Perkins, Golden Corral, Denny's, and the like. If those are right up your alley, then offsite might be a good choice for you. I suppose we saved some money getting groceries, but they weren't free and we were locked into eating them once we bought them. Later it the week it was, "Okay, somebody's got to drink this orange juice [yogurt, cereal, cookies], or we'll have to throw it out!" On property, I pick what I feel like eating each day.
It's still worth getting a box of cereal or case of bottled water even if you don't eat all of it, but we did end up tossing some food...Also, there are plenty of eateries in Orlando that are EXPENSIVE. Sometimes it can be fun to eat offsite, but we dn't usually save much money when we do.


2. Transportation. The last time we stayed offsite we were at the Vistanas, which was very close to the entrance of WDW, but maybe not the best property entrance. It still took us a while to get to the parks. The 535 entrance has much better park access - at least for getting to MGM and Epcot. Driving can be confusing at WDW. Roads are marked, but not always heavily - miss one sign and you'll have to make a large loop around the property to get where you want. Off property, someone's always got to be the driver. They've got to be sober, they've got to be awake, they've got to navigate, they got to avoid speeding tickets. Disney busing isn't perfect, by any stretch, but I usually prefer it - and I'm no bus fan in the real world. Everyone in the family gets to relax on Disney transportation.

3. Conformity and quality of customer service. The Vistana was certainly a nice place. We had lots of room, it was very clean. The pool was nice, it was secure. It wasn't as cute as Disney. There was on Mickey soap, no Mickey wake up call, nobody said, "Have a magicl day!"
Off property, you just don't - generally - get the same customer service. That's not to say that the folks at the Vistana weren't nice, they were, but at several of the places we dined we got less than stellar service.
At WDW, when there is problem, the staff is usually willing to help solve the situation quickly. Once we dropped something while getting on the monorail. It went UNDER the monorail car. On a fluke, I mentioned it to a CM at the station where I got off. She took my name and lo and behold - the item was waiting at Guest services a few days later when we dropped by!!!! I'm sorry, but there's just no way that would happen at a subway or train depot anywhere in the real world!! I feel lucky if I can get a subway employee to tell me how much fare to buy!

4. Magic motivation. But the real difference btween on and offsite is hard to describe. When we were on property, we spent a lot more time doing things. Our room was nice enough at Vistana that it was hard to get everyone up and out - and we kind of felt like we all had to go together. We had a group of nine, and at the VERY least - we had two cars so we HAD to come and go in groups of four or five.
On property, we still mostly traveled together, but we didn't HAVE to travel together. When my mom got tired, she could go back by herself if she wanted. If my sister wanted to sleep in, she could.
At the Vistana, and this is where it's hard to decribe, the kids got sucked into watching tv in the room a fair amount. I don't go on vacation to watch tv. I can do that at home. When we were on property, they weren't interested in watching tv. In fact, we hardly turned it on at all in our room.

Now if you are the kind of folks who like sitting in your room watching tv, eating in your kitchenette, playing tennis or something like that; then I can see how that would appeal to some folks. Me, I want to be on the go when I'm at WDW. And I want to be on the go in the parks all day and night.
 
Check out Bonnet Creek resort. It is beautiful, spacious and pretty much "onsite" while being offsite.

Heather
 
Now if you are the kind of folks who like sitting in your room watching tv, eating in your kitchenette, playing tennis or something like that; then I can see how that would appeal to some folks. Me, I want to be on the go when I'm at WDW. And I want to be on the go in the parks all day and night.

I'd venture that 9 out of 10 people would rather have the space, lower cost and flexibility of off site accommodation's (meaning a 1-2 or higher bedroom condo vs an on site hotel room or smaller, pricier on site timeshare) than the so-called magic of an on site stay. If that magic is important to your family and you are willing to pay to get it by all means go for it. But if you prefer value, space and not being tied to the cattle herding of the Disney transport system then off site may be the better choice. We've also done both and would never pick on site again. If you've never done on site then you should consider it at least for a short trip to know if you are the 1 in 10 or not that HAS to have total immersion in all things Disney to be happy.
 
I have done both, and generally we prefer onsite - UNLESS - unless you are going to do stuff in the other Orlando, or you want an inexpensive room for your arrival and departure days, or you have a spouse that is in Orlando for work and you can freeload in the same room ;) A free room is always a no-brainer.

What I found was, this:

1. Most of the offsite eateries are chains. I'm not so into Perkins, Golden Corral, Denny's, and the like. If those are right up your alley, then offsite might be a good choice for you. I suppose we saved some money getting groceries, but they weren't free and we were locked into eating them once we bought them. Later it the week it was, "Okay, somebody's got to drink this orange juice [yogurt, cereal, cookies], or we'll have to throw it out!" On property, I pick what I feel like eating each day.
It's still worth getting a box of cereal or case of bottled water even if you don't eat all of it, but we did end up tossing some food...Also, there are plenty of eateries in Orlando that are EXPENSIVE. Sometimes it can be fun to eat offsite, but we dn't usually save much money when we do.


2. Transportation. The last time we stayed offsite we were at the Vistanas, which was very close to the entrance of WDW, but maybe not the best property entrance. It still took us a while to get to the parks. The 535 entrance has much better park access - at least for getting to MGM and Epcot. Driving can be confusing at WDW. Roads are marked, but not always heavily - miss one sign and you'll have to make a large loop around the property to get where you want. Off property, someone's always got to be the driver. They've got to be sober, they've got to be awake, they've got to navigate, they got to avoid speeding tickets. Disney busing isn't perfect, by any stretch, but I usually prefer it - and I'm no bus fan in the real world. Everyone in the family gets to relax on Disney transportation.

3. Conformity and quality of customer service. The Vistana was certainly a nice place. We had lots of room, it was very clean. The pool was nice, it was secure. It wasn't as cute as Disney. There was on Mickey soap, no Mickey wake up call, nobody said, "Have a magicl day!"
Off property, you just don't - generally - get the same customer service. That's not to say that the folks at the Vistana weren't nice, they were, but at several of the places we dined we got less than stellar service.
At WDW, when there is problem, the staff is usually willing to help solve the situation quickly. Once we dropped something while getting on the monorail. It went UNDER the monorail car. On a fluke, I mentioned it to a CM at the station where I got off. She took my name and lo and behold - the item was waiting at Guest services a few days later when we dropped by!!!! I'm sorry, but there's just no way that would happen at a subway or train depot anywhere in the real world!! I feel lucky if I can get a subway employee to tell me how much fare to buy!

4. Magic motivation. But the real difference btween on and offsite is hard to describe. When we were on property, we spent a lot more time doing things. Our room was nice enough at Vistana that it was hard to get everyone up and out - and we kind of felt like we all had to go together. We had a group of nine, and at the VERY least - we had two cars so we HAD to come and go in groups of four or five.
On property, we still mostly traveled together, but we didn't HAVE to travel together. When my mom got tired, she could go back by herself if she wanted. If my sister wanted to sleep in, she could.
At the Vistana, and this is where it's hard to decribe, the kids got sucked into watching tv in the room a fair amount. I don't go on vacation to watch tv. I can do that at home. When we were on property, they weren't interested in watching tv. In fact, we hardly turned it on at all in our room.

Now if you are the kind of folks who like sitting in your room watching tv, eating in your kitchenette, playing tennis or something like that; then I can see how that would appeal to some folks. Me, I want to be on the go when I'm at WDW. And I want to be on the go in the parks all day and night.

1. We never eat at places like Denny's or Golden Corral. Even away from Disney. We ate at Kobe and Red Lobster when we ate off-site. We could afford to eat at any Disney Restaurant we wanted b/c we saved so much money by staying in our Condo. AND, I didn't HAVE to eat that greasy crap they try to pass off as food at the counter Services, b/c I already "paid" for it either. :confused3 It was a win-win situation.

2. Again, the driving thing was a non-issue. We were EXTREMELY close to the parks, and driving was faster than the buses HANDS DOWN. Roads are marked very well, IMHO, if you are navigationally challenged, or don't pay attention when you drive, then yes, it can be confusing.

3. There was noone at Pop, or any of the all-stars, or the campground, or at Port Orleans waiting there when I got out of bead to tell me to have a Magical Day. If someoen told me that, it was after I had stood in line for half an hour to do/get something, so I could give a crap about their well-wishes. Yes, Disney has awesome customer service, but what happened to you at the mono-rail would have happened whether you stayed on-site or not. :confused3 I think the best customer service that we had off-site was the fact that we never even had to deal with the people. We didn't have to stand in line to check-in or check-out, everything was done over the internet and required no waiting, or dealing with anyone. THAT was good customer service.

4. So your kids watched more TV off-site than on-site?? I don't understand how that should factor in into anyones planning but your own. WE hated coming back to our itsy-bitsy value room, and having to turn the lights out and just "sit" there waiting for the kids to fall asleep. Off-Site, we could put them down in their own room for bed, and go lay down in our own room, in a King Size bed, and watch TV and relax together. It gave us some couple time while on vacation, instead of the constant and exhausting get up and go. Of course, the reason we had so much time to relax at the condo is b/c we got in earlier b/c we weren't standing in bus lines all night.

We didn't think of our on-site vacations as "on the go". It was more like: wake-up, sit around for eons while everyone takes turns getting ready in the one bathroom, then, walk to bus line, SIT AND WAIT, get on bus, SIT AND WAIT, walk to park, enjoy it for a few hours, back to bus line, STAND AND WAIT, walk back to hotel, sit in dark with nothing to do while kids fall asleep, back to bus lines, SIT AND WAIT, back to park, enjoy for a few hours, take part in mass exodus leaving park, get in longest bus lines in the world, STAND AND WAIT (holding sleeping kids for over an hour), squeeze on bus, walk back to hotel (still holding kid) at almost midnight, so we can get up at 6 a.m. and do it all again.....:scared:

We did not spend all our time watching TV. We do watch more TV off-site, but that is b/c of all the extra free time we have by eliminating the whole bus and standing in line thing.

Again, I'm not picking on you. I just hope that the OP realizes that each side of this issue will think that their way is best, and so they have to take each of our reccommendations with a grain of salt. Yes, mine too :) Obviously, there are many factors. I can tell you, OP, that if you stay at Windsor Hills, you will probably have an AWESOME time, just like we did. But, I can't tell you that ANY off-site vacation you have will be the same way, b/c it all depends on where you stay, IMO. Quoted Poster obviously didn't stay in the best of places convenience wise, and probably was against it from the start b/c of those Disney themed rose colored glasses diehard on-siter's tend to wear. (I used to own a pair of these, btw. ;) )

SO just try it out and make up your own mind. :cheer2:
 
I'd venture that 9 out of 10 people would rather have the space, lower cost and flexibility of off site accommodation's (meaning a 1-2 or higher bedroom condo vs an on site hotel room or smaller, pricier on site timeshare) than the so-called magic of an on site stay. If that magic is important to your family and you are willing to pay to get it by all means go for it. But if you prefer value, space and not being tied to the cattle herding of the Disney transport system then off site may be the better choice. We've also done both and would never pick on site again. If you've never done on site then you should consider it at least for a short trip to know if you are the 1 in 10 or not that HAS to have total immersion in all things Disney to be happy.

Well, we have 8 people in our family, and 8 out of 8 prefer to stay on-site! Don't assume you know what Joe Q Public would prefer. We can all give the OP our opinions. Please don't presume to know what they should do.
 
I'd venture that 9 out of 10 people would rather have the space, lower cost and flexibility of off site accommodation's (meaning a 1-2 or higher bedroom condo vs an on site hotel room or smaller, pricier on site timeshare) than the so-called magic of an on site stay. If that magic is important to your family and you are willing to pay to get it by all means go for it. But if you prefer value, space and not being tied to the cattle herding of the Disney transport system then off site may be the better choice. We've also done both and would never pick on site again. If you've never done on site then you should consider it at least for a short trip to know if you are the 1 in 10 or not that HAS to have total immersion in all things Disney to be happy.
I don't think so. I think you need to venture over to the Disney Resort board, because you would get totally opposites opinions and numbers over there. And for the record, we will only stay ON-SITE, along with all of my BILs and SILs and other extended family. None of them like to stay off-site either. We have at least ten couple friends who have been with their families in the last two years or so and none of them stayed off-site. We have 4 kids and we get two adjoining rooms at an All-star resort. We went this past September and stayed at POP, had great FREE bus servcie, great FREE Magical Express Service, Free Extra Magic Hours at all of the parks and FREE Dining (We ate at a character meal every day we were there). For 8 nights at Pop with 8 day hoppers and all of our food (we used snack credits for breakfasts each morning) it only cost us $2,600.00. I think we got our monies worth of magic for that.
 
I'd venture that 9 out of 10 people would rather have the space, lower cost and flexibility of off site accommodation's (meaning a 1-2 or higher bedroom condo vs an on site hotel room or smaller, pricier on site timeshare) than the so-called magic of an on site stay. If that magic is important to your family and you are willing to pay to get it by all means go for it. But if you prefer value, space and not being tied to the cattle herding of the Disney transport system then off site may be the better choice. We've also done both and would never pick on site again. If you've never done on site then you should consider it at least for a short trip to know if you are the 1 in 10 or not that HAS to have total immersion in all things Disney to be happy.

no offense but here you are wrong.

no one would pay $470 for a view of mk at the Polyn if your example was correct.

believe me they do.

here is Polyn's rates.

http://disneyworld.disney.go.com/wdw/resorts/resortRates?id=PolynesianResortRatesListingPage

Disney sells out of the suites at all the MK resorts. In the last few years Disney has NOT offer discounts or codes or even AAA on their suites.

disney resort have around 85% to 93% occupancy rate. So the disney resorts are - very, very popular and will continue to be.

Outside can be fun, too.

I do both and enjoy both. and I am not the only one.
 
Op==Have you found this thread to be any help at all? Or are you now just convinced that we are a bunch of bickering nut cases?;)
 
no offense but here you are wrong.

no one would pay $470 for a view of mk at the Polyn if your example was correct.

believe me they do.

here is Polyn's rates.

http://disneyworld.disney.go.com/wdw/resorts/resortRates?id=PolynesianResortRatesListingPage

Disney sells out of the suites at all the MK resorts. In the last few years Disney has NOT offer discounts or codes or even AAA on their suites.

disney resort have around 85% to 93% occupancy rate. So the disney resorts are - very, very popular and will continue to be.

Outside can be fun, too.

I do both and enjoy both. and I am not the only one.

The point is that anyone can get a Disney on site unit if they want. Yet the majority of guests - easily 9 of 10 - stay off site. It isn't even cost as some of the Disney units get down to nearly the lowest levels seen outside (ignoring the really tacky ones of course).

The main reasons to stay outside Disney is better value for the dollar, more choices in accommodations, restaurants, stores, etc, and because unless you WANT to immersed in Disney 100% of the time it is is hassle to be on site (traffic, distance, wasted time in travel) rather than in the local community.

As for visiting the more dedicated Disney Boards of COURSE they only want to be on site - those are the fanatics - far from the average Orlando guest enjoying a week or two in the area. The majority don't care if they are on site or off and in fact most seem to prefer off site as shown by the numbers. If there is 85% occupancy at Disney that means 15% of the rooms are available and unused. While the outside hotels may not always be at 85% (and neither is Disney - they even shut down hotels a few years back) they bury the total number of guests on site by the shear number of rooms they have. I'll stick with my original estimate of 9 of 10 - I'd be surprised if it was 8 of 10.

Sorry, but 1 family of 8 is hardly an unbiased "survey". Again it is likely they all have similar tastes as that is what the groups decided they like. We're a family of 10 and not one of us has any desire to ever stay on site again. Been there - done that - no thanks.
 
go read the latest financial report from Disney.

last year they averaged 93% occupancy rate.

so yes that means 100% alot of the time.

disney generally does not try for 100% - because then you are using all your rooms and when trouble happens - then you have a problem.

promise you - the more hotels that Disney builds - the more people will stay onsite.

you can't compare 2001 and 2002 - to now. Disney so far has not felt the economic problems that the rest of the US has.

people will go on vacations. Disney is not as expensive as places up north.

and going aboard these days - with the US dollar falling. No thanks.

will stay with Disney.

right now the only hotels Disney is building are the DVC. they get their money back fast with DVC. the AKV is DVC going up at AKL. and hopefully the CRV is going up at CR (okay Disney has not say this)

would love Pop to be finished - another site says that it should be started again soon - but it wasn't. the problem seems to be the contractor wants to finish what he contracted for - rooms - Disney wants them to be suites.

can understand both views.
 
A couple of thoughts:

1) I've never understood people that rave about Disney Transportation. Unless you're staying in a deluxe, you're going to be taking a bus pretty much everywhere. There is nothing "magical" about that. I'd much rather be in my own car driving from a nearby off-site hotel.

2) This is what it boils down to for me. If by staying off-site I can go to Disney more often, then I will stay off-site. If it doesn't make a difference, then I would stay on-site.
 
I suppose a lot comes down to expectation level and what other things you have planned when visiting Orlando.

We stayed on site three or four times previously and we did the "Disney" thing then. We still do it now but not as often and that helps our decision to stay offsite because we like exploring other attractions and areas of Orlando.

The poster who said the food was all chains is wrong. There are some great restuarants if you know where to look and a little research prior to going will reveal Sand Lake Rd and the Mall of Millennia area as just two great eating places.

Transport... frankly Disney sucks as far as I'm concerned. I'll never forget the scramble for the monorail after the fireworks at MK or the hour long wait trying to get back to the Swan from Epcot. The buses actually take longer to reach their destination than driving from outside the area to Disney. We actually timed it once.. and we managed to get to both MK and AK quicker in our car than when we did it staying onsite.
 
1) I've never understood people that rave about Disney Transportation. Unless you're staying in a deluxe, you're going to be taking a bus pretty much everywhere. There is nothing "magical" about that. I'd much rather be in my own car driving from a nearby off-site hotel.

It wouldn't be magical for me to drive myself, cause I would get lost! I have absolutely no sense of direction! I still get confused driving around my own home-town. There is no way I would attempt to find my way around Disney! That makes Disney transportation very magical, imho!
 
I love staying-offsite. We did price our last trip to stay on-site and wouldve cost us $2000 more (flying in from UK for 14 nights). We are a family of five too. Just think of the magic you could create with your savings. Disney want me to pay more, for less space!! They might throw in a Mickey wake up call, or an extra couple of hours in the park, so I am paying $2000 more for that! I've heard more horror stories about transportation and ME than good. If they weren't free, I'm sure most people wouldn't pay for them.

There seems to some kind of Disney snobberty about staying on-site, not particularly on this board but in general. I can't understand why, everyone has different ideas of a great vacation. Mine isn't being squashed into a small space for two weeks with four other people, on top of each other, whats magical about that?

The rooms at Disney are small, even the suites. Off-site you have more space, cooking and laundry facilties, most hotels offer a free breakfast and free internet access. We aren't Disney blinkered, we visit lots of other places, KSC, Universal, Seaworld etc, as well as lots of shopping with the $2000 I saved. It is not a money issue about staying onsite for me, I still spend the money I save, Its purely a space issue.

The magic only stops when you let itpixiedust: The magic is not just Disney, the magic should be spending quality time with your family. Disney is just a setting for this, some of our most magical moments from our vacation have occured in the strangest of places, walking along I-Drive, Eating at Ponderosa, sat outside our hotel waiting for a cab etc,.
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!











facebook twitter
Top