Is free parking at the parks going away for Value Resort guests???

[DizneyRox]

If only everything was connected by monorail and peoplemovers like Walt intended.

Just to make sure I follow along properly...

Disney should charge guests to park simply because they can? Also, they should decrease the quality of the offering at Value resorts because it is starting from a lower level of service already?

Yep...

That's the general idea, and I think it's not beyond comprehension that Disney would do this. I would actually be surprised if it's not already under active discussion.

The reality is, there's curerntly not much difference between a Deluxe resort stay and a value stay in essence. Besides outward appearances and the sheer number of rooms is there that much of a difference? Really, you have a bed, transportation to the parks, a pool, etc... Yes, there are differences in themeing, etc, but enough to really justify and expect to charge 4 or 5 times more for stay at GF vs Pop? Enough people are not willing to pay the difference.

If they started differentiating them with real "value", like the dining plan, parking perks, even fastpass distributions, etc, you hae a real reason to chrge more. I know I'd pay for the ability to get more fastpasses.

It really not out of the realm of possibility!

The build of the resorts even supports this, with values having CS locations and the deluxes having mostly TS eateries. Providing a dining plan the fits where you are staying actually makes sense.

In the real world, money talks, why not Disney World?

[Tekneek]

That's the general idea, and I think it's not beyond comprehension that Disney would do this. I would actually be surprised if it's not already under active discussion.

I'm sure they routinely discuss crass ways to increase revenue. I'm amazed they don't implement all of them, actually. They already raise most of their rates faster than inflation on a regular basis.

The reality is, there's curerntly not much difference between a Deluxe resort stay and a value stay in essence. Besides outward appearances and the sheer number of rooms is there that much of a difference? Really, you have a bed, transportation to the parks, a pool, etc... Yes, there are differences in themeing, etc, but enough to really justify and expect to charge 4 or 5 times more for stay at GF vs Pop? Enough people are not willing to pay the difference.

Are you saying that the higher end hotels are suffering high vacancy rates? Odd for them to decide the answer is to reduce incentives to stay at the low end, rather than increase incentives to stay at the higher end. That doesn't square with the concept that Disney emphasizes quality. Perhaps they're putting the finishing touches on the retiring of that reputation.

If they started differentiating them with real "value", like the dining plan, parking perks, even fastpass distributions, etc, you hae a real reason to chrge more. I know I'd pay for the ability to get more fastpasses.

I almost look forward to the day that Disney goes down this path. It will be far easier for me to turn my back on them as well. I've rationalized some of the things I don't agree with up to now, but they will eventually take it too far and it might be more liberating than I once thought.

The build of the resorts even supports this, with values having CS locations and the deluxes having mostly TS eateries. Providing a dining plan the fits where you are staying actually makes sense.

That only makes sense. Why would you put your, supposedly, 4 or 5 star table service restaurant inside Pop Century? You put what, presumably, fits with the price point presented by the whole place. That's smarter planning and design to me, not reflective of the sinister plan to yank it all out from under your guests at some arbitrary point in the future.

In the real world, money talks, why not Disney World?

Money already talks at Disney World. Does anyone really think it doesn't?

[DizneyRox]

I do believe there was some discount offered for end of this year that only applied to the deluxe hotels. I can only deduce that occupancy at deluxes was low.

The reason they take away at the lower end instead of boosting incentives at higher ends is there's savings associated with take aways (either by actual cost savings or increased revenue as people are forced to pay for things), as opposed to costs with giving something away (again, either through costs to implement or reduced revenue when people no longer have to pay for things).

You're absolutely correct in that CS locations at values is good planning, I'm just saying that it's a natural progression then to offer the QSDP only to folks staying at values, the normal dining plan to the moderates and the deluxe dining plan to those staying at a deluxe.

Want the DDP? Well, you're going to have to pay more for it, room AND the plan.

Wrong? Well, maybe. It's a break from long ago Disney practices, but I don't think they care about that anymore. Those days are gone.

Forcing people to pay to play seems to be the direction. All disguised behind magic mirrors and pixie dust, but it's coming.

[Tekneek]

I do believe there was some discount offered for end of this year that only applied to the deluxe hotels. I can only deduce that occupancy at deluxes was low.

That makes some sense, of course. I don't think they've got into the realm of some of the discounts that were out in the years after 9/11. I can remember having access to rates as much as 50% off the rack rate in 2004.

You're absolutely correct in that CS locations at values is good planning, I'm just saying that it's a natural progression then to offer the QSDP only to folks staying at values, the normal dining plan to the moderates and the deluxe dining plan to those staying at a deluxe.

This kind of change actually makes some sense to me. I can actually get on board with packaging the vacation in this manner. What I am not keen on is changing things up for the parks.

It's a break from long ago Disney practices, but I don't think they care about that anymore. Those days are gone.

I know that is the truth. It's not so much about their decisions being "wrong", but more about them being antithetical to what the company once stood for. The money was important only because it allowed them to keep doing new things. Adjusting for inflation, Walt had a low salary compared to what top executives pull down these days. They also re-invested profits into the business more often than not. Not surprising that they were constantly innovating in those days either, I suppose.

[DizneyRox]

I know that is the truth. It's not so much about their decisions being "wrong", but more about them being antithetical to what the company once stood for. The money was important only because it allowed them to keep doing new things. Adjusting for inflation, Walt had a low salary compared to what top executives pull down these days. They also re-invested profits into the business more often than not. Not surprising that they were constantly innovating in those days either, I suppose.

That's my best preaching to the chior emoticon...

[BrerGnat]

The thing about parking at WDW is that it simply is NOT a necessity for on property guests, so charging for it does not seem (to me) like some heinous decision.

If a guest is not using Disney transport, and is driving their own car to the parks, they are using the parking lots, which DO cost money to maintain, believe it or not.

Look at it this way, would you rather they charge the guest to park in the lot, or would you rather they average out the money they are LOSING and turn that into increased rates at the resorts that will burden EVERYONE staying on property, rather than just those who drive their own cars?

[Seasonscraps]

The thing about parking at WDW is that it simply is NOT a necessity for on property guests, so charging for it does not seem (to me) like some heinous decision.

If a guest is not using Disney transport, and is driving their own car to the parks, they are using the parking lots, which DO cost money to maintain, believe it or not.

Look at it this way, would you rather they charge the guest to park in the lot, or would you rather they average out the money they are LOSING and turn that into increased rates at the resorts that will burden EVERYONE staying on property, rather than just those who drive their own cars?

If they are going to start doing things like that then they should do away with other "free" perks like Magical Express. Resort guests who pay cash for rooms and do not use ME partially bear the financial burden of providing this service to the guests that do use it. I'd rather they keep both free and say it evens out in the end.

[Tekneek]

The thing about parking at WDW is that it simply is NOT a necessity for on property guests, so charging for it does not seem (to me) like some heinous decision.

Not factual. There is a definite difference in transit times for those driving themselves and those using Disney transport. Depending on where you are staying, the difference can be significant.

If a guest is not using Disney transport, and is driving their own car to the parks, they are using the parking lots, which DO cost money to maintain, believe it or not.

Given the state of maintenance inside the parks, I can't imagine how much they are using for the parking lots. Perhaps you can enlighten me on just how much they spend on this per quarter.

Look at it this way, would you rather they charge the guest to park in the lot, or would you rather they average out the money they are LOSING and turn that into increased rates at the resorts that will burden EVERYONE staying on property, rather than just those who drive their own cars?

As Seasonscraps said, why are all the non-ME users having to subsidize that? People found a way to get to WDW before ME on their own tab, and they can do it today as well. By driving my family to WDW, I am actually saving Disney that expense. That expense is easily worth at least 2 or 3 days of free parking in the parks. If they want to start nickel-and-diming this experience, they need to really lay all the cards out on the table. Make it an entire al-a-carte deal, where I can weigh including parking and opting out of Disney transport, getting a refund for not using Magical Express, etc. Remember, Magical Express and "Disney Transportation" costs money also!

[ERJDriver]

The mention of magical express just made something else pop into my mind. Taking away the free parking perk is another way to discourage cars at disney world. I highly doubt it has to do with parking capacity, but if you don't have a car you can't go to Universal or Sea World. This essentially is another reason for guest that fly in to not rent a car. Disney will take you to your resort for "free" and even if you do rent a car it's going to cost you $14 a day to park if you decide to use it. So why not forget that side trip to Universal and just spend an extra day at Disney. If this doesn't happen, I wouldn't be suprised to see a parking charge per night of stay charged to guest with cars for parking at the resort. The precident has already been set by non Disney hotels, and it even more than charging to park at the theme parks discourages bringing cars to Disney, and locks you and your money onto Disney property. Is this what Walt would have done? Probably not, but I don't think that has been a concern for many years.

[Tekneek]

Is this what Walt would have done? Probably not, but I don't think that has been a concern for many years.

We don't need to go too far down this tangent, but today's Walt Disney World would not exist if Walt could've lived long enough to prevent it. He reluctantly agreed to the Magic Kingdom, and proceeded to bury it at the far end of the property from everything else he wanted to do. I also doubt he ever expected to have buses roaming the property, with Disney logos on them, 15+ hours a day in 2010. He wanted people using the monorail and Peoplemover for all intra-property transportation.

[Polynesian Dweller]

An awful lot if angst in this thread about something that has not been announced and from reports in this thread hasn't happened. Disney is again being vilified for something they haven't done. Maybe that should wait until it actually happens which it might never.

The only actual announcement is for SOG which is not a Disney hotel. If, like any other non-Disney hotel, there isn't a contractual arrangement then no free parking. It's management of SOG who didn't do that so it's their issue not Disney's.

If Disney actually does do this at it's values then would be the time for all the negative comments about Disney but not now.

[BrerGnat]

Not factual. There is a definite difference in transit times for those driving themselves and those using Disney transport. Depending on where you are staying, the difference can be significant.

You are talking about a convenience; a time savings. It is not NECESSARY to have your own car at WDW. I have been to WDW many, many times. I have NEVER had a car there. I have never been stranded anywhere on property, unable to get back to my resort.

Given the state of maintenance inside the parks, I can't imagine how much they are using for the parking lots. Perhaps you can enlighten me on just how much they spend on this per quarter.

Well, I don't have the numbers in front of me; I left them at the office. Let's see, for starters, there is the cost to operate the trams. There is gas, CM labor, maintenance. There is the cost of paying the CMs at the tollbooth, the computers in the tollbooths, the tollbooth maintenance and electric bills (Air conditioning, heating, lights, etc.). Costs associated with repaving, repainting, etc. Costs associated with paying for security in the lots. I could go on. Parking lots are expensive to operate.

As Seasonscraps said, why are all the non-ME users having to subsidize that? People found a way to get to WDW before ME on their own tab, and they can do it today as well. By driving my family to WDW, I am actually saving Disney that expense. That expense is easily worth at least 2 or 3 days of free parking in the parks. If they want to start nickel-and-diming this experience, they need to really lay all the cards out on the table. Make it an entire al-a-carte deal, where I can weigh including parking and opting out of Disney transport, getting a refund for not using Magical Express, etc. Remember, Magical Express and "Disney Transportation" costs money also!

I agree with you on this. I have always been willing to pay for DME. I think an a la carte system would be great. However, it makes things too complicated for the everyday visitor. People NEED simplicity. It's unfortunate, really.

[Tekneek]

I agree with you on this. I have always been willing to pay for DME. I think an a la carte system would be great. However, it makes things too complicated for the everyday visitor. People NEED simplicity. It's unfortunate, really.

If people NEED simplicity, then this and some of the other rumored changes based on class of hotel are surely only going to add complexity. Instead of the current simple set of guidelines we have today, we would have a completely different set based on where you were booked at. People who split a vacation between value and deluxe, or moderate and deluxe, would be faced with the complexity of those rules changing midway through a vacation. By no means would this make any of it simpler for the guest.

You are talking about a convenience; a time savings. It is not NECESSARY to have your own car at WDW.

With the amount of planning involved for some vacations, time management is a crucial part of it. So, it depends on what your definition of "necessary" is. Just because Disney transportation is sufficient for your needs does not mean it is sufficient for everyone else.

There is gas, CM labor, maintenance. There is the cost of paying the CMs at the tollbooth, the computers in the tollbooths, the tollbooth maintenance and electric bills (Air conditioning, heating, lights, etc.). Costs associated with repaving, repainting, etc. Costs associated with paying for security in the lots. I could go on. Parking lots are expensive to operate.

Sounds like they might be, but still we have no figure to run with. As a rule, we never take a tram, so I expect to be able to opt-out of paying for that. We can do away with everyone in the lot subsidizing that operation by making people pay for a ride on the tram.

[Goofster]

If only that SOG front desk clerk knew the fury of anger that she ignited on Intercot by her (most likely) inaccurate statement...

[lightyearfan]

You are talking about a convenience; a time savings. It is not NECESSARY to have your own car at WDW. I have been to WDW many, many times. I have NEVER had a car there. I have never been stranded anywhere on property, unable to get back to my resort.

well maybe for u it's not necessary, but allot of wdw guest aren't there just for wdw, i would bet that 7 out of 10 guest also visit universal and seaworld as well, and unless you use public trans which isn't on wdw property, then u have no choice but to use a car. look to each his own, but me and dw always rent a car, when we leave the parks at night and look over the buses im not going to cue up waiting to go home after a long day, sorry not happening. as far as the free parking for resorts guests goes i don't feel that wdw will make any alterations to this policy.

victor

[Mickey91]

I think it would be a bad idea. As such, do I think today's Disney would actually consider it? Yeah, I do. Look at Golden Oak. They will consider anything that they think will put more money into their bank account.

It's all well and good to play the "Disney is a business after all" card, but even Walt himself never claimed his primary driver was making money. Him and Roy mortgaged everything for new ventures all of the time, and sometimes had to beg for loans to meet payroll. Despite all of that, they were never looking for blatant cash grabs like today's Disney.

I totally agree. Today it is about squeezing one more penny out and giving as little as possible for it. I almost feel like Disney is the tailor of the Emperor's New Clothes!!!

[Goofy4TheWorld]

If only that SOG front desk clerk knew the fury of anger that she ignited on Intercot by her (most likely) inaccurate statement...

Not just a statement, a memo!

I guess this thread will be my record holder for 'most active thread started by me'....so lets change course and talk about politics next.

Who wants to go first?

[IamaDisneyFan]

[QUOTE=BrerGnat;2080290] It is not NECESSARY to have your own car at WDW.


All I can say is that when my husband got sick (vomiting profusely) at Hollywood Studios and needed to return to our room, I was grateful to have our vehicle at the park in order to get him to the room quickly. No need for a 'sick bag' and praying the bus moved faster!

[Mickey91]

Forcing people to pay to play seems to be the direction. All disguised behind magic mirrors and pixie dust, but it's coming.

They need to be careful where they point that magic and pixie dust! They might just make their guests go "poof".

We've never been to Universal. Maybe we'll see what they are like next time. And even if they nickel and dime their guests as well, Disney apparently doesn't care that they have lowered their standards and offerings and sadly, the magic.

[T-Belle]

Not just a statement, a memo!

I guess this thread will be my record holder for 'most active thread started by me'....so lets change course and talk about politics next.

Who wants to go first?

LOL!!!!!!