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

[Goofy4TheWorld]

I saw on post #6 in this thread (http://www.intercot.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=173071) that Disney might me eliminating the free parking perk for Value Resort guests, as well as SOG and Dolphin/Swan guests.

Does anyone out there have confirmation that this is true and not just a one-day fluke?

If Disney does this, I would expect a large segment of people, who don't like Disney transportation, and who only stayed at Disney for the free parking, to jump ship and head off-site.

I know I would....

[DizneyRox]

That was interesting wasn't it?

I wouldn't be surprised to see it happen. Not sure what the contracts look like between SOG/Swan/Dolphin and Disney. Disney certainly could do with with their values.

Doesn't impact me, I don't mind Disney transportation at all. Would it push people away? Probably not... People would just use the busses or whatever was available to them. I don't think the actual numbers in that "large segment" really amounts to that many people.

The cost of off-site plus parking is probably mostly cheaper than on-site and bussing. Now, if they started charging people to park at the resorts, maybe... That would be a phase 2 in this plan however.

[Georgesgirl1]

I hope not! If Disney just keeps taking away perks, but not reducing prices I think they are going to see people start going off property or skip Disney all together. When we are trying to do Disney "on the cheap" we stay at Pop. The reason we go there versus off property is because of the free parking (with little kids we don't make much use of EMH). Without that, I would be VERY tempted to get a much cheaper hotel off property.

[Renfairwedding]

That would be bad for me at least. Its much easier for me to bring my van and use the hadicaped spots then using the bus system.

[dyin tago]

I just went to the disneyworld website ans if you go to faq`s and click on resort benefits it says free parking for all disney resort guests.

until they change that I would just print that page and if they charged you they would surely refund it.

swan and dolphin being on property but not disney owned could be iffy but that would be dirty if disney did that in my opinion.

[ThanxForNoticin]

I'm not going to worry about it much unless it becomes a reality. I'm not sure I understand why they would do it, but it certainly could affect the way we do the parks. It seems to me that people who prefer to drive to the parks help ease the burden of the buses, which can get pretty crowded certain times of the day. Take away the free parking and they might need to add buses. And I also agree with the previous poster - it's also very possible people will have one less reason to stay on WDW property.

[Renfairwedding]

I called two diffrent times and the CM's both said its still free for Disney Owned resorts to park fro free at the parks.

[magicofdisney]

I'd like to see a copy of that memo.

[gerald72]

A fee to park at the parks wouldn't affect me because I prefer to take Disney transportation.
But if they charged a daily parking fee at the resorts themselves (as most other hotels do) then I would seriously consider an alternate vacation destination altogether.

[big blue and hairy]

This would be going against one of the basic principles of staying in a Disney-owned hotel. Other than the luxury of the room you choose to pay for, all Disney hotel guest are created equal. In my mind it would show contempt for customes who aren't "spending enough".

:sulley:

[Pigtunia]

We park at other resorts (Boardwalk, Saratoga and Wilderness Lodge), and we drive to Golf, Minigolf, and (sometimes Downtown Disney), but we never drive to the actual parks: the Disney Transport is so much more convenient. So we wouldn't miss this at all.

[Seasonscraps]

This would be going against one of the basic principles of staying in a Disney-owned hotel. Other than the luxury of the room you choose to pay for, all Disney hotel guest are created equal. In my mind it would show contempt for customes who aren't "spending enough".

:sulley:

I agree completely. I never stay at value resorts but I would HATE to see Disney start doling out park perks based on a guest's resort level.

[magicofdisney]

I agree completely. I never stay at value resorts but I would HATE to see Disney start doling out park perks based on a guest's resort level.
They're already doing this with the free dining promo.

[Tekneek]

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.

[1DisneyNut]

If the bus transportation at the value resorts wasn't so terrible (not enough buses running, having to wait too long for buses) there wouldn't be so many people driving from the values to the parks.

[Tekneek]

If the bus transportation at the value resorts wasn't so terrible (not enough buses running, having to wait too long for buses) there wouldn't be so many people driving from the values to the parks.

That is a critical part of this. If Disney is unhappy with the number of people driving from the Values, they need to realize it is a symptom of another problem. Of course, it all depends on whether they actually want it fixed or not. They may actually prefer for the "Value" experience to be sub-par. As if somebody might actually think, "I had such a terrible experience at Walt Disney World last time, why don't I pay more next time?"

[wdwfansince75]

From the Shades of Green website:
Please note: Shades of Green provides complimentary transportation to the Walt Disney World Resort theme parks for registered guests. Parking at the theme parks is $14 per day.

[Renfairwedding]

Shades of Green is not a Disney owned hotel as told to me by the Res CM's on the phone.

[BrerGnat]

Shades of Green provides its OWN buses to the TTC, and some other parks. From the TTC, you can catch a bus anywhere on WDW property (park wise...not hotels).

Swan and Dolphin, and SOG already do not participate in DME, and only Swan/Dolphin still get Disney transport, which Disney could take away whenever they feel like. However, it IS worth noting that S/D and SOG ALREADY charge their guests with cars a daily parking fee at the resort. Since they are not "Disney", they can make their own rules, and Disney, in turn, can change the "rules" when it comes to their allowances as well.

I imagine it's only a matter of time before Disney starts charging everyone to park at the theme parks, regardless of hotel guest status. They CAN do this, because they STILL provide Disney operated bus/monorail/boat transport to all the parks, from all the resorts. So, really, no one NEEDS to drive to the parks. If you choose to, then you choose to be bound by Disney's terms in doing so. Frankly, I think it's been mighty generous of them to allow free parking all this time.

And, quite honestly, I would expect a lower level of "perks" (amenities) at the Value level. There ALREADY IS A LOWERED LEVEL OF AMENITIES AT THE VALUE LEVEL. By pretending that Disney is not already creating, in essence, a "class system" within the resort matrix is just foolish. More money begets more perks. As it should be, in a capitalist society such as this one.

[Tekneek]

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?

[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.
:sing::sing::sleepin::whistle::sing: :blah:

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... :D

[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... :D

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.:thedolls:

Who wants to go first?

[IamaDisneyFan]

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


:twocents: 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! :mickey:

[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.:thedolls:

Who wants to go first?

LOL!!!!!!:funny::funny::funny:

[BrerGnat]

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


:twocents: 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! :mickey:

I had the same thing happen to me two trips ago. I got off a bus from DHS to Epcot, and promptly threw up in the bushes, right there at the bus stop. I took the monorail back to Contemporary (from EPCOT), which required a "pit stop" at the TTC to visit the bathroom. It was a LONG trip, but I managed to do it alone. Of course, the smart thing to do would have been to hail a cab and go directly to the resort. Would have saved me about 15 min of the longest monorail ride of my life. :D I spent two very long days in my room at the resort. But, I was able to visit the Polynesian when the Contemporary ran out of Power Ade, by taking the monorail.

I still maintain that a car is a luxury at WDW, not a necessity. There are taxi cabs all over the property who will take you from point A to point B for just a few bucks. Trying to justify a rental car as a necessity is not going to fly with me. ;)

[BrerGnat]

Oh, and you can also take a taxi to Universal or Sea World, or anywhere else in the Orlando area for significantly less than a rental car. That's how we have always done it...

[DizneyRox]

I knowe a few people that don't even own a car, period. A car IS a luxury. One that many people think they can't live without, but the reality is, you can. Is it easy or convenient? Nope, but there's a big difference between the two.

Should you choose to not have a car, your other options in life, like where you lie and work are impacted, but that's the choice you have. Sick? Well, there's ambulances for that.

[Tekneek]

Sick? Well, there's ambulances for that.

I don't know what the rates are like down there for ambulances, or in your area, but in mine it is a minimum of $500.

[BrerGnat]

I don't know what the rates are like down there for ambulances, or in your area, but in mine it is a minimum of $500.

In a life threatening emergency, your health insurance will cover the ambulance. I've been there, done that, unfortunately.

Taxi cabs can handle any other trip to the ER or Urgent Care clinic that arises during a WDW trip. Many other people have been THERE, done THAT!

[DizneyRox]

Man, I NEED an iPad, my spelling lately has been horrible, the little keyboard on this iPhone is bad!

[MouseHead]

My husband is confined to a wheelchair...we have stayed at Moderates & Deluxe resorts...Disney buses are not truly handicapped accessible....they do not accomodate full sized electric wheelchairs...we tried....they do not fit....we were refused access--my husband cannot transfer to any type of scooter or smaller wheelchair.....so what option is there for us except to drive his handicapped equipped van to the parks from our Disney resort? Why should we be charged to park [if we are staying onsite] because Disney buses do not accomodate *all wheelchairs*? I am usually not this *radical*but this possibility could be considered discriminatory.....just needed to vent.

[Renfairwedding]

I so agree with the haddicaped issue. With a choice between the drivers who don't have a clue, getting looks of anger driving the van to the parks is the best option for me to.

I Love Disney and all its hotels and faciltys but I find no real value staying on property if they charge anything for parking at any resort or park. The rooms and food is so much cheeper off property.

[Tekneek]

I Love Disney and all its hotels and faciltys but I find no real value staying on property if they charge anything for parking at any resort or park. The rooms and food is so much cheeper off property.

Indeed. Were they to implement such a plan, they might be left only w/ the patrons that do not have cars. Having to kick in the parking fee anyway makes pricing more competitive. They may be overestimating the value of the "magic" a bit. There are always better rates outside of Disney hotels for comparable accommodations. They just can't always compete on price for the total package, but Disney may be opening that door if they start charging for parking.

[magicofdisney]

Man, I NEED an iPad, my spelling lately has been horrible, the little keyboard on this iPhone is bad!
Off topic: Typing on my new iPad (that I got for Mother's Day) is SO much easier. Love that thing!

[magicofdisney]

I have to agree that the no parking fee has been a huge incentive for us staying onsite. If that changes, they will lose us and we're there almost monthly when our tickets aren't blacked out. I'm sure there are many FL residents in the same boat.

[SandmanGStefani24]

so with all the :offtopic: stuff I got lost...

:D

Is free parking going away or not?

Just a rumor?

[DizneyRox]

This is all speculation and rumor...

I don't think we got too far off-topic. We went into need vs convenience for a bit, but that's related to the NEED for free parking. BTW - I don't NEED an iPad, I just need to be more diligent, but that's my point. I can still post without an iPad, so I don't NEED one. It would save me some time and embarassment though.

[SandmanGStefani24]

This is all speculation and rumor...

I don't think we got too far off-topic. We went into need vs convenience for a bit, but that's related to the NEED for free parking. BTW - I don't NEED an iPad, I just need to be more diligent, but that's my point. I can still post without an iPad, so I don't NEED one. It would save me some time and embarassment though.

thanks so much for the clarification!
and BTW, being that you are helpful and full of good info i think we here can overlook the random spelling issue caused by the lack of an iPad. ;)

[Mickey91]

[QUOTE=IamaDisneyFan;2080354]

I still maintain that a car is a luxury at WDW, not a necessity. There are taxi cabs all over the property who will take you from point A to point B for just a few bucks. Trying to justify a rental car as a necessity is not going to fly with me. ;)
What is a simple "few bucks" to some, is quite expensive to another. I cannot imagine having my "fun cash" spent on a taxi. It would be cheaper to pay the parking fees. But, I still maintain that as much as Disney charges for their rooms (small compared to rooms outside the gate for the same prices), free parking is not too much to ask.

[BrerGnat]

I brought up the taxis simply because WDW transport provides for your every need. BUT, if you for some reason NEED to get somewhere quickly at some point in your vacation, the taxi is an option, and will cost FAR less than either renting a car for the duration, or even paying for parking ONE time (currently $14).

A cab ride from Downtown Disney up to the Contemporary (which is about as far as you can go, driving wise, on the property) cost us exactly $13 (with tip) the ONE time we did it.

[Daisy'sMom]

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.



I also doubt he would have wanted so many hotels, deluxe. mods, and values. Although I think he would have been happier with the values. The deluxe are so expensive for young families. And wasn't the main reason for Disneyland so families would have a place to bring their children? It's sad that greed has taken over Disney.
:mickey:

[Daisy'sMom]

I have to agree that the no parking fee has been a huge incentive for us staying onsite. If that changes, they will lose us and we're there almost monthly when our tickets aren't blacked out. I'm sure there are many FL residents in the same boat.

The main reason we go with the annual pass vs seasonal is the parking. DH decided that we would actually save money with annual because it includes parking. :mickey:

[Mickey91]

And as far as a car not being a necessity, we drive down and do not fly. Therefore, I will have my car and I don't think it would be fair to charge me to park it when part of my resort charges goes to help fund MME and I have not and probably will not ever use it. It is a whole lot less expensive for them to allow me to park than to pay for the bus, driver and gas for MME. And, if they would up the amount of buses they run for each resort to each destination, I might would consider always using their transportation. But sometimes, usually toward the end of our stay, I am just too tired to STAND on a bus after STANDING in a 40 min. line after being in the park all day. They don't come close to filling up their parking lots anymore anyway.

[DizneyRox]

They don't come close to filling up their parking lots anymore anyway.
Don't give them any more reasons to raise the parking fees! :D

[BluewaterBrad]

I have to agree that the no parking fee has been a huge incentive for us staying onsite. If that changes, they will lose us and we're there almost monthly when our tickets aren't blacked out. I'm sure there are many FL residents in the same boat.


I would probably be one of them.:mickey:

[Mickey91]

Don't give them any more reasons to raise the parking fees! :D
So true...please forgive my slip up! LOL!:secret:

[magicofdisney]

The main reason we go with the annual pass vs seasonal is the parking. DH decided that we would actually save money with annual because it includes parking. :mickey:
In this particular instance I was referring to the parking fee many hotels have (that Disney does not have, outside valet parking). I know I didn't clarify this in my statement.

[Tekneek]

As far as Disney transportation being all you could need, apparently they make the All Stars share buses now (I know they weren't shared in 2001 and 2003 when we stayed here before). As a result, full buses show up at All Star Movies in case anybody wants to pretend to ride the bus to an EMH park.

[magicofdisney]

As far as Disney transportation being all you could need, apparently they make the All Stars share buses now (I know they weren't shared in 2001 and 2003 when we stayed here before). As a result, full buses show up at All Star Movies in case anybody wants to pretend to ride the bus to an EMH park.
We've been regularly visiting since '04 and in this time they've always shared. The exception to this is opening and closing times. The values "usually" get their own buses during those busy times.

[Goofster]

And as far as a car not being a necessity, we drive down and do not fly. Therefore, I will have my car and I don't think it would be fair to charge me to park it when part of my resort charges goes to help fund MME and I have not and probably will not ever use it.

The problem with this logic is that it can be applied several different ways -

1) I shouldn't have to pay full price for the hotel room because I never use the pool (or insert other hotel options that you don't use);

2) I shouldn't have to pay full price for a Theme Park ticket because I don't ride any of the big rides.

IF Disney were to adopt such a policy, and that's a big IF, it would be under the theory that a Value Resort lacks certain features, amenities and "bonuses" of the Deluxe and Moderate categories (i.e., Values don't have a monorail or easy walking distance to any of the main parks or even a table service restaurant). Its not that Values are being excluded, its just that it comes with the territory of staying at a Value. Indeed, if it means Disney can keep the price of a Value room lower by charging those that pay for parking, then it might be good all around (and that's just speculation on my part).

And to those that would stop staying at a Disney Value resort over the parking fee (an increase of about $70-98 depending on the length of your stay)...does that amount really trump the benefit of staying onsite, not having to exit the gates and deal with increased traffic and possibly spending more for a generic run-of-the-mill hotel? It seems more like a cut off your nose to spite your face type of decision. But that's just me. :cool:

[big blue and hairy]

The problem with this logic is that it can be applied several different ways -

1) I shouldn't have to pay full price for the hotel room because I never use the pool (or insert other hotel options that you don't use);

2) I shouldn't have to pay full price for a Theme Park ticket because I don't ride any of the big rides.
Nope, it's not. Why do people get free transportation to a Disney resort, but are charged if they don't use it. That's more apples and apples....

:sulley:

[Ian]

I won't pretend that I've read every post in this thread, so if I missed someone already touching on this I apologies.

If I go to an Eagles game here in Philly it costs me twenty dollars to park for like three or four hours. Pretty much every other theme/amusement park on the planet charges everyone an exhorbitant amount of money to park. In fact, I'd guess Disney's parking fees are among the lowest of any theme park operator on Earth.

While I agree with most criticisms around Disney World's recent (i.e. last decade or so) penchant for vulgar money grabs, but Disney has to at least explore pursuing revenue streams of which their competitors are taking advantage. They'd be fiscallly irresponsible if they didn't.

I'll be first in line to slam them for shilling multi-million dollar homes in Disney World's backyard to the rich and famous, but charging for parking? Eh. Not a big deal to me. It's really something everyone should expect when attending/visiting any kind of entertainment venue.

[Scar]

I don’t think what “we” want or what “other” venues do will have anything to do with this. Disney (if they really are considering this) will have to decide if it is worth it. Sure, some people may still drive and pay up, but I suspect most will opt for the free buses and Disney will (or at least should) have to hire more drivers, use more buses, and spend more on fuel. There will be no savings for Disney with less people driving. They will still need trams and parking attendants. My guess is they keep it free.

Now I could see them eliminating it from the S&D, but it would only affect two parks, with one of those parks being pretty much a 1 time per trip drive, so it wouldn’t be that big a deal. And the S&D would still be way cheaper than the other Epcot resorts.

[magicofdisney]

There are a couple of themes intertwining throughout this thread. One relates to the actual topic of charging value resort guests to park in the theme parks. The other theme is charging guests to park at the resort. I'm opposed to either.

[Goofster]

Nope, it's not. Why do people get free transportation to a Disney resort, but are charged if they don't use it. That's more apples and apples....

:sulley:

That's an extreme way of looking at it...

[big blue and hairy]

That's an extreme way of looking at it... How so? If I fly to Orlando, take the Magical Express which Disney pays for, I go for free, then I get on the free bus to the park, which Disney pays for, but if I drive my car and park, then drive my car to the park only to be charged, that's fair? How is that extreme?!

:sulley:

[JabberJaws]

I think that one of the big draws of staying on property is the convenience, party of that being the free parking throughout the WDW resort. It wouldn't make sense for them to take this away from the values or any resort inside WDW property for that matter.

The free parking is a BIG marketing tool for them (saving $10/day or whatever it costs to park now) that really doesn't cost them that much money. The benefit is too great from a marketing perspective, I just couldn't see them pulling it.

[big blue and hairy]

I think that one of the big draws of staying on property is the convenience, party of that being the free parking throughout the WDW resort. It wouldn't make sense for them to take this away from the values or any resort inside WDW property for that matter.

The free parking is a BIG marketing tool for them (saving $10/day or whatever it costs to park now) that really doesn't cost them that much money. The benefit is too great from a marketing perspective, I just couldn't see them pulling it.

I agree completely.

:sulley:

[Goofster]

How so? If I fly to Orlando, take the Magical Express which Disney pays for, I go for free, then I get on the free bus to the park, which Disney pays for, but if I drive my car and park, then drive my car to the park only to be charged, that's fair? How is that extreme?!

:sulley:

How is Disney paying for all of this? You are the one paying for it by booking a room at the value resort. If you'd like to have parking included for "free", then go stay at a Moderate or Deluxe resort, where you will pay for the benefit of free parking through the higher cost of your room and have it included as an amenity of that resort.

[PopPhan]

How is Disney paying for all of this? You are the one paying for it by booking a room at the value resort. If you'd like to have parking included for "free", then go stay at a Moderate or Deluxe resort, where you will pay for the benefit of free parking through the higher cost of your room and have it included as an amenity of that resort.

So, Goofster, you are saying that those on a tighter budget are second-class visitors and do not "deserve" the same respect and benefits as those with 'deep pockets'? That is a definitely un-Disney (as in Walt, not company) way of looking at things.

[big blue and hairy]

How is Disney paying for all of this? You are the one paying for it by booking a room at the value resort. If you'd like to have parking included for "free", then go stay at a Moderate or Deluxe resort, where you will pay for the benefit of free parking through the higher cost of your room and have it included as an amenity of that resort. Disney is paying for it because it is an "added value". Well, in your way of looking for it, lets put it this way....I'm helping pay for people who fly in, no matter what level of resort. I'm helping pay for the busses to the park, no matter what level, but I who use neither pay extra??!! Really, come on now, explain how that is fair, or extreme.

PS. I don't beleive Disney is going to do this and I can't beleive anyone thinks it's a good idea!

PPS. By the way, I stay at all levels of Disney resorts, and am very happy with the fact that the parking, busses and ME are equal for all.

:sulley:

[big blue and hairy]

Something else no one has mentioned. One thing charging Value resort guest would be guaranteed to do....require more busses to run to the resorts, increase lines, cause a lot more headaches for Disney. It would be stupid on many levels.

:sulley:

[Scar]

Something else no one has mentioned. One thing charging Value resort guest would be guaranteed to do....require more busses to run to the resorts, ...Pssst... Check out post #69. ;)

[lightyearfan]

, then go stay at a Moderate or Deluxe resort, where you will pay for the benefit of free parking through the higher cost of your room and have it included as an amenity of that resort.

?????? i had mentioned in a previuos post on this thread that i wouldn't comment anymore on this topic, but this comment just set me off, so your saying because i stay at a value resort i shouldn't be allowed to get the free parking? whats next no emh for value resort guests either! this is WDW that were talking about and there primary response to a returnig guest is welcome home no matter where u stay, this is the WDW POLICY, we are considered guests not cattle, the comment u made is foolish, just because we choose to stay at a value that doesn't mean that we don't have money or that were below people who stay at a moderate or deluxe, i got news for ya me and dw have stayed at all 3 types of resorts and we got treated exactly the same. some of the ammenties might have been nicer but that's it, when u make comments like this u make it sound that your better than me because u stay at a moderate or deluxe, well goodie for you. if u must know, i don't see paying top $$$ to stay at a moderate or deluxe when im out at the crack of dawn and don't return till late at night, when our dd was coming with us we stayed at a moderate because we were at the resort more

victor

[Mousemates]

To me this is one of those places where the tension between the bean counter "its just a business" mindset and the dreamland "we all should be members of the greater Disney family" comes into focus.

The financial minds essentially say...its a company, not a charity....maximize short term profits...explore (exploit?) all possible streams of revenue to the max. While those on the other side of the fence balk at any attempt to make money and view any efforts in this regard as something that would make Walt sick to his stomach.

In my mind both sides miss the magic middle ground that Walt captured in the first place...first and foremost Walt was a businessman who wanted to make money...but he also seemed to have an understanding of "where the line was" between "making a dollar" and creating magical vacation expeirences which left the general public feeling like they had gotten good value for the money spent (which is really just good business since it fosters repeat customers).

More and more it seems (to me) that on a strategic decison making level that the short term revenue maximizer's voices are dominating the decison making process and are increasingly alienating people by "nickel and diming them" at every turn. To me the question of charging an extra parking fee would (if instituted) be just another example of this.

I believe that the tipping point of this process (in which return business begins to be affected) could be closer than some might think and might already be coming into play. The recent economic downturn has obviously had a negative impact on their revenues and occupancy (o.w. they would not be offering 40% discounts on rooms and extending free dining). It appears that for many families a disney vacation became the place where economics dictated a cut.

It could very well be that as many of those folks (who after their financial condition improves) begin to think about a return trip to WDW and then discover they are going to have to pay for things that used to be included in the price....that they just might "keep on not going to Disney."

Kind of like people quit going to baseball (which was once called America's pastime) when it became clear to the fans that their value/wants/enjoyment weren't really that important to either the players or owners...but that they were just revenue streams. Baseball has yet to fully recover and might never do so.

Like I said earlier, Walt seemed to have a good idea of where the money/good value line was located...whereas it seems to me that current disney execs often appear to have no clue that such a line actually exists.

[Renfairwedding]

WOW.... :jaw:

If the mods get free parking over the values what dose the deluxe get? I know Value people have to spend one hour a day washing the cars of the deluxe people.

I have stayed at all levels of Disney on site housing. I LOVED the Grand Floridian and looked down at the little people..(From the monorail people look smaller walking on the ground sidewalks). I really enjoyed Riverside but like the last post if I am spending time only to sleep and shower why spend the extra money.

I said before if parking is no longer included then why pay to stay on property at any level. The savings off site would greatly off set the parking cost.

Oh and I would like to point out that the deluxe people have to suffer and pay to have their cars valet parked..... Oh the injustices in this world..... :D

[Mickey91]

How is Disney paying for all of this? You are the one paying for it by booking a room at the value resort. If you'd like to have parking included for "free", then go stay at a Moderate or Deluxe resort, where you will pay for the benefit of free parking through the higher cost of your room and have it included as an amenity of that resort.
Disney created the value resorts to lure people from off site accommodations. If they take all the perks of staying on site away from the value resorts, who in their right mind would pay as much to stay in a room smaller than a normal room at Best Western for what they could stay in a suite? There are some really nice rooms/suites offsite for around $100 - $120 a night. And, since I would be staying offsite, I may as well try Universal for a few of my days instead of just going to the Disney parks. Does Disney really want to go there? Especially since the values usually fill up first? If they do, they need to fire every exec for being completely stupid!

[Hammer]

To me this is one of those places where the tension between the bean counter "its just a business" mindset and the dreamland "we all should be members of the greater Disney family" comes into focus.

The financial minds essentially say...its a company, not a charity....maximize short term profits...explore (exploit?) all possible streams of revenue to the max. While those on the other side of the fence balk at any attempt to make money and view any efforts in this regard as something that would make Walt sick to his stomach.

In my mind both sides miss the magic middle ground that Walt captured in the first place...first and foremost Walt was a businessman who wanted to make money...but he also seemed to have an understanding of "where the line was" between "making a dollar" and creating magical vacation expeirences which left the general public feeling like they had gotten good value for the money spent (which is really just good business since it fosters repeat customers).

More and more it seems (to me) that on a strategic decison making level that the short term revenue maximizer's voices are dominating the decison making process and are increasingly alienating people by "nickel and diming them" at every turn. To me the question of charging an extra parking fee would (if instituted) be just another example of this.

I believe that the tipping point of this process (in which return business begins to be affected) could be closer than some might think and might already be coming into play. The recent economic downturn has obviously had a negative impact on their revenues and occupancy (o.w. they would not be offering 40% discounts on rooms and extending free dining). It appears that for many families a disney vacation became the place where economics dictated a cut.

It could very well be that as many of those folks (who after their financial condition improves) begin to think about a return trip to WDW and then discover they are going to have to pay for things that used to be included in the price....that they just might "keep on not going to Disney."

Kind of like people quit going to baseball (which was once called America's pastime) when it became clear to the fans that their value/wants/enjoyment weren't really that important to either the players or owners...but that they were just revenue streams. Baseball has yet to fully recover and might never do so.

Like I said earlier, Walt seemed to have a good idea of where the money/good value line was located...whereas it seems to me that current disney execs often appear to have no clue that such a line actually exists.

There is one thing that is not figured into your opinion and that is Wall Street. Walt never had to deal with stockholders to the level companies have had to do since the market explosion of the 1980's. I sometimes wonder if Walt had lived to see the company have it's problems in the 1980's if he would have been able to prevent the company from being taken over.

Also, baseball has come back in many cities, so I do not agree with that analogy. The cities where it struggles has a lot to do with who owns the team. Will it overtake the NFL? No, but that does not mean it isn't back. I think basketball is a better example. That is a league that has priced out a large part of its fan base.

[big blue and hairy]

Pssst... Check out post #69. ;)Oops! Weeeelll.....almost no one else.....;)

:sulley:

[DizneyRox]

WOW.... :jaw:

If the mods get free parking over the values what dose the deluxe get?
Deluxe accomodations will come with chauffeured limos of course!

[CaptainSad]

I find it wrong to charge at all if you stay on or off property. They charge what..$80 a day if you go just for the day and charge you for parking at $15 a wack. For what. Your car just sits there. They don't even touch the car.. I can only see them using the excuse that it is for the Trams. $7+ each way?? But that is way over priced at that.

I go to concerts and other amusement parks and I don't pay for parking there. I guess it's just Disney...

[Scar]

I go to concerts and other amusement parks and I don't pay for parking there. I guess it's just Disney...Citi Field last week was $19 for about 4 hours of parking. No tram and it smelled like urine.

[PopPhan]

I go to concerts and other amusement parks and I don't pay for parking there. I guess it's just Disney...

At Hersheypark, Citizens Bank Park (Philadelphia), Orioles Park at Camden Yards and all our local ballparks (York, Lancaster, Harrisburg,) parking is NOT free and can range anywhere from $5 (local ballpark [Go Revolution!!]) to upwards of $20 (some events in Philadelphia and Baltimore)

It is NOT just Disney!

[Mickey91]

I go to concerts and other amusement parks and I don't pay for parking there. I guess it's just Disney...
Last year Kings Dominion and Busch Gardens in VA cost $12+ for parking. So the price to park is about average. But again, take that away from Value and there isn't much reason to stay there. The buses take forever and are way over crowded. When one fills up, it is another 15 - 20 minutes usually before another one comes. By that time there are more ECVs waiting that get on first no matter when they show up and take up several seats. You can literally wait an hour during busy times and waste precious park moments after spending a small fortune on tickets. We will a lot of times drive to avoid this especially later in the week.

[SandmanGStefani24]

I go to concerts and other amusement parks and I don't pay for parking there. I guess it's just Disney...

Just a list of venues/events I have gone to and their parking costs :

Houston Astros-$6-15

Sea World-$16

University of Texas Football-$6-35

Metallica-$10

Fort Worth Zoo-$8

Carolina Panthers-$7.50-35

Nascar Texas Motor Speedway -FREE!

No Doubt Concert-$5-15

Only one free parking event for me.

[big blue and hairy]

No, it's definitely just WDW, but that doesn't change all the reasons why they should not start charging value resort guests. The whole deal with WDW has always been that all resort guest are equal. It would be a quantum shift in attitude.

Where did this rumor come from anyway? I just don't believe Disney is dumb enough to do something like this. Not only would it cause a lot of bad will, it would likely cost them a lot of money, with people opting to stay off property, or having to hire more bus drivers and possibly buy more busses. It doesn't make sense.

:sulley:

[wdwfansince75]

Where did this rumor come from anyway? I just don't believe Disney is dumb enough to do something like this. Not only would it cause a lot of bad will, it would likely cost them a lot of money, with people opting to stay off property, or having to hire more bus drivers and possibly buy more busses. It doesn't make sense.

:sulley:[/QUOTE]
I think I started it....When we were at SoG in July, we were told upon checkin that the parks were no longer accepting the SoG parking passes, and we would pay for parking if we drove to the parks. One of the members of our party went to Customer Relations to check on several other issues, and asked about the new policy. He was told that there was a memo (which was waved at him) from Disney which stated that SoG guests would no longer receive free parking at the parks. The CR staffer told DS that she understood that the same policy was apparently being extended to Swan and Dolphin, and to the value resorts. We did not actually read the memo, but we, and other SoG guests were told both at the desk, and at the ticket office, that the policy had changed....and the SoG website now does have the following note:
Please note: Shades of Green provides complimentary transportation to the Walt Disney World Resort theme parks for registered guests. Parking at the theme parks is $14 per day.
So...for SoG, the policy was in place in July....I do not know if any other Disney or non-Disney resort guests are being told that they may have to pay to park at the Parks.

[Rekenna]

I guess this rumored topic worries me-b/c so many of these rumors end up being true.

I LOVE WDW, but if this happens we will not be staying onsite as a family.:(

[Tekneek]

I guess this rumored topic worries me-b/c so many of these rumors end up being true.

I LOVE WDW, but if this happens we will not be staying onsite as a family.:(

I don't really think this is on the verge of becoming reality, but I cannot say I would be shocked. At this point, it seems they will do anything that they think will raise short term revenue (even if it leads to lower long term growth). When that blows up, they will throw in freebies and other discounts to pick up the slack.

[Mickey91]

I don't really think this is on the verge of becoming reality, but I cannot say I would be shocked. At this point, it seems they will do anything that they think will raise short term revenue (even if it leads to lower long term growth). When that blows up, they will throw in freebies and other discounts to pick up the slack.
Ya know, there are times when I think all the execs are actually working for other companies and dreaming up ways to kill growth at WDW. So far it is working according to the figures for 2009. This would be another brilliant idea to push more people to Universal or some of the other theme parks and area attractions.

[BigRedDad]

If the bus transportation at the value resorts wasn't so terrible (not enough buses running, having to wait too long for buses) there wouldn't be so many people driving from the values to the parks.

This is why I have sent ideas to WDW on how to improve its bus system. All they need is a ticket reader at the bus stops. When people show up for the bus, they slide their cards in. The computer can track data and route buses based on the demand rather than guess work. It is a far more efficient and cost saving system.

I don't drive when I am at WDW. Charging to park is at the discretion of WDW. It would make people think twice about driving. I see them cutting it out for Swan, Dolphin, and SOG.

[Jodi]

If they are going to take it away from certain resorts, then, they should take it away from all. It doesn't matter if it affects someone or not, or if someone choses to use their transportation or not. But, to put a restriction based on a particular resort is ridiculous!

[TheVBs]

If they took away free parking at the parks, I can't say we'd honestly be affected by it. After spending nearly two days in a car to get there, one of the benefits is not having to get back in our car the entire time we're there. But I can certainly understand why some people prefer to drive themselves to the parks, especially when we're in one of those massive bus lines late in the evening.

If they started charging for parking at the resorts, that would really stink. However, the cost of 4 plane tickets, plus all of their new fees, would still far outweigh a resort parking cost. We wouldn't be happy, but it wouldn't deter us. I would think of it of a price increase.

If they did either of these things only at certain resorts I'd think they'd get a lot of backlash. We would still opt to stay in a value because we're in our room/at our resort for such a small part of each day that we never have been able to justify putting our money into upgrading and I can't imagine a parking fee so high that it would rival the cost of an upgrade.

[Renfairwedding]

[QUOTE=Scar;2085142]Citi Field last week was $19 for about 4 hours of parking. No tram and it smelled like urine.[/QUOTE

I see you had the DELUX parking. :D

[wdwfansince75]

After 18 trips, I can only remember actually parking at the Parks on 5 occasions; EPCOT once (with 2 ECV), DHS once, and AK 3 times. Even with the SoG bus schedule (and the campgrounds, when we stayed in the cabins), it was a pleasure to park our vehicles, and use the buses, boats, and monorails. The glass is decidedly more than half full...

[big blue and hairy]

Citi Field last week was $19 for about 4 hours of parking. No tram and it smelled like urine.Unfortunately, the product inside isn't smelling that much better lately....:fit:

:sulley:

[Mousemates]

There is one thing that is not figured into your opinion and that is Wall Street. Walt never had to deal with stockholders to the level companies have had to do since the market explosion of the 1980's. I sometimes wonder if Walt had lived to see the company have it's problems in the 1980's if he would have been able to prevent the company from being taken over.

Also, baseball has come back in many cities, so I do not agree with that analogy. The cities where it struggles has a lot to do with who owns the team. Will it overtake the NFL? No, but that does not mean it isn't back. I think basketball is a better example. That is a league that has priced out a large part of its fan base.

Sorry for the long delay in replying.

As for Walt not being able to deal with Wall Street, I have a really hard to buying that for the simple fact that if he were alive and in good health during "the wall street explosion time frame" I believe that as the founder and intellectual genius of the company he would have the intellectual and proprietary clout to keep the ship on course. (in the same manner as a Steven Jobs at Apple or Sergey Brin at Google--both guys in the modern era who have a great deal of clout and who have been known on occasion to go against the flow of Wall Street .)

As for my baseball analogy I think I'll hang in there with that too...two stats that I think back up my statement concerning the decline of America's "past time." ;)

#1 The Major League Baseball All-star game...which once was called the Mid-summer classic and was considered a showcase night for the sport ..had a meager 7.5 rating and was actually beaten by last nights meaningless NFL exhibition game (7.6). The NFL exhibition game also drubbed last nights redsox/yankee game on ESPN on a head to head basis.

#2 From 2000-2009 the crown jewel of MLB, the World Series, only averaged a 12.05 rating which represents an over 50% drop from the years 1980-1989 when the average rating was 25.51.

Not trying to be argumentative, but just clarifying a few things that I think lead credence to my conclusions. :mickey:

[Hammer]

Kind of like people quit going to baseball (which was once called America's pastime) when it became clear to the fans that their value/wants/enjoyment weren't really that important to either the players or owners...but that they were just revenue streams. Baseball has yet to fully recover and might never do so.





As for my baseball analogy I think I'll hang in there with that too...two stats that I think back up my statement concerning the decline of America's "past time." ;)

#1 The Major League Baseball All-star game...which once was called the Mid-summer classic and was considered a showcase night for the sport ..had a meager 7.5 rating and was actually beaten by last nights meaningless NFL exhibition game (7.6). The NFL exhibition game also drubbed last nights redsox/yankee game on ESPN on a head to head basis.

#2 From 2000-2009 the crown jewel of MLB, the World Series, only averaged a 12.05 rating which represents an over 50% drop from the years 1980-1989 when the average rating was 25.51.

Not trying to be argumentative, but just clarifying a few things that I think lead credence to my conclusions. :mickey:

Your original premise was about going to baseball games, not watching them. Yes, national TV ratings are down and they will probably never surpass football again, but baseball does extremely well in regional TV ratings in many markets. My argument was based on baseball game attendance.

It's possible Walt would have been able to handle the stock market explosion of the 1980's, but as he would have been in his 80's himself I wonder how active he would have been in day to day management activities. It's guesswork on both of our parts.

[Mousemates]

It's guesswork on both of our parts.

yep, it is....but the mental exercise that comes with the free exchange of ideas and varying viewpoints is enjoyable nevertheless. :thumbsup:

[wdwfansince75]

yep, it is....but the mental exercise that comes with the free exchange of ideas and varying viewpoints is enjoyable nevertheless. :thumbsup:
And at least most Intercotees tend to disagree without being disagreeable! (unlike several other sites)