What does Disney have against families of 5?

[BuzzLiteYear]

Maybe it's just me, but there seems to be far fewer options for families of 5 as opposed to families of 4 :confused:. My SIL had problems getting into a value resort and I see that AKL and the moderates (other than POR) are also limited to 4. Couldn't they allow 5 and charge a fee for a cot or an extra person fee? I guess I'm just a little frustrated as my options are somewhat limited due to our family size. Anyone know why they've gone this route?

[MartyS]

You might also consider the Fort Wilderness cabins...

[lovedisneyworld]

I feel your pain buzzliteyear. I also have a family of 5. It is actually cheaper for us to go to a moderate resort at the POR than get 2 rooms at a value resort. So I know it can be frustrating.

[SBETigg]

I believe it's a safety code violation to allow too many per room depending on size of room. If you travel frequently, you find that there's a room occupancy limit in many hotels around the country. Sorry for the hassle for larger families. I'm sure it's a bother to have to get two rooms or book into a pricier resort.

[TheRustyScupper]

1) They "average" family is still 3-4 people.
2) If they build rooms for 5, then why not 6?
3) If they build rooms for 5, that is a lot of wasted space.
. . . extra square footage to build
. . . extra square footage to maintain
. . . extra square footage to heat and cool
. . . extra square footage to furnish
. . . extra square footage to repay as debt load

[MNNHFLTX]

We recently had a similar topic that you might find interesting:

please help me understand this (http://www.intercot.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=123977)

I can understand your frustration. There are options out there for a family of five--Fort Wilderness cabins, Port Orleans trundle bed room, two rooms or a family suite at a value resort, a room at a deluxe resort that allows five (the Polynesian, Beach/Yacht Club, Contemporary, Grand Floridian), etc. But they do all involve spending more money than you would have to pay if you were just going for one room at a value resort.:(

[BuzzLiteYear]

I guess I just don't understand why some of the resorts have absolutely no rooms for parties over 4. I'm not asking that every room have an occupancy over 4, but would it hurt them to have 5% or 10% of the rooms at every resort capable of 5 or 6? Charge more for those rooms and when they are gone, they're gone. Figure out the revenue lost due to the loss of sq. footage and make that the difference in price. I don't know, but it is just a little frustrating to be limited to certain resorts. Just my $0.02.

[BuzzLiteYear]

We recently had a similar topic that you might find interesting:

please help me understand this (http://www.intercot.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=123977)

I can understand your frustration. There are options out there for a family of five--Fort Wilderness cabins, Port Orleans trundle bed room, two rooms or a family suite at a value resort, a room at a deluxe resort that allows five (the Polynesian, Beach/Yacht Club, Contemporary, Grand Floridian), etc. But they do all involve spending more money than you would have to pay if you were just going for one room at a value resort.:(

Thanks!

[DisneyTwirler13!]

I, too, have a family of 5 people, but we've always stayed at the Fort Wilderness Campgrounds, so we've never had that problem. At least, not yet...
But I remember my parents having trouble finding a room that would accomidate a crib for my brother years ago..... but that's off topic.
But I understand, and I know it's frustrating.

[tink'72]

I too am a family of 5 and find it very frustrating that we can't get accomadations without costing us an arm and a leg. I ended up one year renting a vacation villa and that is now how we do it. We have a 4 bedroom house, 2000 square foot house with our own pool 10 minutes from Disney and it costs a fraction of the price.

[Tigger&Stitch]

Hmm...was Walt a "middle child"? ;)

Don't know, sorry...perhaps families are (in general) getting smaller as the years go on?

[BigRedDad]

The issue is with Fire Codes. They could have built less rooms in the value resorts to accommodate for families of 5, but the majority of families is 4 or less. Why would they want to reduce the number of rooms to accommodate for a larger family in a Value resort? It is not cost effective on their end. If they can keep 2200+ rooms for for 4 or less at the current rate and force families of 5 or more to the more expensive resorts, why make any changes?

There are many choices available to you. You may not like the answer, but it is a fact of life. You can go to a Moderate, Deluxe, Cabins, Villas, offsite. You can get a house for less than a Value for a week.

[Gottaluvgoof]

I totally agree with you Buzz. I think it's just another way for them to make money. We have a family of five, actually six, but my teenage son hates Disney, so he's not an issue. We travel all over and never have a problem getting a room for all of us. Disney is the most strict with number of people in a room. What could it possibly hurt to have a cot, or let a small child sleep on the floor? If they can put rooms in the higher price resorts for 5, why not in the value resorts also? It's very frustrating actually. Now, we just leave the DH home, so we can get a room for 4. I refuse to pay for another room for one person, and as much as I enjoy the POR, it's gets tiresome staying in the same resort all the time.

[moe513]

I hear you too. We do one room at either yc/bc or poly. We figure 1 deluxe at a prime location equal 2 rooms at a mod.

[BouncingTigger]

When my boyfriend and I were at ASMo recently, there were at least five or six people staying a room a few rooms away from us! At the time, we did not know that the maximum allowed was four, otherwise we definitely would have complained! They always kept their curtains open and once when we walked by at night, we saw the parents asleep in one bed, three kids in another, and another person on the floor. When they weren't sleeping, they were LOUD! Just walking down the hall, you could hear all of them yelling to be heard over the other people in the room. I feel so bad for the people in the rooms next to them! We could still kind of hear them when we were in our room (but not much). Plus, the adults smoked outside the door so much - just walking by was like walking through a huge cloud (and they left the door open, so I'm sure their room smelled like smoke).

My point is that while I realize it stinks to have to pay more for rooms, having too many people in one room just can get way too loud. Of course, some rooms will still be loud with four people or less, but it just seems to be really bad when you keep adding people. Plus, there is a safety/fire issue with too many people in rooms. I guess this is just one of the things you have to deal with when you decide to have a big family.

[playdead88]

what about the family suite at the all star value hotels? i saw pics of it and it was nice! the other option would be to upgrade to a deluxe resort since they can fit 5 - we are a family of 4 but next year my sister is coming so we chose the poly since the rooms are large and they have a pull out bed along with two regular beds - im sure you'll find a place :mickey:

[robemcdo]

What does Disney have against family of 5???

Plain and simple....Rate of return? Makes a significant group of their customers pay more for the same thing...lodging. You may see excuses about fire code etc...but this is about money

[Donald A]

What does Disney have against family of 5???

Plain and simple....Rate of return? Makes a significant group of their customers pay more for the same thing...lodging. You may see excuses about fire code etc...but this is about money

Well said, it is all about money. I love Disney, but I realize if it won't make more money for the "DIS" symbol and CEOs, it will not happen.

[Gottaluvgoof]

When my boyfriend and I were at ASMo recently, there were at least five or six people staying a room a few rooms away from us! At the time, we did not know that the maximum allowed was four, otherwise we definitely would have complained! They always kept their curtains open and once when we walked by at night, we saw the parents asleep in one bed, three kids in another, and another person on the floor. When they weren't sleeping, they were LOUD! Just walking down the hall, you could hear all of them yelling to be heard over the other people in the room. I feel so bad for the people in the rooms next to them! We could still kind of hear them when we were in our room (but not much). Plus, the adults smoked outside the door so much - just walking by was like walking through a huge cloud (and they left the door open, so I'm sure their room smelled like smoke).

My point is that while I realize it stinks to have to pay more for rooms, having too many people in one room just can get way too loud. Of course, some rooms will still be loud with four people or less, but it just seems to be really bad when you keep adding people. Plus, there is a safety/fire issue with too many people in rooms. I guess this is just one of the things you have to deal with when you decide to have a big family.

As you say, this can happen with a group of four. These were obviously people who had no concern for the people around them. I guarantee you, I could have six people in a room and you wouldn't hear a peep coming out of our room. (Not that we ever have, because Disney is sooooooo strict) It's just the individuals involved. We go to the parks from open until close every day we are there. By the time we get to the room, all we want is to sleep. This is another problem I have with having to stay in a more expensive resort. We never use the resort for anything except sleep.

[elmjimmlm]

We are also a family of 5...We stay at POR and we cant complain...The first year that we were there, my oldest stayed with my Mom in her room and we stayed at ASM...I have to say that I like POR better because it doesnt seem as busy or crowded...The busses are not as packed as ASM...
I do have a question off topic...Why do they consider a 10 year old an adult? Tickets, dining plan...Why?...Show me where there is a ten year old that eats as much as an adult...:confused:

[dad4wdwfun]

Are children under 3 considered a person when it comes to room occupancy?

[ThanxForNoticin]

What does Disney have against family of 5???

Plain and simple....Rate of return? Makes a significant group of their customers pay more for the same thing...lodging. You may see excuses about fire code etc...but this is about money

I have a question. When folks travel to places other than Disney, aren't most of the accomodations designed for up to 4 people, too? This is not as much a Disney issue as it is a business issue. The large majority of families or groups staying in hotels or resorts consist of 4 of less. There are places that offer suites for more people (as does Disney) or select rooms for 5 people (as does Disney), but they are not the norm. You probably also find that groups of 5 or more have more trouble getting tables for dinner, because most of the tables are for 4 or less. Probably 80% of the rental cars are comfortable for 4 or less - if you have more people, you pay more for a bigger car.

I don't mean to downplay the frustration, but to blame this situation only on Disney is not right. In fact, in some ways, I think Disney has responded more than most to the needs for families of 5. The suites at the All-Star, the rooms at POR, suites at some of the deluxes, the campgrounds, and even the ability to stay at the much larger VC resorts. It's not perfect, but Disney certainly does not seem to have 'something against' families of 5.

[SBETigg]

I don't mean to downplay the frustration, but to blame this situation only on Disney is not right. In fact, in some ways, I think Disney has responded more than most to the needs for families of 5. The suites at the All-Star, the rooms at POR, suites at some of the deluxes, the campgrounds, and even the ability to stay at the much larger VC resorts. It's not perfect, but Disney certainly does not seem to have 'something against' families of 5.

I believe you're correct. I know my SIL, with four kids, almost always has to book two rooms when they vacation, and not just at Disney. Granted, this isn't a family of five, as we're discussing, but this was the case even when the youngest was a baby.

[thrillme]

Since there are only 3 of us...I'm almost tempted (note ALMOST :D) to "rent" out my extra space. It would be cool to get a 1/4 discount in the room. Unfortunately we don't live in that "leave it to Beaver" world where everybody is sweet, manerly and honest.

But...wouldn't it be cool instead of families of more than 4 having to get an extra room...you could just bunk with the neighbor who had one or two extra persons to spare. HA HA...this sounds sooooo silly...:blush:

[robemcdo]

I have a question. When folks travel to places other than Disney, aren't most of the accomodations designed for up to 4 people, too? This is not as much a Disney issue as it is a business issue. The large majority of families or groups staying in hotels or resorts consist of 4 of less. There are places that offer suites for more people (as does Disney) or select rooms for 5 people (as does Disney), but they are not the norm. You probably also find that groups of 5 or more have more trouble getting tables for dinner, because most of the tables are for 4 or less. Probably 80% of the rental cars are comfortable for 4 or less - if you have more people, you pay more for a bigger car.

I don't mean to downplay the frustration, but to blame this situation only on Disney is not right. In fact, in some ways, I think Disney has responded more than most to the needs for families of 5. The suites at the All-Star, the rooms at POR, suites at some of the deluxes, the campgrounds, and even the ability to stay at the much larger VC resorts. It's not perfect, but Disney certainly does not seem to have 'something against' families of 5.

It is quite normal in discount type hotels, to have the option of a rollaway cot or something like that.

In a Boardwalk 1-bedroom, there is enough room to land a plane. yet only 4 can lay their heads.

[Sean Riley Taylor's Mom]

We are a family of 5 as well :)

Once our DD turned 3 we used it as our "excuse" to finally join DVC

I know it is not the easy answer for a lot of people but, it was the right one for us!

I understand your frustration

[CandleontheWater]

I grew up in a family of 5 and it always drove me crazy also. I didn't think it was fair that we had to stay off property while my cousins (family of 4) got to stay at CBR. As for other hotels discriminating against families of 5, well we never had a problem anywhere else we went with getting a roll away cot. We traveled extensively as family of 5, and never ran into the problem we faced at Disney.

[davidrea]

Sounds like this is an issue Disney could deal with. We have a family of 5 and in my sunday school class we have 29 couples and ave 3 kids so maybe the ave is going up. :mickey:

I didn't realize the issue as the hotels we looked at it wasn't a problem, but 1 in our party is 2. We looked at WL and POR (which is where we are staying) - wasn't due to the rooms - kids wanted to stay there. Interesting topic though. I see this as a hardship in the future, 5 doesn't seem like that many to me. Thanks for info

[vamaggie]

I do have a question off topic...Why do they consider a 10 year old an adult? Tickets, dining plan...Why?...Show me where there is a ten year old that eats as much as an adult...:confused:

My understanding (from what I have read here before) is that tey have ot make the cutoff somewhere and most 10 yr olds are big enough to ride the "adult" stuff so they cut it there. Since tickets are 10, DP is 10 too. Still, they don't charge and adult rate for rooms til 18.


Are children under 3 considered a person when it comes to room occupancy?

Disney allows 1 child under 3 to be in the room and not count toward the room count. So you could have mom, dad, 10 yr old, 5 yr old and 2 yr old and still stay in a 4 person max room. BUT if you have 2 kids under 3 only one counts as non counting. (So if the above family had twin 2 yr olds they would have to stay in a room that accommodates 5) Again, this is my understanding.

[BuzzLiteYear]

I grew up in a family of 5 and it always drove me crazy also. I didn't think it was fair that we had to stay off property while my cousins (family of 4) got to stay at CBR. As for other hotels discriminating against families of 5, well we never had a problem anywhere else we went with getting a roll away cot. We traveled extensively as family of 5, and never ran into the problem we faced at Disney.

Same here...Most major chains we frequent do not impose the limit of 4. I have never had to upgrade in order to get a room. The small "King Suites" that hold 2 or 3 are out, but most other rooms are able to hold us with no problem. We either request a cot or whatever is available at that hotel. Not an issue at most places.

I guess I just don't understand why there can't be a small percentage of larger rooms (5% or 10%).

[J.C.&ALI'SMOM]

I guess I just don't understand why there can't be a small percentage of larger rooms (5% or 10%).

The harsh truth is that WDW is keeping the rooms filled as it is. There is no financial reason for them to add more rooms that hold more than 4.

They have the family suites, the trundle bed rooms, the cabins, and deluxes. There are several choices out there for families of 5. I really don't see the problem. :confused:

[LynneM]

Disney clearly doesn't have a thing against families of 5, since they have thousands of rooms that sleep 5 at Poly, CR, GF, YC, BC, and BWV. Not to mention the many, many, two - bedroom villas at the DVC resorts that sleep up to 8, and the three-bedroom villas that sleep up to 12. Oh, and the cabins at FW that sleep 5 or 6.

They don't have as many options for families of 5 with smaller budgets, but even then, there are the ASM Family Suites and the trundle bed rooms at POR.

Disney is a publicly-held company, and as such, their goal is to make as much money as they possibly can. If they can fill the more expensive rooms, then there's not much financial incentive for them to build value resorts with larger rooms.

You can argue, if you wish, that they have some sort of moral obligation to provide more affordable lodgings for families that can't afford to stay at the deluxes, but that's another discussion.

[TheRustyScupper]

Disney is a publicly-held company, and as such, their goal is to make as much money as they possibly can. If they can fill the more expensive rooms, then there's not much financial incentive for them to build value resorts with larger rooms.

You can argue, if you wish, that they have some sort of moral obligation to provide more affordable lodgings for families that can't afford to stay at the deluxes, but that's another discussion.

Points well taken.

[Tinkerfreak]

We are really bummed out that they eliminated the deluxe rooms at AKL to put in DVC rooms. Why did they eliminate those rooms with the extra room and daybed to put in DVC rooms when they are buidling another entire building for DVC. This really upset DH because we loved these rooms. Now if we want a room that sleeps 5 at AKL we have to pay more money for a big villa. I could understand if those were going to be the only DVC properties but the are not. We used to bring grandma along but can't afford to anymore if we want to stay at AKL.

[tjstrike]

I'm sure that there is / was alot of research that goes into all this, (room size, age for meal plan, knocking off the gratuity, etc...) but bottom line is - MONEY !! As everybody else has already said, if WDW isn't making money, it's not gonna happen. :mad:

[WishingStar2006]

kinda off topic but another "rooming" situation where they "getcha" is I'm a single mother with two teenage sons who have grown up on WDW...now they are 18 and 19...still my babies, but I have to pay an extra $15 per night because they are both over 18....same three people (not 4 or 5) in the same type of room but now that they're both 18+ I get hit with the extra charge. Seems, at least, that it should be maximum of 4 people, regardless of the age.

[katzctkpt]

I too am a family of 5 and find it very frustrating that we can't get accomadations without costing us an arm and a leg. I ended up one year renting a vacation villa and that is now how we do it. We have a 4 bedroom house, 2000 square foot house with our own pool 10 minutes from Disney and it costs a fraction of the price.


I totally agree with you Buzz. I think it's just another way for them to make money. We have a family of five, actually six, but my teenage son hates Disney, so he's not an issue. We travel all over and never have a problem getting a room for all of us. Disney is the most strict with number of people in a room. What could it possibly hurt to have a cot, or let a small child sleep on the floor? If they can put rooms in the higher price resorts for 5, why not in the value resorts also? It's very frustrating actually. Now, we just leave the DH home, so we can get a room for 4. I refuse to pay for another room for one person, and as much as I enjoy the POR, it's gets tiresome staying in the same resort all the time.
POR is the resort that we've stayed at because it does accomodate 5 and about the only one we can afford. I do enjoy this resort but, would like to stay at others to compare. When you start adding another 100 or 200 to a nights stay that adds up and we just can't afford it. A family of 5 stays at a value, one child is under 3 why is it ok and it doesn't effect the fire code you still have 5 in the room? It's still an individual just like a 10 yr old at WDW is considered an adult and isn't truly one until they turn 18 in the eyes of the law.

[csdavis]

We are a family of 6 and deal with this everywhere we go. Sometimes we book 2 rooms and sometimes we take our travel trailer with that has 4 bunk beds. Usually at Disney we take our TT because of food. Two of our children are 10 and considered adults so dining would cost us a fortune everyday in addition to 2 rooms. We like to vacation several times a year so I have to stick to a budget. As they get older, I'm sure we will do the 2 room thing but now they are all happy camping! I know the frustration though. It's almost like being discriminated against for having a big family! We need to start a Big Families Act for the hotel industry.
A day in my life: :dishes::mop::laundry::iron:

[BigRedDad]

The discussion has absolutely nothing to do with WDW. The issue is with the fire codes and WDW profiteers. If you feel that strongly about why you can't put 5 people in a 350 sf space, contact the Fire Marshal and WDW directly. Have the Fire Marshal rewrite all building and occupancy codes. This will take an act of God and many years of work on your part. Next, convince a publicly traded company that they should forego profits to accommodate a minority of the minority of their guests.

The fact of the matter is WDW is filling the resorts as it is. Why in the world would they decrease the number of rooms to accommodate a minority of their attendees? This would be a poor business decision on their part. What would you say if they made a few rooms available at the Value resorts that could accommodate 5, but they charge the same rate as a Moderate or Deluxe due to the lost rooms? I am sure you wouldn't agree to that.

The options you have are tremendous, but you may choose not to like them. you can stay in a resort room level that can accommodate 5 people, get two rooms, find offsite accommodations, stay in the campground, and the final one is to not go at all.

[csdavis]

get a travel trailer. Think of it as a home on wheels! We love ours, can take pets, our own food, and are all together. We have stayed at different places on property before #4 but personally prefer FW because of the laid back atmosphere. With a big family it was easier for us to invest in one because we knew we would use it often- at least monthly- and we knew we were too many to fit in one room.

[crazeedizneefinatic]

:soapbox:I agree with those that say it's all about profit. Occassionally we travel with 5 but mostly 4. This time around we will be 5 and had to choose POR with the trundle. I can imagine that the room is no bigger than the ones intended for a family of 4. Now talk about fire hazard. Let's think you are all sleeping the trundle is pulled out, the lights are out and the fire alarm goes off. The panic ensues and getting out of the same size room as anywhere else now has a obstable to hurdle before you get out the door! Don't know if it's true or not but read on a different post that the trundle bed pulled out was only inches from the door?? Who in their right mind would have the whereabouts in the event of an emergency to grab everyone than move the bed? Okay, I am exaggerating a bit, but I do agree that it all comes down to profits, profits, profits. Fire code, smire code! I do agree that packing a hotel room with an entire family and extended family is crazy, there definately needs to be limits, but Disney or any other hotel chain, should not hide behind the law to gain more profits. Will, that ever change, NO. I do agree that most families nowadays are smaller (heck, who can afford em?). As far as a 4 person room, being charged for the extra adult is crazy too. The room is supposedly designed for 4, if there is 3, whats the problem, oh I forgot, greed. I truly feel for families that are larger than 4.

[KAT1811]

We are also a family of 5 (for now, hopefully we will be a family of 6 next year.) I do agree that the reasonable options for larger families are somewhat limited. I would love to see Disney make their larger, nicer accomodations more reasonable. For a family of 6 to stay in a deluxe resort it will cost $800/night during the regular season and $1000/night in the peak season for a two bedroom suite. In my opinion that is a little steep. We stay at the Ritz for half that.

I do not care for the FW cabins as they are further removed and have less theming. The cabin theme is not our "thing". I also do not care for the ASM suites setup. I wish they would come up with a middle of the road alternative. I wonder what their booking looks like for the large suites.

We are lucky that we typically travel with my mother and father and get a connecting room with them which allows us to split the children among the two rooms. We are finding that the deluxe MK resorts are easier for us now that we have more children but the accomodations just aren't there. I guess we may be better off purchasing the DVC like another poster said, we'll see.

Just my opinions.

[BuzzLiteYear]

The discussion has absolutely nothing to do with WDW. The issue is with the fire codes and WDW profiteers. If you feel that strongly about why you can't put 5 people in a 350 sf space, contact the Fire Marshal and WDW directly.

I respectfully disagree with the first part of that statement. It most certainly does have something to do with WDW. And as for the second part, I don't feel that 5 or more should be put into a room that is 350 sq. ft. (415 in POFQ and POR). I'm simply saying that it wouldn't hurt to have a few rooms with 100 sq. ft. more. Heck, charge enough for that room to recoup the "loss" of valuable sq. footage and make a small profit to boot!!!


Have the Fire Marshal rewrite all building and occupancy codes. This will take an act of God and many years of work on your part. Next, convince a publicly traded company that they should forego profits to accommodate a minority of the minority of their guests.

Again, a few rooms, where they charge a rate that is appropriate for the upgrade and maybe a couple of bucks more to add to the coffers. I would not expect the rooms to be the same cost as the smaller rooms. I can't imagine how they would be foregoing profits to do this??? Charge more money for a bigger room. To me, it's about the choices. I'd like a few more options. I am not advocating the subversion of the fire codes. Keep them as they are. They are there for our safety and WDW's liability. Simply develop a business plan that makes a few bigger rooms and makes WDW a few more bucks


The fact of the matter is WDW is filling the resorts as it is. Why in the world would they decrease the number of rooms to accommodate a minority of their attendees? This would be a poor business decision on their part. What would you say if they made a few rooms available at the Value resorts that could accommodate 5, but they charge the same rate as a Moderate or Deluxe due to the lost rooms? I am sure you wouldn't agree to that.

Interesting point, the family suites at the values do cost the same as a moderate. I have no problem with that. If I do, then I won't book the room. But the option is there for those who want it. So yes, I am in agreement with that ;). And from what I can tell, they are very popular.


The options you have are tremendous, but you may choose not to like them. you can stay in a resort room level that can accommodate 5 people, get two rooms, find offsite accommodations, stay in the campground, and the final one is to not go at all.

Again, I'm going to disagree with you here. I would not use the word tremendous to describe the number of choices. Are there some options? Sure, I can't argue with that. I'd like a few more, thank you :D.

[J.C.&ALI'SMOM]

Again, I'm going to disagree with you here. I would not use the word tremendous to describe the number of choices. Are there some options? Sure, I can't argue with that. I'd like a few more, thank you :D.

I'd like to continue to stay in deluxe resorts, but they are starting to price us out of them. And I don't expect them to lower anytime soon.

The only thing that would ensure more of the options you would like is if they will make MORE money for WDW. The company isn't going to do it because guests want it. It has to improve the bottom line. Otherwise, these wishes for more large accomodations are just wasting time and energy.

[Auntie]

What does Disney have against family of 5???

Plain and simple....Rate of return? Makes a significant group of their customers pay more for the same thing...lodging. You may see excuses about fire code etc...but this is about money


I agree, and have for some time. We are a family of five, and have stayed in many other hotel rooms with a cot for the 5th person, a small fee for the cot..and that was it. With Disney, It's about moving the family of five up into a more expensive resort. Be it a moderate, or a Deluxe. Even the WL, and AKL..considered deluxe will not accomodate 5 ..yet the bunk rooms..they could easily accomodate five. With the bunks you have much more floor space than with two queens. A cot could easily fit without taking up any more floor space than two queen ordinarily would. They are larger than the value resort rooms where you get the "fire code" issue..as far as the size of the room and resort. Which I personally don't buy. We used to travel with my mom when the kids were young, so we would place one in with her. Now that they are older, my older son usually has own room anyway, and one of his siblings stays with him. If we didn't have my mom when they were young it would have been more of an issue for us. People do what they have to do.

I do think it's a good idea as a previous poster mentioned to have available rooms for 5..and charge more at the value resorts. Honestly the way the suites are set up..I don't know who designed them, but they are awful. Even at the WL or AKL..they could offer some rooms that accomodate 5 without too much alteration in design involved. A percentage of the rooms..and as mentioned when they're sold out they're sold out. At least it would be something.

[Gottaluvgoof]

I have a question. When folks travel to places other than Disney, aren't most of the accomodations designed for up to 4 people, too? This is not as much a Disney issue as it is a business issue. The large majority of families or groups staying in hotels or resorts consist of 4 of less. There are places that offer suites for more people (as does Disney) or select rooms for 5 people (as does Disney), but they are not the norm. You probably also find that groups of 5 or more have more trouble getting tables for dinner, because most of the tables are for 4 or less. Probably 80% of the rental cars are comfortable for 4 or less - if you have more people, you pay more for a bigger car.

I don't mean to downplay the frustration, but to blame this situation only on Disney is not right. In fact, in some ways, I think Disney has responded more than most to the needs for families of 5. The suites at the All-Star, the rooms at POR, suites at some of the deluxes, the campgrounds, and even the ability to stay at the much larger VC resorts. It's not perfect, but Disney certainly does not seem to have 'something against' families of 5.

A lot of other hotels allow for up to five people in a regular room. Marriott is definitely one and I have stayed at multiple others who allowed four, plus a roll away. You might pay a little for the roll away, but it was much cheaper than moving to a moderate or deluxe at Disney.
I love Disney, but I don't have to agree with everything they do, and let's face it, they ARE a business. Money definitely has a lot to do with it.

[BuzzLiteYear]

I'd like to continue to stay in deluxe resorts, but they are starting to price us out of them. And I don't expect them to lower anytime soon.

The only thing that would ensure more of the options you would like is if they will make MORE money for WDW. The company isn't going to do it because guests want it. It has to improve the bottom line. Otherwise, these wishes for more large accomodations are just wasting time and energy.

I don't think it would be too dificut for WDW to come up with a figure that not only gives larger families what they want but also boosts the bottom line.

I guess my reasoning for the post was watching some of the disney travel guides on cable. They paraded several VP's who stated again and again, that their goal was to give the customer what they wanted. Now I am not naive, I realize that they have to say that and it basically lip service. But if they are going to put it out there, I'm going to call them on it.

The one travel guide that I'm referring to was discussing accomodations in their resorts and on their cruise ships.

[lockedoutlogic]

I think it is about money...but not a sadistic drive for money that some have inferred here....

Listen, I'm the last to defend Disney's policies when it comes to pricing - as they are more often than not thinly veiled attempts to increase revenue for equal amounts of service and often to hold the pay of their rank and file employees down....

But the issue with sleeping five in a standard room isn't all about greed...it's about logistics
To add an addtional bed...which you would have to to sleep 5 safely and in firecode....would decrease their room inventory by alot....as it would require a small but significant increase in the average square footage of the rooms.

Remember that Disney's room sizes have steadily declined since 1971 to attempt to lessen the burden of construction and provide more bang for their capital expenditure bucks

There is also the issue of codes...as you simply cannot just cram a sleeper sofa into a room and have it be cleared by fire safety.

So while I empathize with this sticky situation for many families....you can't expect disney to have cookie cutter rooms to cater to a range of varying children...it would be silly as the rooms would often be underutilized when the demand was low for a particular size.

The All star suites at Music was a step in the right direction....as many hotels both in orlando and nationwide have moved towards the suite concept...perhaps disney will build more...too bad they don't have a half finished hotel sitting around somewhere

But Disney is a business...and as with all businesses....the travel market will dictate whether or not they will take action on this.

[KAT1811]

So while I empathize with this sticky situation for many families....you can't expect disney to have cookie cutter rooms to cater to a range of varying children...it would be silly as the rooms would often be underutilized when the demand was low for a particular size.



I bet Disney would find that the rooms would also be utilized by smaller families in search of more room. Maybe a family with grown children for example. IMHO families in search of larger accomodations for smaller families are in the same boat as the larger families. The pricing jump to the larger suite type rooms are huge. I have many friends that would love a little more space on vacation in WDW, even though they have 1 or 2 children, they just don't want to have to pay more than double for it.

[Auntie]

The idea that fire codes would be violated by putting a cot in a WL room, considerably larger than a value resort room seems absurd to me. I've stayed in many hotels..as any family of 5 here has. WL offers at least as much floor space as the Best Wesetern or Marriot I stayed in this winter. Not to mention if the room is a bunk room which offers even more floor space. No one has to sneak anyone into a Marriott. Goes on all the time in Disney. Maybe they should address it, by building accomodations that will hold a family of five. No one's asking them to make the all the value rooms larger, but they could have had a percentage of them larger so as to accomodate a cot. Or even offered more of the moderate resorts with the trundle bed option,which is also dumb..but l'll go with it because they offer it in a limited number of rooms at POR. (talk about a fire hazard) They chose not to..that's about the buck..plain and simple. Also, while a family of five may have difficulty obtaining a booth or a table in a restaraunt, you may wait a few minutes longer, but we've never been charged more for a table of 5.
Checking the rates in the last year or so for Disney and finding the Poly (option for 5..and we have stayed here) going for near $400.00 a night...that is crazy out of line for your average family. We here on Intercot play the game..we know the codes and the discounts,:thumbsup: and frankly we obtain deals that enable a good many of us to get into a room that costs some $400 rack rate for 40 percent off that rate. I know I've stayed in the Poly, Beach Club, and WL, and the cabins. You'll also find the cabins are up there at $355.00 and even $390. for holiday seasons. Many who think the cabins are a good choice, assume they are cheaper because they are located in the campground. Couldn't be more wrong. If you like to camp (which we do, and I love FW) however, be prepared, you will spend Deluxe resort rates for those cabins. Not many people choose them because they are economical, rather they do so because they offer the sleeping accomodations and they love FW..most shocked by the rate.:ack: I would not stay in ANY of these resorts and pay rack rate. Much as I love Disney..have been visiting since '91(our youngest is 16 now), I would never pay those rates. I've always searched the boards, be here or elsewhere for codes, and at one time or another had Disney discounts. Be it the shareholder discounts back in the day(boy those were good..and LONG gone!:()) I have neighbors that ask me how we can afford to go to Disney so often, because they have paid rack rates, and could not afford to do it for another 5 years! Your "average" family..not fellow Intercoters are really being outpriced..and when you figure that they may need two rooms or have to spring for a deluxe resort(.and not the WL or th AKL), but a room at the Poly or the Beach Club...well I believe that's about money. Hey, they're a business, and I guess if they can get..they are gonna keep at it. Somebody is paying those prices, the place is booked and people are coming back. Only I"m not one of them...If I can't get a discount..I don't go.

[amball]

I agree with you. We had to make reservations at POR but I wanted WL. I know of a lot of people with more than two kids. What they should do is have each resort have a few rooms that can accomodate 5, or more of them with suites. That would really make us families of 5 happy. After all we want the same Disney experience!:mickey:

[lockedoutlogic]

A couple more things:

First....if you state that you have "stayed at the ritz for less"...then you can obviously afford your rooms and this argument has little weight for you.....

second...it is also obvious that many posters here have had no dealings with local or state code enforcement. Even in a more "relaxed" Southern area...it is absolute hell. You are bound by literally hundreds of pages of codes that are non-negotiable and many times devoid of common sense.

so the "it's ridiculous not to put a cot in wilderness lodge rooms" argument is invalid. If you can't do it...you can't do it. Even Disney...who practically tells the locals what to do....is bound by the same rules as you or I.

And remember that Wilderness Lodge was not built as a Deluxe....but rather a moderate....so their rooms are not the size of the other deluxes. During the change over they most likely increased the size of the bathrooms a little bit as well....leaving less room space. wilderness lodge rooms are not big at all.

And third...regarding the issue of families with less children wanting more space....I have no doubt that the poster was correct in theorizing that many families with 1 or 2 children would want bigger accomodations....

Ok....but then you have jumped right into the realms of good business...why would disney want to provide free space while cutting down on the number of rooms available? That doesn't make any sense....unless you are of the thought process "they make enough money already" Which is completely Naive and doesn't apply to WDW
That is about money....and it's not as though they really need to entertain the business of the relatively small group of people who are majorly concerned about hotel space but don't want to pay for additional rooms. WDW has been juiced for going on 5 years...has been at over 90% occupancy since it has opened, is a major domestic and international destinantion...and frankly....has a line of people waiting to get rooms a majority of the time.

They actually could be less accomodating to families and probably not feel it too much on the bottom line.

sad but true...

[Auntie]

I'm not a person "who can afford the Ritz" ...just a person who has planned and done plenty of research whether it's a trip to Disney or the Bahamas, Cancun or Bermuda. Besides, just because someone can afford to pay for a Deluxe resort, or two rooms doesn't mean they feel like throwing their money away, when almost any other resort or hotel they've stayed in never had them get another room for the 5th person. Sure, they charge a fee, and I'm fine with that.
So these "fire codes"..that prohibit a cot being placed in value resort, based on the size of the room,(they're small, and frankly too small for my taste, and I've never stayed in one..but I can see that the "code" is an issue based on the size of the room. However, these codes also prohibit a cot from being placed in the WL..which is considerablhy larger. Yeah..right. Yet, they can have a 5th person in a moderate resort..POR...but not in the WL? That's about money..the WL rooms are no smaller than the moderate POR..I've stayed in both. They are only allowed a 5th person in a room at Beach Club..? Oh..let's see, that's Deluxe. Coincidence? I don't think so. Come one...I don't buy it. I've stayed in the Beach Club..with 5. I will tell you it was not bigger than the WL room by much, and you don't always have a balcony..one of the reasons we don't stay there. The WL is suited better to that 5th person, in a bunk room than the Beach Club
room was. While the Poly rooms are huge..frankly they were built in the 70's...and I believe the thinking was geared more toward larger families, than the newer resorts.
I don't think anyone's is saying..or at least I'm not...that the "fire codes" should be violated. Just that Disney could have allocated some rooms in moderate resorts which would be slightly larger to accomodate the family of five without having to go up into a Deluxe category. They could if they wanted to..and truth is ..they don't want to. If the people come and pay the prices for the Deluxe..so be it. Don't kid yourself and think that there aren't people with 5 in the moderates or in the WL or AKL. I've visited enough to know it's done all the time.

[thrillme]

The xtra cot/blowup mattress...problem with fire code... I wonder how many families of 4 have Mom and Dad in one bed. Big Sister in another and little brother on a blow up?

[Auntie]

The xtra cot/blowup mattress...problem with fire code... I wonder how many families of 4 have Mom and Dad in one bed. Big Sister in another and little brother on a blow up?

Plenty from what I've noticed. Disney' knows it..they look the other way. If God forbid, something does happen, and the "fire code" issues comes into play they can say that there were only 4 registered to the room..(so they're covered).

[KAT1811]

A couple more things:

First....if you state that you have "stayed at the ritz for less"...then you can obviously afford your rooms and this argument has little weight for you.....




Just because I can afford it doesn't mean I want to throw my money away. That is partly why I can afford it.



Besides, just because someone can afford to pay for a Deluxe resort, or two rooms doesn't mean they feel like throwing their money away,

Exactly.

[playdead88]

Disney clearly doesn't have a thing against families of 5, since they have thousands of rooms that sleep 5 at Poly, CR, GF, YC, BC, and BWV. Not to mention the many, many, two - bedroom villas at the DVC resorts that sleep up to 8, and the three-bedroom villas that sleep up to 12. Oh, and the cabins at FW that sleep 5 or 6.

They don't have as many options for families of 5 with smaller budgets, but even then, there are the ASM Family Suites and the trundle bed rooms at POR.

Disney is a publicly-held company, and as such, their goal is to make as much money as they possibly can. If they can fill the more expensive rooms, then there's not much financial incentive for them to build value resorts with larger rooms.

You can argue, if you wish, that they have some sort of moral obligation to provide more affordable lodgings for families that can't afford to stay at the deluxes, but that's another discussion.

:ditto:

[wdwfan47]

If this has been addressed then ignore this post... But, the moderates do accomadate 5 if there is a child involved... There is a fifth matress type drawer that pulls out from beneath one or both of the beds... We stayed at the CB a few years ago and it did just that. It could be possible that since the remodeling, they no longer offer it.. :mickey:

[Auntie]

It actually has been addressed and is part of the point. I believe it is POR, from what I remember, that offers trundle beds for a child. That is a moderate resort. They are no larger than a WL room.(somewhat smaller from my recollection) WL does not have offer that option or the option of a cot for an additional fee. It's simply not something Disney wants to provide. Period. I don't feel a "fire code" has anything to do with their not allowing 5 in a room in that particular resort. Since they obviously are permitted in some of the trundel bed rooms at POR. It's just not something they want to do. It either puts you back in a moderate..or moves you up to a higher priced Deluxe resort..which is exactly the point.

Which is fine..I'm not saying they shouldn't do what they want..they are in business to make money. Obviously it's been workin' for them for years now. I object to the idea that they do offer accomodations for a family of 5. Sure they do..they extremely limited.. or if you are willing to pay the price for a Deluxe resort. Which is hard on a family of 5. They do feel a bit discrimated against for having that one child "over the limit" Where other families of 4 have more options available to them. If you don't have the means to go Deluxe..or the know how (codes and the like) you are shoot out of luck. This does contrast to other hotels we've stayed in where a 5th person is accomodated at an additional charge.

[Aurora]

For those heavy in this thread, there's a poll in the Water Cooler right now that asks how many kids you have:

http://www.intercot.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=124725

At the moment the number of people (out of 81 responses) with two or fewer children is 70 percent; three or more is 29 percent.