"It's like Disneyland for adults!"
That running joke is fairly old, but from what I've seen that's becoming more and more of a factual description. No longer just a place to chain smoke and gamble, Las Vegas is now a very multifaceted resort-city, offering a wide range of options and activities for visitors and convention goers who want to live a few days in a vacation bubble. Also, unlike the competing casinos of old, The Strip and its attractions are being mostly folded into a pair of corporate owners (MGM and Caesars) with only some 5-star properties (like Wynn) doing things on their own. These companies have learned that following the 2008 recession, visitors are far less interested in gambling than they ever were, and want to know that when they pay for something they WILL get it, not MAYBE. The response has been a push for shows, tours, shopping (now a larger sorce of revenue per square foot than gambling in some spaces) and dining in varying degrees of price points (with up charge options) to attract consumer spending. IMO, while there is no longer a specific aim to bring in more family visitors, parents with children are becoming more open to the idea of coming to Vegas, if for no other reason than the hotels don't openly discourage it (they want rooms filled regardless) and the parents are less concerned about exposing their kids to "Sin City" (which in practice isn't really more "sinful" than most American cities).
So what does that have to do with WDW? Simply directly comparing the two, they have more in common than you would think. They both have: roller coasters & rides, a monorail, themed hotels at different price points, Cirque productions*, higher-end shopping centres, sports arenas, replicas of foreign countries & landmarks (including Paris and Venice), an aquarium, golf courses and Disney stores. Most of those can be found elsewhere in the country, but to have all of them in a large, tourist friendly setting (mostly operated by a few companies) is very specific to the two of them. Consciously or not, they have both seemed to adopt similar policies and practices to maintain their level of success. Vegas in diversifying its offerings, and Disney in looking to charge fees (resort, weekend nights etc) and sell more tours and upcharges for existing ones. True, you cannot find anything like Animal Kingdom Lodge or rides like Haunted Mansion in Vegas, but the quality and variety of things to do and places to eat and shop are superior in general at the latter (again IMO). I know many people also feel Vegas is a dirty, smoky place to be, but my experience has shown the Strip and its hotels to (mostly) be quite clean and no worse than any of the designated smoking areas of WDW. There are dives to be sure, but they're not really worth visiting anyway.
This long preamble on my part is to help explain why, recently, I have been choosing Vegas over WDW of late for vacations. I think it offers a better selection of things to do, and has more options for someone looking to make the most of their vacation dollar. While both are chasing after the big spenders, I find it much easier to get a deals on food and lodging in Vegas and I also find the other tourists less annoying to be around (though obviously, obnoxious people can be found everywhere). Specific to me, I have also found it surprisingly easy to combine Vegas with a visit to DLR, which obviously helps to give me my Disney fix, even though most of the trip is spent in another state.
Has anyone else been to both within the last few years? How do you think they compare, if at all?
*at the time of this post, I'm not sure what's happening next year when La Nouba closes
That running joke is fairly old, but from what I've seen that's becoming more and more of a factual description. No longer just a place to chain smoke and gamble, Las Vegas is now a very multifaceted resort-city, offering a wide range of options and activities for visitors and convention goers who want to live a few days in a vacation bubble. Also, unlike the competing casinos of old, The Strip and its attractions are being mostly folded into a pair of corporate owners (MGM and Caesars) with only some 5-star properties (like Wynn) doing things on their own. These companies have learned that following the 2008 recession, visitors are far less interested in gambling than they ever were, and want to know that when they pay for something they WILL get it, not MAYBE. The response has been a push for shows, tours, shopping (now a larger sorce of revenue per square foot than gambling in some spaces) and dining in varying degrees of price points (with up charge options) to attract consumer spending. IMO, while there is no longer a specific aim to bring in more family visitors, parents with children are becoming more open to the idea of coming to Vegas, if for no other reason than the hotels don't openly discourage it (they want rooms filled regardless) and the parents are less concerned about exposing their kids to "Sin City" (which in practice isn't really more "sinful" than most American cities).
So what does that have to do with WDW? Simply directly comparing the two, they have more in common than you would think. They both have: roller coasters & rides, a monorail, themed hotels at different price points, Cirque productions*, higher-end shopping centres, sports arenas, replicas of foreign countries & landmarks (including Paris and Venice), an aquarium, golf courses and Disney stores. Most of those can be found elsewhere in the country, but to have all of them in a large, tourist friendly setting (mostly operated by a few companies) is very specific to the two of them. Consciously or not, they have both seemed to adopt similar policies and practices to maintain their level of success. Vegas in diversifying its offerings, and Disney in looking to charge fees (resort, weekend nights etc) and sell more tours and upcharges for existing ones. True, you cannot find anything like Animal Kingdom Lodge or rides like Haunted Mansion in Vegas, but the quality and variety of things to do and places to eat and shop are superior in general at the latter (again IMO). I know many people also feel Vegas is a dirty, smoky place to be, but my experience has shown the Strip and its hotels to (mostly) be quite clean and no worse than any of the designated smoking areas of WDW. There are dives to be sure, but they're not really worth visiting anyway.
This long preamble on my part is to help explain why, recently, I have been choosing Vegas over WDW of late for vacations. I think it offers a better selection of things to do, and has more options for someone looking to make the most of their vacation dollar. While both are chasing after the big spenders, I find it much easier to get a deals on food and lodging in Vegas and I also find the other tourists less annoying to be around (though obviously, obnoxious people can be found everywhere). Specific to me, I have also found it surprisingly easy to combine Vegas with a visit to DLR, which obviously helps to give me my Disney fix, even though most of the trip is spent in another state.
Has anyone else been to both within the last few years? How do you think they compare, if at all?
*at the time of this post, I'm not sure what's happening next year when La Nouba closes
