Disney Testing Paid Parking at Walt Disney World Resort Hotels

[Andrew C]

I think you really need to qualify your comments better.

Almost NO other average hotel in the area charges for parking.

If you're talking only about 5 star hotels, then state that, because there are a zillion other options. You can stay on 192 for $25 a night sometimes. That is an available option - with no parking fee, often no resort fee, and a free shuttle to the parks. It's not all about the 5-star hotels, and most Disney resorts are not 5 star hotels.

There is no shortage of places to stay in the Orlando area, to fit all budgets and experiences.

We can stay on property every time, off property every time, or a mix depending on pricing. That may or may not matter to WDW.

But - "value" is subjective and the concept of a "good value" must be met in order for people to book the trip in the first place.

Too many big companies today don't charge what is necessary or what is fair, they charge as much as they can get away with because they can, and because Wall Street expects them to (quite unrealistically in some cases) post a certain amount of gains every year.

People getting used to that and accepting it as normal and OK is dismaying.

The only valid reason for WDW to charge for parking at the resorts IMO is as a deterrent for people trying to avoid paying at the theme park lots. All hotel guests should be exempted. When you pay to get in, you are paying to get in to the entire "World" not just your hotel. Lord knows they should be making enough money off the meals and shopping without having to charge you to park there for that very valid purpose.

A lot of hotels in the area charge for parking. Although not sure what you consider an average hotel.

But, I really don't think what other hotels are doing is going to have much of a bearing on if Disney ever decides to charge.

 

[ToInfinityAndBeyond]

I agree it's been well publicised by many online, So I thought that the talk of charging at resorts is to stop those people who are offsite visitors but who are bypassing parking charges, rather than trying to erode the parking privileges of those onsite by turning it into a revenue stream and rinsing more money from guests staying at what are already premium rates.

If there is any truth to this rumor, that is certainly the case. I have not read anywhere that it would affect resort guests or folks with reservations, so it would only be to deter people trying to avoid paying money for parking.

 

[s8film40]

think you really need to qualify your comments better.

I've already stated I'm talking about 4 diamond hotels. I have further stated the reason behind this is because these hotels need valet to maintain that rating and in turn need to fund a valet operation, self parking charges are a factor in doing this in almost every other hotel.

 

[Imagineerwannabe]

The only valid reason for WDW to charge for parking at the resorts IMO is as a deterrent for people trying to avoid paying at the theme park lots. All hotel guests should be exempted. When you pay to get in, you are paying to get in to the entire "World" not just your hotel. Lord knows they should be making enough money off the meals and shopping without having to charge you to park there for that very valid purpose.

I agree with this, they have to strike a balance between the parking requirements whilst still ensuring that the restaurants and shopping revenue is growing too and not at risk because they decide to charge...

As you say Tony, it should be a justified charge with a valid reason, not just 'because they can'
We are all creatures of habit and convenience, you take that away and it is bound to impact something

 

[flynnibus]

Just because they allowed free parking in the past, does not mean that it should be that way in perpetuity.

If we go by that mantra, then there would never be any change anywhere.

What you argued was this was some service that needs/should be paid for. The juxtaposition being it's something owed. Disney's own actions have shown that to not be the view of Disney, nor is there some big shift in the equation.

A change here would be one of CHOICE- not necessity or balance.

 

[unkadug]

Just because they can charge for something doesn't mean they should, either.

Why should they allow free parking for people that are not staying at that hotel? That makes no sense what so ever.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

Why should they allow free parking for people that are not staying at that hotel? That makes no sense what so ever.

Of course it does if they designed the hotel to be an attraction in itself with unique dining and shopping - which generates significant income. These restaurants are not all bursting at the seams with reservations all year long.

As has been discussed at length on this thread, there are ways to allow valid[ated] parking for those reasons.

 

[s8film40]

What you argued was this was some service that needs/should be paid for. The juxtaposition being it's something owed. Disney's own actions have shown that to not be the view of Disney, nor is there some big shift in the equation.

A change here would be one of CHOICE- not necessity or balance.

If you think your not already paying for parking your completely wrong. Disney just prefers to build it into the room charge and fool people into believing it's free.

 

[flynnibus]

Why should they allow free parking for people that are not staying at that hotel? That makes no sense what so ever.

Because they are more than just hotels. They used to be sites themselves... Until Disney lost their way...

 

[unkadug]

Of course it does if they designed the hotel to be an attraction in itself with unique dining and shopping - which generates significant income. These restaurants are not all bursting at the seams with reservations all year long.

As has been discussed at length on this thread, there are ways to allow valid[ated] parking for those reasons.

But by your own reasoning, if the Hotel is an attraction, then doesn't it follow that you should pay parking to visit just as you pay parking to visit The Magic Kingdom or Epcot?

I totally agree with validated parking, but in order to have validated parking, you must have PAID parking to begin with.

 

[s8film40]

Of course it does if they designed the hotel to be an attraction in itself with unique dining and shopping - which generates significant income. These restaurants are not all bursting at the seams with reservations all year long.

As has been discussed at length on this thread, there are ways to allow valid[ated] parking for those reasons.

Because they are more than just hotels. They used to be sights themselves... Until Disney lost their way...

I don't think there's any question they will have some sort of validation program. Disney resort dining is a big business. Disney already does this at other locations I would expect the same here.

 

[flynnibus]

If you think your not already paying for parking your completely wrong. Disney just prefers to build it into the room charge and fool people into believing it's free.

I'm also paying for the water, the electricity, etc. that falls under a collective 'no #^%'

But unless they reduce the rate for people not parking.... That highlight is pointless because the new model still represents an increase

 

[Imagineerwannabe]

I think the point is that if they introduced parking charge for an onsite guest visiting another hotel, why would you ever go and eat at another resort...if you have a hire car or your own vehicle, once you have explored your own resort dining and shopping, you would be better heading offsite than trying to visit another Disney resort and being charged for the privilege.

As long as charging was limited to those offsite visitors who are trying to bypass parking charges then I don't have a problem with them charging those visitors who haven't already paid a premium for staying at an onsite resort.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

If you think your not already paying for parking your completely wrong. Disney just prefers to build it into the room charge and fool people into believing it's free.

...which would not be possible if there were additional separate parking fees.

 

[flynnibus]

But by your own reasoning, if the Hotel is an attraction, then doesn't it follow that you should pay parking to visit just as you pay parking to visit The Magic Kingdom or Epcot?

I totally agree with validated parking, but in order to have validated parking, you must have PAID parking to begin with.

Not necessarily- for instance Disney springs

The idea of "attraction=paid parking" is not some absolute.

 

[raymusiccity]

We were there in December, at AoA. When we drove in, they gave us a blue one. Then, the front desk gave us a white one. We never did put the white one in our car.
When we were there in May, they didn't give us the paper. I'm not sure what the difference was.
Even with the blue paper in the car, the guard at AoA always checked my band. I found it easier to stop at the guard than to use the reader in the bus lane. For some reason, my band would only work with the Mickey Head sideways. It made no sense, but that's how it was at the doors to our section, and the door to our room. The rest of my party's bands worked no matter how theirs were turned.

"It's all in the wrist!"

 

[unkadug]

I think you guys want your cake and eat it too.

In order to stop abuse, Disney must implement change. You guys are all for change... until it affects you.

 

[s8film40]

I'm also paying for the water, the electricity, etc. that falls under a collective 'no #^%'

But unless they reduce the rate for people not parking.... That highlight is pointless because the new model still represents an increase

Well they would effectively reduce the rate for those not using parking. If you have a car you pay room rate + parking, if you don't have a car you pay just room rate. If the point comes that Disney has to subsidize the valet operation that very well could be the case.

They had a similar occurrence happen several years ago. They did a study and found that 50% of the valet business was free DVC member parking. The valet company asked Disney to pay a portion of it. Disney decided to remove the free valet perk rather than either eat the cost or pass it on in member dues.

 

[fillerup]

They're already hardcore about scanning Magicbands when you attempt to enter any of the resorts where parking is either an advantage or in short supply. Does this actually verify a dining reservation or is it all for show? (When the scanner actually works)

I don't know what you mean about them being hardcore about scanning bands and monitoring parking.

My experience in all of 2015 has been exactly the experience I've had in all previous years. Extend ID, say "Just visiting", security says "Welcome home. Valet is straight ahead, self parking is on the left."

That's it. End of story.

 

[Imagineerwannabe]

Why should they allow free parking for people that are not staying at that hotel? That makes no sense what so ever.

Not necessarily- for instance Disney springs

The idea of "attraction=paid parking" is not some absolute.

I'm sure the problems of parking at resorts are not because of the attraction of that resort, it's the convenience of avoiding paying the $20 fee for the main lot and/or the location for walking or transport to parks

Poly/contemporary/grand Floridian for MK
Boardwalk/yacht & beach for Epcot