Resort Parking Charges

[flynnibus]

This is factually incorrect. 100% wrong. Disney doesn't care about your $78, their goal was to get you to leave the car at home. Their goal is not "cash grab via small parking fee," their goal is "much larger cash grab from a captive guest who doesn't have a car in the first place so they spend more on merchandise, food, beverage, and recreation."

Then they'd be better off charging in/out fees

 

[flynnibus]

The number of people who drive from outside of Florida is extremely small.

The traffic on I-95 proves you wrong Nevermind how many FL passes does Disney sell a year?

Disney clearly has a nice picture of where people are coming from in their data.. and visiting WDW from the south is not out of character.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

If that's the case, it would be pretty easy to charge it to people who take the Magical Express and also have a car.

Huh? Almost nobody takes DME and also has a car. The people who rent cars rent them at MCO and don't take DME at all.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Then they'd be better off charging in/out fees

Might be. I'm commenting on what the strategy is, not whether or not it's effective.

 

[Kadiem]

You know when we do end up eating off site (even if we don't intend to?) When we stay off site. And we are more likely to stay off site more often with this parking fee, and limit staying on site to event trips.

So they can charge me whatever it is to park at a moderate, which will encourage me to stay off site. Then they lose my hotel purchase, my parking fee, as well as some convenience meals. "Should be walk back to xyz for a QS before our afternoon break?" "Nah, we're already near the exit, we can stop at the place next door to the hotel or Publix on the way."

They don't gain anything by having an extra empty parking spot to match our empty hotel room.

Excellent point (that I forgot to make ) regarding staying off site. The 'no resort and parking fees' was the main differentiator for us staying on Disney property over off site brands. Many of the offsite hotels (e.g. - Hilton Bonnet Creek, Wyndham Grand at Bonnet Creek) are way nicer than the majority of the magical hotels run by Disney.

With all things being (for the most part) equal, I'll choose the nicer hotel off site going forward. No incentive to stay on Disney property, even with their transportation to/from parks.

 

[CaptainJackNO]

They want to stop people like me who left my Resort for two days last vacation to go to Universal instead. That was a lot more Revenue lost to them then they will recover in parking fees.

The most effective way to do this is to provide experiences so superior to Universal that no one staying on Disney property will consider leaving. Used to be that way, not so much anymore.

What does the lot being full or not have to do with it?
Empty lots still cost money to build and maintain...

The reasoning is entirely about 'not leaving money on the table' and justifying it with industry norms.

So exactly what maintenance on that 6 ft by 10ft space needed to be done when I left?

Also, how on earth did Disney maintain these parking lots all these years without this charge, and what overwhelming crisi arose that led to te decision that they just could not go any longer without this charge?

Also, it is NOT industry norm to provide free transportation to a resort when flying to a location, so I am assuming Disney should cease that immediately.

When you are a company the size of WDW, you set the industry standard. Land availability has EVERYTHING to do with it.

When you stay at a rural hotel, or a hotel in a suburb, how much is parking? It's free

When you stay in a city, there exists scarcity of available space (Meaning more vehicles needing parking than available space to park). It's supply and demand that sets the premium for parking; therefore, I ask, where is the scarcity that has led Disney to determine that parking should be a premium. Where is the supply and demand?

I am not saying Disney does not have the right to charge as owner of the property, but as a paying, somewhat regular customer who is very loyal to the Disney brand, I have a right to voice when I feel I am being taken advantage of, and this is one of those cases. There is an overwhelming availability of parking, so scarcity does not exist, thus supply and demand doesn't exactly apply. Also, Disney does not have to pay leasing or rental fees to some company to utilize the parking lots, therefore there are not rental or leasing fees that need to be passed onto the customer. So, please tell me what service that parking space received upon my arrival or leaving that required a 78 dollar charge, other than WDW Co. deciding that it wanted to charge me more money to park because they felt they could? Which, again, is their right, but as paying customer it is my right to disagree and voice that disagreement.

 

[CaptainJackNO]

Excellent point (that I forgot to make ) regarding staying off site. The 'no resort and parking fees' was the main differentiator for us staying on Disney property over off site brands. Many of the offsite hotels (e.g. - Hilton Bonnet Creek, Wyndham Grand at Bonnet Creek) are way nicer than the majority of the magical hotels run by Disney.

With all things being (for the most part) equal, I'll choose the nicer hotel off site going forward. No incentive to stay on Disney property, even with their transportation to/from parks.

Not to mention, you don't have to walk 6 miles back to your hotel room after you get off of the bus, after walking 5 miles through the parks all day. You just walk 200 feet to an elevator, then 60 feet to your room, which is much more appointed and in line with "Industry Standards."

Good point!

 

[Tony the Tigger]

Huh? Almost nobody takes DME and also has a car. The people who rent cars rent them at MCO and don't take DME at all.

Fair point. See how much I don’t fly?

The larger point remains: it can be applied in better ways or discounted for locals.

 

[DisneyFreak]

With all things being (for the most part) equal, I'll choose the nicer hotel off site going forward. No incentive to stay on Disney property, even with their transportation to/from parks.

Especially these days with bus wait times and broken down monorails. The most reliable Disney transportation these days are the parking trams.

 

[John park hopper]

I find it hard to believe Disney management is that myopic to think not driving to the resorts is an option for everyone. In my own case flying is not a option 1. no direct flights to Orlando 2. cost far more than driving 3. with connecting flights it would take me longer to get there. My last 9 day trip my truck never moved so there was no maintenance required on that spot (that i'm sure has been paid for for years) when I left. My gut reaction is this has been nothing more than a $$$$$ grab justifying it by saying it's industry standards. I can say my next trip in May 2019 I will be spending less on food in the parks and bringing more food with us to cover breakfast and lunch. If Disney's intent is to get more of my money by penalizing me for driving it ain't happening

 

[BASS]

It doesn't really bother me that much, nor will it affect future vacation plans--I'm in a big city so used to paying for parking--but it's a total cash grab lol.

 

[Rumrunner]

This is an absolute cash grab. I just left WDW yesterday after 6 days. My car sat idle for 6 solid days, and there were ample spaces, so it was not in any way a space issue. While 78 dollars pales in comparison to the other money the trip cost (And I received solid value for every single dollar spent), all except for that last 78 dollars. It's ridiculous and an absolute cash grab, and don't tell me "other resorts offsite do it." Big deal. There is no reason to charge to park in a parking lot that is not nearly filled. Had a blast on my trip, but I felt totally hoodwinked being required to pay 13 dollars a night for use of a 6 ft by 10 foot space in a place where there is ample parking and the property is completely owned by the resort.

I'll pay 50 bucks for QS burgers and fries, I'll pay 200 bucks to eat at Ohana. I get value and a one of a kind experience for this, but this parking fee is absurd and an overt cash grab.

Anytime new charges are invented and add no value to the experience they are nothing more than a cash grab. It is akin to an insult.

 

[Missing20K]

Disney's execs are so out of touch

Nahhh. Not those folks. Finger on the pulse.

 

[homerdance]

This is factually incorrect. 100% wrong. Disney doesn't care about your $78, their goal was to get you to leave the car at home. Their goal is not "cash grab via small parking fee," their goal is "much larger cash grab from a captive guest who doesn't have a car in the first place so they spend more on merchandise, food, beverage, and recreation."

Disney does care about the $78 extra. There isn't a world where if Disney has a choice to collect $78 or not to collect $78 they won't take it if it costs them nothing. So, 100% wrong, no, but not completely right either. Disney prefers you to not rent a car and stay on property.

 

[Goofyernmost]

BTW, not many of the hotels offsite charge a parking fee. In fact they are using the "free" parking way to get people to decide that they can save even more money if they don't stay onsite. I even say a number of signs in the front of those hotels that stated.... "And we will never charge you to park your car here."

 

[Minnie Mum]

This is factually incorrect. 100% wrong. Disney doesn't care about your $78, their goal was to get you to leave the car at home. Their goal is not "cash grab via small parking fee," their goal is "much larger cash grab from a captive guest who doesn't have a car in the first place so they spend more on merchandise, food, beverage, and recreation."

Then I'm not going to be one of the people helping Iger reach that goal. We have been driving down for the last 10 years. Not just because it's cheaper, although it's significantly less expensive. But because we also stop elsewhere for several days going down and back. We've stayed on site exclusively for over 30 years, giving the Mouse all the money. Before we started driving, we sometimes rented a car, and sometimes used DME.

But when this latest cash grab came out we sat down and crunched the numbers. With the number of loyalty points we accumulate yearly, we can stay at a hotel just one exit over for FREE. If we plan a longer stay, we can then pay about half the cost of a Disney resort, get a free breakfast and daily newspaper, and FREE parking. The cost to pay for parking at the parks each day is miniscule compared to the money we will save by staying 5 min off site. So Disney not only loses our parking fee, they lose the cost of the resort and at least one meal per day. If more people start crunching the numbers, there may be a lot more availability at the Disney resorts in the future.

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

This is an absolute cash grab.

Yes.

their goal is "much larger cash grab from a captive guest who doesn't have a car in the first place so they spend more on merchandise, food, beverage, and recreation."

Yes.

The reasoning is entirely about 'not leaving money on the table' and justifying it with industry norms.

1000% Yes.

Sadly there is a lot more money lying on the table that they'll find a way (or at least try) to justify.

 

[flynnibus]

that i'm sure has been paid for for years

Asphalt isn’t forever BTW. It’s why everyone has to maintain capital reserves for upkeep and replacement

 

[flynnibus]

So exactly what maintenance on that 6 ft by 10ft space needed to be done when I left?

Also, how on earth did Disney maintain these parking lots all these years without this charge, and what overwhelming crisi arose that led to te decision that they just could not go any longer without this charge?

If a business absorbs the costs themselves or not is their decision.... but the lots are not free to build nor maintain... nor does it really matter much if a space is taken or not. The environment still does it thing. Customers often assume such things are just cheap or free. But talk to anyone who has had to add parking to their building, or is involved with the budgeting and most would be shocked.

Disney doing this now is Just capitalizing on what they can do... verse the standard they’ve set themselves. But besides maximum utilization driving the need or not for more spaces... the rest of your “no load” justifications are pretty irrelevant

 

[Goofyernmost]

If a business absorbs the costs themselves or not is their decision.... but the lots are not free to build nor maintain... nor does it really matter much if a space is taken or not. The environment still does it thing. Customers often assume such things are just cheap or free. But talk to anyone who has had to add parking to their building, or is involved with the budgeting and most would be shocked.

Disney doing this now is Just capitalizing on what they can do... verse the standard they’ve set themselves. But besides maximum utilization driving the need or not for more spaces... the rest of your “no load” justifications are pretty irrelevant

If they include parking fees in a overnight charge that it sometimes hundreds of dollars less then just the room costs onsite, I can't help but say that I am alright with that. Big Picture! Legally, of course they can do it, and based on the behavior of guests over the years they will get away with this too. But, it can and will backfire when the economy tanks which I think it is about to do.