News WDW Resorts to add fees for parking

[Chef Mickey]

I went to MK today. The waits were great, but the food was disgusting, it was under cooked, over priced, and 50% of what I ordered was not given to me because they didn't bother to ring it up properly. I guess I should keep my mouth shut because Disney is a business. That makes total sense.

Where did you eat and where? Food is always consistent for me at MK. Eaten there many, many times. And yes, if you had a problem, the restaurant or guest services would have taken care of it for you. They always try to do the right thing, especially if you are calm and respectful.

Maybe you didn't communicate your order clearly because it was dripping with sarcasm? Or maybe they didn't think 1 person could actually eat 2 burgers? I keed, I keed.

 

[Buried20KLeague]

ITA. When we lived in FL, we went several times a year. We moved away in 2009, and still went in 2010 and had a trip sched for 2012 when FE, followed by the whole MDE/MB/FP+ thing kicked in, so we postponed until the dust settled. We didn't go again until 2014 (DL/DCA) and then in 2016 we decided to try WDW again. We had a good time, but it felt too regimented. So now our next trip will likely be Tokyo later this year. I can't see going back to WDW until all the upgrades are finished.

Welcome to the club.

And if you want any help planning... from the airport to where to stay to how the monorail works... PM me. Be your Yoda, I can.

 

[RobbinsDad]

Hi, my name is RobbinsDad and I'm a Disney Addict.

Well not really. Like any 80s kid who grew up in Central Florida, Disney World was a huge part of my life. It's a nostalgia for something that will never be what it was but hopefully can be something special again. That's why I go back.

 

[NearTheEars]

Although I know why you used that comparison, it really doesn't connect. The difference between Disney being able to control the actions of an Alligator in a Florida swamp and their ability to charge for something that they are already charging for all these years is not at all the same thing. We all know that those resort fees were built in to what we paid for a room at (pick a) resort. Always have been paying it. Now all of a sudden they are having a new charge under the heading of Resort Fees, however, have they reduced the room rates in any way that would indicate that some of that was a resort fee in the past? No? I didn't think so!

One thing I do wonder though, because I have seen it in other states. Is there a bit of a savings to guest due to the premise that Room rates are taxable and Resort fees either are not taxed or are a lower tax rate?

I don't think the two things are the same at all. Only thing in common is that both could (and have) resulted in negative press. I think the fear of a child being snatched by an alligator trumps any concern over an added hotel fee. Either way, people will keep coming.

 

[flynnibus]

A dividend is often used in combination with buybacks because dividends create a tax burden on the investor, which is not always a good thing. Buybacks do not.

Buybacks can permanently reduce share count, adding long term value and increasing EPS without income growth. They have disadvantages, but acting like "buybacks are stupid" is just not correct. Even the smartest companies like Berskshire do it when the price is right. Dividends, like buybacks, also "detract" from capital expenditures, so Berkshire refuses to pay them and feels buybacks are better for shareholders.

Capital return programs have advantages and disadvantages. Saying one is better than the other just isn't accurate because there are so many different circumstances.

It's playing the market vs your own product. Berkshire doesn't have product to invest in... so comparing a holding company to an actual company driving value through its own products is kind of lame. Berkshire functions to buy and sell... of course it's most interested in market value verse actual diving sustainable return within the business. They want value now so they can move shares.

Dividends have a tax burden... so does stock when you sell it. Dividends are income now... stocks aren't income until you sell. Dividends can sustain you and keep people invested... they drive stability vs trying to game the movement of a stock.

The idea they want to reduce outstanding shares is another sham. If they cared so much about that they'd would not keep issuing shares to fund compensation plans. Buying shares has near term pumping action on the stock, while issuing shares dilutes but isn't seen in the prices in the near term due to vesting.

 

[King Capybara 77]

Here's my quandry on this whole situation,
The parking charge alone is enough for me to reconsider vacationing to WDW. Why ? Because the European cruises seem like a much better option for my money because,
1. The chauffeur can be made to take the time i am at sea as part of his holiday and therefore i don't have to pay him (or the parking fee) for my holiday time.
B. All i need is my butler and my DW's ladies maid.So i can save on bringing the chef and footman from my regular vacation plans.
3. The Resort fee is annoying as i am effectively paying for things the staff do for me.
Maybe i am alone in looking at this in this way but i think it will keep a large selection of the aristocracy from visiting with the commoners in the colonies.

 

[NearTheEars]

Here's my quandry on this whole situation,
The parking charge alone is enough for me to reconsider vacationing to WDW. Why ? Because the European cruises seem like a much better option for my money because,
1. The chauffeur can be made to take the time i am at sea as part of his holiday and therefore i don't have to pay him (or the parking fee) for my holiday time.
B. All i need is my butler and my DW's ladies maid.So i can save on bringing the chef and footman from my regular vacation plans.
3. The Resort fee is annoying as i am effectively paying for things the staff do for me.
Maybe i am alone in looking at this in this way but i think it will keep a large selection of the aristocracy from visiting with the commoners in the colonies.

My eyes!

 

[RustySpork]

Where did you eat and where? Food is always consistent for me at MK. Eaten there many, many times. And yes, if you had a problem, the restaurant or guest services would have taken care of it for you. They always try to do the right thing, especially if you are calm and respectful.

Maybe you didn't communicate your order clearly because it was dripping with sarcasm? Or maybe they didn't think 1 person could actually eat 2 burgers? I keed, I keed.

Ahhh yes, of course it's my own fault. Business does no wrong! To be fair, they fixed it. They should have gotten it right in the first place, but we should not have a right to say that. Quick, get a pen and write an amendment!

 

[Goofyernmost]

I don't think the two things are the same at all. Only thing in common is that both could (and have) resulted in negative press. I think the fear of a child being snatched by an alligator trumps any concern over an added hotel fee. Either way, people will keep coming.

Not wanting to make a big thing out of this, but, one was and is totally emotional and not a common or likely event. The other is not only emotional and economically a consideration, but, it is totally controllable and constant with 100% chance that it will directly affect anyone staying there. Most people can understand that one is tragic and isolated, like getting struck by lightening the other is frustrating and constant like grabbing an electric fence. If you don't grab it you don't have a chance of it affecting you. So, therefore, it could impact much more on how people are encouraged not to grab the fence even with the same amount of publicity.

 

[wdisney9000]

Quick question.

Has anyone on these forums stayed at the Breakers or Atlantis?

Hahahahahaha.

 

[mmssbrg2]

How many people are going too figure out that they can park at the economy lot at MCO for $10 per day (or even less at one of the third-party lots), give Disney a bogus flight number, and take DME to the resort, saving $20/night or more? On a long trip, this would save a good bit of money and end up costing Disney more money...until they begin charging for DME.

 

[rael ramone]

If that $1 is part of a hotel resort fee, they are probably making 80-90%.....which is why the hotel industry loves them - high margin, not subject to occupancy tax, nor travel agent commission, and mandatory.

ETA: BTW, the hotel industry knows that this gravy train may be ending....if Disney were savvy, they would advertise 'no resort fee' or set themselves apart by making it optional.

Unfortunately, the 'timeshare' gravy train ended a very very long time ago..... except for $DIS. They may feel they are bullet proof here, too.

 

[drizgirl]

Is there a bit of a savings to guest due to the premise that Room rates are taxable and Resort fees either are not taxed or are a lower tax rate?

The fallacious premise that resort fees might save guests was already brought up on page 3 of the thread:

Resort fees are horrible, however it's the taxes on top of the room costs that cause them. The occupancy tax is on the room costs and not the additional resort fee. Therefore if a hotel charged 100 a night for the room and there were a resort fe of 20 a night the 12% occupancy tax would be 12 but if the room cost 120 wit no resort fee the tax would be 14.40. Now 2.40 may not sound like much but think if the costs were double or triple that and you were staying a week or more. 2.40 a day for 7 days is 16.80, double is 33.60 and triple is 50.40. It really adds up so the real reason for these fees is the over taxing of rooms.

 

[Goofyernmost]

The fallacious premise that resort fees might save guests was already brought up on page 3 of the thread:

Well, I guess that it was brought up again on page 31.

 

[NearTheEars]

Not wanting to make a big thing out of this, but, one was and is totally emotional and not a common or likely event. The other is not only emotional and economically a consideration, but, it is totally controllable and constant with 100% chance that it will directly affect anyone staying there. Most people can understand that one is tragic and isolated, like getting struck by lightening the other is frustrating and constant like grabbing an electric fence. If you don't grab it you don't have a chance of it affecting you. So, therefore, it could impact much more on how people are encouraged not to grab the fence even with the same amount of publicity.

Again, I don't disagree at all. My point is more about WDW's ability to weather storms, tragic, or created by themselves (DCA Guardians Tower, closing half of DHS, raising ticket prices yearly, peak season pricing, Frozenstrom, MK hub renovation, upcharge events etc.). All have been declared the end of Disney, yet none of it has deterred the non forum-reading masses.

PS: I'm not defending the rumor. I'm not sure how anyone (outside of JT) could see it as a good thing. Well, maybe major shareholders that have never stepped on property.

 

[RustySpork]

Again, I don't disagree at all. My point is more about WDW's ability to weather storms, tragic, or created by themselves (DCA Guardians Tower, closing half of DHS, raising ticket prices yearly, peak season pricing, Frozenstrom, MK hub renovation, upcharge events etc.). All have been declared the end of Disney, yet none of it has deterred the non forum-reading masses.

PS: I'm not defending the rumor. I'm not sure how anyone (outside of JT) could see it as a good thing. Well, maybe major shareholders that have never stepped on property.

TWDC can do whatever they want, people will still go. Raising the price to try and limit attendance is not going to limit attendance. We are seeing that already. Adding extra parking and resort fees will annoy those who pay attention to pricing, but it won't even slow down those who save for years to visit WDW.

 

[rael ramone]

My eyes!

I had to drag & highlight the whole post in order to read it...

 

[Bandini]

TWDC can do whatever they want, people will still go. Raising the price to try and limit attendance is not going to limit attendance. We are seeing that already. Adding extra parking and resort fees will annoy those who pay attention to pricing, but it won't even slow down those who save for years to visit WDW.

You may be right, But I still think WDW is losing their repeat business. Our last trip was 2 years ago and before that we used to go annually. We have no plans to return, even with the new attractions.
I wonder how many first time visitors, who had the potential to become repeat vacationers are choosing to go elsewhere because of the nickel and diming.

 

[SorcererMC]

Unfortunately, the 'timeshare' gravy train ended a very very long time ago..... except for $DIS. They may feel they are bullet proof here, too.

Yes that is a good point, ie the DVC model is not sustainable. Ultimately I think that they will offer different amenity packages that the guest can choose from, and charge accordingly. A sort of tiered pricing for an amenities bundle (or yield management).

 

[RustySpork]

You may be right, But I still think WDW is losing their repeat business. Our last trip was 2 years ago and before that we used to go annually. We have no plans to return, even with the new attractions.
I wonder how many first time visitors, who had the potential to become repeat vacationers are choosing to go elsewhere because of the nickel and diming.

I'm with you, we had our annual passes for many years and renewed every year. Now we get them every other year. This year we are going to let them go until all of the new stuff opens. Disney doesn't care though, they make plenty of money off of everyone else. I do know quite a few people who went to other Orlando attractions last year instead of WDW though, maybe it will eventually catch up with them.