Parking Rate Increases Announced
Effective today, June 18th.
As the old joke goes … Disney World is where Mickey Mouse picks you up by the cuff of your pants and shakes you upside down until all your money falls out of your pockets.
1 Like
Why.
Do.
They.
Need.
That.
Extra.
Dollar?
Parking fees at Resorts are part of the self imposed carbon tax and carbon offsets as @len first reported on Episode 207 of the Disney Dish Podcast
So the extra dollar is saving the planet.
2 Likes
To
Discourage
Guests
From
Bringing
Cars
(still crummy, but I believe this is the motive)
2 Likes
After being annoyed, I realized that too. But Len also made the interesting point about the break even point on carbon for driving vs flying. The people within 200 miles are actually saving on carbon emissions vs flying. But what are you gonna do…
I mean, sure, there’s an effect on good ol’ Mother Earth. And while I like to think Disney does care about these things (basically, look at all of AK, and let’s not get started on strawgate again), the bigger immediate impact of guests not bringing cars is fewer cars on the road (ie less traffic). I think that’s what they’re going for, especially with SWGE and then 50th anniversary coming back to back years.
(OMG I am so excited for 50th!!! The end.)
1 Like
True point. And, in that vein, as far as Disney caring for mother earth, if you count all the driving around the property in your carbon emissions total, flying gains an even bigger edge.
I feel like I just got carbon-juked. If that’s a thing. 
OK, OK. But I’m still gonna be a little fussy about it.
Yes yes, but oh man, it sure is nice. 
Self imposed carbon tax? Maybe. 
But since Parks, Experiences and Products is the highest revenue and earnings contributing segment of all Disney operations, I suspect quarterly results are a stronger motivator. Especially in light of all the other coordinated customer prices increases announced right now … AP rates, DVC AP costs, 2020 rack rates and lord knows what else. Me thinks buying Disney stock will be a more magical experience these days than buying a Disney park ticket. 
1 Like
You know, I never thought it was about carbon footprint. How cool! Makes sense!
I always thought it was because they simply didn’t have enough parking spots in the hotel areas and maybe to stop you from leaving the WDW bubble to go over to Universal.
I bet it has way more to do with “because they can” and “they want to discourage people from bringing cars” and the PR dept. is responsible for the “saving the planet” angle of it.
5 Likes
Honestly, it’s making me second guess staying on site. They have a lot of balls to charge a parking fee at what is essentially a glorified motel.
Also, for Disney to claim they’re worried about their carbon footprint when they own a fleet of cruise ships is ridiculous. This article is about Carnival, but Disney is no different really: One corporation to pollute them all | Ecohustler
1 Like
“Honestly, it’s making me second guess staying on site.”
Us too. It used to be fun going to WDW, now it’s simply expensive. I’ve spent too much time in corporate America before retiring to drink the Disney PR Kool-Aid. Their brand appeal is so strong right now, this is a money grab because they can. We have a trip in September and it may be our last. At some point it becomes a personal finances common sense test, pure and simple.
2 Likes
I certainly can’t fault you and it certainly is absurdly expensive to go, but it’s not like Disney is hurting for customers right now. They’re probably at the point where they have to increase prices just to keep from hitting max attendance all the time. I mean, just look at the AP price increase.
1 Like
This is the truth. With the proliferation of paid morning/evening events cutting back on the opportunities we used to have for evening EMH being a part of a perk of staying onsite… then they extend 60 day FPP to some Disney Spring resorts making it harder to get headliner attractions… now they charge for parking. A few years ago we wouldn’t even entertain the idea of staying offsite, but it is certainly something that is on our radar now. They’re making it more feasible, to me anyway, all the time.
You would have to pay $25 a day for parking at the parks though. So if you have a car, they get you either way. Although if you don’t need Uber carseat, that might be a cheaper option. Or you might save so much on offsite stay that it would make up for the parking fee.
We loved staying off site in January though and plan to for the next trip at least.
True… but now we’re looking at paying $25 at a deluxe resort anyway, so staying offsite at a place that may offer a similar quality room for less money has more appeal if you’re driving anyway.
And in my personal case, I’m probably looking at a moderate. I could stay offsite in a vacation home, have more room, possibly pay less and my parking cost difference is only $5.
I don’t think that is the sole factor you base a decision like that on, but it is one of the factors that comes into consideration and while “free parking” used to be a somewhat significant reason to stay onsite it certainly isn’t anymore.
I completely agree. That’s what we’ve done. I’ll happily pay the $25 to park when I’m paying $200 a night for a 5 bedroom house. And actually our next trip, we’ll have two cars for more flexibility with our larger group and pay $50 a day to park.Still cheaper than the equivalent onsite rooms.
Know that most places will charge a per-night parking fee as well. This was one of the things Disney leaned on when they first released the parking fee about a year ago: “It’s in line with industry standard.”
And so then you’re getting double-whammied: paying for parking at hotel AND at park.