Charting the Appeal of Hotels

[Plip]

A lot of people ask about the relative virtues of the various hotel options when visiting Disneyland. What's best? That's a reasonable question, considering both the expense of lodging as well as the effect it can have on your trip. Book the right hotel, and it can make your vacation. Make a bad choice, and you'll regret it the whole time.

But what makes a hotel the right hotel? It becomes quickly apparent that we don't all put equal value on the same things. One vacation planner values "Disney immersion" above all else. Another just wants to be as close to the parks as possible. Still another has budget concerns that make affordability the top priority. And another places comfort above everything else.

I've been thinking about this for a while. How do you quantify the appeal of a hotel when we all have a different mix of priorities. I've seen the kind of chart I've inserted below used for other applications. And I thought it might work for this, too. I chose five different categories (affordability, distance, immersion, comfort, and amenities). It's certainly debatable whether those are the five (or whether five is even the right number). And then I selected four different hotels and mapped those categories onto a chart for each one to give a visual representation of how it meets those priorities.

So, the Grand Californian, for instance. It gets a zero for affordability because it's usually going to be the most expensive option there is. But it maxes out distance, immersion, comfort, and amenities).

The Best Western, is middle-of-the-road for affordability (a fraction of cost of the Grand Californian, but certainly not the least expensive option). Distance is high (because it's close), immersion is low, and comfort and amenities (for the breakfast) are also middle-ish.

And I threw in a couple more examples, too.

I don't have any plans to try to do this for every hotel in the area (and I wouldn't be qualified to come up with the scores to use in the charts anyway). But I thought I'd share it because I had a little time to waste this morning, and I thought it was interesting.

 

[SteveH]

Nice work thanks for sharing!

 

[clb79]

This is a great idea for showing how someone can make a visual comparison between the different hotel choices they are considering.

 

[StarlitNight05]

This is amazing! Do you mind sharing what software you used? I am a program evaluator and often need to create data visualizations -- I really like the simplicity of these figures! It tells the story quite well.

 

[hyperminimalism]

You've got lots of great points and it really depends on the person. For me, affordability is key. That's my number one must-have. Second would be a close second, but comfort would then come after that. I do not want to stay in a run down motel with three locks on the door for a good reason, bugs crawling around everywhere, and mystery stains on the mattress and other furniture. My third most important aspect would then be walkability. I drive my car down there so that I can visit family, but I want to be able to keep it at the hotel so I'm not shelling out $125 extra bucks for the 5 days we typically go to the parks. That money would easily buy me and my friend a nice meal (maybe even a few) or some cool souvenirs to remind us of our trip. I'd say preferably less than one mile away, something like 0.7-0.9 miles from the park. I've had experience staying in some hotels those distances away from the parks and after 13+ hours days my feet and hips are really bothering me. Fortunately, during this November trip, we'll be staying directly across in the BWPAI. I've never actually stayed this close to the park before so I'm excited to see just how short a walk it will be. I know where it's located, but actually doing it and then going back to the hotel across the street will be interesting for me.

 

[PippensMcGee]

Wow--this is great and I think would be really helpful to people!

 

[Bossy22]

For me I always go with DI&S. Priorities for me are $ and closeness. I don't need frills, just a good basic hotel thats clean. Breakfast is also a priority as that saves $. Everyone has different priorities but I have looked and looked and no other option seems even close to me.

 

[Plip]

Do you mind sharing what software you used?

I just used an old version of CorelDraw and basically drew the charts by hand. Nothing sophisticated at all!

Ideally, you'd use something much more automated -- maybe a custom chart for Excel? -- but that's beyond my skill set.

 

[Kimpossible1]

I don't think you can plot something like this out because what one person thinks is great, another thinks is terrible. For instance Bossy22 said the Desert Inn and Suites is there go to hotel and never had problems, but I was supposed to be there for 4 nights and thought is was soooo dirty and smelled moldy! I checked out at 6am the next morning. It's too subjective to think that you could put all the resorts in nice charts. I probably sound like a "negative Nancy" I'm sorry, it's just my opinion. ;-)

 

[tsumgirl]

This is so cool! I'm a very visual person, so I love your take on "quantifying" the hotels' attributes to help way the pros and cons of each choice.

 

[Indiana Scott]

Cleanliness is big on my requirements. Next is walking distance.
Emmersion is not as important at DLR as it is at WDW for us. We stay at hotels on Harbor and all of them revolve around Disney. The vast majority of guests are going to DL , the hotels are decorated in DL motif and everything is about DL. Heck, even the street itself is decorated in Disney.
They are just as much in the bubble as the DLR hotels are for us.
They are the shortest walk to the gates of DL. too.

 

[NannyBeBe]

I have been staying in motels around DLR for over 30 years. Cleanliness is very important, of course, but hospitality and service is equally important. We have found the management at HoJo and Castle Inn to be exceptional. I can always find a good deal at one of those so no need to look elsewhere.

 

[Indiana Scott]

I think the reason the local hotels are as nice as they are is because they have unusually high accupancy rates for the industry. They make enough money that they can afford to be good.

 

[smartlabelprint]

I agree that service and hospitality should be on the list.

Also, quality of sleep/enjoyable room (ETA-maybe your comfort category takes that into account). I used to be in the park all day. BWPPI was amazing! Now, now so much. Hard to sleep even with white noise, beds aren’t comfortable, not a place I’d like really spend much time in the room.

I think immersion could be left out. Only the DLR hotels have that IMO.

I also agree things are subjective. Courtyard would be the perfect hotel for us...if it had breakfast, my kids need to eat immediately.

 

[violina]

Chiming in, things that matter a lot for me are cleanliness, and accessibility (not really distance, but just the ability to get to my intended place with ease). Theme is something that I also like -- so I've never stayed at Paradise Pier but I would like to. Lower on my list is immersion and hospitality because I usually don't really utilize those services as much.

I've travelled with my best friend and my husband, and their priorities (which are weirdly similar) are different than my own. They prize immersion, hospitality, distance, amenities/food, and convenience. Cleanliness is something that matters to them, but definitely not as much to me.

As a result, we've ended up at the Grand more often. Even though I'd be fine with the other on-site hotels or a good neighbor.

 

[hyperminimalism]

I don't think you can plot something like this out because what one person thinks is great, another thinks is terrible. For instance Bossy22 said the Desert Inn and Suites is there go to hotel and never had problems, but I was supposed to be there for 4 nights and thought is was soooo dirty and smelled moldy! I checked out at 6am the next morning. It's too subjective to think that you could put all the resorts in nice charts. I probably sound like a "negative Nancy" I'm sorry, it's just my opinion. ;-)

Yup. You could chart these hotels/motels by their price, walking score, amenities, and whatnot, but these aspects will mean various things to different people. Take this thread, for instance. This is by no means bashing on the OP of that thread, nor any ill thoughts toward the people who replied, but what mattered to the OP in that thread was something I could never fathom being bottom lines for my decision to visit the parks. That's not necessarily bad, we just have different priorities in where we stay while we're not at the DLR.

 

[Chickinvic]

Great post. For me walking distance to the parks and affordability are up top. Of course comfort and cleanliness are important, but I've honestly never stayed anywhere "gross". It is just a place to rest my head, and I couldn't are less about Disney immersion. I' happy enough to be going to Disney, I don't need 24/7 Disney for that.

 

[theluckyrabbit]

I don't think you can plot something like this out because what one person thinks is great, another thinks is terrible. For instance Bossy22 said the Desert Inn and Suites is there go to hotel and never had problems, but I was supposed to be there for 4 nights and thought is was soooo dirty and smelled moldy! I checked out at 6am the next morning. It's too subjective to think that you could put all the resorts in nice charts. I probably sound like a "negative Nancy" I'm sorry, it's just my opinion. ;-)

Totally agree with this. Subjectivity is a huge factor when it comes to hotel recommendations at DLR! That is why I know which posters I trust here and take their word when it comes to hotel reviews. Reading their reviews makes a big difference and tells me which posters think the same way about hotels as I do. When they recommend a hotel for specific reasons, I listen. And when they give a negative review, I listen. Everyone has different ideas of what makes a "good" hotel. Finding posters here whom you can agree with and whose reviews you can trust can be so helpful.

 

[mentos]

Interesting thoughts here. Personally, at this point in life (with a 5 year old), distance from the park is absolutely key. I've gone so far as to use Google Maps to measure the exact distance from the furthest rooms at VGC vs. hotels across Harbor (hint: they're almost the same). Safety is also a concern, and crossing 6 lanes of a major thoroughfare + multiple driveways (including a McDonald's drive-thru) can feel harrowing.

Taking shuttles is also out of our consideration, having to wait for a shuttle, fold up the stroller when embarking, and then hauling/refolding isn't something I want to do (I'm on vacation, darn it!)

Therefore, we stay at VGC or DLH when it's available. When they're unavailable, we pick Tropicana Inn and Suites and Camelot Inn and Suites (sister properties) as they are some of the closest properties to the esplanade and you cross the fewest # of driveways in the process.

Flip this around when it's just me and the wife traveling (which includes so-cal, so a quick Disney jaunt), we value a full service hotel (valet parking, room service, Starbucks in-house) and don't care so much about a shuttle (if there's one soon, we'll use it... if not, dial up Uber/Lyft. We'll usually stay at the Hilton next to the convention center as it suits our needs then.

 

[mentos]

I think the reason the local hotels are as nice as they are is because they have unusually high accupancy rates for the industry. They make enough money that they can afford to be good.

Funny I come to the opposite conclusion.... that since the hotels surrounding the park are limited and constantly occupied, owners have little incentive to improve them.

Don't get me wrong, they're clean... but nice, I wouldn't call them nice.