suprz wrote:
Too expensive, does NOT live up to the hype
Disney runs perhaps the most successful entertainment enterprise on the planet. They own what is regarded as one of the best RV parks in North America. It is 100% full, for much of the year. For ever potential client with your attitude, there are several that are disappointed that they failed to even get in. The fact that anybody is not impressed with Fort Wilderness, is of little concern to them.
The average family of four now spends $7500 for a five day Disney vacation. Obviously, that figure would cause many here to faint, as many are tighter than a frog's butt, and have moths flying out of their wallets when they get cracked open, every few months.
Here on the forum there is a long history of those that bitterly whine that FW is a "rip-off" since it's fifty bucks more that the local KOA. The same people who drop over $100 per person a day,for park tickets, are horrified that a high end RV resort on the property isn't as cheap as the one ten miles away in Kissimmee. (in one of the highest crime cities, in one of the highest crime states, BTW) Having been a loyal customer at FW for the last two decades, I occasionally wonder when Disney leadership is going to pull the plug on the whole place. It's located on prime property, and I doubt it generates the return of other high end lodging located on the lake. It's a valid concern, with the long abandoned water park, immediately adjacent, being replaced with a huge timeshare facility. I can see the day when some executive asks, " If Fort wilderness brings such a poor ROI, and our internal data shows that our camping guests spend much less on their vacation experience as those who stay in our high end properties, why are we wasting prime property on them?"