dvc at the institute!

[tom in ct.]

just got back from picking up my wife at the airport I sent her on a quick 3 day cruise with my mom! And the the first thing out of her mouth when she got off the plane was GUESS WHAT? The bus driver for the disney cruise line bus was telling the whole bus that DVC is turning the whole institute into a timeshare! And he said that he was'nt sure when they were going to start selling points and there was a few renovations to be made but he had heard unofficailly that it would probably be sometime in late fall of 2002! She said that he sounded like he knew alot of the DVC lingo, has anyone heard anything else about this? Maybe it's going to take the place of the Eagle pines resort! Maybe the points would be cheaper because they don't have the initial building cost etc. etc.

[CLC]

Haven't heard anything about this-other than the villas at DI are closing. Very interesting!

[Richyams]

I am here right now, the next time I go past a DVC booth, I will grill them.

[DVCDAVE]

I hope not. The Institiute was built on Ei$ner's ego, and failed. It should stay that way. It has been the second biggest Disney failure since Disneyland Paris (or EuroDisney). I can only hope and pray they board up the Disney Insititute to remind Ei$ner of what he has done over the last six years to Disney; a huge waste of land, and a larger waste of shareholder equity.........

[Granny]

DVCDAVE....

As a shareholder, wouldn't you rather see Disney take a losing proposition and turn it into a profitable one?

Having said that, this does sound like a pretty wild rumor. With BCV coming on line in a year, would they want to have two WDW DVC resorts selling at once?

[dianeschlicht]

I think the bus driver was doing some personal wishful thinking. I for one would not want to stay at the Institute. I find them bare and boring.

[DVCDAVE]

GRANNY; Of course you are right. As a shareholder I am just upset that we haven't earned any money on the stock over the last 6 years.

Now, back to the topic. DI was Ei$ner's own idea. Not only do I think it was a horrble one, but it even lacked follow through (execution), thus a waste of valuable resources (land and precious capital). I would like to see something done there, however, I do believe it will be an expensive venture to convert it to a DVC resort as it lacks a theme. I DO NOT want it 'decorated' (as opposed to themed) like a tacky, ugly, moderate resort which I am afraid Ei$ner may do. The bottom line is I am afraid of a DVC resort becoming cheap and tacky looking like All Stars ____, or Pop Century thus degrading and cheapin the entire DVC program.

I would be far happier if they simply bulldozed DI into a swamp and built something entirely new from scratch on a grand scale like OKW, BWV, etc. Second, as a shareholder, I will make sure I don't vote for Ei$ner the next time I get my proxy. At his point in time it is quite clear that Ei$ner has over deveoped the WDW property as it is awash in hotel rooms. Especially cheap hotel rooms. Pop Century is mothballed, as is Riverside. I also have read that at some of the other resorts entire floors have been closed. It is abundently clear that there is a overcapacity on Disney property, building any more rooms weather DVC or not, will only serve to worsen the problem and waste the capital Disney needs to restore its credit rating with S&P, Moody's and Fitch.

[Granny]

I must admit that I don't know much about the Disney Institute.

However, based on your comments, DVCDAVE, I agree wholeheartedly that they should not try to do a DVC home "on the cheap". People would buy there and then not want to stay there and would clog up the current "homes".

I think DVC works best when each home has its own character and features, in a first class setting. We chuckle over the "my home is best" threads on this board, but honestly it would be a disaster if everyone thought the same DVC home was the best. Thank goodness for "different strokes....". :)

[PKS44]

From a financial standpoint DVC is a good moneymaker for Disney...the cash is paid NOW for future accomodations. Thus building a DVC resort is not the same risk as a non-DVC resort as each sale is guaranteed business for 40 years. The question is could DI sell...Answer, probably not as it is now...is there a market for a DVC resort after BCV? Don't know- but maybe this could be the site for my previously proposed Greek Island Resort...doubtful, but I can dream...

Paul

[DVCDAVE]

Granny ; Exactly !!!

[DVCDAVE]

PKS44; All you said is true to a degree, but each time Disney sells a DVC interest, it is also lossing a cash paying customer who would normally be staying at a non-DVC resort. Therefore, building of DVC resorts does not solve the problem of overcapacity that Disney is currently facing.

Truthfully, I don't see DI conversion to DVC as a gain for Disney. It would be another failure for Ei$ner. Why would someone buy a timshare interest in a resort that they wouldn't stay in with a cash reservation ???? Makes no sense to me...... It is obviously a resort that has no appeal, character, or charm.

[WebmasterDoc]

Interesting rumor and good comments!!

The DI is an old resort. The villas and bungalows are certainly, IMHO, not up to DVC standards and a retrofit to accomplish that would likely cost more than a bulldozing and new construction. DI was, I believe, built in the early 70's and I have been told that some units were used by construction execs while MK was being built- which would make some areas even older. (I don't have any actual dates however.)

There are not too many 2BR villas and no easy way to combine other villas to make a 2BR. Many are townhouses and studio-type accommodations. The fairway villas are spread out and the Treehouses far removed from the rest of the resort.

Before joining DVC in '93, we had been enjoying many stays in 1 and 2BR Townhouse Villas at what was then Disney Village. The Insitute concept was an attempt to revive interest in the resort by using it as the focal area for the great programs which were offered. For a variety of reasons, not appropriate for this board, the DI has been a failure. (I think it could have worked.)

Anyway, IMHO, the current DI is not a candidate for inclusion as a DVC resort, but certainly makes a great rumor. I agree with the comments about the desirability factor for the resort, which would certainly be a significant challenge for the marketing/sales staff at DVC.

Stay Tuned!

[NFalzon]

BUT I have a serious problem calling The Institute a failure. While, yes, it did fail to make a profit for the company, I was unaware that the only means of judging success or failure is on the bottom line.

It seems that Disney gets bashed coming and going--having vacationed at the Institute I can say that I adored it and found it to be one of the finest offerings in the entire WDW Resort, and while I do believe the proof is in the pudding, I do suspect that history might look a tad more favorably on the Institute--and the discussion of profit will be minimized as the only true thing that matters is guest satisfaction.

But regardless, to make the suggestion that the entire Institute was built on the back of Eisner's idea is completely false--the resort went through a major rehab and was outfit with facilities for "classes". The rooms were all there.

As far as theme goes--I don't quite get how Vero, for example, is any more themed than the Institute Villas which essentially have a treehouse, woodsy, hidden-away feel.

The rooms that were there for the last few years--largely underused--were NOT the product of gross over-expansion; the rooms were there prior to my birth (and prior to the birth of DVC). They obviously took a hit when the classes ceased, and they worked to handle overflow. Now that there's no more overflow, the resort really has no function.

That is NOT to say it has no character, however.

Though, when all is said and done, Doc is right that it would be a VERY difficult sell to convert the Institute Villas into a DVC Resort--though I heard that very rumor two years ago!--just simply because DVC's product seems to be based on fairly similar floor plans and designs; Bungalows and Treehouse Villas, while quite spacious in comparison to standard rooms, do not offer many similarities with the DVC norms.

Nick

PS: Disneyland Paris isn't much of a failure either--neither commercially NOR artistically.

[Regina]

I just returned from WDW. While your bus driver was telling everyone that they were converting the DI to DVC, our bus driver was telling us that it was being closed.

As Doc stated, this resort is quite old, and certainly precedes Eisner. It never had a strong identity or a traditional resort feel.

While the DI concept didn't work, at least it was an attempt to revive this often overlooked part of Disney.

Beyond being told that it's being closed, no mention was made as to what it's future holds.

[KNWVIKING]

"Why would someone buy a timshare interest in a resort that they wouldn't stay in with a cash reservation ???? "

If the VWL was not DVC but just a cash add-on to the WL, would you pay the big $$$ to stay at VWL or the main WL with all the common areas at your doorstep and all the best views. I don't think VWL would survive as a cash resort unless they severely discounted the rooms as compared to WL rates. The same would apply to BCV.

DI is a money pit as it stands now. Bottom line: how do you change that. Bulldozing is a waste of money. A complete renovation to a new theme- if done in true Disney style- could be very cost effective. DI could possibly become the start of the much talked about DVC II. I personally think renovating DI is a better option then a new resort at Eagle Pines. My concern with future DVC sites is "location,location,location". I think WDW will build upscale cash resorts at all the prime locations and stick DVC where they think it will fit at a pre-existing resort or build new at out-of-the-way locations like Eagle Pines.

[PamOKW]

The accomodations at what is now called the Disney Institute were built well before Eisner had anything to do with WDW. I believe the idea at first was to make it a condo complex and then they backed off that because of the problems of having voting residents living on WDW property. Eisner had a great idea for the Disney Institute using these buildings but it just didn't fly. There is just too much to do at WDW to go there for educational experiences.

I can't see them converting them, as is, to a DVC resort. Maybe soemthing along those lines will be built there in its place. Or, maybe there is a bigger plan we are unaware of that will use the PO/DXL and DI property for some future expansion.

[KNWVIKING]

After reading this post this morning, I asked a few CM's manning the DVC kiosk's during the day and they were totally unaware of this rumor.

[disrailfan]

You know while we were there during our stay 11/10- 11/17 we noticed that several of the buildings at the DI had those tale tale walls up around them that Disney uses to hide when they are working on something. It appeared as though these buildings were being repainted and retrofitted with new appliances and such.

Not sure, but thought that I would throw my two cents of observation in here. If they are going to close it I can't see Disney spending the money to upgrade them.

:smooth:

[DVCDAVE]

I know this is getting off the topic but I feel I must reply;

Quote by NFALZON; "PS: Disneyland Paris isn't much of a failure either--neither commercially NOR artistically"

No one has mentioned the artisitic success or failure as that would be too subjective of a topic to either win or loss. However the commercial success of Disneyland Paris isn't subjective at all. Fact-- the company went public in 1991 and was forced to reorganize in 1994 and restructure it's debt, or face bankruptcy. Fact-- During the resructuring Disney Inc., was forced to reduce it's equity ownership from the original 51%, forgo royality and other fees, and Fact-- raised additional capital by selling equity ownership to a Saudia Aribian Investor. Since this restrucuring the company has had a spotty at best earinings record, most recently having one of its BEST Quarters barely showing an abissmal profit margin of 4%. Under current agreements Disney Inc. does not collect any royalties at all unless Euro Disney shows profitability.

Quote by KNWVIKING; "If the VWL was not DVC but just a cash add-on to the WL, would you pay the big $$$ to stay at VWL or the main WL with all the common areas at your doorstep and all the best views. I don't think VWL would survive as a cash resort unless they severely discounted the rooms as compared to WL rates. The same would apply to BCV. "

I am sorry, but I don't understand your point, or I am missing something. From what you have said, and what I think I understand, all I can respond is this..... I think you have it backwards. DI is a money loser now, and I don't see how converting it to DVC would help. As I would (personaly) find it hard to buy a timeshare interest in something that I wouldn't pay for with a cash reservation too. Now, in contrast WL was already a success with tens of thousands of cash paying customers staying there annually, and building a DVC adjacent to it seemed, and still seems like a logical move. Certainly this is not the case for DI, or it would remain fully open.

QUOTE by PAMOKW; "The accomodations at what is now called the Disney Institute were built well before Eisner had anything to do with WDW."

True, I agree, but that is not what I was talking about. I was referring to the Disney Institute itself not just the accomodations.

Quote by PAMOKW; "I believe the idea at first was to make it a condo complex and then they backed off that because of the problems of having voting residents living on WDW property,"

The part about voting residents is absolutely 100% true and well documented in the book "Living with the Mouse". I thought that origianlly they were to be living quarters for international employees for EPCOT workers, and other dignataries, but I may be wrong.

Quote by PAMOKW; "Eisner had a great idea for the Disney Institute using these buildings but it just didn't fly."

I thought then, and I still think now, it was just another one of Ei$ners great horrible ideas that is ending as it deserves to end. But this is just my opinion. It may have worked, but there was little if any execution of a marketing plan, or follow through on what little plan exisisted.

[KNWVIKING]

I was refering to the comment you made about DI- that if it couldn't make it as a cash resort what makes WDW think it would make it as a DVC resort. My point is that DVC sells,makes money,just because of the type of program it is. If WDW had build the VWL as just an extension of WL- a cash resort- I don't think it would have been successfull because if I'm going to pay cash I'm going to want to stay in the main lodge,not an added,unattached wing. I think the feeling at Disney is if they build anything DVC,it will sell, including a revamped DI.

[kgillum]

On the News and Rumors board they said the Disney Institute is being sold to the military to become something like a "Shades of Green II". That makes a little more sense, as I'd heard they wanted to expand the military resort capacity. I still wouldn't say any of it is the gospel truth yet.

[ducklite]

Originally posted by kgillum
On the News and Rumors board they said the Disney Institute is being sold to the military to become something like a "Shades of Green II". That makes a little more sense, as I'd heard they wanted to expand the military resort capacity. I still wouldn't say any of it is the gospel truth yet.

Partially correct. SoG IS going to be expanding, right at SoG! They have the approval and funding to almost double the number of rooms at the resort. What I've heard, and it makes sense to me, is that during construction at the current SoG resort, AFRSC is going to use part of the DI to house SoG eligible people.

At the same time, the DI is rethinking it's program offerings. While programming for the public was not well received, many corporations used their services. It's likely that a revamped DI will reopen in the future with a more B2B course outline.

For a number of legal reasons, it would be difficult for the DI to become a DVC property. Estimated life remaining of structures, etc., etc. would all fall under srutiny by the DCA, and I'm not sure it would fly.

The DI does have a use, it just hasn't yet been found. The property has been there for a long time, the DI concept was Eisners idea, but the property was all there long before.

BTW- I attended the Annual meeting of BW owners the other day, and saw the architectural renderings of BCV and Eagle Pines, which looked absolutely stunning. I think that the idea of WDW building cash resorts at the best locations and DVC at the off the path one can be quickly disproven by Animal Kingdom Lodge and Pop Century. Add that a lot of people like to stay at OKW because it is a little out of the way (compared to BWV) and the idea quickly deflates. Face it, there is a finite amount of land. More than likely the next deluxe will be built a little more out of the way simply because there's no place left to put it in a prime location.

Anne

[KNWVIKING]

.... When I mentioned the prime locations I was refering to Deluxe resorts,not the likes of POP CULT. As for AKL, it was designed for the savana views with the live animals so I would consider it prime. There is still room for a couple more deluxe units I believe with easy access to MGM,AKL and maybe MK and EPCOT. I just don't think we'll see new DVC construction along the lines of BWV's.

[kamgen]

In response to the original idea of DI becoming a DVC resort, part of me believes this may be a possiblity.

Based on information I received from a reliable DVC person ( I will not go into further detail), there MAY be another DVC resort introduced BETWEEN the BCV and Eagle Pines dates.
Eagle Pines is a full go and MAY be completed by 2004.

The DI is a good location and could be expanded and refurbished into a DVC property. Remember, all the DVC resorts are different, some with Grand Villas, different lay-outs, etc. There is no reason why any future DVC resorts need to mirror those we have now.

This is my opinion. :)

As for the info I received this past week, I am excited about the future of DVC and what is in store in the next few years. For those of you cynics out there...if you don't like what they offer...don't buy into it. :) There are some of us, me included, we have NO interest in BCV. It is a matter of taste and a matter of location.

Kamy :)

[KNWVIKING]

.... I thought I read on a previous post that Eagle Pines project was on hold due to the economy. I think the post had a link to a news article,but not positive.

[kamgen]

KNWVIKING-
I thought so too. We spoke to a person connected to DVC who said it is still on track for 2004 and that DVC is still doing very well.
We were pleased to hear this.
AND, we were clued in on the possibility of another big announcement soon.

We don't count our chickens too early, but it is nice to hear positive information.


Oh, by the way, we were also told NOT to believe everything you hear in the media. SHOCKER, huh?? LOL! :)
Kamy

[DVCDAVE]

I am NOT trying to start a rumor, or make any predictions about Eagle Pines. But during our Thanksgiving stay a few weeks ago, we went over to Fort Wilderness for the Trails End Buffet, and the Campfire Program. We passed an access road with a sign that said 'Eagle Pines Construction Access', but it had been blocked with a steel gate that was chained and locked. We stopped to look further, but couldn't see anything, and there were worn dirt paths on the grass that the vehicles did, but there were no fresh tracks in the dirt.

I wish we can have someone who is going soon, and playing golf at Eagles Pines give us an update on any activity.

[WebmasterDoc]

When we were at WDW 10 days ago, the entrance to the Eagle Pines site was still under active construction. So, in spite of rumors to the contrary, there is certainly something still proceeding at that location.

Stay Tuned!

[Pluto4President]

I also noticed activity a couple of times there while we were taking the back road home.

[Werner Weiss]

Think of the Disney Institute (training programs & facilities) and the Villas at Disney Institute (a mish-mash of various suite- and condo-style accomodations) as two different things. Sure, someone could stay at the Villas while attending a training program, but that's all.

All it would take to "divorce" the two from each other would be to rename the Villas to something else.

Furthermore, the Villas at Disney Institute are actually five different kinds of accomodations that were brought together under one name. They could be split up again. Some could be sold to another lodging company, or could be torn down so the land could be redeveloped, or could remain branded as the Villas at Disney Institute -- or could be turned into timeshare accomodations.

Imagine if the Treehouse Villas were turned into a small Disney Vacation Club resort. After all, a Treehouse Villas DVC resort would offer unique 2-bedroom, 2-bathroom villas with kitchens -- just the sort of accomodations that timeshare owners with families enjoy. Under this "what if" scenario, Disney Vacation Development would take title to the Treehouse Villas, bring them to tip-top condition, and sell them as DVC points. To keep expenses reasonable, check-in could be at the adjacent Old Key West Resort. Even the access road could be rerouted behind the Old Key West security gate.

Maybe this is a good idea. Maybe it's a bad idea. But the purpose of this posting is just to point out the the Disney Institute is not a single, monolithic entity, but a collection of at least six major parts, each of which could have a different long-term fate. And maybe, just maybe, one or more of those parts could see a DVC logo in the future.

[DebbieB]

BTW- I attended the Annual meeting of BW owners the other day, and saw the architectural renderings of BCV and Eagle Pines, which looked absolutely stunning.

Anne,

Do they have any plans for renovations at BW next year? Any other notes of interest from the meeting?

Thanks,
Debbie