Your thoughts about location importance?

[WebmasterCricket]

If there were no DVC resorts on site, but they were all right up the road say....5 miles away, would you still have bought into the club?

Everything would be identical, just up the road. You keep all of the amenities & perks that exist at the resort now, you just loose your location.

Busses, restauraunts, pools, layout, and I'll say the man made creeks and ponds go nowhere. Don't forget that the attached resort hotels would still be on site along with all that is in them.

Would that have changed your mind?

I will add to the poll responses if you find other answers that I didn't think of. Be sure to tell me what they are before you vote though.

I got into an argument yesterday with someone about this and I'd like to hear other members thoughts too.

JC

[The4OfUs]

I realize that HH and VB are not on property, but for me that was so much of the allure. There's just something, at least for my family, to being IN Disney as opposed to NEAR Disney.

[WebmasterCricket]

It still affects HH and VB members because they would not be able to get onsite either unless they used points at a WDW hotel.

JC

[WebmasterCricket]

If you vote to keep your membership in whatever form, could you let me know why? You obviously don't have to, but I'd like to hear why.

JC

[drusba]

As a BWV owner this a no brainer. Location, location, location. If I could not have bought at BWV, I would not have bought at all even if OKW and VWL were where they are now.

Also, J. Cricket, I think some may be confused by your first choice in the poll--I was. Not sure that if you vote for first choice whether you are saying you would have done the same thing even if 5 miles away or are saying you are rejecting that idea and would only keep exactly what you have now including location.

[WebmasterCricket]

I changed it for clarity. I hope that of the 7 that voted for that choice, it was the right choice after the change. :(

JC

[Caskbill]

I voted that I would have done the same, but remember, when I purchased in 1993, we got free passes into the theme parks for every day we stayed, up to 1/1/2000. That gave us 6-1/2 years of free admissions.

Maintenance fees then were about 2.50/point. A 1-BR at OKW low season is 16 points. So back then, excluding the initial cost, for $40/day we got a 1-BR OKW accommodation, and two tickets into the parks. It didn't take a lot of brains to figure out that was a good deal.

Yes, I would have missed not being on-site. But on the other hand, if there was no DVC on site, then the only on-site choices would have been the hotels. So if the choice was still between a 'hotel' room (albeit a very nice WDW resort), and a 'Disney' operated time-share resort, but off-site, then I think I would still go for the larger and more comfortable OKW villas over any of the on-site hotels. (It would still be more cost effective than paying even discounted rack rates at the hotels. The only difference is that if it were off-site, then Disney's purchase price would have to be more competitive with all the other time-share resorts in the area.)

[dianeschlicht]

I did not vote, because "off-site" makes no sense to me at all!!! That is why we bought DVC, to stay "on-site". Are you a sales person for an "off-site" timeshare not Disney?:confused:

[WebmasterCricket]

Salesperson? Not even remotely.

The argument (discussion) stemmed from "Anyone will buy anything with the Disney name on it". I disagreed. As the votes are reflecting at this point, I was mostly right.

The "discussion" then got really specific about "Do the busses use regular roads, or special "Disney" roads?" and "How far apart are the offsite resorts from each other?" and a few other quirky details that I have left out.

The only real differences that I saw were:

1) Travel time

2) Proximity to non-DVC amenities

3) Any bonus views you may have now (fireworks at EPCOT)

4) Magic

After I thought about it for a while, I realized that I really got into a timeshare only because of the "Magic" (as OKW has few walking distance amenities). I bought something because of an intangible element. I love OKW but I guess not enough to buy in just because of OKW on it's own merits. I will also say that the other DVC resorts lost ALL of their "shine" being offsite. I still can't figure out what that means to me though. :)

JC

[rpink58]

I voted I would have done same. With the buses and everything else being the same the only differece would be the travel time. The DVC is still operated by Disney (which is why most of us purchased) onsite-offsite is really just the way you look at it.

[BobBrazeal]

At this time, I have to say that I wouldn' t have bought at all. I'm a pretty new DVC owner. I haven't even taken my first trip as a DVC member. I might feel differently after I've stayed to OKW and WL. To me though it was a lot about the magic of staying onsite. I stayed offsite for many of my trips to Disney. Then after that first onsite stay, I've been staying onsite ever since. That was the magic that grabbed me and that is what made me think again about joining DVC.

[Peggy Sue]

There are numerous off-site time share resorts, some just a good as Disney..but they're off-site. No brainer for us..we only purchased because our resorts are inside WDW... If the DVC resorts were off-site, I don't think they would have the same appeal, nor would they offer the same trading power with II (I know, not a good use of your points!)

Although we love the flexibility of DVC, we paid the higher than normal time share costs for the WDW location.

[CarolMN]

We definitely would NOT have bought!

I want to walk to EPCOT.

I want to walk to MGM.

I want to walk to the Boardwalk entertainment area.

I want to walk to the restaurants in the BC, YC, Swan and Dolphin Hotels!

I want to watch the EPCOT fireworks from my balcony!

Can you tell we love our BWV?

There are lots of less expensive timeshares that are "near" Disney. And even though many of them are just as nice as the DVC resorts, we wouldn't even have considered them. If the BWV were off-site, we'd still be speed-dialing CRO, looking for a discount at one of the on site hotels. :D

[Disney Doll]

The on-property location is the most important feature for us. I would see no point in staying 5 miles up the road.

[RamVA]

Although sometimes it's hard to say what one would have done, I don't think we would have even considered this purchase if it was off-site. I mean, we weren't as a family even remotely thinking about a "time-share"; in fact, I was barely conscious of their existence. We had taken our first "real luxury" vacation to WDW and stayed on-property at the Polynesian. It was that experience of luxury combined with magic that made me want to vacation at WDW every year that I could afford it for the rest of my life. So, when we heard about DVC in spring of '92 we bought without hestitation because I knew what ON-SITE Disney magic was all about!

Although, like Caskbill, we also were part of the free ticket incentive, my driving consideration was being able to afford a luxury resort on Disney property--the tickets were just an added bonus.:wave:

[Mickies'Girl]

It's all about the location for us. My husband & I love the Boardwalk area and that was the big selling point. We would not have purchased off site.

[CaptainMidnight]

Onsite is most important, the Disney name is a close second. But, we can walk to Epcot and maybe MGM from BWV.

[ceejay13]

It's definitely all in the location. We wouldn't have considered another timeshare. We purchased solely because it was on the WDW property.

[robinb]

Location, location, location.

Heck, DVC is too expensive otherwise. Traditional timeshares are much less expensive when bought on the resale market. Their yearly dues are also less expensive.

[wdwendyd]

We almost bought into another timeshare that uses Interval Internaional as their exchange group. They told me that meant we would be able to trade into WDW resorts. On my own I did research at TUG and with the help of Dean, I discovered that trading into WDW was very difficult and not to be counted on as most DVCers do not trade out. When I told the timeshare rep about this their response was, " Well, you can always stay at one of the many timeshares available in Orlando!"
Needless to say, that made me realize how very, very important it is to me that we stay on Disney property. We bought into DVC a week later and are so very, very happy we did!!!! :D

[Laurajean1014]

We would not have bought!

I wouldn't go to WDW if I couldn't stay IN WDW!

OKW and BWL was a fabulous concept and design!

[Deb & Bill]

If the DVC resorts were 5 miles away, we wouldn't have bought. The location is a big part of the whole deal. The bus rides would be longer, we would have to fight the interstate traffic, nah, it wouldn't be worth it.