CMOORE185
HH 240 Points, SSR 260 Points
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2009
NiceYou forgot to add that they may DOO DOO
NiceYou forgot to add that they may DOO DOO
I think another DVC option in the MK area would be amazing. If they could redesign RC for use by DVC that would be an even bigger bonus and the best reason to add on there!!
River Country closed before we ever started going as regulars to WDW, but I thought I read something about the water not being good for swimming and that is why they closed it. So wouldn't that mean they probably wouldn't open something like that for a DVC resort?
I mean, if they had a water park type thing there, but would be really nice, and would be a draw for us too.
I personally wouldn't stay in any place pets were allowed, can't trust alot of pet owners to control what their pets do. I also wouldn't want to own at a place that allowed pets because it may drive up dues due to the added housekeeping and maintenance it would entail. I may be in the minorty though.
I would seem odd, though, for DVC/Disney to build a resort that they market as "Deluxe" in such close proximity to the campgrounds, even though Ft Wilderness is very nice, it is still perception, perception, perception. Especially at the price DVC will surely be asking. If they had wanted to do so, it seems it would have been much cheaper to put in DVC across from POP century instead of the Art of Animation. The utilities and infrastructure was already there, and that is the reason they gave for abandoning Eagle Pines and building SSR.
If they sold SSR they can sell this.I would seem odd, though, for DVC/Disney to build a resort that they market as "Deluxe" in such close proximity to the campgrounds, even though Ft Wilderness is very nice, it is still perception, perception, perception. Especially at the price DVC will surely be asking. If they had wanted to do so, it seems it would have been much cheaper to put in DVC across from POP century instead of the Art of Animation. The utilities and infrastructure was already there, and that is the reason they gave for abandoning Eagle Pines and building SSR.
I would seem odd, though, for DVC/Disney to build a resort that they market as "Deluxe" in such close proximity to the campgrounds, even though Ft Wilderness is very nice, it is still perception, perception, perception.
I think the proximity to MK is the main reason, they think that will sell it.
If they sold SSR they can sell this.
I own at SSR and I am not sure why so many people seem to think it is such a bad resort. I will admit that many of the other DVC resorts are more charming but SSR although large is also really beautiful. The landscaping is wonderful and diverse and the proximity to Downtown Disney is nice.
I think Villas at FtW would be interesting but I can't help but think there is going to be some problems with perception and implementation. As a vacation club member I cannot use Storm along Bay or the pools at several other DVC properties unless I am staying in those villas. Would the same need to be true for any pool built at FtW. Would it be fair to allow someone staying on a campsite access to the pool that will be maintained with DVC member fees and higher room charges? Or perhaps there will be a huge spike in the cost of the camping options.
I doubt campground guests could use the DVC pool. I agree it's like BLT and the Contemporary.
The problem with SSR is they built it too big. They just wanted to sell as many points as possible and used the line "buy here, stay anywhere". So that has created more demand on the other resorts at 7 months. Did you ever see a post that said "I reserved my home resort at 11 months and want to switch to SSR at 7 months"? Except for maybe a THV. Then CRO has a hard time filling the empty SSR rooms without big discounts, which has pushed up the non-DVC point costs.