OKW & BWV - why such point difference in Grand Villas?

[MinnesotaChill]

We are considering a Grand Villa in two years for both sets of grandparents. Not having seen a Grand Villa at either location, can anyone tell me why there is over 100 pt difference for a week in Jan?

 

[GAIL HAYDEN]

Originally posted by MinnesotaChill
We are considering a Grand Villa in two years for both sets of grandparents. Not having seen a Grand Villa at either location, can anyone tell me why there is over 100 pt difference for a week in Jan?

Location, location, location. Then there is the points allocation thing.

 

[HookdonWDW]

I think that they never imagined how popular the GVs would be when they opened OKW. But they were stuck with the point values because of allocation. Then they built BWVs, and decided that they weren't going to do that again. I think they went a little overboard setting the price at BWVs (but then again, I'm cheap, and they don't seem to be hurting for takers ). They seem to be trying to settle for a happy medium at SSR. I really wish that they had added a couple of GVs to VWL and BCVs.

 

[rocketriter]

The difference is NOT size. GVs at OKW are very spacious!

 

[SleepyatDVC]

They probably also have to take into account supply and demand. There are 8 (?) BWV GVs versus 27 (?) OKW GVs.

If they made the GV at BWV any cheaper, it would probably be even more impossible to get. As it is, I think they are very hard to reserve - have to call day by day.

 

[childsplay]

My answer to this question has always been three-fold,
1. location is certainly a factor
2. DVC's "inexperience" when creating the OKW point structure, this was all brand new and they "guessed" the best they could at what the market would bear, I would argue they guessed low
3. Quantity...there are fewer GV available at BW

I have never stayed in a BW GV (hope to some day) but I can tell you from experience that the OKW ones are worth every point

 

[pumpkinboy]

Originally posted by GAIL HAYDEN
Location, location, location. Then there is the points allocation thing.

Well said, Gail.

100 points a night for a sweeping view of the Boardwalk is a reasonable trade-off IMHO. Also the OKW GVs are not practical for my family given that we have a wheelchair-bound 6 yr old DS (I wish we could as I'd love the extra space).
Did you also notice that the differential between weekend nights and weeknights is lower for the GV class? Pretty neat. If you aim to impress, it's hard to beat the BW view; if being at WDW and being together is the main goal, the OKW GVs might be a points-efficient way to go. Sounds like fun either way.

 

[zulaya]

It was a points allocation thing as everyone else has alluded to. They totally guessed with OKW, it being the first DVC.

There are also many more GVs at OKW. I think there are 6 or 8 at BWV and something like 26 or 27 at OKW (I am sure Nick or Doc will be around shortly with the real numbers if I am wrong.)

BWV really does have that location and that sweeping view to compete with the other GVs. The other differences is that the GVs at BWV are all one level so everything probably seems a lot bigger than the ones at OKW, which are all 2 story.

Every review I have ever seen about the BWV GVs everyone has been blown away by the layout and the view. It all comes down to is it that important to you to spend the points on it, even in the low points month of January? Because you can always get a combination of Studio/1BR/2BR to your party.

Personally, I'd use the points, even if it means borrowing. How many times are you going to get both sets of grandparents with the kids at the age where they truly believe in the magic? I envy you if you have grandparents who are ready to go at the drop of a hat. My inlaws are like that, but my parents are of the misconception that if you been there, you've done it. This December is the first time my parents will come with us and my kids will both be 8.

Best of luck in your decision. We should get together for some coffee (or some Oh My Chai ) sometime!

 

[dianeschlicht]

I disagree that points are determined by location. When OKW points were allocated BWV was not even thought of yet. Therefore, it has nothing to do with points for OKW. Instead, it was assumed that Disney Vacation Club (the original name of OKW) would be a more typical timeshare in usage. When they discovered folks didn't stay at Disney in the same way they stayed at other timeshares, they decided that perhaps spending all that SPACE on 3 bedroom units was not a good use of facilities. Then after building VWL and BCV without GVs, they learned that perhaps they didn't have enough, so they decided to add them back into the play for SSR. They had also done several surveys, and the number of points needed for a BWV GV was a BIG issue, so they assured folks that the new resort would have more affordable points for GVs. SSR still costs Far more points for a GV than OKW, but not as many as BWV.

 

[zulaya]

I know I didn't mean to imply that location was the reason BWV was more. It's like you said they thought OKW would be more like a typical timeshare in usage and didn't know that it was such a good thing.

When I said points allocation, I meant that OKW was built with a certain points allocation and BWV was built with a different points allocation. We can't change it since that was what was offered.

The difference was probably DVC's attempt and managing supply and demand.

I really do wish they had made GVs at all of the resorts at WDW. That would have been some great flexibility as well as a fun attempt to stay at every GV at the world!

 

[dianeschlicht]

I really do wish they had made GVs at all of the resorts at WDW. That would have been some great flexibility as well as a fun attempt to stay at every GV at the world!

I think that is why they decided to add them back into SSR. I feel sorry for the VWL and BCV owners, because they have no way to stay in a GV at their home resorts.

 

[y2khardtop]

I agree that it is simply DEMAND, not inexperience, that has led to the difference. OKW points charts changed regularly over teh first several years before stabilizing, and I think they could have easily raised the points on the GV's if they were selling out of them quickly. OKW GV's are actually supposed to be bigger than the one's at BWV, to boot!

During a recent trip, the BWV open house folks pointed out that you can get 2 2-bedrooms cheaper (points) than a single GV, and actually get more sleeping room. Of course, you loose the large, open den.

We are planning a trip in a GV Nov 2005. I plan on staying at OKW, but if BW becomes available during my booking time (I'm a OKW member), I may upgraded. I love OKW, but there really is so much more to do at BW.

Dave

 

[PamOKW]

Originally posted by y2khardtop
OKW points charts changed regularly over teh first several years before stabilizing, and I think they could have easily raised the points on the GV's if they were selling out of them quickly.

I only recall one adjustment of points at OKW. They could not have raised the points on the GV's without lowering points somewhere else.

I'm not sure what the formula is, but the amount of points is somehow related to the construction costs of the resort. They had to have enough points to cover the costs of building the resorts. Construction on BWV may have been higher since it was built several years later and is a different type of construction. It is also smaller than OKW so they had to sell more points giving them a bigger "points pool" to divvy up among the units. This may play into the amount of points needed to stay in GV. They loaded up the top unit to make the studios more affordable. Theoretically, they could have raised the studios-2 bedrooms 10 points per night and lowered the GV by 30 points per night.

 

[jmminarik]

Don't forget, making VB and BW's 12 person villas more expensive pointswise also means they had more points in the inventory to sell. Combine that with their lessons from OKW and the limited supply, it probably meant a higher 'profit' margin for DVC...just like when they learned (most) DVCer's are happier with the smaller, hotel type rooms over the larger, suburban subdivision style housing at OKW. After all DVC isn't just to make us happy...someone's got to pay for Eisner's stock options.

-Joe

 

[Jimbo]

Originally posted by y2khardtop
During a recent trip, the BWV open house folks pointed out that you can get 2 2-bedrooms cheaper (points) than a single GV, and actually get more sleeping room.

That's true during the week. But on weekends, the BWV GVs cost less points then a 1BR plus a 2BR. It's weird!

We've got a GV trip sort of planned for 2006, and we're thinking about staying at OKW during the week to conserve points. Then we'll move to BWV for Friday and Saturday because the points are very nearly a wash between the two resorts on weekends.

 

[Richyams]

Points were not "changed regularly"

There was one change back in .....????? thinking.....????? '96

I think it was due to them not realizing the demand and setting the points up first. I think the best buy at WDW is the OKW GV speaking strictly on value returned per point. I think that if 2042 were today and they were reselling OKW, GVs would be higher and the weekday/weekend point differential would be lower.

I am pretty sure it was '96....possibly '95, definitely not '97 that the only re-adjustment at OKW occured.

There was also a re-allocation at BWV to provide for standard view rooms, they only lowered some to standard view and didn't make any offsetting increases.

Those were the only changes in point structure in DVC history.

 

[dianeschlicht]

OKW points charts changed regularly over teh first several years before stabilizing,

NOT TRUE! They adjusted a couple of days points in 1996, but that is the only time points have been adjusted at OKW. BWV also had one point adjustment that I recall, but I can't remember if it was to Standard or preferred rooms.

 

[Richyams]

It was the creation of standard rooms.

 

[Nick@ VB+OKW]

Originally posted by zulaya
I think there are 6 or 8 at BWV and something like 26 or 27 at OKW (I am sure Nick or Doc will be around shortly with the real numbers if I am wrong.)

OKW-27 GV's
SSR-12 GV's
BW-7 GV's
VB-6 Beach Cottages
HH-5 GV's

 

[DBBN]

BWV is simply a more expensive neighborhood. This statement is not meant to stir up a debate on which resort is better. They are both GREAT resorts.

Looking at a different perspective...I'll try to explain my observations when comparing each size villa (square footage) within a particular resort. A pattern seems to appear.

For example at OKW a 1 bdrm gets you 35.33 sq ft per point, a 2 bdrm gets you 36.58 sq ft/pt and the GV gets you 37.19 sq ft/pt. Only a 5.3% spread. Not really much of a difference, meaning the number of points needed for a particular villa appears linked proportionally to the size villa (square footage).

In the case of BWV a 1 bdrm pref gets you 20.12 sq ft per point, a 2 bdrm pref gets you 23.27 sq ft/pt and the GV gets you 21.45 sq ft/pt. An 8.4% spread. More spread than OKW but I don't consider it significant. These numbers show a pattern similar to that present in the OKW example. Here again the number of points needed for a particular villa appears linked proportionally to the size villa (square footage).

You get a lot less square footage at BWV for your point. The numbers are further exagerated by the size of the villas within each resort. For example the OKW GV is 68% larger than the OKW 2 bdrm. While the BWV GV is 100% larger than the BWV 2 bdrm.

If given the total number of points needed for the whole resort for a year and tasked with determining the points needed for each size villa within a particular resort my results would be very close to the current points chart.

The square foot per point calculation was based on the total number of points needed for one year in that particular villa at that particular resort. Square footage figures were obtained from this thread. The number of points needed for one year at each villa was obtained from The DVC Planner by Caskbill (Thanks Bill).