Value of a point spent at a resort

[StevenR]

It's an interesting theory, and valid points are made by all. However, I believe the point value assigned to VWL has less to do with the location or size of accommodations (i.e., which site is most desireable) than it does with the cost of the project to Disney. I suspect Disney took the total cost of VWL (which would be more that BWV or OKW) and divided by the cost per point it could sell to determine the total available points for the property. This was then allocated over the units and nights in the year.

VWL accommodations cost as many points as BWV preferred not because they are deemed to be as desireable as BWV, but because they have to be to recover Disney's investment and profit. I would not be surprised then if BCV require even more points

 

[PamOKW]

I believe Steven is correct in how they determine the cost per point. Also, since VWL has so few units yet they still included the pool area and other features wouldn't the costs per unit for these be more than OKW or BWV?

 

[DisneyCrazy]

This is another one of those value vs cost things to me. The value of the resort is what YOU are willing to pay (cash or points) to stay there. The cost is what Disney must charge to recoup expenses and make a (tidy) profit. Remember that each of the resorts were built at different times and therefore the later ones cost more per square foot to construct. So if Disney wants to make money they must charge more points per night (and therefore sell more points) to cover their expenses and make some $$$. I would fully expect BCV to be more points per night than BWV.

So even though WLV is a less desireable location (again debatable) Disney should charge less per night, but the cost to build was MORE so they charge the same (as BWV). I expect DVC's built after the turn of the century (God I've been waiting to use that for a while now) to cost more per night (pointwise).

One could also argue that the price increase in points is to cover this - and I believe this to be PARTIALLY true - but the point/night cost also take into account those (us) pesky OKW people that paid next to nothing (yeah, right!) for their points.

My opinion, YMMV...

-Paul

 

[mattsdad]

you guys are missing the total picture....VB is by far the best DVC resort!!!

 

[HorizonsFan]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Personel opinons and preferences don't make the Park Avenue address worth less then the Spitoon Falls, Nebraska adress. [/quote]

If I don't want to live on Park Avenue and long for the cornfields of Spitoon Falls, then the Park Avenue location has no worth at all to me, and I may pay anything to live in Spitoon Falls. If I want to spend my vacation at WL and will not be happy anywhere else, the lower cost of OKW has little attraction. The actual cost per point of staying at a particular resort may be different from another but what makes it worth it (a good value) or not is entirely based on personal preference.
Would Park Avenue real estate cost what it does if nobody wanted to live there?

Dave

 

[dthomas]

I am not here to debate which WDW DVC is better, worse, etc. The point I would like to make is that I feel DVC is treating new members differently than old members. I feel that each resort is comparable when all things are considered. I do not think it is right for DVC to keep raising the price in the initial cost and keep raising the points per night also. New DVC members should be able to have comparable points at their home resort too. A 20 % or so (just approx. I didn't take time to do exact math) difference in points I feel is not justified.

 

[Richyams]

The point is that location has value...obviously the country mouse prefers Spitoon Falls, but that doesn't make Park Avenue worth less....obviously, if every didn't like Park Ave, it wouldn't be worth more, but we have standardized values for things.

Those standardized values are what make OKW larger units return a somilar value for a point spent there as BWV smaller units with its more central location.

You can argue your preference all day long, the standard and the reson used for BWV point schedule was the Boardwalk location. I mantain that while VWL may be most atractive to some, its standard value is less becuase it does not have a Boardwalk area or the ability to walk to two parks.....Remember, me personally, I said:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> And he also wrote:

Personally, I would buy OKW at $75 before I would buy BWV at $55.

BWV units are too small, the points are too high per night, its too loud at night, and the dues are too high.

[/quote]

I agree that the BWV area is not worth it TO ME, but I recognize the standard value placed on real estate, I believe the first three evaluators are location, location and location, the size of the units and peacefulness of the resorts come in a far fourth and fifth. AND VWL have the same sized units at a higher average caost, hence my opinion that a point spent at VWL returns less value then a point spent at BWV.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs", Karl Marx, pretty sick, huh?

 

[HorizonsFan]

dthomas-
You always have the option to buy a resale if the product that Disney is currently offering does not meet your needs or wants.

Rich-
My point is that you shouldn't confuse value with cost. Cost is set by many outside factors (including demand which is based on preference) and is absolute. Value is in the mind of each individual consumer. I can buy the most expensive piece of real estate on the planet at a great price but if I'm not pleased with my purchase it doesn't have much value to me. I think our disagreement is largely semantic...

Dave

[This message was edited by HorizonsFan on 02-15-01 at 12:33 PM.]

 

[dthomas]

I know that I can buy a resale, I did research that option before I bought. It just concerns me about the current trend to raise initial cost(which I completely agree w/construction prices have risen considerably) And also to raise the points per night w/each new DVC WDW resort that is being built. I think DVC has the attitude that they can charge what they want per price and per night(by points) and I just think they should be treating members more equally.

 

[WebmasterCricket]

dthomas:

Members are NOT equal. I am not guaranteed to get any reservations at any resort other than my home resort, thereby defining me as a OKW member not just a DVC member. Some may believe that members that are not of their own home resort, are either higher up or lower down the scale due to the ability to make reservations at their resort of choice. If I desire to make a VB ressie then I may envy the owners of VB. If I wish to make a OKW ressie, I do, and should feel privliged to do so at the 11 month window. Something that only OKW'res can do, thereby making me at that time un-equal to non-OKW'ers wishing to make the same ressie. I also pay less per point for dues, thereby making my value per point higher than others getting the same ressie who pay more in dues.

JC

 

[dthomas]

I don't think you are even "guaranteed" reservations at your home resort. My point is that DVC should be raising the initial point cost to pay for the "construction" price of Bldg. But I still think the actual points per night stay should be fairly uniform throughout WDW DVC.

 

[Richyams]

Mr Cricket and Mr Thomas, I agree with both of you completely. Mr Cricket, I think you are missing DThomas' point. He is speaking of exactly what my theory is about. Regardless of where your home resort is, when you do get into the seven month perion and venture out, will you be more likely to visit a resort that returns a higher or lower value? Now, I hate having to keep qualifying this, but of course there are some that prefer the WL to any place on the planet, some would pay 1000 points a night and are thrilled that the points aren't THAT high....ok, but for the average person using STANDARD vales for real estate....a point spent at VWL returns less value then a point spent at BWV, rather then being a good thing that just doesn't matter....

I believe that this is going to start making an imbalance in availability and demand at the seven month window. BWV is going to be difficult and VWL will be easy, VWL will begin to go unreserved on points as owners there also realize that they get more value for their points when they spend them at BWV...or OKW.

When BCV opens with an even HIGHER point schedule, you eleven month window at BWV and OKW is going to be extremely important, the newer resorts are going to be returning ever lower values for points spent at them. Of course their will be those that love the BCV more then life itself, but in general, the value returned for a point spent there could be even less, not even the owners there are going to be looking to spend their points at BWV and OKW so that they can get higher values for them.

Now, VWL and BCV will be having lower and lower occupancy rates and this will drive up their dues and make seven month availability at OKW and BWV very scarce.

The eleven month window is going to be getting more and more important.

Of course, these are only my dopey opinions and they have no value or basis in reality....how is that DOC???? LOL....

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs", Karl Marx, pretty sick, huh?

[This message was edited by Richyams on 02-15-01 at 01:30 PM.]

 

[RoutemanDan]

Rich,
Everything you are saying makes perfect sense.But,if I'm not mistaken,couldn't DVC change the 11 month window policy, making it only a 1 month advantage for your home resort?

<img src=http://www.geocities.com/routemandan/NJdvcers.gif>

<img src=http://www.geocities.com/routemandan/Danears.gif>

 

[Richyams]

Yes, they can...it was voted a resounding "NO" on the survey, but they can do it without the consent of the members.

I think that would make the 11 month window even more important.

I see the eleven month window and the idea of buying where you expect to stay most, becoming more and more important as we move forward.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs", Karl Marx, pretty sick, huh?

 

[WebmasterDoc]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Mr Cricket and Mr Thomas, I agree with both of you completely. Mr Cricket, I think you are missing DThomas' point. He is speaking of exactly what my theory is about. [/quote]

How can you agree with 2 people "completely" and then tell one he is wrong because he doesn't get your "theory"?

I'm also not clear on how you figure occupancy rates can cause dues to go higher. If the resort is unreserved by DVC members, Disney will just rent out the villas and return some of that rental to the DVC resort budget (it's called "Breakage Income" and is done now at OKW and BWV).

I do "completely" agree about your opinion this time though, Rich! (...and Thanks for calling it an opinion!)

Doc
doc@wdwinfo.com

 

[WebmasterCricket]

Rich: I did not miss his point. I merely wanted to voice my opinion that all memberships are not created equal.

I do agree that building a less attractive resort where members will attempt to trade into a more attractive resort does affect the importance of the 11 month window.

As far as value is concerned, it is a prefrential thing.
I may never dream of going to BCV due to its upscale nature (we will see about that).
I may never want to go to BWV due to the noise (never noticed it, but if someone says so, then ok it's noisy).
I may never want to go to WLV because of the bugs (I'm making up things to make a point here).

Value is not inherently just location and size. Quality, theming, dues, vicinity and access of the general public etc. all have distinct quantifiable effects on total value.

Also-

If I stay only at my home resort and Disney continues to build resorts that no one truly intends on staying in, then yes your point is valid. Who is to say that the trend will continue? What if the next resort is a no holds barred-70 star deluxe-luxury transportation to the parks included-15 restaraunt-has it's own rides resort? Do you think that the point value/night will decrease for that resort? Not a chance. Justifying the increase per night would be easy. Right? Wrong. The trouble is that those luxury things only hold value for certain people. I may hate all of the restaraunts there, I may not be going to the parks, I may not need the extra room, I may have neck problems and not be able to ride the rides at the resort. To me in that situation, WVL might be a better choice thus making the WVL a much higher value/point than the new 70 star resort ever could be TO ME.


All of that typing to come to this. OKW has had the John Hancock syndrome from the very beginning. Since there was nothing to compare it to, Disney created a very nice resort with very large rooms. Now that they see that they can get more money out of smaller rooms, that's exactly what is going to happen. So, as far as a trend goes, yes I am worried that things will get worse. Hopefully the 2042 deadline will prevent them from goofing it up too much furthur, but that will remain to be seen.

Your quote in your signature says it all Rich. We are not all equal so don't treat us that way.

JC

Of course, I'm usualy wrong about things like this.

 

[Joeblack]

Rich. Not only do I agree witht the fact that WLV's point value is lower than OKW or BWV's, but I posted the theory about a month ago. Here's the link:

http://wdwinfo.infopop.net/OpenTopic/page?q=Y&a=tpc&s=40009993&f=14009194&m=434096786

 

[Richyams]

Busted for plagorism and spelling....darn!!!!


I see that very clearly, I guess I fleshed out the theory a bit more....and I am a bit more vocal. I don't remember if I read your post the first time or not...I may have and you may have been the actual father of this great theory.

I am also glad to see that the large majority agree with me. Many are not worried, but I think that may change if reservations begin to go in the direction I think they will.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs", Karl Marx, pretty sick, huh?

 

[jcodespoti]

I agree with Rich(although I am starting to get lost in all this).
I bought At BWV becouse of the location. At the time I had the choice between BWV and OKW. I knew BW was the place to be(for me. I also like OKW. Rich makes a good point. But since I already own at BWV...i'm gonna sound snobish..I really don't care.
I'm envious(they got to get spell check for this site) though of those people who bought in '91 they got cheaper prices because if we all recall in 1991 the economy stunk, construction prices were low, and Disney really took a gamble that DVC would sell.
Now however is a different story, though the point prices at WLV are about what I expected. I see this all the time in the construction industry, if you got a hot market, there go the prices. Also I'm sure it cost them a fortune for WLV and for BCV.

Joe In CT

 

[Dean]

I'm a little late in this thread but back to my impression that BC/YC is slightly more upscale than BW, it's just that, my impression. No slight to BW, I personally like it better than YC/BC. However, I see BW as a more active and happening place and BC/YC as a little more laid back, possibly slightly older crowd. Of course the concierge has an affect there too, did you stay in concierge level. Of course we're referring to the Hotels at this point and not the DVC portions as they are not truly comparable. Regardless of my or your subjective feelings or price comparisions about BC/YC vs BWI, my offer to put money on the prediction that the BC points will be higher than BW stands. Not because I'm a betting person, just to show how strongly I feel this will happen. Then again I've been wrong before, I predicted they would have reshuffled the points structure for this year or next and as of yet they have proven me to be wrong. LOL.

Dean