AnnaKristoff2013
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2021
- Messages
- 3,009
Given the insane buy-in cost I really struggle to see how anyone comes out ahead versus just paying for cash bookings.2.82 apparently!! So $12.35 pp if you stay there. Nice
Given the insane buy-in cost I really struggle to see how anyone comes out ahead versus just paying for cash bookings.2.82 apparently!! So $12.35 pp if you stay there. Nice
3.5 percent is great compared to the other resorts. Most were at or more than that with the notable exception of BLT (which I think is the best SAP choice, but obviously has a much higher buy-in).Wow SSR had a 3.5% increase. Won’t be the SAP of choice for much longer. Glad I only own 75 here![]()
BLT easily works if you also might use the 11 month priority booking from time to time. Aldd to that the extra years remaining on the contract and I think BLT is the clear winner.I am looking at 200-point contracts at BLT and SSR. The BLT dues are about $110 cheaper a year but the SSR contract is $6000 cheaper.
That is a long time to make the dues savings mean much in the overall cost.
6,000 extra translates to about 300-400 a year in interest. So that 100 savings is gone just by that. SSR financially still appears to make more sense.I do not disagree with some of that but the dues at $100 a year less is not a valid reason in my opinion, and I am considering BLT very strongly.
What it has working against it is so far the home resort advantage has not seemed to get me a better room than I am getting at 7 months. If I am not getting the advantage at 11 month and can get the access, I need now for savings of $6000 or more than the $100 is a rounding error.
I never plan to rent points. I do not plan to sell and at 2060 I will be 102 so I am not concerned about the extra 6 years.
The immediate savings on the contract is more important than the $100 a year savings on dues.
6,000 extra translates to about 300-400 a year in interest. So that 100 savings is gone just by that. SSR financially still appears to make more sense.
brilliant! I totally missed that somehow
So BWV and BLT may be getting a reprieve this year due to refurb taking rooms out of service and thereby lowering housekeeping costs.
BWV had due decreases for 2000 & 2001. OKW & VB also had decreases around that time.Why is BCV such a jump? Is it because of the SAB refurb work coming up?
Also for the old timers...sorry...long timers, have you ever seen a year with extremely minimal increase or even a (gasp) decrease?
Ad valorum taxes are property taxes. The rates for those are set by the various taxing authorities and would be the same for both. The value of each property is set by the Orange County tax assessor. So apparently the assessor believes VGF is more valuable than BWV. We don’t mind!the estimated 2024 ad valorem tax is quite different per point, $1.64 and $2.02 respectively. Maybe an excessive marble tax added to Grand Flo?![]()
Why is BCV such a jump? Is it because of the SAB refurb work coming up?
Also for the old timers...sorry...long timers, have you ever seen a year with extremely minimal increase or even a (gasp) decrease?
Yes, but the cost of maintaining it is shared by the Beach Club and Yacht Club Resorts, so I don't think it's a large factor.Is SAB part of the DVC dues? Forgive me for not knowing the answer!
VGF isn't a new DVC resort anymore - the original went on sale a decade ago. It's always been historically lower dues than most resorts. I was happy to see that the dues remained modest once again this year.I do wonder how much the lower dues have been used to promote new resorts--dues that then might rise more quickly than the older resorts. I've seen this come up many times: VGF is only $7.33, about $2 less than OKW. On a 150 point contract, that a $300 savings each year, which is $15k over the life of the contract--i.e. you're better buying directly from Disney with a resort you want than resale on an older resort. But then those MFs can rise more than the older resorts.
We should also recognize that VGF shares common expenses with the GF Hotel/Resort. VGF is smaller than the GF portion of the resort, and thus pays for the smaller portion of those shared operating expenses. OKW is entirely DVC and shoulders 100% of the operating budget.VGF isn't a new DVC resort anymore - the original went on sale a decade ago. It's always been historically lower dues than most resorts. I was happy to see that the dues remained modest once again this year.
OKW is much more spread out and therefor will always have higher MFs
Yes, all good reasons why VGF has been historically lower.We should also recognize that VGF shares common expenses with the GF Hotel/Resort. VGF is smaller than the GF portion of the resort, and thus pays for the smaller portion of those shared operating expenses. OKW is entirely DVC and shoulders 100% of the operating budget.
That's not why, it's the old charts. When rooms are only 9 points, there are a lot less points carrying the total weight of the resort. That means the points are exposed to more cost. It's surprising they aren't more, given the legacy chart, really.OKW is much more spread out and therefor will always have higher MFs
Yeah - I’m looking at an increase of about $350/Year across 970 points(5 Home Resorts). Approx. 4% overall increase.I'm not complaining. Even with the big AUL and BCV bumps, my dues only went up $279.88 per year, or $23.32 per month, for 776 points across all 4 resorts (the de minimis increase at BRV definitely helped).