A new spin on "buy where you want to stay" vs. "points are points"

[Mississippian]

I do not agree that a lot of people will more than likely want to stay near Epcot or the MK.

Really!

I find the Animal Kingdom Lodge to be almost equal to the Polynesian in quality. Many find it better. But the rooms are much cheaper at the AKL because you have to take a bus to the parks.

The garden rooms at the Contemporary are really no better than those in a motel, but they bring top dollar because they are walking distance to the Magic Kingdom.

If location didn't matter, then rooms at the French Quarter ought to sell for as much as those at the Contemporary. They don't, because location does matter.

 

[3DisneyKids]

How can you not KNOW???!!!

Again and again I read posts from people who say they just bought at SSR but there first stay is booked elsewhere. Why would they do this? After all, if I had just bought in, my first impulse would be to stay at my home resort. Rarely, if ever, have I seen members chortle about how they just got a BCV contract, but they think they'll stay at SSR for their first visit. I'm not saying it's never happened, but it is certainly not the flow of the posts I've read.

Perhaps these people stayed at other resorts because they wanted access to dining options, which SSR doesn't offer. Perhaps they wanted easy access to the parks, which SSR doesn't offer. Are people going to quit eating and going to the parks? If so, why have DVC in the first place?

Bad money drives out good. If you start making quarters out of nickel instead of silver, the silver will still circulate. But slowly but surely the silver will start to disappear. Oh, it might take a while, as they will still circulate. But after a while, those who can get their hands on silver won't let go. In the context of DVC, those with the 11-month option get the silver coin.

Make no mistake, if SSR had lots of nice restaurants and great access to the parks, I'd be fighting to get in there. And for some people, these things just aren't important. But for most, they are important -- very important. And so we are going to have a huge group of people who think that SSR is "okay," but they really are going to try to stay elsewhere.

It will make the 7-month window harder to book. I KNOW this. Any thinking person knows this as well.

By the way, for the MANY people who like SSR, I'd glad you're happy. But please don't pretend that you haven't noticed the large number of people buying in there in hopes of staying elsewhere. Also, the extra years are important for many people, which can make SSR a good business decision, even though it makes life less desireable for owners at other resorts. So please understand, there is nothing wrong with owning at SSR if that is your choice, but the large number of owhers there are going to make it harder to book the smaller resorts. This is just fact, and if there was a way to give five- or 10-to-one odds on it, I would.

Edited to add: Chloe, I just re-read your post and saw that you disagreed with Dean from a logical standpoint. So I guess my remarks are really meant for Dean more than you.

I'm the OP and I'm beginning to wish that I had never asked this question...now I'm more confused than ever! Oh well, I'll figure it out and get the right contract eventaully.

However, it seems like many posters (though this is not necessarily directed to the person above) see SSR owners as "outcasts" or "less desireable" DVC members. Yes, I see that the overwhelming number of SSR owners will eventually affect life at all the DVC resorts, but it really seems like some DVC owners who have been around for years and/or own at the smaller resorts are looking down at SSR owners. I surely hope this is not the case.

If a person wants to buy into a new DVC contract, there is no choice except SSR. Thus, I can totally understand how a person might say, "Well, SSR is not my first choice, but it is currently the ONLY choice, so I'll buy at SSR and stay elsewhere when I can." Yes, there are resales (which is likely the way I will go), but if you want the longer window, there is only SSR. Dollar for dollar, SSR is the better deal right now. It costs more upfront, but it has the lowest dues and the extra 12 years, so definitely the most bang for your buck over the long haul.

Oh-oh...there I go talking myself into an SSR purchase...LOL

I would just hate to think that there exists an attitude of "Those *#&** SSR owners...they are ruining everything!"

 

[Mississippian]

However, it seems like many posters (though this is not necessarily directed to the person above) see SSR owners as "outcasts" or "less desireable" DVC members. Yes, I see that the overwhelming number of SSR owners will eventually affect life at all the DVC resorts, but it really seems like some DVC owners who have been around for years and/or own at the smaller resorts are looking down at SSR owners. I surely hope this is not the case.

If a person wants to buy into a new DVC contract, there is no choice except SSR. ......

My problem with SSR is not with the owners, but with DVC for "screwing with the ratio," if you will.

You should be aware that you CAN buy the other resorts through Disney. I bought a 50-point BWV contract through resale, and then decided after reading these boards to try to buy more through Disney. It only took two weeks to get a 150-point Disney-financed contract.

If you want BCV, forget it. But BWV is do-able, and my guess is that you won't have to wait long at all for OKW.

Do note that you "guide" won't get as big a commission for selling these units. It might help if you tell them you really don't like SSR "because....". But you can get a contract elsewhere, through Disney, if that is what you want.

So tell your guide what you want, and if you aren't able to buy in anywhere else, request a new guide.

 

[jiggerj]

You should be aware that you CAN buy the other resorts through Disney. I bought a 50-point BWV contract through resale, and then decided after reading these boards to try to buy more through Disney. It only took two weeks to get a 150-point Disney-financed contract.

If you want BCV, forget it. But BWV is do-able, and my guess is that you won't have to wait long at all for OKW.

Do note that you "guide" won't get as big a commission for selling these units. It might help if you tell them you really don't like SSR "because....". But you can get a contract elsewhere, through Disney, if that is what you want.

So tell your guide what you want, and if you aren't able to buy in anywhere else, request a new guide.

I agree to tell your guide what you want. I had contracts in hand for SSR but my heart just wasnt in SSR. I love the Boardwalk area. To me owning at the BWV compared with owning at SSR (even with the extra years) was more appealing to me. She had points available and suggested to me 2 contracts at the BWV. I was thrilled! I have since added on at VWL and feel that I have the best of both worlds! Close to Epcot and close to MK. Ahhhh....doesnt get any better than this for me! Well maybe another add-on! Good luck with your decision!

 

[Dean]

However, it seems like many posters (though this is not necessarily directed to the person above) see SSR owners as "outcasts" or "less desireable" DVC members. Yes, I see that the overwhelming number of SSR owners will eventually affect life at all the DVC resorts, but it really seems like some DVC owners who have been around for years and/or own at the smaller resorts are looking down at SSR owners. I surely hope this is not the case.

that may be true for some, it certainly isn't for me. I don't care because I own where I want to stay and tend to plan well in advance. I've also recommended many people buy OKW (mostly) just to get into the system based on their own circumstances. I don't disagree that this is an emotional issue for some. But in general, I think it's more an emotional issue for those that bought elsewhere than it is for those that bought where they want to stay. Just like we have had many posts over the years about why one person likes resort A better than resort B and some owners of resort B were insulted. IMO it's almost always a case of the one insulted being too sensitive.

I would agree that any upset should be directed at DVC and not the purchaser. When SAB came of the PH list, you should have heard the insults thrown around.

 

[RLevy29]

Really!

I find the Animal Kingdom Lodge to be almost equal to the Polynesian in quality. Many find it better. But the rooms are much cheaper at the AKL because you have to take a bus to the parks.

The garden rooms at the Contemporary are really no better than those in a motel, but they bring top dollar because they are walking distance to the Magic Kingdom.

If location didn't matter, then rooms at the French Quarter ought to sell for as much as those at the Contemporary. They don't, because location does matter.

My point was not about location mattering but whether it mattered to everybody. My sister had a vacation booked at the Poly and once she saw the AKL she wanted to move there. They did not have a car so they used Disney transportation. Location was not an issue for them.
We have the option to stay at other resorts but we prefer OKW at certain times of the year. Loction is not the issue during these times but the atmosphere of the resort itself.
I don't think that it is that impossible to get BCV. If you are looking for a resale there have been more BCV available lately. If you already own you can do an add-on. We just did one at BCV and it took 1 1/2 months to come through.

 

[NMW]

Really!

I find the Animal Kingdom Lodge to be almost equal to the Polynesian in quality. Many find it better. But the rooms are much cheaper at the AKL because you have to take a bus to the parks.

The garden rooms at the Contemporary are really no better than those in a motel, but they bring top dollar because they are walking distance to the Magic Kingdom.

If location didn't matter, then rooms at the French Quarter ought to sell for as much as those at the Contemporary. They don't, because location does matter.

I agree that location does matter, A LOT, to a lot of people. It did to us, that's why we bought a BWV resale. I don't think they would have built the Epcot resorts as deluxe resorts if location didn't matter. People want to be close to the parks and will pay top dollar for it. Lots of people don't rent cars at Disney. We don't, and neither do any of the families we are friends with. Park proximity matters to us. I LIKE walking in to Epcot and am willing to pay for it. I am also willing to always book it at 11 months, LOL. I don't look at SSR as an inferior resort, in fact I think's it's quite lovely and I want to try it someday. It really doesn't matter to me how many SSR owners try to book another resort at 7 months, since mine will already be booked. In fact, I hope they get what they want!

I just think that the arguement that most people don't care about location is false.

 

[CarolMN]

...(snip)..... It really doesn't matter to me how many SSR owners try to book another resort at 7 months, since mine will already be booked. In fact, I hope they get what they want! ......

ITA! Only the people who cannot plan more than 7 months in advance and the people who want to stay at non-home resorts need to worry. T

There are and will continue to be more and more people who book at the 7 month window. Those who want to stay at a non-home resort will soon be calling day by day to be sure of getting the non-home resort accomodations they want during the more popular seasons.

Best wishes -

 

[3DisneyKids]

My problem with SSR is not with the owners, but with DVC for "screwing with the ratio," if you will.

You should be aware that you CAN buy the other resorts through Disney. I bought a 50-point BWV contract through resale, and then decided after reading these boards to try to buy more through Disney. It only took two weeks to get a 150-point Disney-financed contract.

If you want BCV, forget it. But BWV is do-able, and my guess is that you won't have to wait long at all for OKW.

Do note that you "guide" won't get as big a commission for selling these units. It might help if you tell them you really don't like SSR "because....". But you can get a contract elsewhere, through Disney, if that is what you want.

So tell your guide what you want, and if you aren't able to buy in anywhere else, request a new guide.

This is complete news to me, and I consider myself a fairly well-informed about-to-be DVC'er. I specifically asked Disney this and was told that "We are only selling SSR right now." I asked about the older resorts and was told that only existing DVC'ers could purhcase add-ons at these reorts. No mention of 150+ point contracts at the older resorts.

LOL...back to the drawing board I go...

Hey, at least I still have a sense of humor about all of this. After all, I am joining DVC because it will be FUN!

 

[Mississippian]

This is complete news to me, and I consider myself a fairly well-informed about-to-be DVC'er. I specifically asked Disney this and was told that "We are only selling SSR right now." I asked about the older resorts and was told that only existing DVC'ers could purhcase add-ons at these reorts. No mention of 150+ point contracts at the older resorts.

I suggest you ask your guide again about this, and explain that you understand many people have been able to buy at the other resorts. You might have to wait, but they are out there.

IN FACT, it might be easier to buy for the first time at one of the older resorts (versus an add-on), since you don't have to wait for the "right" use-year to come up.

My guess is from easiest to hardest would be OKW, BWV, VWL, BCV, but I would defer to others more knowledgable about this.

If you guide tells you this again, call and ask for another guide. Michelle McAllister was very nice to me and has a reputation for honesty in these matters.

 

[RLevy29]

This is complete news to me, and I consider myself a fairly well-informed about-to-be DVC'er. I specifically asked Disney this and was told that "We are only selling SSR right now." I asked about the older resorts and was told that only existing DVC'ers could purhcase add-ons at these reorts. No mention of 150+ point contracts at the older resorts.

LOL...back to the drawing board I go...

Hey, at least I still have a sense of humor about all of this. After all, I am joining DVC because it will be FUN!

I didn't realize that you could buy the older resorts direct from Disney either. I thought that you had to own points already and do an add-on. Two people that I know that were interested in DVC were told that Saratoga Springs was the only resort available. One did buy 150 points and is extremely happy with her purchase.

Keep your sense of humor because DVC is fun!

 

[TammyAlphabet]

You can definitely buy the "older" resorts. I did it as a new member this year! I had to go on a waiting list and in 16 days, the points came in. Just tell your guide that you are not interested in SSR and want to go on the waiting list for whichever resort you want. They will try to convince you that they rarely get points for the "older" resorts, but this is only partially true. It is hard to get BCV from what I understand, but the other resorts will be available if you are a little patient. (not my strong suit) If that is what you want, then that is what you want. I wanted BWV instead of SSR because I figure, because of the size of the resort, I would get ample opportunity to stay there and I am convinced that the "older" resorts will get harder and harder to get. This is my opinion, of course. SSR IS beautiful. But, I love the Boardwalk area and proximity to the parks.

And I agree that Michelle is the best guide in the world, she is my guide!!!

 

[DrTomorrow]

How can you not KNOW???!!!

Again and again I read posts from people who say they just bought at SSR but there first stay is booked elsewhere. Why would they do this? After all, if I had just bought in, my first impulse would be to stay at my home resort. Rarely, if ever, have I seen members chortle about how they just got a BCV contract, but they think they'll stay at SSR for their first visit. I'm not saying it's never happened, but it is certainly not the flow of the posts I've read.

[...]

By the way, for the MANY people who like SSR, I'd glad you're happy. But please don't pretend that you haven't noticed the large number of people buying in there in hopes of staying elsewhere. Also, the extra years are important for many people, which can make SSR a good business decision, even though it makes life less desireable for owners at other resorts. So please understand, there is nothing wrong with owning at SSR if that is your choice, but the large number of owhers there are going to make it harder to book the smaller resorts. This is just fact, and if there was a way to give five- or 10-to-one odds on it, I would.
[...]

It never ceases to amuse me when I see people basing comments, opinions and odds ::hee:: on DIS Board posts. Someone who posts on the DIS DVC forum is in such a minority (if you don't see why, please let me know and I'll go over it) that trying to infer anything from "Well, I saw these posts" is, ahem, not very useful.

Folks like Dean and Caskbill make very reasonable statements and predictions based on math/stats and human nature (CaskBill get's bonus points for using 'X' and 'Y' ). But to say that just because a few DVC experts (and I consider anyone who posts/reads these forums to be significantly more informed about the ins, outs and tricks of DVC ownership than the vast majority of owners) do something means that it is a trend, well, sorry, no. For example, look at the poll RAD posted: after a week, a whole 44 people have responded, and the results are inconclusive ( 59% ended up getting BWV within 7 month window, 41% did not).

Disclaimer: I bought into SSR before it opened, knew full well about resales (thank you, DIS!) and of 19 nights spent at DVC, only one of them was not at SSR (VWL on arrival day: grounds were great, building itself was sort of dark). The final comment I'll make is that even the statistics & math don't take into account future changes (aging population, new development, theme park fatigue, etc), so the future will have to be lived to be known.

Be well!

 

[jiggerj]

And I agree that Michelle is the best guide in the world, she is my guide!!!

and I agree with both of you! Michelle is my guide also and worked her magic and I instantly was able to purchase BWV. That was one very happy day for me!

 

[Cinderella]

Comments from a previous poster: "I think in the short run owners of other DVC units will try to get into SSR just to try it out. The problem is that SSR owners are new and will more than likely have a need to try out all of the other DVC's...by definition that need will last longer since its 4 to 6 other units versus one for everyone else. Oddly enough I'm still trying to get into SSR but each time I've tried I couldn't get the full timespan and thus wound up elsewhere (VWL owner here).


"I am having the opposite problem - i am staying at SSR, because it is all that is available. I don't mind, but I would really like to stay in my home resort VWL. I am looking forward to SSR - but what is worrying me that there seems to be alot of availability there in December - and a lot of travel agents are renting out the units cheaply. I hope this is just because of the newness and the fact that it is still being built. I can't imagine Disney building anything awful, and I do think the Downtown Disney location is a great idea."

 

[Mississippian]

It never ceases to amuse me when I see people basing comments, opinions and odds ::hee:: on DIS Board posts. Someone who posts on the DIS DVC forum is in such a minority (if you don't see why, please let me know and I'll go over it) that trying to infer anything from "Well, I saw these posts" is, ahem, not very useful.

Actually, disboard posts are a darn good indicator of the views of the people who post on the Disboard!

While the Disboard sample certainly is not perfectly representative of the entire DVC community, neither is it a group with no correlation with reality. If the issue at hand was whether Internet availability was important, the Disboard gang would NOT be a representative group. But on other issues I see no reason they would not be in line with those of non Disboard members.

I believe the views expressed here are pretty representative of DVC members overall -- and that includes a LOT of people who really like SSR. My only problem, as I've stated many times before, is SSR is about four times larger than it needs to be for such a niche product, since most people like to eat and be close to the parks.

In addition to the many comments from people who have bought at SSR but are staying elsewhere, I've also visited with three different couples on my last trip who had bought in at SSR but were staying elsewhere. You are very well of this ongoing pattern of behavior by those who post here. And it is a pattern that will make life less desireable for those of us who own and want to stay elsewhere.

Stanford Wong, the blackjack expert, says the mind struggles to find patterns where there are none. But I believe I have found a bona fide pattern here that is not going away. As Ayn Rand would put it, I refuse not to be believe the evidence of my own eyes and reason.

Finally, you should be aware that John Zogby, America's most celebrated pollster, is now basing much of his analysys on INTERNET SURVEYS! Not the same as a disboard posting, but you get my drift.

 

[DrTomorrow]

Actually, disboard posts are a darn good indicator of the views of the people who post on the Disboard!

While the Disboard sample certainly is not perfectly representative of the entire DVC community, neither is it a group with no correlation with reality. If the issue at hand was whether Internet availability was important, the Disboard gang would NOT be a representative group. But on other issues I see no reason they would not be in line with those of non Disboard members.

I believe the views expressed here are pretty representative of DVC members overall -- and that includes a LOT of people who really like SSR. My only problem, as I've stated many times before, is SSR is about four times larger than it needs to be for such a niche product, since most people like to eat and be close to the parks.

In addition to the many comments from people who have bought at SSR but are staying elsewhere, I've also visited with three different couples on my last trip who had bought in at SSR but were staying elsewhere. You are very well of this ongoing pattern of behavior by those who post here. And it is a pattern that will make life less desireable for those of us who own and want to stay elsewhere.

Stanford Wong, the blackjack expert, says the mind struggles to find patterns where there are none. But I believe I have found a bona fide pattern here that is not going away. As Ayn Rand would put it, I refuse not to be believe the evidence of my own eyes and reason.

Finally, you should be aware that John Zogby, America's most celebrated pollster, is now basing much of his analysys on INTERNET SURVEYS! Not the same as a disboard posting, but you get my drift.

First, there are a lot of DISers here who would gladly agree with me that they - and I - have at best a tenuous grip on reality.

More to the point, IMHO the correlation between DIS DVC owners [DISers for the purpose of this discussion] and other DVC owners is actually quite low. Think about it for a minute - this is a self-selected group of people that, by definition, is quite fanatical about their DVC ownership. We spend time (weekly? DAILY!) discussing our ownership: how/where to buy in, maximizing point utility, and the perennial discussion about the effect SSR owners will have on smaller resort availability . We worry about the effect that point rental and point rental prices have on the value of our ownership. We speculate on when the Villas at CR / PR / AKL / DLR / Mars Outpost will be built. Heck, there are even DIS social gatherings! I simply don't accept that our thinking is any way near the level or intensity of thinking of the average Joe & Jane on Main Street who took the tour and bought into DVC. They don't worry about 11 month windows or 7 month windows - many DISers know non-DIS owners who actually let points expire, unused. They don't think about staying non-DVC on weekends to conserve points. It's just like gambling (back to Vegas!): there are a few who take the time to actually figue out the house edge, the best games to play to minimize loss and how to maximize comps for the $$$ bet - then there is the vast majority that play Keno, split 10's in BJ and simply love the Proposition bets in the middle of a craps table.

To summarize by analogy: Just like the Corvette Fanatics Association isn't representative of Corvette owners; just like oenophiles (wine lovers) aren't representative of all wine drinkers; just like the people who sit in the bleachers, paint their faces and attend every game aren't representative of all who go to baseball games, DIS DVCers are not representative of DVC owners as a group.

As Ayn Rand said, "Reason is not automatic. Those who deny it cannot be conquered by it. Do not count on them. Leave them alone."

Be well!

 

[RLevy29]

The people that I know that bought into SSR are thrilled to stay there and do not care about staying anywhere else. These are people that book about 3 months or less for vacations and are just happy to be staying on Disney property. I still don't think that you can make blanket statements about what people are going to want or what is going to be available. Things happen, people book, people cancel. The mantra" Buy where you want to stay" is only valuable to people who MUST have a specific resort and are able to book from 11-8 months in advance RIGHT NOW. What happens in the future as far as a booking window is not written in stone. When and if Disney changes this is not certain, but there will probably be a lot of advance notification; it won't happen overnight.

 

[Mississippian]

As Ayn Rand said, "Reason is not automatic. Those who deny it cannot be conquered by it. Do not count on them. Leave them alone."

Be well!

I think we're a pretty representative group. After all, virtually everyone quotes Ayn Rand!

 

[crisi]

More to the point, IMHO the correlation between DIS DVC owners [DISers for the purpose of this discussion] and other DVC owners is actually quite low. Think about it for a minute - this is a self-selected group of people that, by definition, is quite fanatical about their DVC ownership. We spend time (weekly? DAILY!) discussing our ownership: how/where to buy in, maximizing point utility, and the perennial discussion about the effect SSR owners will have on smaller resort availability ...

I agree with you, but there is one significant way we infomred DISers are different that supports Mississippiene's point....

A lot of owners, except for the original OKW owners - were sold on it being "easy" to "stay where ever they wanted." (And, provided you aren't talking four months out, or some special cases, it pretty much is easy at seven months - or at least not impossibly hard). As more resorts have entered the system, there are more resorts other than home to be attractive to you. I think the early BWV owners looking at BWVs and OKW, offsite options, and the possiblity of future options were more likely to recognize that although they could stay anywhere, they'd probably stay home more often than not because there weren't that many options. SSR owners are being told its easy - and being given an impressive menu of options.

DISBoarders seem to recognize that there are limits to how easy it will be to book a stay "whereever" once you enter the seven month window (and, in some cases, before then). The folks that got here pre-purchase were at least exposed to the idea that it might not be easy to get BCVs at seven months over Easter, and that if your heart is set on taking advantage of that Standard View point structure, its best to own at BWVs. We may not all agree, but the notion doesn't come as a surprise here.