Anyone else struggling with the climate of evasiveness?

[DonMacGregor]

I have standards just because they don't align with yours does not mean mine are wrong and for you to think that only yours are THE standard tells me much. I don't know that I will stay at the cabins often, but I see the advantage of having them. I don't have to like something to see the value of it. I just happen to think that not everything has to be what I like. I personally prefer our stays at the Beach Club Villas and Grand Floridian.

C'mon man....everyone knows how bougie OKW, VB, HHI, and SSR are.

 

[Sammie]

C'mon man....everyone knows how bougie OKW, VB, HHI, and SSR are.

We love SSR and HHI. HHI has the best staff of any DVC resort and the new rehabs are awesome. We stay there often. I was sticking to WDW resorts. As to SSR, love the new rooms, like the central to all parks location, and walking distance to Disney Springs offers great restaurants. Think they have the best collection of pools and quick service too. We have stayed at every DVC resort at least once and see value in all of them. Not every resort is a best fit for us, but it doesn't have to be. There are over 250K members and everyone's needs and wants are different.
Love that you said, "bougie"

 

[Sammie]

BPK wasn’t a refurb. It was supposed to be “new” for sale. It’s one thing to not redo the electrical in an elevator. But it is shocking that Disney didn’t even address scuff marks and wear and tear in the elevator. They should have taken the building to the studs before selling it as new. New timeshare owners are not responsible for the upkeep Disney did not do previous to sale. They are responsible for future refurbs.

How was the Polynesian and Jambo House conversion handled? Was it the same as BPK?

 

[DonMacGregor]

We love SSR and HHI. HHI has the best staff of any DVC resort and the new rehabs are awesome. We stay there often. I was sticking to WDW resorts. As to SSR, love the new rooms, like the central to all parks location, and walking distance to Disney Springs offers great restaurants. Think they have the best collection of pools and quick service too. We have stayed at every DVC resort at least once and see value in all of them. Not every resort is a best fit for us, but it doesn't have to be. There are over 250K members and everyone's needs and wants are different.
Love that you said, "bougie"

I agree. I was just pointing out the fact that the whole argument (by others), that EVERY DVC resort before CFW was equal and all “deluxe” doesn’t hold water. There is already a broad selection of DVC resorts, more than a handful of which really do fall closer to a “moderate” resort, at least amenity-wise.

 

[New Mouse]

I agree. I was just pointing out the fact that the whole argument (by others), that EVERY DVC resort before CFW was equal and all “deluxe” doesn’t hold water. There is already a broad selection of DVC resorts, more than a handful of which really do fall closer to a “moderate” resort, at least amenity-wise.

But none of them approached value level until now

 

[Sandisw]

But none of them approached value level until now

I certainly don’t think the cabins are value level and I think the accommodations are pretty nice.

I think they are a diffeeent product and no way devalue the program.

Not saying there aren’t some things they could do that I would view differently, but I also think it goes to the same point that we all see things differently

 

[New Mouse]

I certainly don’t think the cabins are value level and I think the accommodations are pretty nice.

I think they are a diffeeent product and no way devalue the program.

Not saying there aren’t some things they could do that I would view differently, but I also think it goes to the same point that we all see things differently

Value isn't about the cabin it's about the resort as a whole.

 

[Sandisw]

Value isn't about the cabin it's about the resort as a whole.

I also don’t see FW as a value property and think it offers a unique experience.

Heck, some feel RIV should be moderate because it’s next to CBR and yet I think it’s the best deluxe they offer.

We all view things differently and that’s okay.

 

[lowlight]

I think they are a diffeeent product and no way devalue the program.

I am not trying to sound bougie at all, the harsh reality is that the however many million of CFW points that are sold are going to disproportionately affect 7 month availability at resorts that people actually want to stay at. The same way that SSR and OKW do now, and I say that thinking both of those resorts are nice if just not my cup of tea. When VGF added BPK, it didn’t add millions of points to the whole DVC system via rooms that nobody wanted to book, it added rooms at a highly desired resort that people could book at 7 months. CFW takes more than it gives, I will bet you 100 bucks that 7 month availability is on par with SSR and OKW because people who own there are trading into more desirable resorts. How is that not a net negative on the system?

 

[mkatsy]

I am not trying to sound bougie at all, the harsh reality is that the however many million of CFW points that are sold are going to disproportionately affect 7 month availability at resorts that people actually want to stay at. The same way that SSR and OKW do now, and I say that thinking both of those resorts are nice if just not my cup of tea. When VGF added BPK, it didn’t add millions of points to the whole DVC system via rooms that nobody wanted to book, it added rooms at a highly desired resort that people could book at 7 months. CFW takes more than it gives, I will bet you 100 bucks that 7 month availability is on par with SSR and OKW because people who own there are trading into more desirable resorts. How is that not a net negative on the system?

"CFW ... the resort that takes more than it gives" that's gonna stick!

 

[BeachClub2014]

I am not trying to sound bougie at all, the harsh reality is that the however many million of CFW points that are sold are going to disproportionately affect 7 month availability at resorts that people actually want to stay at. The same way that SSR and OKW do now, and I say that thinking both of those resorts are nice if just not my cup of tea. When VGF added BPK, it didn’t add millions of points to the whole DVC system via rooms that nobody wanted to book, it added rooms at a highly desired resort that people could book at 7 months. CFW takes more than it gives, I will bet you 100 bucks that 7 month availability is on par with SSR and OKW because people who own there are trading into more desirable resorts. How is that not a net negative on the system?

To be fair, OKW is the original DVC resort, so it probably shouldn't be lumped into the argument.

As an owner at BCV, is it bougie of me to be irritated when lowbrow owners of VGF or BLT use their points at my premium resort?

My point is that one of the foundational principles of DVC is the ability to use points (setting restrictions aside for the moment) across the system. It seems to work, as there is system-wide tension on availability for much of the year.

 

[lowlight]

As an owner at BCV, is it bougie of me to be irritated when lowbrow owners of VGF or BLT use their points at my premium resort?

I’ve read enough of your posts to know that you’re smart enough to know that isn’t what I meant. I’m saying the reality is that for last minute bookings or places that fill the slowest at 7 months, it’s OKW and SSR. Rental places pay you less points for these resorts because of the lack of demand. They go for less on the rental board here. Where is the positive in adding a few million more of these points that “most” people don’t want to use except for rarely?

 

[mkatsy]

The units declared into the POS must be available to all owners every day and only owners of those units can book them during the home resort period.


So, they exist as resort property as part of the current condo association.

Thst means they exist in one association and there is language that indicates they can’t exist in another plan. Thst is one piece that I think supports they can’t put a fractional ownership of one unit into another.

In addition , read the terms of the trust documents and how that is set up. The FL statues do discuss selling timeshare estates and trust use plan.

As a developer, they are allowed to add property to the trust and must define the property. Thst property then must be activated for sale as part of a trust use plan, and that is what they are selling…access to units that are there for booking by owners of that specific plan.


An example. if they own .00% of Unit 11 in VGF. Thst unit includes 101 rooms. So, what actual property would get added to to trust?

Those rooms can’t be split since they are part of the VGF condo association and sold that way.

That is why I do not read it that they can add a fractional share of the unit because they can’t pull actual rooms to represent their ownership.

Look at how they activated the current 30 cabins. It said how many points and then tied it to the specific resort maps.

So, it’s all of those pieces that would prevent them from adding a unit from a sold out resort thst they don’t have complete ownership of at this point, at least from how I am reading it all.

ETA: Now, any units at a resort that had not yet been declared into the current vacation plan in a resort can be moved without issue. Bit having the same inventory sold in two different vacation plans doesn’t match the wording of our POS…and the way the leasehold condo was set up.

There is language in the VGF master document about fractional ownership. I skimmed over it yesterday because it wasn't what I was looking for. It was talking about when Disney takes back possession of fractional shares, and that the fractional shares would "auto pool" with Disney's other fractional shares. It went out of its way to mention that the same thing does not happen for members who own more than one fractional share. Again, I'm not sure why they felt this was important enough to take up space on the master declaration. Who knows?

 

[BeachClub2014]

I’ve read enough of your posts to know that you’re smart enough to know that isn’t what I meant. I’m saying the reality is that for last minute bookings or places that fill the slowest at 7 months, it’s OKW and SSR. Rental places pay you less points for these resorts because of the lack of demand. They go for less on the rental board here. Where is the positive in adding a few million more of these points that “most” people don’t want to use except for rarely?

I'm just saying that I don't think it's entirely fair to say that points of a specific resort somehow devalue or dilute the system when each resort brings rooms to the table. Are some resorts "valued" more than others? Of course.

The core of the argument is around SAP, right? At the price CFW is being rolled out, along with those sky-high dues, it's not a very attractive proposition as SAP's.

 

[walt34]

There is language in the VGF master document about fractional ownership. I skimmed over it yesterday because it wasn't what I was looking for. It was talking about when Disney takes back possession of fractional shares, and that the fractional shares would "auto pool" with Disney's other fractional shares. It went out of its way to mention that the same thing does not happen for members who own more than one fractional share. Again, I'm not sure why they felt this was important enough to take up space on the master declaration. Who knows?

But as I understand it, this auto-pooling remains within the same unit, doesn't it?

I thought this was there for DVD to be able to get back 2 100 point contracts and sell them as one 150 and one 50 points contract (which nobody but DVD can do).

 

[walt34]

To be fair, OKW is the original DVC resort, so it probably shouldn't be lumped into the argument.

As an owner at BCV, is it bougie of me to be irritated when lowbrow owners of VGF or BLT use their points at my premium resort?

My point is that one of the foundational principles of DVC is the ability to use points (setting restrictions aside for the moment) across the system. It seems to work, as there is system-wide tension on availability for much of the year.

Great point. I else believe that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I'm quite happy that OKW and SSR are there because they allow me to trade one week at VGF into nearly two weeks of a somewhat less park connected but also less stressful holiday. Sometimes that's what I want. I'm not at all interested in CFW but I'm sure there are people for whom this is a great addition.

Sidenote: Your bougie BCV is so tiny that most of it seems to be booked up months before we even get to the 7 months window.

 

[BeachClub2014]

Great point. I else believe that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I'm quite happy that OKW and SSR are there because they allow me to trade one week at VGF into nearly two weeks of a somewhat less park connected but also less stressful holiday. Sometimes that's what I want. I'm not at all interested in CFW but I'm sure there are people for whom this is a great addition.

Sidenote: Your bougie BCV is so tiny that most of it seems to be booked up months before we even get to the 7 months window.

Very true!

Thankfully, I subscribe to the "buy where you want to stay" school of DVC thought, which used to be the prevailing mantra here on the DIS about 100 years ago or so. Then, that old-school theme morphed into "buy where you're willing to stay" for many people, and now it seems to be "buy where you get the best price because you can always reserve someplace else at 7 months" for just as many people.

You can't go wrong if you buy where you want to stay and then stay there.

 

[lowlight]

You can't go wrong if you buy where you want to stay and then stay there.

My home resort filled up, and I mean 100% of room categories, with walkers two weeks before my intended travel dates opened to book. It was a bloodbath and I only got half the days I needed. So there’s that. But yes, generally you are correct.

The intended point of this thread, I believe, was the change in behavior from DVD lately. Putting all the straw mans aside, my opinion is that I agree with the OP and I don’t trust DVD to do the right thing that makes financial sense for them and is good for the owners of the product anymore. They have shown time and again to not only prioritize profit over experience, but to do so to the exclusion of experience.

 

[BeachClub2014]

My home resort filled up, and I mean 100% of room categories, with walkers two weeks before my intended travel dates opened to book. It was a bloodbath and I only got half the days I needed. So there’s that. But yes, generally you are correct.

The intended point of this thread, I believe, was the change in behavior from DVD lately. Putting all the straw mans aside, my opinion is that I agree with the OP and I don’t trust DVD to do the right thing that makes financial sense for them and is good for the owners of the product anymore. They have shown time and again to not only prioritize profit over experience, but to do so to the exclusion of experience.

Thanks for the re-direct back to the thread topic! I hear you and others when expressing concerns and reservations about how "trustworthy" DVC may be in its decision-making processes, and I can understand why. In my mind, TWDC is a for-profit mega-corporation that exists to make money. Period. If how they choose to do so doesn't align with my values or ceases to meet my needs, then I would stop throwing darned near all my travel money at them. But that hasn't happened yet, for me. Is there a deal breaker on the horizon? Maybe.

 

[lowlight]

If how they choose to do so doesn't align with my values or ceases to meet my needs, then I would stop throwing darned near all my travel money at them.

Why does it have to be a binary choice? We aren’t renting hotel rooms. We may not have representation on the board, but we are timeshare owners who should have a say. I like DVC as a product, but want to see changes, and public opinion campaigns can be very effective. That’s why I don’t like the “if you don’t like it sell it” line.