Attack of the Lakeshore Lodge

[Lorana]

If the studios/1BR end up sleeping 5 and they can get the dues comparable with most of the other resorts we will definitely be buying here when it opens.

We’ve thought about adding on resale at CCV but as a family of 5 it doesn’t make a lot of sense as we have to book a 2 BR. BRV being a 2042 resort means we won’t buy there either but we spend a lot of points there. WL is one of our favorite resorts so we are really excited about this news.

I would love for the studios sleeping 5, as that would be a huge win as well... but with Poly Tower opening with studios sleeping 4, my fear is that Disney is not going to have these studios sleep 5, either.

(Huge miss, IMHO, on Poly, especially as the longhouse studios are larger and sleep 5).

 

[davidhr]

From the photos it looks like they’re keeping the same footprint for the pool areas that had the lazy river.

 

[Paul Stupin]

As a Copper Creek owner, I think it will be fun to have a resort with some new dining options within walking distance, and am assuming that there will in fact be a walkway connecting the two locations.

That said, I don’t think I’ll have any interest in buying there, with the rooms no doubt smaller, the reduced theming and footprint, and, as usual with new DVC construction, a somewhat more modern look with a reduced wow factor. The lazy river sounds great, but my wife and I are already spoiled by the spectacular one at Aulani.

Will be fun to give it a try for a quick stay though! And Lakeshore will no doubt have resale restrictions, so it will justify some of our direct point purchases as well. Thinking about this, if the resort has enough unique amenities, it could be the first step in actually justifying DVC’s resale restriction strategy, and potentially start to erode the resale market, as the 2042 date gets closer and fun new resorts like this one appear that aren’t bookable with resale points.

Also, the talk about this shadowy trust changing the entire DVC system seems to have evaporated, since there doesn’t seem to be any real added value combining this resort with Fort Wilderness.

 

[Steelers0854]

As a Copper Creek owner, I think it will be fun to have a resort with some new dining options within walking distance, and am assuming that there will in fact be a walkway connecting the two locations.

That said, I don’t think I’ll have any interest in buying there, with the rooms no doubt smaller, the reduced theming and footprint, and, as usual with new DVC construction, a somewhat more modern look with a reduced wow factor. The lazy river sounds great, but my wife and I are already spoiled by the spectacular one at Aulani.

Will be fun to give it a try for a quick stay though! And Lakeshore will no doubt have resale restrictions, so it will justify some of our direct point purchases as well. Thinking about this, if the resort has enough unique amenities, it could be the first step in actually justifying DVC’s resale restriction strategy, and potentially start to erode the resale market, as the 2042 date gets closer and fun new resorts like this one appear that aren’t bookable with resale points.

Also, the talk about this shadowy trust changing the entire DVC system seems to have evaporated, since there doesn’t seem to be any real added value combining this resort with Fort Wilderness.

Agreed, this would be great and make Copper Creek an even better non-park stay then it already is. Plus you have the easy boat ride over as well. Win win all around and may have me increase my points at Copper Creek!

 

[peder]

Also, the talk about this shadowy trust changing the entire DVC system seems to have evaporated, since there doesn’t seem to be any real added value combining this resort with Fort Wilderness.

If DVC is moving toward a Marriott-style trust system, then it wouldn't just be one or two resorts, it would likely eventually become all resorts wrapped into the trust. It's just easier to start with new resorts being in the trust by default.

But under this setup, there wouldn't be a "home resort", you'd simply be buying into the trust for a set number of years with the expectation that Disney provides something for that duration.

It boils down to this: the trust conversation is tangential because it's likely going to eventually end up closer to the system that Marriott uses, which is more of an overhaul of the entire system.

 

[eticketplease]

I would love for the studios sleeping 5, as that would be a huge win as well... but with Poly Tower opening with studios sleeping 4, my fear is that Disney is not going to have these studios sleep 5, either.

(Huge miss, IMHO, on Poly, especially as the longhouse studios are larger and sleep 5).

I agree PIT should have been able to sleep 5 in studios but at least PVB still has the option for 5 in a studio. Look at VDH that has a huge studio footprint but you have to book one of the few 1 br or larger rooms for families of 5. It could be worse like @Electron_si mentioned with CCV having to get a 2 BR for families of 5.

 

[Cfabar1]

Yeah I am skeptical of the trust. I would consider deeded points though. My concern with the trust is how the makeup of it can change over time.

We already know DVC will add inventory to associations, but there seem to be limits around what they can do with the deeded locations - cCV is a great illustration of that.

A trust may allow them to do what Marriott did which was in essence require everyone to share the cost of high MFs across resorts and also now put you in the soup with everyone competing for the same desirable locations.

Most deeded owners in Marriott and Hyatt understand to not sell those deeds to the trust program. The deeds are far more valuable.

 

[CastAStone]

Are we thinking this stays with the original 900 rooms or something smaller?

As I have said elsewhere I have heard (on the internet but from people I trust) that they can’t make it as tall as they initially planned and until I see differently I’m going to believe them.

 

[DisnEElove]

If DVC is moving toward a Marriott-style trust system, then it wouldn't just be one or two resorts, it would likely eventually become all resorts wrapped into the trust. It's just easier to start with new resorts being in the trust by default.

But under this setup, there wouldn't be a "home resort", you'd simply be buying into the trust for a set number of years with the expectation that Disney provides something for that duration.

It boils down to this: the trust conversation is tangential because it's likely going to eventually end up closer to the system that Marriott uses, which is more of an overhaul of the entire system.

Not having a home resort would turn me off. Not in the least bit interested in CFW, so the idea of not being able to book where I want each time wouldn't be exciting.

 

[Cfabar1]

Not having a home resort would turn me off. Not in the least bit interested in CFW, so the idea of not being able to book where I want each time wouldn't be exciting.

Here's the other dirty secret - easiest resorts to book are the three large resorts that don't have transportation two and from the parks other than a bus - SSR, OKW, and AKV....

So, take that profile of resort, now add in restrictions - where those who bought resale since 2019 will not be able to use the resale points there but they can at SSR, OKW, and AKV (and the other resorts)...

Very real possibility Reflections A Disney's Lakeside Lodge resort becomes a new "resort of last resort" That is why I think it needs to be an extremely elevated offering that makes guests want to be there - that pretty statue of Pocahontas isn't going to be enough....

 

[Lorana]

Here's the other dirty secret - easiest resorts to book are the three large resorts that don't have transportation two and from the parks other than a bus - SSR, OKW, and AKV....

So, take that profile of resort, now add in restrictions - where those who bought resale since 2019 will not be able to use the resale points there but they can at SSR, OKW, and AKV (and the other resorts)...

Very real possibility Reflections A Disney's Lakeside Lodge resort becomes a new "resort of last resort" That is why I think it needs to be an extremely elevated offering that makes guests want to be there - that pretty statue of Pocahontas isn't going to be enough....

Well, that will make me happy, in that I'd be able to more easily use my other points there at the 7 month mark.

That said, there are some -- me, I am definitely in that group -- that absolutely love the boat transportation to the Magic Kingdom, and so that would place Lakeside Lodge above SSR and OKW as far as "last resort" properties. (I love AKV, so it's never a last resort resort for me).

Also, if it does have a lazy river, I feel like that (and its proximity to the MK) will make it more popular. I used to swear I wasn't going to stay often at the Beach Club resort because it's themed to my back yard (Cape Cod/New England), but I love lazy rivers and so does my BFF, so it's become our resort of choice when we do Girlfriend Getaways together (that, and we both love EPCOT/World Showcase).

 

[BayTower2010]

This is my bet. Exactly the same room configuration, with the hotel rooms being "resort studios." No reason to pay the architects (and, more importantly, Imagineering) twice.

Also: If memory serves, the last non-DVC resort they built was Gran Destino, and that was intended to feed CSR's convention business. Before that? AoA, which was started before 9/11. I was honestly surprised by the original Reflections announcement of mixed-use. I suspect the pandemic reminded WDW that owning a bunch of cash rooms was a huge risk.

If they keep the same configuration, it would be the second largest DVC resort in WDW (second to SSR). So as above, I would have a very real concern about transportation. Even with road improvements, moving the great number of people in this resort and going past Wilderness/Copper Creek/Boulder Ridge just seems like a nightmare. After all, the whole reason for going to WDW is to visit the parks-not be stuck in traffic jams.

 

[CastAStone]

Here's the other dirty secret - easiest resorts to book are the three large resorts that don't have transportation two and from the parks other than a bus - SSR, OKW, and AKV....

So, take that profile of resort, now add in restrictions - where those who bought resale since 2019 will not be able to use the resale points there but they can at SSR, OKW, and AKV (and the other resorts)...

Very real possibility Reflections A Disney's Lakeside Lodge resort becomes a new "resort of last resort" That is why I think it needs to be an extremely elevated offering that makes guests want to be there - that pretty statue of Pocahontas isn't going to be enough....

 

[Sandisw]

If DVC is moving toward a Marriott-style trust system, then it wouldn't just be one or two resorts, it would likely eventually become all resorts wrapped into the trust. It's just easier to start with new resorts being in the trust by default.

But under this setup, there wouldn't be a "home resort", you'd simply be buying into the trust for a set number of years with the expectation that Disney provides something for that duration.

It boils down to this: the trust conversation is tangential because it's likely going to eventually end up closer to the system that Marriott uses, which is more of an overhaul of the entire system.

The DVC trust has been set up to allow for more than one RTU plan and therefore they can add component sites that are their own resorts.

It doesn’t require them to become one big “home resort”.

So, they could decide to put DLL with CFW in the same RTU plan which makes them one resort for booking purposes or they could still add DLL to the trust but under its own RTU plan which means it’s not the same home resort as CFW.

Until something is added, we have no idea how each future resort that enters…and I do believe they will put the future resorts into the trust…how it will be structured.

 

[DebbieB]

I would love for the studios sleeping 5, as that would be a huge win as well... but with Poly Tower opening with studios sleeping 4, my fear is that Disney is not going to have these studios sleep 5, either.

(Huge miss, IMHO, on Poly, especially as the longhouse studios are larger and sleep 5).

I think they want to push larger families into the Tower 1 bedrooms. If families of 5 could stay in Tower studios, the 1 bedrooms would sit there, especially with the higher points. They already have 360 studios for 5.

 

[samsp99]

I agree PIT should have been able to sleep 5 in studios but at least PVB still has the option for 5 in a studio. Look at VDH that has a huge studio footprint but you have to book one of the few 1 br or larger rooms for families of 5. It could be worse like @Electron_si mentioned with CCV having to get a 2 BR for families of 5.

would it make sense to have a mix of units that can be combined to form different combo’s:
* traditional studio with 1 queen + murphy bed + mini kitchen + bath (sleeps 4)
* kitchen + murphy bed + bath (sleeps 2)
* king bed + nicer bath, no kitchen (sleeps 2)

That way you can have the
- traditional studio, traditional 1 bed ( 2 separate rentals)
- extended 1 bed (top 2, sleeps 6, would be a new option), king room (hotel like)
- traditional 2 bed, sleeps 8 ( all 3 units)
- each unit individually - not sure how popular a murphy + kitchen combo would be - but it may work for longer stays where self catering is of more importance.

If a family is larger than 4.5, the current studios don’t work well. This would give more flexibility and have a more luxe option for just a couple without having to stretch to a 1 bed.

 

[Paul Stupin]

The DVC trust has been set up to allow for more than one RTU plan and therefore they can add component sites that are their own resorts.

It doesn’t require them to become one big “home resort”.

So, they could decide to put DLL with CFW in the same RTU plan which makes them one resort for booking purposes or they could still add DLL to the trust but under its own RTU plan which means it’s not the same home resort as CFW.

Until something is added, we have no idea how each future resort that enters…and I do believe they will put the future resorts into the trust…how it will be structured.

I had to read this post twice and still don’t understand! Whatever the trust ultimately amounts too, it seems that it’s going to stay a shadowy, somewhat worthless behind the scenes component for the next several years.

 

[Jimmy Geppetto]

I had to read this post twice and still don’t understand! Whatever the trust ultimately amounts too, it seems that it’s going to stay a shadowy, somewhat worthless behind the scenes component for the next several years.

I tend to agree. If @Sandisw prediction holds true it becomes a big deal in 2042.

 

[eticketplease]

would it make sense to have a mix of units that can be combined to form different combo’s:
* traditional studio with 1 queen + murphy bed + mini kitchen + bath (sleeps 4)
* kitchen + murphy bed + bath (sleeps 2)
* king bed + nicer bath, no kitchen (sleeps 2)

That way you can have the
- traditional studio, traditional 1 bed ( 2 separate rentals)
- extended 1 bed (top 2, sleeps 6, would be a new option), king room (hotel like)
- traditional 2 bed, sleeps 8 ( all 3 units)
- each unit individually - not sure how popular a murphy + kitchen combo would be - but it may work for longer stays where self catering is of more importance.

If a family is larger than 4.5, the current studios don’t work well. This would give more flexibility and have a more luxe option for just a couple without having to stretch to a 1 bed.

They sort of do this already.

There are very few dedicated studios or One bedroom units.

Most have a door between the studio and the living room in the 1 bedroom units so when booked together can sleep 8-10 depending on resort.

Studios sleep 4-5 (queen, pull down Murphy or pull out couch, possible twin flip down bed) and 1 bedroom units sleep 4-5 (King, pull down Murphy or pull out couch and possible twin flip down or twin pull out chair)

 

[sarahlord]

Are we thinking this resort will be in the same association as the cabins?