Be careful what you wish for (Contemporary DVC)

[Mississippian]

Like many people I am excited about the rumored Contemporary DVC. But there is a downside that is similar to the issue that has caused all the debate over SSR.

I think most DVC-2042 members think SSR is way too big and offers far less "bang-for-the-buck" that the DVC-2042 resorts. That's why there is so much friction over this issue.

If the Contemporary DVC comes in with a really high point chart, then it threatens to throw even more sand into the gears. As one poster has noted, if Disney builds it, people will buy it.

But if Contemporary DVC has a really high point requirement -- say 50 or even 30 percent more than BCV -- then members will tend to use it for short stays. For longer stays, I fear Contemporary members may try to book stays at the DVC-2042 resorts because of their good locations and lower prices. So essentially DVC-2042 members will see the value of their memberships devalued even more as it will become even harder to get rooms at the 7-month window.

In terms of park access and amenities, Contemporary DVC will offer about the same things at the BCV and BWV. So here's hoping for a Contemporary DVC with a reasonable point chart that is roughly the same as the EPCOT resorts.

 

[Mickmse2002]

Interesting point. I think as DVC continues to grow then there will always be the potential for additional on smaller resorts like Beach Club. Thank goodness OKW is so large and nice it serves as a great option when trying to maximize point use.

 

[Pluto 2]

just a guess of mine but i except the point charts to be the same as bcv,vwl and bwvp. except to pay a pretty high maint fees

 

[tmt martins]

just a guess of mine but i except the point charts to be the same as bcv,vwl and bwvp. except to pay a pretty high maint fees

It looks like it uses most of the common grounds and the only thing that might make the main.fees higher is if they add cost of the monorail operations.

Other then that it seems like upkeep would be simple enough and staffing as it's not spread over several buildings.

 

[gtrist4life]

Mississippian,

I had not read your post before I started my "hunch" thread

http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=1187662

I do believe that the new DVC resorts (both CR and AKL) will have higher points, however I also started a thread awhile ago that offers a proposed solution to the "problem" you stated..... A change to the reservation windows.

For reference
DVC I - OKW, BWV, VWL, BCV, VB, and HHI
DVC II - SSR, VAKL, VCR, and eventually some other location, either Disneyland or Hawaii.

Home resort - 11 months
To book other resorts in your group DVC I or DVC II - 9 months
To book any other DVC DVC - 7 months

I debated giving HH and VB an advantage by letting them book anywhere at 9 months, but another option would be like I listed, adding a non-WDW location to the DVC II group of resorts.

Just my thoughts.......

 

[Inkmahm]

Mississippian,

I had not read your post before I started my "hunch" thread

http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=1187662

I do believe that the new DVC resorts (both CR and AKL) will have higher points, however I also started a thread awhile ago that offers a proposed solution to the "problem" you stated..... A change to the reservation windows.

For reference
DVC I - OKW, BWV, VWL, BCV, VB, and HHI
DVC II - SSR, VAKL, VCR, and eventually some other location, either Disneyland or Hawaii.

Home resort - 11 months
To book other resorts in your group DVC I or DVC II - 9 months
To book any other DVC DVC - 7 months

I debated giving HH and VB an advantage by letting them book anywhere at 9 months, but another option would be like I listed, adding a non-WDW location to the DVC II group of resorts.

Just my thoughts.......

Why would SSR owners have an advantage over BWV and VWL owners when it came to booking VAKL or VCR?

 

[Mississippian]

Mississippian,

I had not read your post before I started my "hunch" thread

http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=1187662

I do believe that the new DVC resorts (both CR and AKL) will have higher points, however I also started a thread awhile ago that offers a proposed solution to the "problem" you stated..... A change to the reservation windows.

For reference
DVC I - OKW, BWV, VWL, BCV, VB, and HHI
DVC II - SSR, VAKL, VCR, and eventually some other location, either Disneyland or Hawaii.

Home resort - 11 months
To book other resorts in your group DVC I or DVC II - 9 months
To book any other DVC DVC - 7 months

I debated giving HH and VB an advantage by letting them book anywhere at 9 months, but another option would be like I listed, adding a non-WDW location to the DVC II group of resorts.

Just my thoughts.......

I agree in part with your outlook, except that I would prefer to see DVC I and DVC II have a four-month window instead of seven.

DVCs I and II are really apples and oranges when you think about it. DVC II members are getting to make an even trade to get into DVC I resorts, and after all the trading is done they get 12 additional years of DVC accomodations. If the situation gets bad enough in the future, I suspect this is something that could be challenged on legal grounds.

But let's see how the point charts come out for any new resorts. DVC has apparently decided there won't be any more resorts with an OKW point chart. But perhaps they won't throw the system further out of balance with the Contemporary DVC, should it come to exist.

 

[BCV23]

Just wanted to say nice signature picture, Mississippian!

 

[bobbiwoz]

These are interesting thoughts. We're not ready to buy anymore points but if these (Contemporary and Animal Kingdom) are the next DVC's, I really like the way DVC will be developing. These are more attractive to me then Eagle Pines.

Bobbi

 

[yearbook50]

I really like the fact of the Comtemporary DVC.

My fiance and I have agreed we will buy into that, since we have time to save up the money for it now.

 

[DonnaL]

I like the general concept of DVC I and DVC II.........didn't really look too closely at your specifics, but, I do like the general idea........

 

[tomandrobin]

Why would SSR owners have an advantage over BWV and VWL owners when it came to booking VAKL or VCR?

Because SSR, VAK and VCR would all expire in 2054, not 2042 like the rest of the resorts. Thats why whe broke them down into the two groups.

 

[Barak's Disney]

Just wanted to say nice signature picture, Mississippian!

Ditto!

 

[Mississippian]

Thanks for the compliments on the signature. I'm not much of a graphic artist, but slapped it together after I saw the artist's rendering of the proposed resort.

 

[kimberh]

I wonder if Disney execs take any of the Ideas off the Dis and discuss them. I hope they keep the points in a balance and give the extra years. Mississippian, I do really like your signature!!

 

[byoung]

Like many people I am excited about the rumored Contemporary DVC. But there is a downside that is similar to the issue that has caused all the debate over SSR.

I think most DVC-2042 members think SSR is way too big and offers far less "bang-for-the-buck" that the DVC-2042 resorts. That's why there is so much friction over this issue.

If the Contemporary DVC comes in with a really high point chart, then it threatens to throw even more sand into the gears. As one poster has noted, if Disney builds it, people will buy it.

But if Contemporary DVC has a really high point requirement -- say 50 or even 30 percent more than BCV -- then members will tend to use it for short stays. For longer stays, I fear Contemporary members may try to book stays at the DVC-2042 resorts because of their good locations and lower prices. So essentially DVC-2042 members will see the value of their memberships devalued even more as it will become even harder to get rooms at the 7-month window.

In terms of park access and amenities, Contemporary DVC will offer about the same things at the BCV and BWV. So here's hoping for a Contemporary DVC with a reasonable point chart that is roughly the same as the EPCOT resorts.

I agree, and hoping also.

 

[Dean]

It's possible but doubtful that DVD would start a new timeshare system separate from DVC. There's no reason for them to do so. And given that SSR is already in DVC, it would be almost impossible to severe those ties and move to a new timeshare system so they would be left out. Plus the old resorts are a selling point. One of the benefits to the system is the economy of scale. To add a couple of smaller resorts and charge the members there the true operating costs of reservations and the like would be staggering. While I don't believe DVD would run two separate timeshares systems, if they did, SSR wouldn't be included. The ending date really makes no difference other than in that transition time when the current resorts are ending and even then it will be a small part.

As I've said, I would expect the points per night to be the same for similar accommodations. DVD has shown a propensity to keep things the same else VWL and BCV would likely have been different than they are. It would take an extremely large VCR to balance the system with the points from SSR, likely in the 400-500 unit range minimum to make a noticeable dent in this issue.

 

[Beca]

Wow!! I am really glad to know that someone else thinks of these ramifications, too!!!

I'm not sure if I agree or disagree with you. I am just so stinkin' excited that it appears that TWO destination resorts may be built instead of EP!!! I am totally doin' the happy dance, and have never been so excited to be wrong.

I, too believe that CRV would higher per night. A few years ago, I was speaking to a DVC rep who pretty much agreed that would HAVE to happen, as DVD would have to purchase the land from WDW, and the "price per point" would never be able to make up for the costs of "the most valuable land at WDW".

I also agree that if points are, say 30% higher than BCV, VWL, or BWV...people might just stay "for a few nights" and then move on. However, what I don't think you are accounting for is the number of people who will LOVE these resorts enough to pay the difference. When we initially bought, our first contract was BWV...primarily for the standard views (knowing they were pretty much an "owners only" perk). After falling in love with BCV, we decided that truly the MOST expensive component of any vacation is dh's "time", and that we would rather pay the difference and stay at BCV.

I think that both CRV, and VAKL would have loyal followings as well. CRV would have some of the BEST views at WDW, and access to the monorail....something people have been salivating over for years!! And, VAKL would have one of a kind animal viewing, and access to the "no pool hopping" Uzima pool. Oh....I also believe DVC would put in a REALLY amazing pool at the CRV.

I don't know that I am ready to see a 15 story building at CRV (let's hope that gets scaled down a bit), but I don't think there will be a lot of open rooms at CRV. I do still think that the "heat" will be on at VWL, BWV, and BCV....but, adding two destination resorts I feel is an "overall good" to the system.

Thanks for your thoughts!!!

Beca

 

[Fonzy13]

It's possible but doubtful that DVD would start a new timeshare system separate from DVC. There's no reason for them to do so. And given that SSR is already in DVC, it would be almost impossible to severe those ties and move to a new timeshare system so they would be left out. Plus the old resorts are a selling point. One of the benefits to the system is the economy of scale. To add a couple of smaller resorts and charge the members there the true operating costs of reservations and the like would be staggering. While I don't believe DVD would run two separate timeshares systems, if they did, SSR wouldn't be included. The ending date really makes no difference other than in that transition time when the current resorts are ending and even then it will be a small part.

As I've said, I would expect the points per night to be the same for similar accommodations. DVD has shown a propensity to keep things the same else VWL and BCV would likely have been different than they are. It would take an extremely large VCR to balance the system with the points from SSR, likely in the 400-500 unit range minimum to make a noticeable dent in this issue.

This is pretty much right on target.

As an SSR owner, I'd love to have your proposed 9-month booking window, but in the end, it really is not a plausible idea, particularly when you include Saratoga.

 

[snowbunny]

CRV is going to have the one advantage that is unbeatable in real estate: location location location. This is a whole different ball of wax than SSR. A lot more CRV owners are going to plan to buy there because they want to stay in that location, with monorail transportation.