Beach Club extending contract date??

[_auroraborealis_]

They are contractually required to renovate every 14 years

Please quote the section of the contract that says this? I cannot find it. I find that the management company is responsible for maintenance and good order on the resort, but no where does it obligate them to refurbishment schedule.

 

[havoc315]

There is a huge difference between a normal facelift of rooms and calling it a resort renovation. A hardgoods refresh is very much different than a resort renovation. What they will do is the normal refresh they do at all resorts nothing "special".

No, no they won't. They will have 15 years left in the resort at which point they will need to flip 100% of the resort. Disney is not putting more than the expected amount of money in to the resort.

Those "hard good" refreshes have been far more than a coat of paint. All new furnishings, etc.

Because VGF will be 28 years old and over half way through its lifespan on the contract. It won't be a lower quality room by any extent.

Nonsense. Don't care how old VGF becomes, absent massive renovations, OKW is an inferior room/resort/location.
If rooms at OKW had the same point chart as VGF, why would many people choose to stay at OKW instead of VGF????

To be very clear you don't need to rip down a full resort to redo it and vastly upgrade it. They will strip the inside completely and likely move walls but keep the base structure likely to the resort.

Notice what I suggested as a possibility -- Building on currently un-built land, and connecting it to the existing structure -- which may have walls moved to expand the sizes, etc. But yes, a total rip down might very well be an option. Takes 2-3 years to build anew.
The profit from selling a new and exciting property will vastly exceed the profit from simply re-selling a 50-year-old resort for another 50 years.

People are buying 22 year contracts for $200 BWV and $230 BCV currently on the direct side. That essentially is like paying $400+/point because of how short the contract is.

Let's unpack this. First, there are very few of these full priced direct sales. It's because of small supply that Disney can still offer a high direct price. There wouldn't be enough demand to sell thousands of contracts at those prices.
I assume you're adding the annual dues to the per point charge, for total price.
BCV is $225 per point new...7.81 in annual dues, so another 21 years... $389 per point. Meaning, they are paying about $17.50 per year per point, saving a few bucks off of just renting.

This does indeed show the massive potential demand for BCV. So wouldn't Disney want to MAXIMIZE this the next time they can sell it all new??
Beach Club Villas currently has about 3 million points.

Selling 3 million points at $250 per point would be really nice. It would generate $750 million in revenue for Disney!!
Now bad!!!
But imagine you did a major reconstruction--- more rooms, the ability to charge a much higher point chart -- So imagine they could instead sell 5 million points at $260 per point -- $1.4 BILLION in revenue!!

Hmm.... so renovation gets you to $750 million. Major rebuild gets you to $1.4 billion.

How much does it cost to built a new deluxe DVC property?
I can tell you it costs under $100 million...

So using these hypothetical (but realistic) numbers... A re-build can generate about $500 million more in profit than a simple renovation.

As long as Disney has the capital for investment, they will seek to maximize their returns. Again, I'm not going to predict the degree to which they choose to demolish, etc. But I expect we will get a lot more than a fresh coat of paint.

 

[havoc315]

Please quote the section of the contract that says this? I cannot find it. I find that the management company is responsible for maintenance and good order on the resort, but no where does it obligate them to refurbishment schedule.

Technically, it's part of the condo association bylaws, not part of the purchase contract. Of course, those bylaws can be amended, but that's subject to vote by the condo association.

My link was blocked... but you can google it simply enough. "Soft goods" every 7 years, hard goods every 14 years.

 

[sethschroeder]

Those "hard good" refreshes have been far more than a coat of paint. All new furnishings, etc.

Its a normal process with money specifically set aside out of MFs to cover the full cost. Disney is not paying out of pocket for the cost.

The way it was outlined it I was reading it as a resort wide re-do not just a normal facelift that they do.

Nonsense. Don't care how old VGF becomes, absent massive renovations, OKW is an inferior room/resort/location.
If rooms at OKW had the same point chart as VGF, why would many people choose to stay at OKW instead of VGF????

You won't get a room at VGF. People spend more on rooms all over the place. Why do people spend more to stay at SSR than BWV? Why doesn't everyone stay at AKV Value Rooms?

But imagine you did a major reconstruction--- more rooms, the ability to charge a much higher point chart -- So imagine they could instead sell 5 million points at $260 per point -- $1.4 BILLION in revenue!!

They don't need to level the resorts because they will have 3 resorts all expiring in 2042 (BWV, BCV, and VWL).

Guess how many rooms are at Riviera? 300

In 2042 you will have 950 rooms expiring across the 3 resorts (BCV 282, BWV 532, WVL 136). Lets also look at recent resorts built as well in: CCV 220, Poly 380, VGF 147, BLT 295. So they have the room to add sq/ft to rooms by reducing room counts if they really wanted and just selling for more.

They essentially built 3 large resorts of which 2 are completely stand alone in SSR (1260) and OKW (761). Then you have AKV which is split between (458) and (214) while the resort side has (972) so the 2 DVC portions make up a minority of the resort.

Again I don't see them building 2-3 huge towers and if they are not building a huge tower why level these resorts when they can use the current bones of the building, knock down all the walls, and speed up the flip.

We will see in 15 years how plans shape up but right now I see a great path for Disney to redo the resorts, not spend as much on the building construction, and still make a bunch of money. Maybe there is a substantial flaw in the building requiring it to be leveled though.

 

[havoc315]

Its a normal process with money specifically set aside out of MFs to cover the full cost. Disney is not paying out of pocket for the cost.

The way it was outlined it I was reading it as a resort wide re-do not just a normal facelift that they do.

Go read what I wrote -- I said I expected an entire "re-do" at BWV/BCV, but a more limited renovation at OKW. Something more than the normal hard goods refresh, something less than a complete re-do.

And it makes complete sense to start work in stages, sometime before 2057. Not saying they will go that route.. but it makes sense. It would be way to sell new contracts on a rolling basis. It's the year 2050 -- You can go to a prospective buyer and say, "we can give you a contract that lasts until the year 2100... right now, the western half of the resort has been renovated, after 2057, the entire eastern half will get a similar renovation." As opposed to, "it's 2050, if you buy now, your contract expires in 2057. At that point, we will do some renovations and start all over in 2058."

Basically... if you are just doing modest renovations, then it makes the most sense to do that on a rolling basis. The only reason to wait until 2057, would be if you did want to do a complete re-do from basically scratch.

You won't get a room at VGF. People spend more on rooms all over the place. Why do people spend more to stay at SSR than BWV? Why doesn't everyone stay at AKV Value Rooms?

Why doesn't everyone stay at AKV value rooms?? Because some people want nicer and bigger rooms! Plus, because they are extremely limited supply so you can only get them if AKV is your home resort!!

There are certainly some quirks and anomalies in the point charts... But overall, it's generally consistent that nicer rooms in nicer resorts in superior locations "cost" more than lower quality rooms, in lesser resorts, in inferior locations.
When people pay more, they rightfully expect to get more. Whether that be a better location, a better pool, a bigger room.

They don't need to level the resorts because they will have 3 resorts all expiring in 2042 (BWV, BCV, and VWL).

Guess how many rooms are at Riviera? 300

In 2042 you will have 950 rooms expiring across the 3 resorts (BCV 282, BWV 532, WVL 136). Lets also look at recent resorts built as well in: CCV 220, Poly 380, VGF 147, BLT 295. So they have the room to add sq/ft to rooms by reducing room counts if they really wanted and just selling for more.

??? They don't NEED to do anything. They can demolish the hotels and not replace them at all!! Or they could just give everyone free extensions of the contracts!!

But guess what --- They would make more money selling 1200 rooms at Epcot-resort DVC than the current 814 rooms of BCV and BWV.
It's all a question of demand -- If there is only enough demand for 814 rooms, then they would be foolish to expand and build more rooms.
But the continued strong pricing of BCV/BWV... the fact that those resorts book up quickly around Epcot festivals... It shows that there is plenty of demand. Demand for far more than 814 rooms. If there was enough demand for 3,000 rooms, then they should build 3,000.
You build, based on how you can expect to maximize your profit... which includes anticipation of the demand.

Notice, I haven't included Wilderness Lodge/Boulder Ridge in this discussion -- because it's an entirely different situation. There already is plenty of real estate there for DVC expansion -- which is exactly what they did with Copper Creek.
So, why did they build Copper Creek??? According to you, they shouldn't have built Copper Creek.. they should have just waited until 2042, and then re-sold Boulder Ridge.

Again I don't see them building 2-3 huge towers and if they are not building a huge tower why level these resorts when they can use the current bones of the building, knock down all the walls, and speed up the flip.

Again, I suggested that very scenario. But sometimes it's cheaper to demolish and start from scratch than to use "old bones." It depends on a lot of factors, including how they anticipate demand. If they anticipate that shiny new towers would be a lot more profitable than "old bones," then they will go that route.

But here is the thing, 2042 presents a "once in a century" opportunity for Disney. They have premium real estate that, at that point, they haven't been able to do anything with for 40+ years. Suddenly, it's all theirs again. This top quality, premium real estate, for the first time in 40+ years, they can do anything they want with it. I suspect they will want to do something BIG.

We will see in 15 years how plans shape up but right now I see a great path for Disney to redo the resorts, not spend as much on the building construction, and still make a bunch of money. Maybe there is a substantial flaw in the building requiring it to be leveled though.

I wouldn't phrase it at a "substantial flaw." Not every building is designed and built to last 100 years. Technologies and building codes change over time. Consumer preferences and expectations change over time. Whatever they build in 2042 will be expected to last until 2092.
If you own your house... and I told you that you're not allowed to make any major renovations right now. You're allowed to fix leaky sinks, you can repaint... but you're not allowed to build an expansion, you're not allowed to do any major renovations. And I told you that in 2042, you can have a single window to make changes -- And then you can't make any more changes for another 50 years. Wouldn't you be considering doing something big with your once-in-a-lifetime opportunity?

 

[RoseGold]

So now, you can't just increase the point chart while offering smaller and worse rooms. The whole reason that Riviera can offer a point chart similar to BLT, while being in a slightly inferior location, is because of vastly superior rooms.

I disagree that the parking lot of a moderate is a "slightly inferior" location.

The RIV grand villa has a 20% point premium over BLT. It's bigger, sure, but both are huge. I guess it's 10 years newer, but I would not agree this room is "vastly superior." Other than size and I guess the charging ports, I'm not sure what else could be considered superior at all.

I do agree this will be the trend going forward. Big resorts in mediocre locations with big rooms. Difference is, those resorts (SSR, OKW) used to be the cheaper charts. Now, the charts will continue to inflate with whatever selling point that resort has.

 

[havoc315]

I disagree that the parking lot of a moderate is a "slightly inferior" location.

The RIV grand villa has a 20% point premium over BLT. It's bigger, sure, but both are huge. I guess it's 10 years newer, but I would not agree this room is "vastly superior." Other than size and I guess the charging ports, I'm not sure what else could be considered superior at all.

To location.. many people prefer Skyliner to Epcot and DHS, with views of fireworks at both parks, over the BLT location.
I certainly think the BLT location is better, but each location has its fans.

But yes, the room quality is vastly superior.
Let's start with studios -- BLT only sleep 4, Riviera sleep 5. That alone is a huge difference.

Talk size -- Since you cited Grand Villas... BLT is big at 2044 sq, but Riviera is 2530 sq -- 20% bigger. That's a big difference.

And it's not a 20% point premium..

For tonight, November 17:

GV theme park view at BLT is 106 points.
Riviera doesn't have non-view Garden Villas... their preferred view GV is 108 points.

That's not anywhere close to a 20% premium -- It's less than a 2% premium. 2%, to get a room 20% bigger.

If you want to compare standard view to standard view... Can do that with 2 br:
2 br standard view at Riviera --43 points. SF - 1246 sf
2 br standard view at BLT -- 39 points. - 1152 sf

So 2 bedroom, standard view... there is a 10% premium for Riviera, but you get about 8% more space.

Now, there are certainly quirks in the point chart. You can find a particular room category that might be a particularly good/bad value within a resort.

But the trend is clear -- bigger nicer rooms, nicer resorts, and better locations, all factor in to higher point totals. Overall, the Riviera rooms go for about 2%-10% more than the BLT. You can certainly subjectively believe that BLT is a better "value," as you subjectively measure location and room quality.

But objective factors are clear -- Riviera rooms are bigger. In most categories, they are significantly bigger. And their point costs are generally just a tiny bit more than BLT. If BLT has Riviera quality rooms... then they would be using the GFV point chart!And that's really the more accurate comparison -- GFV vs Riviera.

I do agree this will be the trend going forward. Big resorts in mediocre locations with big rooms. Difference is, those resorts (SSR, OKW) used to be the cheaper charts. Now, the charts will continue to inflate with whatever selling point that resort has.

Locations will continue to factor into the price chart. "Bus only locations" without special add-ons like the AK savanna, will continue to be cheaper point charts. And of course, it's not just room size but also room quality. OKW and SSR have very big rooms, but they can't match the room quality of Riviera or Grand Floridian.

 

[RoseGold]

And it's not a 20% point premium..

For tonight, November 17:

GV theme park view at BLT is 106 points.
Riviera doesn't have non-view Garden Villas... their preferred view GV is 108 points.

For tonight, it's 88 vs 108 for the non-theme park view. RIV doesn't have a theme park view spitting distance of a park. That's a 23% difference. But RIV is sold out and BLT isn't, so someone must like that room!

 

[AvidDisReader]

Someone a while back on a different thread mentioned that a resort could fit inbetween Port Orleans Riverside and French Quarter. That a skyliner spur could be built to service all three resorts. Might lose some of Riverside on such a resort, but if they can redo the Carribean resort surely a redesign of the Port Orleans resort is not out of the question if they were so inclined.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

I guess it's 10 years newer, but I would not agree this room is "vastly superior."

And nothing stays brand new.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

Someone a while back on a different thread mentioned that a resort could fit inbetween Port Orleans Riverside and French Quarter. That a skyliner spur could be built to service all three resorts. Might lose some of Riverside on such a resort, but if they can redo the Carribean resort surely a redesign of the Port Orleans resort is not out of the question if they were so inclined.

I will continue to quietly believe that Riverside is going to be re-themed. Just renaming it from Dixie Landings worked for a bit, but times have changed and romanticizing plantations is definitely moving out of style.

 

[RoseGold]

I will continue to quietly believe that Riverside is going to be re-themed. Just renaming it from Dixie Landings worked for a bit, but times have changed and romanticizing plantations is definitely moving out of style.

Tiana's restaurant was slated for Reflections. She'll be in a rocking chair on the porch by the time that happens. But leaning into the New Orleans theme seems to work well enough.

My money's on Coronado 2, with the Latin princess they've been working on for a decade now and Lin Manuel Miranda may or may not produce eventually.

 

[Matty B13]

Might be an easy convert, but the YC is an important part of the profitable convention business. I don't think a DVC conversion is very high on the list of future options. Might not even be on the list at all.

Is convention business for Disney going to continue to be profitable post-covid? A lot of business are cutting back on business travel and plan to do so even after things calm down (at least from what I hear on CNBC)...... Maybe Disney might be rethinking the convention centers.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

Is convention business for Disney going to continue to be profitable post-covid? A lot of business are cutting back on business travel and plan to do so even after things calm down (at least from what I hear on CNBC)...... Maybe Disney might be rethinking the convention centers.

Convention business will return. If you believe we will return to full park capacity, DCL sailing, and normal restaurant ops...

Business travel is a different thing than a convention.

 

[Lorana]

That´s an interesting take... So maybe RIV would be a good investment in the (very) long term. 15-20 years from now having bought RIV at $145 would have been a steal. Never looked at it this way. Do you agree?

It's one of the reasons we decided to buy RIV, is looking at the long term. We were already buy FWs at CCV, and because the summer incentives stacked with RIV & CCV, we got an effective price per point of $148.34 for our RIV points. And that was direct! I'm kind of wishing now I had bought a few more points, but I think we'll be very happy with the cost we paid post-2042. (I mean, we're happy with it now, but we'll be even happier then)

 

[sethschroeder]

a more limited renovation at OKW.

And it makes complete sense to start work in stages, sometime before 2057.

Basically... if you are just doing modest renovations, then it makes the most sense to do that on a rolling basis. The only reason to wait until 2057, would be if you did want to do a complete re-do from basically scratch.

They legally are required to provide and upkeep the rooms and the resort for the current membership not some possible future membership. Taking down parts of the resort with the express desire for a future flip of the resort is crossing lines and potentially would draw eyes of a lawsuit.

This is the same resort on pace for a possible lawsuit in 2042 by original members who did not sign the quit claim.

Why doesn't everyone stay at AKV value rooms?? Because some people want nicer and bigger rooms!

Incorrect the AKV Value rooms are actually the quickest rooms to sell out on property (partly because its a small category).

Again, I suggested that very scenario. But sometimes it's cheaper to demolish and start from scratch than to use "old bones." It depends on a lot of factors, including how they anticipate demand. If they anticipate that shiny new towers would be a lot more profitable than "old bones," then they will go that route.

Which is fine but I can't project 22 years in advance that it is cheaper to build a full new resort. It is easier to go with the idea that gutting the resort would be more cost effective and a quicker project. At least until Disney releases some tangible information to the contrary about the age or infrastructure of BCV/BWV.

 

[sethschroeder]

Convention business will return. If you believe we will return to full park capacity, DCL sailing, and normal restaurant ops...

Business travel is a different thing than a convention.

This next 2 years will be a good measure of what happens. I think many companies will find that these conventions and kickoffs are wasteful and others find that they help their organization.

I could also see for some companies they opt to go more local with their company convention/kickoff and invest the money saved in to other incentives or events.

Flip side with more companies going to remote work they might choose to actually hold bigger conventions or kickoffs thus moving from some random hotel to Disney with family invited as a 4-5 day event turns in to a 7-8 day event with more team building and "fun" activities.

Who knows be interesting to see. I know those of us wanting a more remote society have the best chance possible to speed up the shift in society.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

This next 2 years will be a good measure of what happens. I think many companies will find that these conventions and kickoffs are wasteful and others find that they help their organization.

I could also see for some companies they opt to go more local with their company convention/kickoff and invest the money saved in to other incentives or events.

Flip side with more companies going to remote work they might choose to actually hold bigger conventions or kickoffs thus moving from some random hotel to Disney with family invited as a 4-5 day event turns in to a 7-8 day event with more team building and "fun" activities.

Who knows be interesting to see. I know those of us wanting a more remote society have the best chance possible to speed up the shift in society.

YC host a lot of smaller CME events and CSR events. I especially do not see those going away. The hands on requirements for ongoing licensure won't go away in either industry, even if states are being a little generous right now.

 

[havoc315]

They legally are required to provide and upkeep the rooms and the resort for the current membership not some possible future membership. Taking down parts of the resort with the express desire for a future flip of the resort is crossing lines and potentially would draw eyes of a lawsuit.

This is the same resort on pace for a possible lawsuit in 2042 by original members who did not sign the quit claim.

There very well may be contract issues, but Disney already rents out unused units to cash guests... units get taken out of service for their scheduled refurbishments. So there is no guarantee of every room being available 365 days per year.

There are very few 2057 contracts.. most of the contracts will expire in 2042. So is DVD/DVC really required to leave the resort 80% vacant for 15 years? (or whatever the percentage would be). I admit I don't know the answer. But the repercussions could be horrendous for OKW owners. If the resort is suddenly only 20% sold, and Disney can't offer new long term contracts (only contracts expiring in 2057), then most of the resort will remain unsold. But if 100% of the rooms remain allocated for those 20% of owners (or whatever the percentage is), it would potentially cause annual dues to skyrocket. If 100% of the resort has to stay open and maintained, but only 20% of the guests are paying annual dues, you could see annual dues skyrocketing to $50+ per point.

Of course, I suspect DVD/DVC can indeed pull out unused inventory. But I admit there may be other contract ramifications.

Incorrect the AKV Value rooms are actually the quickest rooms to sell out on property (partly because its a small category).

I've totally lost track of what point you're trying to make?!?? How am I incorrect??
I said not EVERYBODY wants to stay in AKV value -- I cited as one of the reasons, because they sell out super quickly because the demand is greater than the limited supply??
So what was I incorrect about?!?! You think every single DVC guest would prefer to book AKV value? You think parties of 12 would prefer to squeeze into a AKV value?!??
Please, what did I say that was incorrect? I was incorrect when I said that different people prefer different room types, sizes, locations, etc? I was incorrect when I said that AKV value rooms book up super quickly, so it's really only an option if it's your home resort? I really don't get what point you're trying to make, nor do I understand what you're saying was incorrect.

Which is fine but I can't project 22 years in advance that it is cheaper to build a full new resort. It is easier to go with the idea that gutting the resort would be more cost effective and a quicker project. At least until Disney releases some tangible information to the contrary about the age or infrastructure of BCV/BWV.

It depends on lots of factors. Depends on the degree of the rebuild, depends on the existing structure, etc. As we move to "greener" construction particularly, older buildings may not pass muster. Further, when you get to the point where you want to blow out all the internal walls to change the layout... you want to modernize all the electric, all the plumbing, all the appliances, all the flooring.... you get to the point where you're just keeping the old frame and the concrete poured foundation. At that point, it's cheaper to just start fresh, keeping nothing more than the concrete foundation, then being forced to make the project work within the existing frame.

Imagine it like this... you have an old suit from when you were 14 years old. You find it in the closet. You're now 40 years older. You're taller, you're double the weight. You can take the suit to the tailor... they will have to rip it apart, add more fabric, re-stitch it all... by the time they are done, all that is left is part of the lapels and the buttons. Would have been much cheaper to just buy a new suit.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

More than 20% of OKW is 2057 at this point.

Disney will own the other points at OKW and can rent those units cash. They cannot tear down buildings willy nilly that have contracts associated to units therein.

It's one of the big issues at OKW.