BW-YC Transportation Budget QUESTIONS UPDATE 1/14/04

[PKS44]

For those who have been following the saga of Crescent LakeGate -the questions regarding budgetary differences between the YC BC BCV and the BWI BWV resorts- I have more but still not all the answers...and some of you (BCV owners) are not going to be happy with what I have learned so far.

First of all-
I have been praised by the GM and the finance guys for picking up what is indeed an error in what they have been doing. Since the BCV opened it has not been charged at all for use of the boats ---apparently future budgets will definitely reflect this glitch (BCV dues will go up-sorry)

In short --
when we back calculate the budgets with BCV being 19% of the YC/BC/BCV family we came to a total transport charge for those resorts of a bit over $1.2MM--while BW side is calculated at $1.6MM--but that is apparently not the case... they never calculated BCV having to also pay any for use of the boats, only the buses....so in fact they are supposedly charging YCBCBCV $1.6MM but the cost of the boats is the difference between $1.6MM and $1.2MM so as originally claimed the BWV and YC families of resorts are charged equally but the YC/BC has been picking up more than its share of the boat tab. with BCV not paying any of the boat budget. This would go along with the original claim that the BCV was being underwritten by the YC and BC.

IF true--and I have no access to any numbers to confirm or dispute this claim, this still does not address the other issue which is the use of two different models for assigning these costs.
When the BWV is assigned a cost it is determined to be using 58% of the transportation on the BW side of the Lake..this is using a model that assumes that 58% of the guests are in the BWV and 42 % are in the BWI--
They use the same method for the BCV. It is 19% of the hotel room units on the North side of Crescent Lake...seems fair--more guests, pay more surely they should not divide it up by number of stops (one at YC one at BC so 50% YC 50 % BCV and BC)--
THis all seems fair and appropriate.

But when they split up the costs between YC side and BW side they are not using a number of guests model or number of units model--in fact the number of guests on the YC side is more than 1.6 x the number of guests on the BW side.
(TroyWDW elegantly demonstrated this by his calculations: they are considering the BW as about 900 total "hotel room units"-and the YC BC BCV is about 1497 units--he solved the equation by using the number of known hotel rooms in either the YC and BC and in the BWI and used those as single "units" and then shows that each villa is considered on average about 1.35 times the size of the hotel room side units. It comes out the same at each resort hotel room/villa comparison suggesting he is right on with his calculations)
So even if the two sides are being charged the same it is not a consistent way to split the costs using one model in one instance and a different model in the other....they are indeed looking into this and again I suspect the BW owners have been in a way subsidizing the YC/BC for years (and now BCV guests ) by picking up more than their fair share of the costs...and it is agreed that the BWV and BWI guests should definitely not be asked to pay for any extra transporting of other WDW resort guests to the BW entertainment venues-that makes no sense -

Again the fairest model would be to split costs between resorts the same as they currently do between the hotel and villas--according to the number of guests staying at the resort--I would think they can spread any extra cost of transporting non Crescent Lake guests to and from the BW over the rest of WDW equally...or to the venues doing the business..to stick the BWV guests with 58% of that cost again is not using the same model...it assumes that the extra BW traffic makes the BW use the transportation the same as the YC side so 1497 guest like use or an added 597 guest like users--well the BWV are not 58% of 1497 they are 35%--again they need to be more consistent and not mix models...

Also in general this has made them more aware of the deficiency in the way BW is served by transportation by being charged equally but the buses fillling up at the other stops first leaving less room for the BW guests...they are looking into addressing this issue as well.

I expect more information as they try to figure out how they are going to address things...but there will be changes. And while BCV owners may not be happy, I am told DVC management is happy that I brought this to their attention.

Paul

 

[Nink]

So, Paul:

It sounds like you are assuming that the only people using the boat system at the ones staying at the BCV/BC, BWI/BWV, and YC. Where are the costs being paid for those using the boats from the Dolphin/Swan and those that are staying at other resorts yet using the boat system to get them from EPCOT to MGM.

If your issue here was to make them aware of the bus problems, I think another route could have been managed.

Thanks alot,
BCV Owner

 

[RobDoc]

Thanks for doing the followup on that Paul.

It's a bit incredible that this accounting glitch has gone unnoticed by the resorts and WDW Transportation for so long. It will be interesting to see what remedy is applied to BCV and BWV dues in the coming years ... and to see what remedy will be applied to the BWV bus situation (and that should be addressed immediately- no need to wait for a new budget to come out!).

Good report!

 

[PKS44]

Originally posted by Nink
So, Paul:

It sounds like you are assuming that the only people using the boat system at the ones staying at the BCV/BC, BWI/BWV, and YC. Where are the costs being paid for those using the boats from the Dolphin/Swan and those that are staying at other resorts yet using the boat system to get them from EPCOT to MGM.

If your issue here was to make them aware of the bus problems, I think another route could have been managed.

Thanks alot,
BCV Owner

Nink-

I am not assuming anything at all about the Swan and Dolphin or about other users of the transport--they are charged by some model unknown to me and irrelevant to the discussion. This all has to do with how they divide up the costs. And I discovered they have been doing it unfairly. I realize that you as a BCV owner,realizing that you might have to pay more is upsetting, but what is fair is fair and WDW has not been doing things fairly. I am sure you are for fairness.

(Edited to add the following):
The added cost of the boats, by the way, should come to less than a 0.03 a point...

Paul

 

[BWVDee]

I am impressed, good work Paul! Thanks for taking the time to research this. I am also impressed in how quickly Disney responded to your questions and appears to be working on a solution! Maybe our BWV dues will go down! Hmmmm......... time for an add on, LOL!!
Please continue to keep us updated on any future news.

 

[pat-rick]

Since it is closer to walk to EPCOT from the Beach Club rather than walk to the boat launch should the Beach Club / Villas only participate in the cost for use to and from MGM ? That at least should keep the cost equal to what it is now if not lower.

Just my opinion.

 

[zulaya]

I guess maybe the BCV owners should be up in arms now that they are being charged for Epcot transportation that they probably won't use (ie boats). They should be hitting up the GM to make sure they are getting fairly treated dues-wise as well, being BCV is a smaller resort.

Kudos to you for saving yourself some money. Sympathies to BCV folks who will get stuck with more dues that was none of their doing.

 

[DemoBri1]

Originally posted by pat-rick
Since it is closer to walk to EPCOT from the Beach Club rather than walk to the boat launch should the Beach Club / Villas only participate in the cost for use to and from MGM ? That at least should keep the cost equal to what it is now if not lower.

Just my opinion.

Even though I am a BCV owner, I'd have to disagree with this statement. It is just as easy for the BWV people to walk to Epcot, as it is for BCV people, so that's awash.

Now, my response to Paul. I understand where you're coming from with the amount of guests between the one side of the lake and the other side of the lake being so disproportionate. However, there is a disproportionate difference in the size of BWV to BCV. I believe the count was 383 rooms to 205?? Please correct me if I am wrong. How do we determine how much BWI, YC, and BC are paying into the transportation system? I find it hard to believe that BCV has been open 1.5 years and no one saw this.

I guess if we're talking fairness here then this is how everything should be broken down:

- Take all the guest rooms for the Disney properties around Crescent Lake and add them all together.

- Then take each individual resort and take the number of rooms in that resort. Divide by the total number of rooms and get a %.

- Determine what the total Transportation cost budget is for the resorts and then each resort should be assigned their % of the cost.

This may raise the BCV dues, but this is the most fair way to go about it, don't you think?

Does anybody have the maintenance fees for BWV and BCV currently?

 

[DebbieB]

BCV-$4.17
VWL-$4.22
BWV-$4.25

BWV has always had higher dues than VWL and BCV but I've noticed the gap is narrowing. When VWL opened in 2000, VWL was $3.62 vs $3.94 BWV. When BCV opened in 2002, BCV was $3.77 vs $3.92 BWV.

 

[RobDoc]

Originally posted by zulaya
I guess maybe the BCV owners should be up in arms now that they are being charged for Epcot transportation that they probably won't use (ie boats). They should be hitting up the GM to make sure they are getting fairly treated dues-wise as well, being BCV is a smaller resort.

IMO, the transportation costs should be based on the cost of maintaining/staffing the boats and docks needed for each stop. (Yes, I feel the Parks should share in that cost also). It effectively costs no more for 100 guests to ride the boat from the BC/YC/BCV dock than 2 guests to ride ( and the same goes for BWV/BWI and S\D)- so any additional guests going from Epcot to MGM, BW or one of the restaurants at the BC/YC/S/D don't affect the cost of providing the service to any great extent.

As for the buses, I agree that the BWV/BWI has been shortchanged at times since the buses can be filled by the other 3 stops before arriving at the BW stop and something needs to change to correct that situation. The same cost sharing as mentioned for the boats still applies- the transportation cost, IMO, should be to maintain the stops and maintain and staff the buses. Each resort should have to pay it's portion of those costs. Again, as with the boats, the buses will stop at each resort regardless how many guests will use the service and there is minimal additional cost for 20 to ride as 2.

As for the suggestion that a resort should pay less for any transportation service because some guests choose to walk (or drive) shouldn't change the financial dynamics unless that resort also cuts back on it's transportation service accordingly- reducing the number of buses/boats stopping at the resort. (The same principle applies at OKW - where many choose to drive to parks instead of taking the bus and some choose to take the boat to DD - and some choose to walk to DD.)

Using this process, BCV owners would still pay less for the boats and buses than BWV owners since there are more rooms to split the fixed cost of the shared services. From Paul's report above, it sounds as though BCV owners haven't shared in any of the boat costs thus far and BWV owners have been shortchanged with filled buses stopping at that stop.

.02

 

[PamOKW]

It's good to know that Disney was so open in discussing this with you -- even to the point of admitting an error on their part and acknowledging that they should look into the bus problem. Congratulations Paul on seeing this through.

 

[gazeborob]

If we take Doc’s theory that cost of the boats should be per stop, that doesn’t mean at all that the BWV have been supporting the BCV part of the transportation cost at all. It just means that the BC/YC were paying the bill. And this I find this very hard to believe. What I would love to know is what the Swan and Dolphin are paying. I think that they should be paying a bigger portion of the bill since they are not Disney owned hotels.

Rob
BCV Owner

 

[TroyWDW]

Paul,

Good job! Looks like our calculations were right on the mark. I'm glad to see DVCMC was willing to admit the error. Sounds like they are still reviewing the data to determine the fairness issue.

Just a quick recap on some important data. I've estimated the number of equivalent hotel rooms for each of the resorts at Crescent Lake.

         Rooms (equivalent hotel rooms)
BWV       522
BWI       378
Total     900

BCV       284
YC        630
BC        583
Total    1497

Swan      758
Dolphin  1509
Total    2267

Note: The number of Rooms for BWV & BCV does NOT equal the number of Units. 
I've adjusted the number of Units appropriately so that we can 
compare apples-to-apples.The adjustment is based on DVCMC data.

DVCMC has indicated that currently, the transportation costs (bus & boat) are split equally amongst the three different complexes. So each complex pays 1/3 of the total cost.
1/3 - Swan & Dolphin (2267 total equivalent hotel rooms)
1/3 - YC & BC & BCV (1497 total equivalent hotel rooms)
1/3 - BWV & BWI (900 total equivalent hotel rooms)

(Then DVCMC splits the costs within each resort complex based upon utilization factors)

Do you think each resort complex is fairly sharing the costs of the transportation? The Swan & Dolphin complex is 2.5 times larger than the BWV & BWI complex, yet they pay the same total transportation cost. It appears that the Swan & Dolphin is getting a sweetheart deal.

For example, a quick rough estimate suggests that there may be 1,500,000 guests from the Swan & Dolphin each year. The BWV & BWI would have 600,000 for the year (2.5 x 600,000 = 1,500,000). I struggle to believe that 900,000 additional guests from S&D have no impact on the costs of the transportation system and that the system can absorb this as part of the fixed costs. Decrease the S&D number by 30%, it's still a huge difference.


The Swan & Dolphin have 49% of the rooms around Crescent Lake. The other 51% is YC & BC & BCV & BWV & BWI.

Maybe Disney should negotiate a Swan & Dolphin pays half and Disney pays half. Then Disney could distribute the Disney half into each of the resorts based upon utilization. Everybody would see a decrease in dues!

Time to renegotiate...

Troy

 

[Johnnie Fedora]

These "shared" types of services are a good example of how DVC is a great asset to the Disney maintenance and operations budget. Fees are based on the number of rooms, and probably not actual member usage. One thing that is great about HH, OKW, VB, and SSR...members only pay for the services used by their DVC resorts, and not for those of the adjacent hotels.

 

[Dean]

IMO, there are two reasonable models for calculating the difference. One could group the YC/BC into one and take the number of busses that run and other expenses. Then use the same calculations for the BW then divide by the average number of guests at each resort. Do the same for the boats. Or you could do the YC/BC separately for the buses and group them for the boats. I suspect it's easier for Disney to just assume the same fixed costs for each resort and then divide by the rooms/number of guests. It will be interesting to see what happens.

 

[lenshanem]

I have to agree with others on here that BCV guests probably don't use the boat system anywhere near as often as BWV guests. I know when I stayed at BCV I never used the boat to go to Epcot, I always walked. It also has to be taken into account the amount of people that use the boat system to go to the BW complex, but are staying elsewhere. Is any of the revenue from that entertainment complex going towards transportation? I think I would have been inquiring about that more than trying to push for a higher due for your neighbor DVCers.
I wonder how many of us BCV owners would gladly drop the boat transportation to Epcot? It is farther to walk to the boat than to just walk to Epcot. Probably one of the reasons YC/BC was paying the bill as their guests would be more likely to use it.

I don't see how any of this helped the BWV bus concerns cause?!? Seems more like you trying to save yourself a little money, while pushing for others to make up the difference for a boat they probably don't even use.

Like others have said, thanks alot! (Note extreme sarcasm.)

 

[Terry S]

I agree with you Shan! They can just eliminate the boat stop at Epcot for the YC/BC/BCV for all I care. As anyone who has stayed at BCV's knows, it takes less time to walk to Epcot than it does to walk to the Boat Dock from BCV. Has anyone on this board actually ever walked to the boat dock from BCV's to go to Epcot?

 

[Crissup]

Originally posted by Terry S
They can just eliminate the boat stop at Epcot for the YC/BC/BCV for all I care.

Ever since they changed the boat service so that the boats run from Epcot to MGM and back to Epcot, hitting each resort on the way, there is no longer any real distinction between the Epcot boat vs the MGM boat. So, the issue becomes whether you would like to eliminate boat service completely, or not. Since the BCV is only a small part of the Y&BC complex, I don't think BCV would be able to make a valid argument to eliminate boat service even if they wanted to.

Personally, I agree with the concept that each hotel, including Swan/Dolphin, should pay a proportionate amount based on the number of hotel rooms in that resort.

 

[PamOKW]

Every member pays for things that they don't use. Heck, you can shut down the children's programs and I wouldn't notice. Other members have never set foot on a bus. It's give and take. Even if they eliminated the Epcot boat from the BWV budget, I assume you'd still like to have boat access to MGM? The cost of maintaining the dock would have to be taken care of somehow. It sounds as if the difference is not going to be a substantial hardship on BCV owners but it will be a more equitable sharing of costs. Who knows -- maybe they will renegotiate S&D as part of this and you'll end up paying less.

 

[SimbaCub]

I don't own at either BCV or BWV but understand the dilemma. I don't think they should be charged 1/3 of the total costs for transportation if Swan/Dolphin have almost 1/2 of the rooms on the lake. That is not fair at all. Sounds to me like some "lazy" math where someone didn't want to take the time to divide the costs fairly. It's not that difficult to do but it does take some effort to do so correctly. This is a good time for DVC to take a long look at their accounting department. I think the people who caught this should be praised even if it means dues going up/down for other DVC owners. What's right is right and in the end that is all that matters.

SimbaCub