CCV now $210/Point Direct

[deerh]

Disney’s own timeshare policy changes allowing studios, built for four, to sleep five suggests otherwise.

Not at CCV it doesn't. They only sleep 4..Also, you cut off my original post-With a 1BR, you get Washer/Dryer/Kitchen/etc. Would not want 5 in a studio for a week with no washer/dryer/kitchen. Too Crowded for me..Again just my .02 worth......

 

[jarestel]

Again, I highly doubt that. After all, Disney is a "Family" place to take families, and a studio won't cut it. Too small, and no washer/dryer/etc. I still think the whole "panic as there are very few studios' available" is a Small sample...YES-In SOME instances, but a lot of people buy for 1BR/2BR, etc. Even us, as old DVC folk (20 years owning) don't like studios anymore and we are empty nesters... Just my .02......

Disney is indeed a "family" place, but the regular Disney hotels are full of families sharing a single room because $$$ is more of a determining factor than comfort in many cases. Sure, in a perfect world I imagine everyone would prefer the larger rooms over the studios. My point was that with the high cost of direct points, more people are buying smaller contracts where the option of a 1-BR is probably out of the question. So that creates even more competition for studio bookings as folks try to s-t-r-e-t-c-h their points. I'm not arguing your point that 1-BRs are more comfortable, just that they may not be affordable for many.

 

[Bing Showei]

Not at CCV it doesn't. They only sleep 4..Also, you cut off my original post-With a 1BR, you get Washer/Dryer/Kitchen/etc. Would not want 5 in a studio for a week with no washer/dryer/kitchen. Too Crowded for me..Again just my .02 worth......

Oh I agree. I personally wouldn’t stay in a studio for more than 2 people, or a 1BR for more than 3 people.

But Disney learned they could move more contracts by changing the occupancy to allow 5 in a studio. They did it agin with Riviera. I was just speaking to jarestel's point that Disney will continue to move small contracts against those larger accommodations further stressing the system. And management will be tasked with addressing it once it's sold out. This is already an apparent problem at CCV and they technically haven't "sold out" that resort yet.

 

[jerseyduke]

Now that CCV is $210 direct purchase, does that mean current owners price to sell just went WAY up?
If you bought at the beginning-$176/point I think, did the resale go up?, and if so how much do you think it would.

Just wondering..........

DeerH

Maybe? It is only one factor.
Look at VGF and Poly.
VGF started selling at 150 per point and resale is above that.
Poly started in the 170s and is now below 150 resale.
Both were jacked up as far as direct purchase price.

You can get studios at the poly at 7 months at times since there is what, 360 of them? VGF has (at most) 47 - you are not getting one at 7 months in all liklihood

Supply and demand play a big role, as does the question as to how important is the home booking window. Probably other factors too.

CCV could go up since apparently the studios are so hard to get

 

[Just People]

Ugh, I feel like DVC's new tactic of building bungelows is leaning towards shady business practice seeing how so many of the overall resort points are based on the bungelow requirement.

 

[MilesMouse]

Ugh, I feel like DVC's new tactic of building bungelows is leaning towards shady business practice seeing how so many of the overall resort points are based on the bungelow requirement.

I don’t know if I’d throw words like “shady” out quite yet. I think Disney is doing a really good job of casting a wider net than ever before at getting all types of people interested in coming back multiple times versus every few years. New lands, alcohol, appealing to foodies, economy isn’t too bad, and the list goes on. I don’t have evidence on this, just feels that way to me.

 

[Bing Showei]

Supply and demand play a big role, as does the question as to how important is the home booking window. Probably other factors too.

CCV could go up since apparently the studios are so hard to get

The problem is studios are hard to get at 11 months at CCV. It's not that non-owners want to be able to get in before 7-months so they'll buy there to resolve that challenge (as it is with VGF), it's that owners are having issues getting in at 10-months year-round, and at 11-months plus 1 minute many times of the year.

 

[skier_pete]

Ugh, I feel like DVC's new tactic of building bungelows is leaning towards shady business practice seeing how so many of the overall resort points are based on the bungelow requirement.

I don’t know if I’d throw words like “shady” out quite yet. I think Disney is doing a really good job of casting a wider net than ever before at getting all types of people interested in coming back multiple times versus every few years. New lands, alcohol, appealing to foodies, economy isn’t too bad, and the list goes on. I don’t have evidence on this, just feels that way to me.

Nope it's shady. They are building those bungalows/cabins to generate points at a new resort to sell. Then the cabins remain empty half the time for breakage and meanwhile owners (at CCV) can't get into a studio at 11 months because demand is so high from all the people that bought there with no intention of staying in cabins. The problem isn't as drastic at the Poly because 80% of the site points are in studios and 20 % are in cabins, so enough of the 80% go elsewhere on property to prevent an issue. But here's the breakdown at CCV:

65 Studios	11%​
68 One Bedroom Villas	24%​
60 Two Bedroom Villas	27%​
6 Grand Villas	7%​
26 Cabins	31%​

So 38% of all points sold there are for GV and Cabins, while only 11% of points sold are in studios. What % of owners at CCV do you think WANT those to categories? (Hint - it's not 11% and 38%.)

I also have to point out that the DAY the point distribution was announced I pointed out in the CCV thread that there was going to be a major problem with studios at this resort. And if I can tell this in 30 minutes of work - DISNEY sure as hell knew this was going to be a problem. But did they care - no they did not. And so I agree it's "Shady". Disney looked at the almighty buck and didn't worry that a large percentage of their owners were going to be unsatisfied with their purchase.

 

[jerseyduke]

The problem is studios are hard to get at 11 months at CCV. It's not that non-owners want to be able to get in before 7-months so they'll buy there to resolve that challenge (as it is with VGF), it's that owners are having issues getting in at 10-months year-round, and at 11-months plus 1 minute many times of the year.

I am sure the cabins do not help at CCV.
I only know Poly numbers, but using that as an example:
4 million points in the Poly
1 million of them are for the cabins.
How many of those 1 million do you think were bought with the intent on using at the bungalows? If its like 300,000 that means there is 3.7 million points competing from 3 mil worth of rooms. And this is all home resort. At the poly it gets mitigated by the huge number of studios.

At CCV, it probably gets crushed because there are so fewer studios.

Maybe ppl get frustrated by this and there is a gluttony of resale and the price tanks. Maybe people think they have to get CCV points, and the price spikes. Remains to be seen

But these lake front cabins and bungalows are reeking havoc. And it is risk free development for Disney. With the current system, they are guaranteed to sell them, no matter if they ever get used. I guarantee that if Disney were required to sell the Bora Bora Bungalows separately from the rest of the Poly, where ppl were buying "Bora Bora home resort points" Disney would have built at most 5. Not 20. (Please not that I am making no statement as to whether Dis should have been required to sell them as a distinct resort, just IF they had been)

At this point in time, I am very interested in Reflections. Obviously I have to wait and see how that develops. But if I do, and I am thinking studio at that time, since it also has lakefront cabins in the plans, I can say with almost absolute certainty I will buy a fixed week.

 

[aoconnor]

​

So 38% of all points sold there are for GV and Cabins, while only 11% of points sold are in studios. What % of owners at CCV do you think WANT those to categories? (Hint - it's not 11% and 38%.)

Wow- that 38% figure is pretty shocking.

 

[jerseyduke]

Funny I was typing as Skier Pete was posting similar thoughts.

11 percent of points for studios and 27 for 2 bed rooms. Thats 38% of the points for the room categories that probably make up 80% of the demand.

Take a look at Skier Pets numbers for CCV
65 studios
and 32 GVs and Cabins (I lump them together because of similar point values)

That is a 2 to 1 ratio

Grand Floridian
6 GV
(up to) 47 studios
6 to 1

 

[we"reofftoneverland]

I am sure the cabins do not help at CCV.
I only know Poly numbers, but using that as an example:
4 million points in the Poly
1 million of them are for the cabins.
How many of those 1 million do you think were bought with the intent on using at the bungalows? If its like 300,000 that means there is 3.7 million points competing from 3 mil worth of rooms. And this is all home resort. At the poly it gets mitigated by the huge number of studios.

At CCV, it probably gets crushed because there are so fewer studios.

Maybe ppl get frustrated by this and there is a gluttony of resale and the price tanks. Maybe people think they have to get CCV points, and the price spikes. Remains to be seen

But these lake front cabins and bungalows are reeking havoc. And it is risk free development for Disney. With the current system, they are guaranteed to sell them, no matter if they ever get used. I guarantee that if Disney were required to sell the Bora Bora Bungalows separately from the rest of the Poly, where ppl were buying "Bora Bora home resort points" Disney would have built at most 5. Not 20. (Please not that I am making no statement as to whether Dis should have been required to sell them as a distinct resort, just IF they had been)

At this point in time, I am very interested in Reflections. Obviously I have to wait and see how that develops. But if I do, and I am thinking studio at that time, since it also has lakefront cabins in the plans, I can say with almost absolute certainty I will buy a fixed week.

Nope it's shady. They are building those bungalows/cabins to generate points at a new resort to sell. Then the cabins remain empty half the time for breakage and meanwhile owners (at CCV) can't get into a studio at 11 months because demand is so high from all the people that bought there with no intention of staying in cabins. The problem isn't as drastic at the Poly because 80% of the site points are in studios and 20 % are in cabins, so enough of the 80% go elsewhere on property to prevent an issue. But here's the breakdown at CCV:

65 Studios	11%​
68 One Bedroom Villas	24%​
60 Two Bedroom Villas	27%​
6 Grand Villas	7%​
26 Cabins	31%​

So 38% of all points sold there are for GV and Cabins, while only 11% of points sold are in studios. What % of owners at CCV do you think WANT those to categories? (Hint - it's not 11% and 38%.)

I also have to point out that the DAY the point distribution was announced I pointed out in the CCV thread that there was going to be a major problem with studios at this resort. And if I can tell this in 30 minutes of work - DISNEY sure as hell knew this was going to be a problem. But did they care - no they did not. And so I agree it's "Shady". Disney looked at the almighty buck and didn't worry that a large percentage of their owners were going to be unsatisfied with their purchase.

Wow these numbers are incredible. I had no idea such a high percentage of points were sold on the cabins and bungalows. That is really mind blowing. No wonder it is so hard to book at those resorts. I also vote shady.

 

[MilesMouse]

@skier_pete yes, I agree with what you say and I'm not arguing the math. Numbers like that don't lie. But, to a certain degree if people can point out the issues then some responsibility has to lie with the consumer.

If I'm going to call something shady, it's disney allowing minimal contracts like 75 or 100, even up to 150 to be sold. I think that's bad business because a lot of people won't do their homework and will be blinded by the awe of being able to buy into DVC. Maybe you're convincing me it's overall shady the more I type this out.

I'm with jerseyduke, all cabins and bungalows should be their own "resorts." But I get it, grouping them into the larger home resort allows for outrageous point allotments.

 

[jerseyduke]

Wow these numbers are incredible. I had no idea such a high percentage of points were sold on the cabins and bungalows. That is really mind blowing. No wonder it is so hard to book at those resorts. I also vote shady.

It is brilliant business. Totally Legal. Very Shady.

Breakage is a golden goose for DVC and those bungalows just sow it.

Poly and CCV members pay for the upkeep of them, and disney probably rents them out for cash a lot. They sold them to ppl, get those ppl to pay for them, then rent them out when those ppl don't use them!

It is abusing the system.

Disney has to guess as to room allocation between studios, 1 and 2 bed rooms, GVs. I honestly think, up until the Poly, Disney did try to do they best they could with that. Or at least, a fair job.

I would be willing to bet they talked about how this would be a cash cow for them when they started planning the poly, and very well knew what they were doing.

 

[jerseyduke]

I'm with jerseyduke, all cabins and bungalows should be their own "resorts." But I get it, grouping them into the larger home resort allows for outrageous point allotments.

I did refrain from making that assertion (did not want to spark up that argument), however, I would bet my DVC points, that had Disney HAD to sell the Bora Bora bungalows as their own entity, there would not be anywhere near 20 of them.

 

[ScubaCat]

I would be willing to bet they talked about how this would be a cash cow for them when they started planning the poly, and very well knew what they were doing.

Absolutely. Consider the outrageous, grotesque robbery of BLT owners who booked for TOTWL lounge on the 4th (see that thread for more info on that). That's nothing anyone with any sort of consideration or decency would ever invoke if they cared even one tiny bit about the customer base. The same goes with these cabins and bungalows. The points required to book them compared to the regular villas is obscene and reveals the gimmick as clear as day. Very few owners buy that many points, and even those that do generally don't buy them to blow the whole annual allotment on just one stay in one cabin.

Remember, all they care about is selling the property, not that you can actually book anything. Even the "welcome home booking" is solely to give the false impression that you'll be able to get what you want any time. So you just signed a 10 year loan plus dues and can't get a studio at your home resort? Sucks for you. DVC has been a good value for Disney fans over the years, and still is in many cases, but always understand that the current management cares only about cashing in at every possible turn, and they'll do just about anything humanly possible to do so. It's JUST a timeshare that happens to be adjacent to the world's most popular theme parks. At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if someday they started referring people to TitleMax to finance DVC. It's really not that far off from where they're headed now.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if someday they started referring people to TitleMax to finance DVC. It's really not that far off from where they're headed now.

Nah - they make far too much money off of financing themselves. Probably how they build the next resort. And if people give up the contracts? Then they get to resell them again, probably for more money.

 

[skier_pete]

@skier_pete yes, I agree with what you say and I'm not arguing the math. Numbers like that don't lie. But, to a certain degree if people can point out the issues then some responsibility has to lie with the consumer.

If I'm going to call something shady, it's disney allowing minimal contracts like 75 or 100, even up to 150 to be sold. I think that's bad business because a lot of people won't do their homework and will be blinded by the awe of being able to buy into DVC. Maybe you're convincing me it's overall shady the more I type this out.

I'm with jerseyduke, all cabins and bungalows should be their own "resorts." But I get it, grouping them into the larger home resort allows for outrageous point allotments.

Agree to disagree. Putting 38% of the points in GV/Cabins and then NOT pointing this out to the consumer is shady. They clearly know this resort will have a studio problem (and possibly a 1-bedroom problem too). To sell to a bunch of members that many of which are going to be very upset they can't stay at their home resort is while not illegal it is irresponsible.

They clearly should have to statistics to KNOW what the demand for various room size are and build to that demand. Poly is 80% studios yet somehow those studios still fill up very, very quickly, much faster than most resorts 1-bedroom do. They should be building at LEAST 25% studios at every resort, and probably more like 30 - 40% to really make happy members, I will give them that at Riviera they at least went back to a more reasonable number versus most of their recent resorts, with having some stand alone studios. I think it's still only roughly 20-25% but a lot better.

 

[anomamatt]

Then the cabins remain empty half the time for breakage and meanwhile owners (at CCV) can't get into a studio at 11 months because demand is so high from all the people that bought there with no intention of staying in cabins.

I won't claim the cabins and bungalows are close to being good for the overall membership (despite how much I love staying in them). However, if you look at October through December of this year, there are only 18 days which have ANY availability for a cabin. I realize this is peak season, but that is very high occupancy (~70 days with 100% occupancy).

 

[zavandor]

Playing devil's advocate: when the Poly project was approved, DVD might have thought that the bungalow would be a new successful option for more affluent members. When CCV project was approved, only a small percentage of the Poly was already sold out, so they can say they didn't have enough data to say that the bungalows were a failure. And to be honest the cabins cost a little less than the bungalows and have higher specs, they fixed al the bungalows techincal issues. So while many people predicted precisely what has happened, we cannot really say for sure that the plan was shady from the beginning (Disclaimer: I think it was, but this is my opinion).
But with the 2020 rolled back reallocation they tried to move points from bungalows and cabins to the other room types, they HAVE certified that those very expensive rooms are not popular with the members and the high number of points per night is not justified by members demand.
Please enter the Reflections plan, which includes about 20 cabin like accommodations, over a total of 200 DVC units. If those cabins will all be DVC and they'll have a similar point structure as the CCV cabins, then unequivocally it will be shady business, some might even call it a scam.