Cheapest DVC property per point? Look at annual fees

[Dean]

Well, it also doesn't account for shifts in pricing and also shifts in MF. (AKV was much higher than most locations just a few years ago, but many resorts have caught up in the last two years.) It really only tells you the value right NOW.

Since the inflation should be consistent for all but new properties long term, it may not matter much but there are variables which is why I use a 10 year window. I do feel the TVM is a biggie though.

 

[Disneybuckeye]

I'd written something about the the original analysis failing to factor in the # of points per night at the different resorts, but I see that was covered on page 2.

If you want the cheapest experience possible buy at SSR and stay at OKW. If you can get AKV value so much the better, but you can consistently get OKW at 7 months. There's really no need to rehash the arguments over and over. SSR purchase + OKW stay will always yield the best monetary return on investment and that's not going to change.

But there's so much more to "value" than money.

I bought BLT as my second resort a month ago. I paid $105 per point. I could've got SSR at $80 and saved $25 * 250 points = well I can't do the math in my head, but something like $6000. The reason I did that is because I want a 10 minute WALK to my resort after I leave MK, I don't want a 10 minute wait in line followed by a 20 minute BUS ride. For me, the "value" of BLT is so much more than SSR because I hate the buses so much. Apparently I'm willing to spend $6,000 / 45 years = $150 per vacation in order to walk to and from MK rather than ride a bus. So that walk is worth more than $150 per trip to me or I would've bought SSR. But I HATE the buses so I'm more than willing to pay $150 to avoid them during my vacation.

If your #1 concern is money then stay at All Star Music during free dining.

If your #1 concern is "value" then there is a lot more to factor in than pure dollars out of pocket.

We have the same thought process, except we usually end most or our evenings at Epcot or DHS. That is why we own at BWV. With the new attractions going in at DHS I am even more glad. We do own some VWL points as we like the boat ride home from MK.

 

[Wakey]

Great rankings which id missed originally. SSR is undoubtedly the 'value' proposition.

 

[Wakey]

We have the same thought process, except we usually end most or our evenings at Epcot or DHS. That is why we own at BWV. With the new attractions going in at DHS I am even more glad. We do own some VWL points as we like the boat ride home from MK.

There's more to it though. I could have bought BLT or VGF. I worked out when I go in summer, if I bought enough points for a 1 bed, I could stay anywhere, and get studios possibly anyway. I really wanted a 1 bed. So I bought twice the points at SSR which were less than half price of VGF and substantially less than BLT. Yes the dues are a bit more, but SSR dues are a lot less so not twice the dues. Also I could treat the excess points as insurance, booking 1 beds, but renting the points to cover all dues to score a studio.
This year I'm staying standard view Boardwalk and at Kidani, could have booked anywhere incl BLT, studio at Poly, studio Copper Creek etc (as it happens In getting a 2 bed at BWV as I like space) So depending on when you go, that has to be factored in also. When you think about it, I paid $65 a point a year ago, lowest dues, and I'm stopping anywhere. Couple with best value points anyway and I'm staying massively cheaper at many resorts than the owners.

 

[skier_pete]

There's more to it though. I could have bought BLT or VGF. I worked out when I go in summer, if I bought enough points for a 1 bed, I could stay anywhere, and get studios possibly anyway. I really wanted a 1 bed. So I bought twice the points at SSR which were less than half price of VGF and substantially less than BLT. Yes the dues are a bit more, but SSR dues are a lot less so not twice the dues. Also I could treat the excess points as insurance, booking 1 beds, but renting the points to cover all dues to score a studio.

This can't really be said enough - if you want 1 bedrooms - best to buy SSR points. 1 bedrooms are available almost everywhere at 7 months.

 

[drdengler]

Newbie (considering resale purchase) here... Skimmed prior posts.

Thanks for all the info. So, obviously the best bet is to buy where you want your home resort to be as cost effective as possible, BUT given this analysis....
Should I in fact be buying a low point SSR or OKW just to 'get in' to DVC and then look at adding my fave home resort as an add on later (Wilderness)?

Thank you!

 

[GMG_3]

these numbers appear to be a few years old. I would bet the price increases have tightened the group.

Disney will only get harder to book and more expensive. I say the ultimate rule is buy where you want at the best price possible.

 

[Dean]

Newbie (considering resale purchase) here... Skimmed prior posts.

Thanks for all the info. So, obviously the best bet is to buy where you want your home resort to be as cost effective as possible, BUT given this analysis....
Should I in fact be buying a low point SSR or OKW just to 'get in' to DVC and then look at adding my fave home resort as an add on later (Wilderness)?

Thank you!

It depends on when you go, where/what yo need and how flexible you truly are. Someone OK with SSR but wants to try other things over time should do quite well owning at SSR. Someone who has to have VGF most trips at a certain time likely would not. I personally would not buy OKW for this situation unless I specifically planned to use it there most trips for a 3 BR.

these numbers appear to be a few years old. I would bet the price increases have tightened the group.

Disney will only get harder to book and more expensive. I say the ultimate rule is buy where you want at the best price possible.

I don't know that it will get more difficult, it depends on the demand of future resorts. If Riviera or other larger future projects have a lower demand than most, as I suspect, then yes it will likely get worse at 7 months, no different at 11 months out.

 

[bobbiwoz]

More people here report being shut out of the less expensive villas at 11 months due to fellow members walking reservations. Until and unless DVC charges something for multiple changes within a certain time frame, buying enough points to be able to include all views is important.

 

[zavandor]

More people here report being shut out of the less expensive villas at 11 months due to fellow members walking reservations. Until and unless DVC charges something for multiple changes within a certain time frame, buying enough points to be able to include all views is important.

Changing the reservation system wouldn't make value and standard rooms more easily available.
It would just prevent walkers to book them. Instead of walking, everyone would be ready at 8:00 am to click in the same second, then the server would pick the fastest ones and allow them to book the room. It would be a "clock lottery" or a "who's computer and internet connection is the fastest lottery". The amount of unhappy people with the two systems would be the same.
The only way for Disney to remove the imbalanced request for standard rooms would be to reallocate points to make them less attractive: another reason to not buy just the right number of points for value rooms, points per night might increase in the future.

 

[skier_pete]

Newbie (considering resale purchase) here... Skimmed prior posts.

Thanks for all the info. So, obviously the best bet is to buy where you want your home resort to be as cost effective as possible, BUT given this analysis....
Should I in fact be buying a low point SSR or OKW just to 'get in' to DVC and then look at adding my fave home resort as an add on later (Wilderness)?

Thank you!

So - in short you will hear people say "Buy where you want to stay". I always say it as "Buy the cheapest resort you are happy to stay at." The absolute cheapest resort is SSR, but personally I don't care for it and don't want to have to go there. So for us, we bought at AKV. It's not the cheapest, but towards the cheaper end, but we love it there. I never get "Stuck" at my home resort, because we love it there. If I had the ability to afford anything I wanted, I would probably buy at the Poly, but since I couldn't afford it, we found what works for us.

Another note, generally studios are the toughest get, so if you want to stay in a studio, then you definitely have to like your home resort - especially if you want to travel from September 15th - Jan 10th, but also some other times can be tough. However, if you plan to get enough points and want to stay in 1-bedrooms? Then you can own pretty much anywhere, because my observations are 1-bedrooms are widely available at many resorts (but not all) at the 7-month mark and beyond.

Changing the reservation system wouldn't make value and standard rooms more easily available.
It would just prevent walkers to book them. Instead of walking, everyone would be ready at 8:00 am to click in the same second, then the server would pick the fastest ones and allow them to book the room. It would be a "clock lottery" or a "who's computer and internet connection is the fastest lottery". The amount of unhappy people with the two systems would be the same.
The only way for Disney to remove the imbalanced request for standard rooms would be to reallocate points to make them less attractive: another reason to not buy just the right number of points for value rooms, points per night might increase in the future.

Totally agree with this - high demand dates would still be high demand. And "Walkers" can be taken advantage of if you are patient. I've been able to fill in nights at hard-to-get resorts by "following" the walkers....watching for a couple of days after the window as rooms are cancelled. I've also been a "mild" walker (booking a few days early and walking once - never for weeks at a time). I would love them to stop it, but there's not a great way that I can see.

I don't think they would re-balance the points - those rooms are typically less points for a reason - usually poor location and/or view. What I DO believe is you should never buy planning to get some hard-to-get low-point category every time. (Thinking AKV, BWV, and BLT here.)

 

[dsnydaddy]

So - in short you will hear people say "Buy where you want to stay". I always say it as "Buy the cheapest resort you are happy to stay at."

Skier Pete, I love this quote. It is very true for me. We could have initially bought in at VB or HHI back when it was trading in the $50 range. My buy in would have been cheap but I'd have paid for it in the long run with high maintenance fees. I could have also gotten a deal on OKW which was about $5-10 less than SSR at the time we bought our first contract. But, on one of our last trips to WDW we bounced around to the various DVC resorts to get a feel for them and knew that we'd be happy with SSR. (I really recommend touring the various resorts to get to know them.)

 

[skier_pete]

Skier Pete, I love this quote. It is very true for me. We could have initially bought in at VB or HHI back when it was trading in the $50 range. My buy in would have been cheap but I'd have paid for it in the long run with high maintenance fees. I could have also gotten a deal on OKW which was about $5-10 less than SSR at the time we bought our first contract. But, on one of our last trips to WDW we bounced around to the various DVC resorts to get a feel for them and knew that we'd be happy with SSR. (I really recommend touring the various resorts to get to know them.)

VB and HHI hides their costs in high Maintenance Fees. And yes, I completely agree if your goal is to stay at WDW, it's a pretty bad idea to buy at one of those just because the buy-in is cheaper.

And I second the idea of checking out the resorts before you buy-in. We bought in a AKV because we had stayed there and knew we liked it. We did break that rule when we bought a small contract at BWV this year having never stayed there (26 days!), however we've spent quite a bit of time in the area.