Contemporary Resort

[ranthony]

Why all the secrecy? Why have a building under constuction in plain view of millions of people that have come through the MK in the past months and not have any answers as to what's going on?

I'm with TJKRAZ on this!

I'll say this about the concept--it's crazy enough that I'm not willing to simply write it off in the same manner as other nonsensical Disney rumors. I don't know whether it's being seriously considered or not but the idea has merit.

Maybe NONE of us will get to own CRV. We'll only be competing with each other at the 7 month mark to get rooms there.

 

[nuts]

Great discussion going on! I had the same questions on the legal aspect. Keep in mind that this was only a discussion and not necessarily the decision. I wanted to give you a peek into some of the crazy stuff that does go on behind the scenes. Personally I agree that it will be mixed use.

 

[tjkraz]

Since the economy is taking a downturn, will the resorts division still feel the same way if bookings take a dump?

One of the worst things they could do is make a decision based upon the next 2 years. That's terribly short-sighted. Make a hasty decision based upon doom-and-gloom predictions for the next 2 years and you're stuck with those decisions for another five decades.

but then why make it dvc to start with - if they can rent out the rooms for say $300 a night why turn it into dvc and make it 12-15 points a night - even 20 points a night still only really translates to $200 - $250 a night - less then what they an get for a cash reservation.

they have to pay the dues themselves or right them off so they aren't making money there.

why not just keep it a cash resort?

That occurred to me a couple hours ago.

The dues are a non-issue--there isn't much money to be made in the first place when dues are calculated. If it's a fully cash resort Disney Parks & Resorts pays the full operating costs--same as would happen if it was DVC and they owned all of the points.

As for the ownership issue, part of the disagreement may be little more than a turf war. You can read that subtext between the lines in the original post. That happens in most companies, and don't think that Disney is somehow immune. Many times there is no clear consensus as to what is in the greater good. Even when that concensus exists, it doesn't mean that one party will simply back down.

Would the Contemporary be a popular DVC destination? No question.

Would members gobble up the points at premium prices? Absolutely.

But that doesn't mean that Bob Iger is going to wave his wand and grant the wish. If Parks & Resorts wants more space one of the signature WDW destinations--a hotel that also happens to be home to highly profitable convention facilities--then Jay Rasulo is going to make every effort to retain the property.

I can think of a few advantages to the plan that was described:

1. It gives DVC the ability to market the Contemporary as "a DVC resort" rather than just part of the Disney Collection.
2. It keeps members out until the 7 month window. Right now we can book Disney Collection resorts much further out.
3. When members book the CR at 7 months, it would theoretically free-up DVC Villas elsewhere to cash guests. That gives CRO more villas to sell at resorts like the Beach Club, Boardwalk, AKV, etc. Hard to tell whether that's a benefit or not. I've heard some speculate that Disney has a hard time selling empty villas thru CRO now, while others claim the DVC villas with CRO are almost always booked.

Here's what really strikes me about this idea: it's creative. It fits right in with things Disney has been doing lately--things like converting existing rooms at the Animal Kingdom Lodge to DVC units or finding a way to rebuild the seemingly un-rebuildable Treehouse Villas.

Perhaps there's no fire to go with this smoke. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if Disney announced tomorrow that the entire building was DVC villas. But I don't think the idea is as inconceivable as it may initially sound.

 

[llmurphy17]

Very interesting points I hope they announce something soon.

 

[Mickey'sApprentice]

This is very interesting.

Having NO OWNERSHIP kind of goes along with my thinking of what DVC should do to provide availability to WDW as they start building a lot of non-wdw properties.

How do you make wdw a hook for DVC in other tourist destinations like Gatlinburg, Williamsburg, Myrtle Beach, etc.? I would think you would have to make trips to wdw at least a feasible part of the package.

 

[cincinmouse]

BUT[/U] the resorts division would purchase 100% of the points! Think of what this would mean. They would be able to book the building without competition during the 8 through 11th month. Most conventions are planned at least one year in advance, so that means they have access to the new building without worrying about competing with other members. At the 7 month window those rooms remaining would be made available to other guests, which pretty much guarantees the facility being booked out year round. A real win-win for Disney.

Since I am a little slow the above situation would mean no CRV points sold to the public and all the rest of us members can book at the 7 month window?

Some how this seems a little extreme but one has to wonder why no official anouncement. What was the orginal DVC timeline. I understand CRV sales would impact sales of SSR. I do belive AKV is different enough that with enough of a price point differance between CRV and AKV they could be sold at the same time.

There must be more to it than just simple sales becuase their planning would have been better than that. Or SSR did not sell out as fast as they planned. Becuase they could have demolished the old CR tower and waited on construction. Also why now have the tree houses pop up. If the OP statement turns out to be true than the THV could be a temporary measure to see how the plan works before switching all or part of CRV to DVC control. Disney just seems like they would have planned this out better SSR to AKV to CRV. Or maybe they will make the official anoucement after SSR is sold out.

Just my two cents but hey I new to all of this.

 

[BroganMc]

I still think it's pie in the sky logic at play. Undoubtedly there was a turf war between resorts and DVC. The two entities don't always play nice with each other in the existing mixed-use resorts.

And certainly the impact of already having two properties up for sale have hampered the announcement for fear of its affect on sales.

But at the end of the day, we're not so far away from any reasonable announcement anyway. They can't begin to sell CRV until the building is 70% complete. Right now, they are only 50% done on building the exterior shell. So you're talking another 6-12 months before they can even touch sales. And in the meantime, they'll sell out SSR (already about 90-95% sold out) and AKV Jambo House (also nearing sell out).

So by '09 when they can legally start selling something, they'll be down to just AKV Kidani Village and offsite resorts (GCV). (Unless THV comes along as a mini add-on to SSR.)

The unusual thing for Disney was announcing the Hawaii construction years away from selling. But again, that was probably seen as a strategic plan to give the program the appearance of global growth.

 

[matthew_hull]

A recent picture of the building, taken on 2/20/2008.

 

[Kurby]

ok i have a couple of questions now that more people have posted.

"What was the orginal DVC timeline. I understand CRV sales would impact sales of SSR. I do belive AKV is different enough that with enough of a price point differance between CRV and AKV they could be sold at the same time. "

i'm not so sure this would matter - there have been a lot of posts by people who have said that while they would like to stay there they wouldn't want to own there.

people have speculated that the annual dues would be round about the same because AK have animals but CR has the monorail.

Not to mention that the two locations have different appeal to different people. this would be the reasion that the two regular hotels do just as well. People who stay at AK on cash do so because they want to not because CR is sold out.

"How do you make wdw a hook for DVC in other tourist destinations like Gatlinburg, Williamsburg, Myrtle Beach, etc.? I would think you would have to make trips to wdw at least a feasible part of the package."

I'm not sure if your meaning is what i'm thinking but i wouldn't see a difference between a Myrtle Beach DVC and Hilton Head or Vero Beach. except that Vero Beach is still within a reasonable drive to WDW, HH however is over 6 hours away and i would guess that people staying at HH woudln't drive into WDW while keeping their room at HH - double points or points and cash at the same time is pretty extream

The unusual thing for Disney was announcing the Hawaii construction years away from selling. But again, that was probably seen as a strategic plan to give the program the appearance of global growth.

being new to DVC (only buying AK last year) we have missed all the other announcements but i have read posts that have mentioned that other DVC's were announced then never built. so announcing Hawaii now and then announcing they changed their mind 3 years down the road doesn't seem too out there (thought I hope they don't - while we wouldn't own there we may plan a vacation there in the future)


As for this photo - it's starting to look more like the drawings i've seen in some people's signatures

plus it's the first picture i've seen that really shows it's location and not just the building itself - thanks - i was having a hard time figureing out exactly where on the property it was located.

by the way - does anyone know when google earth updates? i was looking for the construction of both CR and AKV but they are not there - nor is Expedition Everest which means it hasn't been updated in over 2 years.

A recent picture of the building, taken on 2/20/2008.

 

[TisBit]

I am sure this is part of the discussions about how to use the new tower, but there are some very large pitfalls to a plan of WDW Resorts owning that many "points". If members flocked into CRV at 7 months, Resorts would still have thousands of points leftover to rent at other resorts....they already cannot even use up all the points from undeclared and reserve units due to the per night cost of DVC units. I would think it would make more sense for the units never to be declared, allowing CRO to rent them out, or actually selling the building back and forth between DVD and WDW. When they were ready to sell units to the public DVD could purchase the building and declare the units, until then WDW Resorts would own it and be able to rent the units out without impacting DVC.

 

[tjkraz]

The unusual thing for Disney was announcing the Hawaii construction years away from selling. But again, that was probably seen as a strategic plan to give the program the appearance of global growth.

Actually the Contemporary (if it IS DVC) is the aberration. All other resorts have been announced either before or shortly after construction work began: AKV, SSR, Grand Californian, BCV, etc. SSR was announced in '01 and didn't begin selling until '03. Grand Californian announced in '07 and probably won't sell until '09.

Waiting this long to make any sort of public statement on the Contemporary is unprecedented.

There must be more to it than just simple sales becuase their planning would have been better than that. Or SSR did not sell out as fast as they planned. Becuase they could have demolished the old CR tower and waited on construction. Also why now have the tree houses pop up. If the OP statement turns out to be true than the THV could be a temporary measure to see how the plan works before switching all or part of CRV to DVC control. Disney just seems like they would have planned this out better SSR to AKV to CRV. Or maybe they will make the official anoucement after SSR is sold out.

SSR has definitely sold faster than the original development plan. The resort was initially designed to have 12 buildings and sell over as many as 10 years. They ended up building 18 buildings and will finish selling in about 5 years.

As I said above, all previous resorts have been announced well in advance. Resort construction takes 2-3 years. If Disney had waited longer to even begin work on the Contemporary, they would be left with a period of months where they have no points to sell.

IF it is DVC, the most logical conclusion is that they are waiting for SSR to sell-out before making an announcement. But putting the building in DVC is not the only option available.

If members flocked into CRV at 7 months, Resorts would still have thousands of points leftover to rent at other resorts....they already cannot even use up all the points from undeclared and reserve units due to the per night cost of DVC units.

Can't they? That seems to be one of the questions none of us is able to answer with any certainty. I've heard people speculate that CRO has trouble renting DVC rooms to cash guests...but I've also heard people say that available DVC villas are in short supply to CRO.

DVC sent out a mailer with a special rate for "Friends and Family" at SSR. On the surface that would seem to indicate excess inventory. But the rate code was only sent to DVC members rather than the general public. They can't have THAT many rooms available.

Additionally, one of the side benefits here is that CRO would gain additional access to ALL of the DVC resorts when members book at CRV. Just because we're seeing special rates at SSR doesn't mean that CRO would be unable to rent villas at the Beach Club, BoardWalk, etc.

 

[Tinkerdreams]

DVC at the north and the south wings seemed like the right solution.

Perhaps the solution is to tear down the south wing and build a DVC/suite tower like the one that is being constructed now. Considering the apparent popularity of this resort and the confidence that Disney has in its use with DVC, conventions, etc., it sounds it would be THE solution to accomodate this and make everyone happy.

 

[Chuck S]

What part of it are you thinking would be illegal?

A single owner entity can not, by definition, be a timeshare as there is no one to "share" with. If "Disney" retained all points, then at 7 months, they could scoop up ALL DVC rooms not reserved during the priority booking window at every other resorts. All they'd have to do is set the point requirement per night at CRV very high, thus making a huge number of points a part of the resort, and they would own all the points. So they'd have plenty of points to book all the other DVC resorts at 7 months, leaving those high point rooms at CRV for DVC members at 7 months...making DVC basically worthless during the 7 month window.

I don;t see how they could legally declare the units into DVC, and have one owner of the points on the contract.

 

[tjkraz]

A single owner entity can not, by definition, be a timeshare as there is no one to "share" with. If "Disney" retained all points, then at 7 months, they could scoop up ALL DVC rooms not reserved during the priority booking window at every other resorts. All they'd have to do is set the point requirement per night at CRV very high, thus making a huge number of points a part of the resort, and they would own all the points. So they'd have plenty of points to book all the other DVC resorts at 7 months, leaving those high point rooms at CRV for DVC members at 7 months...making DVC basically worthless during the 7 month window.

Excellent point.

 

[Kurby]

As I said above, all previous resorts have been announced well in advance. Resort construction takes 2-3 years. If Disney had waited longer to even begin work on the Contemporary, they would be left with a period of months where they have no points to sell.

so with that are you suggesting that DVC will never stop adding resorts to their growing list? always building something???

this will make it totally impossible to reserve anything at the 7 month window.

i'm glad they build AK - it's were we bought - but if they hadn't we prob would have bought resale.

if they keep making DVC resorts outside the park area ie HH, VB, Hawaii, then all those people who purchased there and want to go to WDW will all be booking at the 7 month mark, which don't get me wrong, isn't a big deal now, but say they build in NY, Vegas, New Orleans, Texis, Paris, London, even Canada and they get thousands and thousands of new DVCers - given the number of people who will want to book WDW even every other year will make in impossible to get another WDW DVC resort at the 7 month mark.

you think getting BW or BC is hard now - wait 10 years when there are thousands more trying to book in at christmas, thanksgiving, easter because they bought at LV and now want to go to WDW.

and yes i know that now everyone who buys at Hawaii will come to WDW on a regular basis because of the cost but there are a lot of europeans who do (which surprises me because of the distance and cost) come on a regular bases.

 

[jade1]

Popularity now really picks up...so they decide to renovate the north wing and keep it (mirror the south wing). Too late. DVC has committed funding for the north wing. Now the fight begins. OK, so the top guys agree to go ahead and build the new wing and negotiate how much is CR and how much is DVC. At one point CR was agreeing to let it be 100% DVC BUT the resorts division would purchase 100% of the points!

.

If WDW doesn't want or need millions of dollars dumped in thier lap up front, then who are we to argue . I will still be glad to have CRV as an option even if it is at 7 months and no money down.

 

[AKV707]

so with that are you suggesting that DVC will never stop adding resorts to their growing list? always building something???

this will make it totally impossible to reserve anything at the 7 month window.

I wouldn't think so. It seems to me it is a fairly simple mathematical situation. More DVC members means more DVC villas. So as the membership increases, more villas are available. Meaning
when a member at a new resort, reserves a room at another resort than their home resort, it leaves a reservation at their home resort available.

I also agree with Chuck S point about this CR idea not being legal and devaluing all of our DVC interests.

I don't doubt that the op has a credible source, but I can't see this actually happening. Has anyone found a report of this concept anywhere else? Could this be more intentional misinformation being made available by Disney management?

 

[macosx]

The unusual thing for Disney was announcing the Hawaii construction years away from selling. But again, that was probably seen as a strategic plan to give the program the appearance of global growth.

It would have been difficult to keep Hawaii a secret, so might as well use it for marketing. Buy DVC today, use it now, and when Hawaii opens up, you have yet another option. If SSR/AKV/CRV/DVC Disneyland/DVC Hawaii were all available on sale in 2011, the buying patters would be quite spread out. Might as well try to make some of those sales today with DVC Hawaii and Disneyland as bait.

being new to DVC (only buying AK last year) we have missed all the other announcements but i have read posts that have mentioned that other DVC's were announced then never built. so announcing Hawaii now and then announcing they changed their mind 3 years down the road doesn't seem too out there

AFAIK, DVC has never officially announced a new resort and then cancelled. Please correct me if I'm wrong. I'm sure there are many rumors, some based on some truth, about potential locations that never materialized, but that's business. Even the CRV talk seems to be from speculation than any actual fact. Taking the history of long pre-announcement at face value, there will be no CRV. Of course, they're in no hurry in dispelling any such phantom beliefs if it helps sales of current resorts (SSR/AKV). Adding to that sales pitch is the future DVC Disneyland and DVC Hawaii. Now those are official announcements, which I expect 98% that they'll deliver, even if a bit late due to development delays or poor economic conditions putting the effort on the back burner. Anything short of a catastrophy derailing these announced projects will seriously put Disney's reputation at risk.

 

[lisareniff]

AFAIK, DVC has never officially announced a new resort and then cancelled. Please correct me if I'm wrong. ....

*cough* *cough* Eagle Pines ....although it was never officially canceled

 

[Mickey'sApprentice]

Mickey'sApprentice Said..."How do you make wdw a hook for DVC in other tourist destinations like Gatlinburg, Williamsburg, Myrtle Beach, etc.? I would think you would have to make trips to wdw at least a feasible part of the package." [/COLOR]
Kurby said..I'm not sure if your meaning is what i'm thinking but i wouldn't see a difference between a Myrtle Beach DVC and Hilton Head or Vero Beach. except that Vero Beach is still within a reasonable drive to WDW, HH however is over 6 hours away and i would guess that people staying at HH woudln't drive into WDW while keeping their room at HH - double points or points and cash at the same time is pretty extream

Kurby:

HH and VB are both very small resorts. Owners at those resorts now have a reasonable expectation that if they book a trip to WDW, especially at unpopular DVC times that they will get a DVC room of some sort. Also, because these resorts are not on property, the resale prices are much lower than any of the on-property resorts for this reason. (Buying at HH to go to WDW is risky.)

If DVC ever desires to make a BIG expansion within the U.S. into these markets, they will need to assure these owners that they can ALSO vacation at WDW. After all, that is what gives DVC its marketing advantage over other timeshares. Marriott can BUY theming. They can't BUY on-property accommodations at WDW.

I have said before that for Disney to best expand into these domestic - Eastern US markets, they would need to start a 50-50 program where the owners in these markets (Gatlinburg, Williamsburg, etc.) would at least have an option of purchasing half of their points at the new resort and half of their points at a WDW resort so that they would have an 11 month advantage in both places and be able to go to each every other year.

Finally, because I live in Alabama, I have a very interesting vantage point. Many of my friends and family vacation in Gatlinburg or on the gulf coast almost every summer. Some of these people also enjoy WDW - but frankly not as much because of the $$$ required for WDW. It is much more expensive and requires either a long drive, or an expensive plane ticket. I think DVC at their "usual" vacation spot, with a WDW component would be very tempting for this group.

It has always amazed me that WDW has more customers from the Northeast than the South strictly from a geographic standpoint.