COPPER CREEK?

[Friendlyadvice2]

None...selling for double what the points 50 feet away cost...officially jumping the shark

There may be no perceived value in buying Copper Creek for you, but that doesn't mean that others won't find some perceived value. Remember, there are many people who find no perceived value whatsoever in owning DVC and that buying points at even $75 is considered a total waste of money.

Everyone has their own set of things they value. Others may feel the 2068 expiration date is worth the price, especially if they want to use the cabins or the Copper Creek grand villas during peak DVC visitation times.

Emotional/Perceived value and financial value are two completely different things and often confused in discussions with DVC. I'll let @lockedoutlogic speak for himself, but I interpret his post to be from a financial standpoint and not dealing with perceptions....and I agree, this is clearly "jumping the shark". Far better off financially with the points 50 feet away, invest the $100 per point you would have spent on direct, and IF the VWL contracts expire in 2042, you can buy back in at CCV then.

 

[DenLo]

The benefits are:

1. 11 month booking at the new villas, which are in the Lodge proper.

2. 2068 expiration.

The downsides are:
Cost per point and insane dues.

Remember, Boulder Ridge Villas expires in January 2042, less than 25 years from now.

Copper Creek doesn't expire until January 2068, more than 50 years from now.

Also CCV has cabins and Grand villas and not many of the latter. For a young family that plans to use their membership for more than one generation, it might worth it to them just for the home resort advantage. Also I prefer the wider balconies in the lodge versus those at BRV.

Personally I am having problems with the price.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Emotional/Perceived value and financial value are two completely different things and often confused in discussions with DVC. I'll let @lockedoutlogic speak for himself, but I interpret his post to be from a financial standpoint and not dealing with perceptions....and I agree, this is clearly "jumping the shark". Far better off financially with the points 50 feet away, invest the $100 per point you would have spent on direct, and IF the VWL contracts expire in 2042, you can buy back in at CCV then.

Yeah...that's the pretty straightforward stance. Thank you.

I always worry about the NEXT move.

So where are we gonna convert at double the price next?

 

[Friendlyadvice2]

Also CCV has cabins and Grand villas and not many of the latter. For a young family that plans to use their membership for more than one generation, it might worth it to them just for the home resort advantage. Also I prefer the wider balconies in the lodge versus those at BRV.

Personally I am having problems with the price.

I agree Denise, there are certainly nice things about CCV. Unfortunately, the price is not one of them, especially when you can have a nearly identical experience for $100 less per point. IMO, if one really needs to stay in a GV or cabin, they can wait and transfer in points and accomplish it that way rather than pay the direct prices.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

Does anyone know what the cost of points will be for Copper Creek? Our home is VWL and wondering if there is any benefit for us to buy in.

The only reasons I can think to buy there is if you feel you want or need the 11 month booking window. Depending on the time of the year that may or may not be important. Another reason would be if you want to have a longer length contract at the Lodge - ie if the 25 years remaining at VWL is not enough.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Also CCV has cabins and Grand villas and not many of the latter. For a young family that plans to use their membership for more than one generation, it might worth it to them just for the home resort advantage. Also I prefer the wider balconies in the lodge versus those at BRV.

Personally I am having problems with the price.

I agree Denise, there are certainly nice things about CCV. Unfortunately, the price is not one of them, especially when you can have a nearly identical experience for $100 less per point. IMO, if one really needs to stay in a GV or cabin, they can wait and transfer in points and accomplish it that way rather than pay the direct prices.

Yes...that's pretty much right down the middle here...

What's different about this...and why I ventured out of my cave...is this is the first time they've tried this...almost identical products at double the price. It's a fundamental difference

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

Remember, Boulder Ridge Villas expires in January 2042, less than 25 years from now.

Copper Creek doesn't expire until January 2068, more than 50 years from now.

I think the price difference equalizes it from a financial view. Then the question is if one sees themselves going for another 50 years or if 25 is good enough and then deal with more when the time comes if they are going to continue going.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

I think the price difference equalizes it from a financial view. Then the question is if one sees themselves going for another 50 years or if 25 is good enough and then deal with more when the time comes if they are going to continue going.

Well...the smaller contracts on resale are flying off the shelves...that will likely intensify.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

Well...the smaller contracts on resale are flying off the shelves...that will likely intensify.

Smaller contracts? Can you explain a bit more the correlation you're making to the 50 years on the CCV contracts or 25 years on VWL that I was commenting about? That other people are deciding 25 years may be just fine?

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Smaller contracts? Can you explain a bit more the correlation you're making to the 50 years on the CCV contracts or 25 years on VWL that I was commenting about? That other people are deciding 25 years may be just fine?

From what I've noticed...there seems to be a run on the 50,75,100 pt resale contracts on older properties more than in the past. My opinion is that's a reflection on the rise from $120 a point to $175 almost overnight...and shows the weakness in the DVC sales market or at least a developing one.

Most people look at vacations 26-50 years away as a hypothetical...it's the point bank and the upfront cost that gets the majority of the consideration.

 

[bianca]

We just passed ROFR on a BRV contract of 150 points. We waited until they posted pics of the new CCV and made our decision easily. We will be 82 when BRV expires. We are okay with that. I do believe they will have a hard time selling this latest DVC product.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

We just passed ROFR on a BCV contract of 150 points. We waited until they posted pics of the new CCV and made our decision easily. We will be 82 when BCV expires. We are okay with that. I do believe they will have a hard time selling this latest DVC product.

Your statement is true only IF numbers don't lie...

Around here we can't tell anyone they're wrong because apparently opinions mean more than truth.

It's a reality tv world​

 

[hakepb]

From what I've noticed...there seems to be a run on the 50,75,100 pt resale contracts on older properties more than in the past. My opinion is that's a reflection on the rise from $120 a point to $175 almost overnight...and shows the weakness in the DVC sales market or at least a developing one.

Most people look at vacations 26-50 years away as a hypothetical...it's the point bank and the upfront cost that gets the majority of the consideration.

Yep,
And if you flip the argument around, and ask an existing owner how much would you pay to extend your existing contract ... paying for something with $0 benefit for 25+ years .. and that answer is usually between $0 and throw away money.

Ultimately, there is no financial benefit to the longer contract, despite the emotional appeal the thought has to new buyers.

 

[Dean Marino]

Remember, Boulder Ridge Villas expires in January 2042, less than 25 years from now.

Copper Creek doesn't expire until January 2068, more than 50 years from now.

Yes - at that point (2042)? My wife and I will be 90 . WDW may have the whole thing back, as I will sell the contract (open Market) for 25 cents . I am NOT going to WDW on a scooter . My children may buy in, or not, as they see fit.
All personal opinion - I'm not necessarily right, no one else is necessarily wrong.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Yep,
And if you flip the argument around, and ask an existing owner how much would you pay to extend your existing contract ... paying for something with $0 benefit for 25+ years .. and that answer is usually between $0 and throw away money.

Ultimately, there is no financial benefit to the longer contract, despite the emotional appeal the thought has to new buyers.

Amen...we're past year 10 and I can honestly say I have no regard for the years left...they don't exaclty fly by. We still have a ridiculous 37 years left...yikes.

 

[LAX]

Yep,
And if you flip the argument around, and ask an existing owner how much would you pay to extend your existing contract ... paying for something with $0 benefit for 25+ years .. and that answer is usually between $0 and throw away money.

Ultimately, there is no financial benefit to the longer contract, despite the emotional appeal the thought has to new buyers.

I disagree with the bolded part. I know BRV along with few others that have 2042 expiration still have 25 years left, so the "depreciation" of a shorter contract hasn't kicked in yet. However, I believe when a contract gets closer to its expiration, it will drop in value. Perhaps it won't happen until 10 years are left, but it will happen at some point. I can't imagine the contract will have any significant resale value left if it has say 5 years left. So, let's fast forward 2 decades from now when BRV will have only 5 years left and CCV will still have 30 years left. CCV should retain a decent portion of its value at that point (assuming the DVC resale market as a whole remains relatively strong) whereas BRV should be minimal. Now, I am not arguing that this longer "shelf life" alone justifies paying double the price of a similar size BRV contract. However, a longer contract by itself does have a financial benefit at least in terms of residual values.

LAX

 

[pmaurer74]

I disagree with the bolded part. I know BRV along with few others that have 2042 expiration still have 25 years left, so the "depreciation" of a shorter contract hasn't kicked in yet. However, I believe when a contract gets closer to its expiration, it will drop in value. Perhaps it won't happen until 10 years are left, but it will happen at some point. I can't imagine the contract will have any significant resale value left if it has say 5 years left. So, let's fast forward 2 decades from now when BRV will have only 5 years left and CCV will still have 30 years left. CCV should retain a decent portion of its value at that point (assuming the DVC resale market as a whole remains relatively strong) whereas BRV should be minimal. Now, I am not arguing that this longer "shelf life" alone justifies paying double the price of a similar size BRV contract. However, a longer contract by itself does have a financial benefit at least in terms of residual values.

LAX

I would agree with you. I would be interested in extending my contract to preserve its value if possible. Plus I will be 68 and I hope still going to Disney.

 

[disneynutz]

IMO 50 year old DVC buildings should be torn down and rebuilt to current standards. Improved lighting, HVAC, design, new appliances, bathrooms, maybe larger rooms, additional beds, real wood flooring or maybe even carpets.

Bill

 

[_auroraborealis_]

IMO 50 year old DVC buildings should be torn down and rebuilt to current standards. Improved lighting, HVAC, design, new appliances, bathrooms, maybe larger rooms, additional beds, real wood flooring or maybe even carpets.

Bill

They won't though. Heck, look at Poly and Contemporary Tower. They are getting there.