Does DVC reserve the right to allow booking only at home resorts?

[tjkraz]

The bottom line is that any DVC member can stay at SSR at any time while SSR owners will be subject to some limitations (depending on time of year) at any of the other resorts. By most accounts, this problem is anticipated to get worse over time. There simply is no "home court advantage" at SSR.

Perhaps that's true. But what is conveniently ignored in this eternal debate is the fact that Home resort advantage only applies to ONE resort...14% of the DVC resorts currently available.

You're arguing Home resort priority with someone who admittedly wants to try ALL of the resorts. No matter where cobbler owns, she still only has priority at 1/7th (soon to be 1/8th or 1/9th) of the DVC resorts available to book.

People who clearly favor one resort should absolutely own at that resort. For those who see themselves varying preferences and moving about through the system over the years, the overall impact of a Home resort choice is negligible.

In fact, it seems to me that someone who envisions him/herself using all of the resorts equally is making a wise decision to buy into the resort with the lowest annual dues. After all, the amount we pay in dues will far eclipse the initial purchase amount in the long run.

Also keep in mind that the value of the 12 extra years in current years dollars is about equal to one years banked points - you could make a case that a DVCI contract resale with full banked 2004 points offsets this SSR benefit.

Ah, if only all decisions in life could be made with a spreadsheet.

Why buy a Jeep Grand Cherokee when a Kia Sorrento will serve the same purpose? Is the leather interior and 8-cylinder upgrade really worth paying 2x the cost? And what about gas mileage and the expected lifespan of the two vehicles?

Or what about buying lunch? Why pay $10 for a burger and fries at Ruby Tuesday if you can get the same thing from McDonald's for $2?

Funny how the numbers add up differently for one person than another.

I have nothing against SSR but it will always suffer in terms of resale value (and rental value) due to this.

Really?

What will resale price be in 2020 when BWV has 22 years left and SSR 34 years? How about in 2030 when BWV has 12 years left and SSR 24 years? How about in 2042 when BWV has zero years left?

And who's to say that cobbler is the least bit concerned about rental value? Amazingly enough, some of us buy points just to USE them.

 

[cobbler]

Ok, I do see everyone's point about trying to get in. Heck I will be one of those that will for that one time I want to try BC/BWV. But after I get my one stay and check them off my list then I won't be going back.

I guess I don't understand what the big deal is. Everyone that owns at these resorts has the 4 month priority window so there should be no problem for an owner to stay there.

I for one won't be complaining when those at BC/BW and so on are clamoring to get into "my" SSR because they make PI bigger/better or whatever they are doing to it.

It really is just curiousity as to why this is looked at so negatively. It just appears that sometimes SSR owners are looked at as less than worthy.
Kind of like that old money vs new money type thing.

And next year I am doing something somewhat taboo. I am going to use my points to stay at Cont Tower because darn it all, that is on my list and I want to stay in the tower before (if) they turn it into DVC and I can't stay in the tower anymore. Heck, after this trip I won't be back into a DVC resort until 2010 when I get GF, AKL, Cont and Poly out of the way ha ha ha

 

[Beca]

It just appears that sometimes SSR owners are looked at as less than worthy.
Kind of like that old money vs new money type thing.

It is really sad that is way you are made to feel on these boards. Let me just state that as a non-SSR owner, I feel NO animosity towards people buying SSR!! Heck...in 37 years, you will be laughing at all of us "poor souls" who will no longer be members!

I am the first to admit that I LOVE my home resort, and am VERY protective about it....I can't help it....that place just makes me happy, and I want to see it stand up well for the next 37 years!! It does take a beating, and is in desperate need of renovation. I don't think DVC planned for it being so popular, as the cleaning/renovation schedule desperately needs to be re-worked.

However, I think that sometimes either SSR owners feel and/or disboarders allude to the fact that SSR owners are to blame. That is not the case. DVD is to blame for the problems that owners of small resorts either imagine, or truly feel because of the differential in the size of the resorts...it's never the members who are buying in and paying more than any other member ever did (except for us idiots who are still buying sold-out resorts at $92 per point ....I truly have a sickness!!)

Anyway....sorry that you feel that way sometimes. And, I am sorry if my protectiveness over BCV ever made you (or anyone else) that way!!



Beca

 

[Dean]

Thanks, very well worded. I'm just wondering if you add members like crazy into SSR, Eagle Pines, Contemporary, what is that going to do to resorts like BCV or BWV? Seems to me that DVC can advertise flexabilty all they want, but the availability at some resorts might be minute unless you own there, that is part of my question. Thanks, Matt

Any member at those resorts would still have a home priority window. It only makes sense that those resorts will be more and more difficult as the number of total owners grow and especially after they have a couple of trips under their belt at their home resort (esp SSR, HH, VB and new OKW owners). It will really only affect two groups. Those that are trying to get high demand, low available resorts/units that are not home resort and those that won't/can't reserve during their home resort priority period.

drusba, I would think it's implied that DVC would have to be the management company. If they sold those rights for a portion of the resorts, you can bet they'd drop out. And they certainly could do so. (reference 8(d) Multi site POS pg 9 3/2002 edition titled "Automatic Deletion by Termination of DVC Resort Agreement"). I think it's an unlikely risk but not zero, esp for HH and VB. Still not something to worry much about though. As mentioned, natural disasters are the biggest risk to either a temporary or permanent elimination.

As for home resort priority, it's not spelled out from a standpoint of how short the lead time would be for non home resort reservations. While I doubt it will ever change, I think the other language in the POS would give a hard minimum of 2 months out and a practical minimum of 4 months ahead.

 

[Sammie]

Ok, I do see everyone's point about trying to get in. Heck I will be one of those that will for that one time I want to try BC/BWV. But after I get my one stay and check them off my list then I won't be going back.

I guess I don't understand what the big deal is. Everyone that owns at these resorts has the 4 month priority window so there should be no problem for an owner to stay there.

I for one won't be complaining when those at BC/BW and so on are clamoring to get into "my" SSR because they make PI bigger/better or whatever they are doing to it.

It really is just curiousity as to why this is looked at so negatively. It just appears that sometimes SSR owners are looked at as less than worthy.
Kind of like that old money vs new money type thing.

And next year I am doing something somewhat taboo. I am going to use my points to stay at Cont Tower because darn it all, that is on my list and I want to stay in the tower before (if) they turn it into DVC and I can't stay in the tower anymore. Heck, after this trip I won't be back into a DVC resort until 2010 when I get GF, AKL, Cont and Poly out of the way ha ha ha

Just want you to know not everyone feels that way. We don't own at SSR, have stayed there 2 times and love it. It is now our favorite WDW resort and we have stayed at all of them many times. Will probably do an add on when money allows it.

So Cobbler I would love to be your neighbor.

 

[Dean]

It really is just curiousity as to why this is looked at so negatively. It just appears that sometimes SSR owners are looked at as less than worthy.

Sorry you feel this way. Many of us are saying that a higher percentage of SSR owners will be trading out at the 7 months window than the reverse and that will cause some specific issues for certain people. Frankly, I don't see how anyone could argue otherwise. Anyone that sees this as a problem should be angry with DVD, not the member that buys though. With one specific exception of a person from several years ago, I can't recall a specific example of a post directed at the person who bought in a negative way though there likely would have been others. That person bought OKW to stay otherwise and said so, he was frankly skewered by the members of this board for that very approach. I was appalled (and said so), esp since we've recommend to many they do this in certain situations. I believe the thread has been trimmed from the BBS as sit was before one conversion or the other, I can give you the poster name if you want to check with him, privately of course.

 

[mydogdrew]

Perhaps that's true. But what is conveniently ignored in this eternal debate is the fact that Home resort advantage only applies to ONE resort...14% of the DVC resorts currently available.

You're arguing Home resort priority with someone who admittedly wants to try ALL of the resorts. No matter where cobbler owns, she still only has priority at 1/7th (soon to be 1/8th or 1/9th) of the DVC resorts available to book.

People who clearly favor one resort should absolutely own at that resort. For those who see themselves varying preferences and moving about through the system over the years, the overall impact of a Home resort choice is negligible.

In fact, it seems to me that someone who envisions him/herself using all of the resorts equally is making a wise decision to buy into the resort with the lowest annual dues. After all, the amount we pay in dues will far eclipse the initial purchase amount in the long run.



Ah, if only all decisions in life could be made with a spreadsheet.

Why buy a Jeep Grand Cherokee when a Kia Sorrento will serve the same purpose? Is the leather interior and 8-cylinder upgrade really worth paying 2x the cost? And what about gas mileage and the expected lifespan of the two vehicles?

Or what about buying lunch? Why pay $10 for a burger and fries at Ruby Tuesday if you can get the same thing from McDonald's for $2?

Funny how the numbers add up differently for one person than another.



Really?

What will resale price be in 2020 when BWV has 22 years left and SSR 34 years? How about in 2030 when BWV has 12 years left and SSR 24 years? How about in 2042 when BWV has zero years left?

And who's to say that cobbler is the least bit concerned about rental value? Amazingly enough, some of us buy points just to USE them.

Of course resale will depreciate in value faster than SSR on the back end. I'm giving my take on why it's not the case now. SSR isn't worth as much because of the lack of a home advantage and the fact that the extra 12 years isn't worth all that much today. The only folks that have really lost money in DVC to date are those who purchased SSR at $90 or more and are forced to sell today. You don't have to rent your points to understand that the rental market and ROFR are the biggest factors driving resale values. You can argue that you'll use your points until expiration so its a non-issue, but at some point, falling rental rates would result in a saturation of DVC owners (some already argue that it's cheaper to rent than buy), halting DVC development and ROFR where market forces then prevail. If that happens, I don't think market pricing will be kind to SSR owners. I've been to SSR and it seems very nice - I'm just disappointed that DVC is chasing the short-term buck going with phase III when this could have dire consequences for the future development of DVC.

 

[Rozzie]

I always find it very funny (to me anyway) that a lot of people think all of us buying into SSR (or any future site) are all desperate to reserve at BCV and BWV.

Cobbler, I am right there with you. DH and I love SSR. We actually switched our BWV ressie in May back to SSR after our stay. We have no desire to stay BWV/BCV. Yes, there are SSR lovers out there. Yes we love our resort! Everyone else can fight like rapid dogs over the Epcot Resort/F&W weeks, we'll watch from afar, with a Saratoga Lager in hand!

 

[tjkraz]

Of course resale will depreciate in value faster than SSR on the back end. I'm giving my take on why it's not the case now.

Sorry, I guess I misunderstood your use of the word "always" when you said:

"I have nothing against SSR but it will always suffer in terms of resale value (and rental value)..."

Did you have a specific timeframe in mind for "always" in that context?

The only folks that have really lost money in DVC to date are those who purchased SSR at $90 or more and are forced to sell today.

That is largely because SSR is currently being sold by DVC. Surely you aren't implying that people were falling over themselves to pay $90 per point resale (or $84 or $80) for BCV points when DVC was selling them for $84 each?

DVC's top price for BCV was $84 each. And you can look at TTS now and see contracts for sale at $85 per point. It has taken over two years since sell-out for BCV resale contracts to meet their original purchase price.

I bought into SSR two years ago at $79, and could easily get that now. Over the next 3-4-5 years until SSR sells-out, base prices will continue to escalate, as will resale prices. Check back with us two years after SSR sells-out (at which point there will probably be about 42 years left on SSR contracts and 30 years on others) and we'll see how things are stacking up.

Until then, I think you're making a lot of questionable assumptions based upon your biased predictions of how the free market will react.

You don't have to rent your points to understand that the rental market and ROFR are the biggest factors driving resale values.

The stagnant rental market is driving resale prices?!?! That's a new one. Here I was thinking it was ROFR and the forces of supply & demand.

As for the rest of your post, I don't agree with a word of it.

 

[Mississippian]

I always find it very funny (to me anyway) that a lot of people think all of us buying into SSR (or any future site) are all desperate to reserve at BCV and BWV. Sure I would like to try them because I have a quirk where I want to try ALL Disney owned properties.

I may be the minority (well at least that is the impression I get) but I like SSR and don't give much of a rip about taking the bus during F/W or anywhere for that matter.

Not to flame, and this is pure curiosity but why do most people think that is all SSR owners want to do, buy there only to always stay at BC or BWV?

I've visited with people who bought into SSR to stay elsewhere, never the opposite.

I've read many posts from people doing the same thing, never the opposite.

SSR is a great resort for people who don't like to eat in restaurants or have easy access to the the theme parks. Many people are happy with this, but I think most are not.

 

[tjkraz]

I've visited with people who bought into SSR to stay elsewhere, never the opposite.

I've read many posts from people doing the same thing, never the opposite.

You did say "never", right? You might want to check Sammie's posts in this thread...

SSR is a great resort for people who don't like to eat in restaurants or have easy access to the the theme parks. Many people are happy with this, but I think most are not.

A new restaurant was announced for SSR over a month ago. As an old journalism professor used to say "always check your facts."

As for the location issue, occupancy levels at Old Key West, Animal Kingdom Lodge, Port Orleans French Quarter, Port Orleans Riverside, Coronado Springs, Pop Century and the All Star Resorts seem to indicate that location is not the be-all and end-all of criteria used to select a resort.

 

[crisi]

I've visited with people who bought into SSR to stay elsewhere, never the opposite.

I've read many posts from people doing the same thing, never the opposite.

SSR is a great resort for people who don't like to eat in restaurants or have easy access to the the theme parks. Many people are happy with this, but I think most are not.

If you bought from Disney it would be difficult to buy a different resort intending to stay at SSR. The other resorts from Disney are officially "sold out" though some people have been able to convince their Guide to sell them points there.

People who bought BWVs originally could not have bought intending to stay at VWL (at least, not until the Villas there were announced).

And I suspect there are plenty of people who bought when DVC was just OKW and BWV who really like something about VWL, BCV or SSR - resorts that weren't even announced when they purchased.

 

[athenna]

I've visited with people who bought into SSR to stay elsewhere, never the opposite.

I've read many posts from people doing the same thing, never the opposite.

SSR is a great resort for people who don't like to eat in restaurants or have easy access to the the theme parks. Many people are happy with this, but I think most are not.

Really? That's news to me. I own at SSR and guess what-I don't starve to death And I don't have to hitchhike to the parks, I get there in one piece.

 

[cobbler]

It is really sad that is way you are made to feel on these boards. Let me just state that as a non-SSR owner, I feel NO animosity towards people buying SSR!! Heck...in 37 years, you will be laughing at all of us "poor souls" who will no longer be members!

I am the first to admit that I LOVE my home resort, and am VERY protective about it....I can't help it....that place just makes me happy, and I want to see it stand up well for the next 37 years!! It does take a beating, and is in desperate need of renovation. I don't think DVC planned for it being so popular, as the cleaning/renovation schedule desperately needs to be re-worked.

However, I think that sometimes either SSR owners feel and/or disboarders allude to the fact that SSR owners are to blame. That is not the case. DVD is to blame for the problems that owners of small resorts either imagine, or truly feel because of the differential in the size of the resorts...it's never the members who are buying in and paying more than any other member ever did (except for us idiots who are still buying sold-out resorts at $92 per point ....I truly have a sickness!!)

Anyway....sorry that you feel that way sometimes. And, I am sorry if my protectiveness over BCV ever made you (or anyone else) that way!!



Beca

No problem Beca. I don't take it personally. I really find it rather amusing.

Hubby and I have already decided if we were to add on it would either be at our home resort (SSR) or a newer resort. We have decided we don't want to add on where there is a shorter contract. We don't want to add on at an older resort. Just us. Maybe I am a very small percentage of this fact but we are there.

I love my home resort, haven't stayed there yet. Have 12 more days before I can but when we took the tour we fell in love with it. I love that more deluxe feeling it has with the decor. The resort is gorgous and heck a spa is right there too!!!

Now of course you can all complain at me for those 3 years when I am trying to stay at BC/BW/WL villas so I can cross them off my list. I don't mind But when I am done there, the chances of me wanting to go back are slim.

My friends aunt owns at BCV and I have seen their rooms, the gorgous 2 bdrm that made me so envious and I really wanted to move in with her. That is when I started dropping hints to hubby about buying. But honestly, I like SSR a little better

It will be interesting to see how this all pans out in a couple of years. Just so long as my old hiney can get into my resort in 2043 when everyone elses contracts are gone. I may have to beat all you BW/BC/WL villa people with my cane because you guys are doing what some SSR owners are doing now!!
(That was a joke by the way, just in case you missed it )

 

[DrTomorrow]

Disclaimer: We bought into SSR with the intent of staying there for the majority of our trips, and have little interest (other than the novelty value) of other DVC Resorts.

Several of you wonderful folks have asked why SSR owners sometimes sound defensive. I can now present 3 examples in answer to your questions.

1. The "always" folks.

[...] I have nothing against SSR but it will always suffer in terms of resale value (and rental value) due to this.

Disregarding the reality outside of 'time value of money' calculations, these folks have no problem making broad negative statements covering multiple future decades. In essence, these folks state, as a fact, that the minute someone buys into SSR they are already behind - and will be forever.

2. The "never" folks.

I've visited with people who bought into SSR to stay elsewhere, never the opposite.

I've read many posts from people doing the same thing, never the opposite.

SSR is a great resort for people who don't like to eat in restaurants or have easy access to the the theme parks. Many people are happy with this, but I think most are not.

Disregarding current and future plans, and despite the fact that such a post is in this very thread, these folks are 100% certain that SSR has no true appeal as a DVC Resort. [And it doesn't take an empath so feel the emotional undercurrent of "only losers stay at SSR" ]

3. The "homers".

[...] You listed your history, but I noticed you have yet tried either resort. I'm pretty sure you would prefer the convenience that BCV and BWV have to offer, that's all. Matt

These are the people who just can't accept the idea that someone would be happy at any other DVC resort than their (non-SSR) home resort. Yeah, some people enjoy staying at SSR, but that's only because they don't know any better.

For me, other than as a minor diversion, it's all a big laugh . I mean if someone has really tied their worth and self-esteem into which DVC Resort they own at, I can do nothing but pity them - and offer them a toast from the balcony of my SSR Villa.

IMHO - YMMV - Be well!

 

[thelobstershanty]

Why would anyone care what a bunch of strangers think about your home resort? As long as you like it, that is all that counts.
The new kid on the DVC block ALWAYS gets picked on. When BWV opened it was ripped apart, then it was VWL, then BCV and now it's SSR turn.
Having said that, I do agree that there are a lot of DVC members that bought at SSR only because that is what is being sold by Disney. And this is only the beginning, SSR still has many more memberships that will become available. If just half of these members buy with the intention of booking at VWL, BCV & BWV, this is going to put a big strain on the smaller DVC resorts when the 7 month booking window opens up. This will most definitely directly effect the members that own at these resorts and wish to book at these resorts. The DVC members at these resorts will then have to be much more vigilant about booking during the home advantage window then members of the large DVC resorts will need to be.
I can see where this could be very frustrating to someone that "bought where they wanted to stay". Many DVC members take multiple WDW vacations per year. If a member owns at a smaller resort and wishes to always stay at their home resort, they are forced to plan all their travel plans for the year at 11-8 months out. At times this requires borrowing pts, banking pts etc. Much more advance planning and more extensive record keeping required for these members, then a member that owns at resort with 3x, 4x or greater, number of villas available.
I have read comments from members with home resorts at VWL, BCV & BWV who state they prefer one of the large DVC resorts over their home resort and have no desire to stay at their home resort. Based on what I have read and heard, these comments are very much in the minority. But, that is just my experience, not to be interpreted in any way, as a broad negative statement covering either the present or future decades of DVC.

 

[CNMooner]

I've visited with people who bought into SSR to stay elsewhere, never the opposite.

I've read many posts from people doing the same thing, never the opposite.

SSR is a great resort for people who don't like to eat in restaurants or have easy access to the the theme parks. Many people are happy with this, but I think most are not.

Yes, of course. Because DTD has no restaurants. And you can walk to EPCOT from a BWV and BCV-- every other location and you're bussing or driving it. So honestly dude, get over yourself. SSR is is not full of people clamoring to kick you out of your resort. And I'm sure that people who owns at BWV and BCV do stay at other places too.

Why don't you just suggest that only SSR owners should be confined to their home resort? I mean, since you obviously consider us non-eating people who are too stupid to recognize a bad location when they see it?

 

[Sammie]

I've visited with people who bought into SSR to stay elsewhere, never the opposite.

I've read many posts from people doing the same thing, never the opposite.

SSR is a great resort for people who don't like to eat in restaurants or have easy access to the the theme parks. Many people are happy with this, but I think most are not.

We do not own at SSR and we love it. Considering an addon there because we like it so much and don't want to have to worry about not being able to book early.

I consider Artist's Pallette a restaurant, they serve food and offer places to sit down, what do you consider a restaurant. They are expanding the offerings in the Turf Club so that will be even better.

The theme park one to me is the most ridiculous statement of all. Proximity to parks has nothing to do with how quickly one can get to a park. SSR has very easy access to the parks, I walk right out my front door go a few yards catch an air conditioned bus and within minutes I am in any park I choose.

No resort has direct access and BCV and BWV can be a long walk. In fact I am sure many SSR guests can be at MGM or Epcot before guests at BCV or BWV can timewise. This summer we stayed at SSR and friends were at BW, we were caught in an horrible thunderstorm while leaving Epcot, we caught our bus and made it back to our villa easily. Our friends on the other hand were stuck at the International Gateway for almost an hour. Their easy access made them late for dinner.

Also lets not forget there are 4 parks, there is no resort close to all of them.

I could care less if anyone likes SSR, but please do not disparage it with false statements. I have stayed at all the DVC resorts many times including HH and Vero, so my comments are based on my actual experiences.

I like all the DVC resorts. Each has it's own appeal, but none are perfect and none are flawed. They are different and sometimes I think that is the main problem, some can not respect the difference.

 

[dvc-NE]

I appreciate the response everyone has given my original question about DCV reserving the right to limit you to booking only at home resort in the future. I must say I learned a few things but the bottom line is I do feel better about my SSR ownership. For example I have stayed at SSR and golfed once at LBV. I could have walked there from my room, and you can not walk to a golf course from BCV or BWV. I realized all resorts have pros and cons but there is really something at each one for everyone. I suppose when Eagle Pines or Contemporary comes along, SSR will no longer be low man on the totem pole. Anyway, I think I know why the Disney Member Cruise is so popular. DVC members seem to be a very nice group of people, and are helpful as well. Matt

 

[Mississippian]

We do not own at SSR and we love it. Considering an addon there because we like it so much and don't want to have to worry about not being able to book early.

I consider Artist's Pallette a restaurant, they serve food and offer places to sit down, what do you consider a restaurant. They are expanding the offerings in the Turf Club so that will be even better.

The theme park one to me is the most ridiculous statement of all. Proximity to parks has nothing to do with how quickly one can get to a park. SSR has very easy access to the parks, I walk right out my front door go a few yards catch an air conditioned bus and within minutes I am in any park I choose.

No resort has direct access and BCV and BWV can be a long walk. In fact I am sure many SSR guests can be at MGM or Epcot before guests at BCV or BWV can timewise. This summer we stayed at SSR and friends were at BW, we were caught in an horrible thunderstorm while leaving Epcot, we caught our bus and made it back to our villa easily. Our friends on the other hand were stuck at the International Gateway for almost an hour. Their easy access made them late for dinner.

Also lets not forget there are 4 parks, there is no resort close to all of them.

I could care less if anyone likes SSR, but please do not disparage it with false statements. I have stayed at all the DVC resorts many times including HH and Vero, so my comments are based on my actual experiences.

I like all the DVC resorts. Each has it's own appeal, but none are perfect and none are flawed. They are different and sometimes I think that is the main problem, some can not respect the difference.

Sammie,
I think you are the first person I know of who owns elsewhere but prefers SSR. But if you like it, I think that's great.

How can you say it is a long walk from BCV to Epcot? The first time I stayed there I started walking, decided it was too long and started to get on the boat. I then realized I was already there! We're talking no distance at all! BWV is a little further off, but you'll beat the bus every time, and enjoy it in the process.

At times I enjoy Disney buses, but nothing beats the reliability of my feet. I frequently have to wait, and wait, and wait, and wait for a bus. I never have to wait for my feet to arrive.

As for what I consider a restaurant, it is not a restaurant unless you sit down and someone takes your order, and you have a full menu to order from, with drinks and wine also available. My understanding is that Artist's Pallette doesn't have this. If I am in error, I apolgize.