does this make sense---or am I just more confused?

[SnowWhite12]

OK, so if we buy at BLT b/c of lower MF's, would we have a pretty good chance of booking at AKV 7months out? The reason I wonder is that I do occassionally want to stay at BLT, and the fees are less, but the points needed for stays are less at AKV. That would give us 2 trips a year there instead of just one. Would this make sense to do?

 

[lark]

OK, so if we buy at BLT b/c of lower MF's, would we have a pretty good chance of booking at AKV 7months out? The reason I wonder is that I do occassionally want to stay at BLT, and the fees are less, but the points needed for stays are less at AKV. That would give us 2 trips a year there instead of just one. Would this make sense to do?

In my opinion, no. The difference in dues right now is about $1/point. This could change at any time, and it's hard to rely on.

But let's assume it stays static for a while. You could buy AKV right now for about $10 less per point than BLT, and up to $20 less per point if you buy resale. At that kind of discount, it would take 10 to 20 years until the fees caught up with you.

In the meantime, you'd have points at the resort where you prefer to stay. I do tend to think that AKV will be somewhat easier to book at the 7 month period than BLT since it's bigger. But if AKV is where you want to stay, I wouldn't let the slightly higher dues keep you from it, given the price difference between the two resorts.

 

[disneynutz]

I would bet that BLT dues are artificially low to make BLT seem like a good deal. I will bet that the cost to maintain the building and the subsequent dues will be increased as the building sells out.

 

[DVC Mike]

I would bet that BLT dues are artificially low to make BLT seem like a good deal. I will bet that the cost to maintain the building and the subsequent dues will be increased as the building sells out.

No, the dues are not artificially low. They are lower than the other resorts because the high point requirements mean the fees can be spread across more points.

 

[pyrxtc]

I think it would depend on what kid of room you would be trying to book. Savannah views are going to go fast as are the value rooms. Standard rooms may not go as fast so if you are okay with that, then you should be fine. If you have your heart set on savannah view or even ever staying in the concierge rooms, then i suggest buying AKV's. I go for the buy where you want to stay thing so I would buy AKV, and I did.

 

[Sandisw]

While it is possible, there will be certain things that will be hard to get at AKV if you don't own there--concierge and possible value rooms.

If you are on the fence and want to stay BLT some times, but mostly at AKV, you will be able to buy both through Disney. Some have done that--split the contract between both resorts.

For example, say you want to do BLT every 3rd year, with AKV the rest of the time. Buy 1/3 the points you need at BLT and the rest at AKV. Then you will be able to use banking and borrowing situation to accomplish both.

As others have said, the difference in price between AKV and BLT with Disney is at least $8.00 per point (and bigger if you go resale). It will take a while to make up the point difference. If your goal is really to stay at AKV, then I would start out owning there. To me, there is nothing worse than owning points and finding out you can't stay where you want. And, as you said, your points will not go as far at BLT as they will at AKV which means you have to book a smaller vacation to start at your 11 month window and hope that what you want is there at 7.

 

[pinnocchiosdad]

I would bet that BLT dues are artificially low to make BLT seem like a good deal. I will bet that the cost to maintain the building and the subsequent dues will be increased as the building sells out.

I think the MF are low NOW because tower number 2 is in the works, and that will ^ MF's.

 

[ssawka]

I think the MF are low NOW because tower number 2 is in the works, and that will ^ MF's.

Why would a second tower increase MFs? If at most the total cost of MFs with another tower doublues (which it shouldn't due to economies of scale), then MFs should be the same.

 

[Dean]

No, the dues are not artificially low. They are lower than the other resorts because the high point requirements mean the fees can be spread across more points.

Mike, isn't there also a developer subsidy which does artificially lower the fees further?

I do expect the dues at BLT to remain a little lower due to the larger number of points the costs are spread over, but not as much difference as now. I personally would assume a max of 50-75 cent savings over SSR/OKW long term. Whether the higher cost for the lower dues is worth it depends on specifics. For one who wants to stay at BLT more trips, esp for MK view, it may be. For one looking to stay at AKV a large part of the trips but at BLT part of the time and don't care about the view type that much, it is likely not. Don't forget AKV has it's share of units you can't get unless you own there including concierge. If costs are are major consideration and you're planning on most of your trips booked at the 7 mo window anyway, I'd buy SSR or SSR plus a smaller BLT add on. Given the price spread, you'll never make up the difference in dues for BLT vs SSR. Or in this case, maybe a combo of AKV and BLT.

 

[Dean]

Why would a second tower increase MFs? If at most the total cost of MFs with another tower doublues (which it shouldn't due to economies of scale), then MFs should be the same.

I suspect the reference is to developer subsidies to facilitate sales now and into the future when when sales are far enough along, the subsidies go away. Ignoring that, you'd expect them to be roughly the same but they could go up or down somewhat due to many other factors.

 

[wdrl]

Mike, isn't there also a developer subsidy which does artificially lower the fees further?

The developer subsidy for BLT in the 2009 budget is only $0.0506 per point (see http://www.dvcnews.com/dvc-program/financial/2009-resort-budgets). Even if the subsidy were to go away, BLT's MF would still be around $3.72 per point, still giving BLT the lowest MF of all the resorts.

 

[Dean]

The developer subsidy for BLT in the 2009 budget is only $0.0506 per point (see http://www.dvcnews.com/dvc-program/financial/2009-resort-budgets). Even if the subsidy were to go away, BLT's MF would still be around $3.72 per point, still giving BLT the lowest MF of all the resorts.

I knew it was small but Mike's statement was there wasn't one. The dues are still likely artificially low at this point because there is little ongoing maintenance and there MAY be other incentives in effect with DVC and other components of Disney they deal with. I think it's unrealistic to expect the difference going forward will be over $1 a point difference between BLT and other on property options. Expect BLT to creep up more over time and faster still once sales have reached a given point. Simply don't expect a major savings on dues long term to make up for a higher up front cost, it isn't going to happen.
I would be willing to wager that in 10 years, BLT isn't the cheapest on property dues.

 

[thepops]

I did a quick spreadsheet comparing a Savanah view and MK and lake views in terms of points needed and maint. fees for a weeks vacation. The MK and savanah costs for maint fees X points is a wash. ($35 in high season). But comparing with a lake view, it's between $177 and $250 less to stay at BLT! But, it will take you between 25 and 31 years to make up the $20/point buy in difference (using the resale number).

 

[Mtnman44]

Buy AKV resale, put the extra money in an interest bearing account and use it each year to pay one $ per point of your dues.