With more memberships, you are going to have more people able to book at the 7 month window - that's just a fact. It isn't a matter of DVC keeping up - there are exactly enough rooms for the number of points that have been purchased for use throughout the year.
My big question comes with all those developer points. Wouldn't that in effect skew the ratio? If someone buys 160 and gets 160 developer, wouldn't that make it as if an additional person had purchased..for the one year only, but still put pressure on the resorts, since the developer points don't come out of any 'room' allotment?
Before Disney Vacation Development (DVD) can sell a given block of points, a corresponding amount of room inventory must be "declared into the condominium." At that point, that inventory ceases to be developer inventory.My big question comes with all those developer points. Wouldn't that in effect skew the ratio? If someone buys 160 and gets 160 developer, wouldn't that make it as if an additional person had purchased..for the one year only, but still put pressure on the resorts, since the developer points don't come out of any 'room' allotment?
It's hard to predict, but it seems to me that to the degree that offsite DVC sales happen faster than onsite DVC sales, we can expect increasing pressure at seven months onsite. I also expect that pressure to be much greater than what we're now seeing -- which is primarily owners of larger home resorts booking at smaller resorts.
DVC California is so small it won't have any impact. And I suspect the Hawaii will be proportionally well sized for the members who occationally want to go to Hawaii to trade into it - I suspect DVC has enough data on people trading to Hawaii to have sized the resort fairly well. Plus as the original membership gets older, I think they will be more interested in offsite options. That may not mean much for getting BCVs at seven months, but the folks in their 50s whose small children are now teenagers or college age who own BWV or OKW may be freeing up some spots.
(My own kids - eight and nine - have a Hawaiian vacation pretty much at the top of their "can we, Mom?" lists.
No. It's just that Disney (DVD) owns those points as they haven't been sold yet. There are still rooms/units to backup those points.
I agree with you. I think those who buy the smaller contracts do so with the intent of booking at the 11 month window. Thus, there are more people using the home resort booking advantage for peak times.I wonder what effect the proliferation of small contracts (through the resale market) has had on room availability. While there may have been enough rooms for the number of points purchased, there are now many more small contract members trying to reserve these rooms. For example, I have a 25 point contract at VWL in addition to my BWV contract. If I sold my VWL contract then there would now be two members booking where there had been only one.
Would this affect the reservation availability?
I agree with your sentiment, and add that folks buying into Hawaii will probably be primarily from the West Coast, so less likely to go to DW vs DL.
All the European travellers I meet in WDW tend to argue against that. Consider when you're a UKer and it costs $1000 USD to fly coach across the ocean why wouldn't you just take a cheaper flight or train ride to EuroDisney? The answer I always get is that "but this is Disney WORLD". The presumption being that all the other destinations are somehow substitutions.
A West Coaster can spend half that on a flight around the same distance and time.
My point is that DVC is seen as a timeshare built around an amusement park. It's not like Marriott where the timeshare is an extension of a worldwide hotel system. People who buy it are doing so to get that Disney experience. Where better to do that than in Walt's dream world?[/QUOTE
We are only speculating, but a couple counterpoints:
1. I do a lot of traveling in Europe (business). When I talk to Disney fans from the great continent, they tell me it's cheaper to travel to Orlando than to Paris (total cost of hotel, food, etc). It is especially cheaper now with the weak dollar, but even when the dollar is strong this statement is still true (at least in the past). I'll let our European DVCers comment on this statement.
2. They have no desire to go to Paris in December (cold and wet) vs Orlando.
3. As to West coasters...many times its cheaper to fly to Hawaii than Orlando (personal experience). Yes, they do like WDW, but many prefer the beaches of the Islands vs Orlando. That is why the timeshare business in Hawaii is going gangbusters.
So, my view, Hawaii is not going to have as big an impact that you assume.
No. It's just that Disney (DVD) owns those points as they haven't been sold yet. There are still rooms/units to backup those points.
2. They have no desire to go to Paris in December (cold and wet) vs Orlando.
3. As to West coasters...many times its cheaper to fly to Hawaii than Orlando (personal experience). Yes, they do like WDW, but many prefer the beaches of the Islands vs Orlando. That is why the timeshare business in Hawaii is going gangbusters.
So, my view, Hawaii is not going to have as big an impact that you assume.
Actually the number of members and units makes no difference for most situations. The question is the relative demand for one resort compared to another. Take SSR, a great resort, but not as high of demand as some of the other resorts thus more people vying at the 7 months window. It'll likely take 2000 or so unit that are more in demand to balance that single resort's effect on the system. I think AKV will help to some disagree, CRV certainly will help if the points are in line with the rest. I think GCV will have no effect mostly because it's so small that mostly those that own there will get to stay and almost no one else. HI is hard to say. As a rule most HI resorts only have 50% owner occupancy presumably due to the airfare, Aruba is similar to a degree.I doubt any one resort will break the system. It's the cumulative effect I worry about. 50 units at GCV, 400-600 units at Hawaii, another several hundred in the Caribbean, then all those other unnamed global locations.
Eventually I can see the number of members wanting to stay in WDW outweighing the number wanting to stay elsewhere. That's not the same as someone wanting to stay a mile down the road from where there's another room.
I doubt any one resort will break the system. It's the cumulative effect I worry about. 50 units at GCV, 400-600 units at Hawaii, another several hundred in the Caribbean, then all those other unnamed global locations.
Eventually I can see the number of members wanting to stay in WDW outweighing the number wanting to stay elsewhere. That's not the same as someone wanting to stay a mile down the road from where there's another room.
I can see your point, but what must Disney do to accommodate members. If they don't build more resorts of that size, it is soon going to become impossible to get a reservation, thus making the membership frustrating and useless.