DVC in Lake Tahoe and Caribbean?

[tomandrobin]

No way I'd buy or stay at Tahoe. We live minutes from great skiing and hiking as it is.

As for the Caribbean, we'd probably want to stay there once or twice, but overall it's too hard to get there from where we live. So we wouldn't buy there.

Hawaii is much easier. We WILL buy AND use either DVC or Westin (or maybe both if I can talk DH inot it) in Hawaii.

And we are totally in the opposite position. Caribbean is much easier for us, and Hawaii we would only visit every 5 years or so. And also do the Westin thing, in fact we are staying at the Westin in Hawaii next October.

 

[dwelty]

I realize these are still rumors and hopefully they are still quite a few years away. I'd feel better if they test the waters with Hawaii rather than developing 2 or 3 off-site locations at once. If any (or all) of those locations don't draw significant year-round crowds, DVC will resort to fire sale tactics and increased competition for the theme park resorts.

I honestly think that Disney is more interested in these type of locations simply to "round out" the DVC portfolio, offering more options that will appeal to a larger market segment. I think these resorts will be relatively small. It does not matter if a Lake Tahoe resort only has 60 units, Disney can still claim that DVC has a ski destination. Even if it takes them 6 years to sell it, so what? Having this additional destination can help sales overall at all locations because DVC is offering more options for its members. Imagin the Dream book with photos of a family at a property in Hawaii, you turn the page, and now you have a family skiing together. Resort possibilities like Tahoe and the Caribbean are more for marketing DVC as a well rounded program than anything else. (IMHO)

 

[tomandrobin]

I honestly think that Disney is more interested in these type of locations simply to "round out" the DVC portfolio, offering more options that will appeal to a larger market segment. I think these resorts will be relatively small. It does not matter if a Lake Tahoe resort only has 60 units, Disney can still claim that DVC has a ski destination. Even if it takes them 6 years to sell it, so what? Having this additional destination can help sales overall at all locations because DVC is offerning more options for its members. Imagin the Dream book with photos of a family at a property in Hawaii, you turn the page, and now you have a family skiing together. Resort possibilities like Tahoe and the Caribbean are more for marketing DVC as a well rounded program than anything else. (IMHO)

And to go one further, what if they partnered up with an established resort and just added a small DVC timeshare. Look at Atlantis, The Harborside Resort is a 50% venture between Atlantis and Westin. The new Hawaiin Resort will be a mixed hotel/timeshare location. We have gotten use to the fact of DVC resorts being exclusive.

 

[shellbelle1971]

I'd feel better if they test the waters with Hawaii rather than developing 2 or 3 off-site locations at once. If any (or all) of those locations don't draw significant year-round crowds, DVC will resort to fire sale tactics and increased competition for the theme park resorts.

Ah, I think I understand. I'm guessing, though, that although Jim Lewis is out scouting new locations (in Tahoe, Caribbean, and/or elsewhere) DVC will have plenty of time to see how Hawaii does before any other "offsite" resorts get to the sales phase.

 

[shellbelle1971]

And to go one further, what if they partnered up with an established resort and just added a small DVC timeshare. Look at Atlantis, The Harborside Resort is a 50% venture between Atlantis and Westin. The new Hawaiin Resort will be a mixed hotel/timeshare location. We have gotten use to the fact of DVC resorts being exclusive.

Wasn't there a rumor some time ago about a DVC-Marriott partnership?

 

[benjaminb13]

It basically comes down to the two things that I mentioned--offering extra incentives to buy at the off-site locations while convincing people that they will have no trouble using their points to book at a WDW-based resort.

Back when DVC made its final push to sell the remaining Vero points, they offered discounts of at least $15 off per point in a time when the discount was $10 at the WDW resorts. And they frequently told buyers that they would never have to use their points at Vero.

I'm not trying to draw any direct comparisons between Vero and Hawaii / Tahoe / Caribbean, but it's the tactic that I fear. As appealing as these new destinations sound, I'm not entirely convinced that a "Disney" timeshare can make the leap to mainstream. If you want a Hawaii or a Lake Tahoe resort, there are an awful lot of other timeshares on the market that will fit the bill. In my mind the bulk of the market will be Disney theme park fans who are willing to try something different. Is that market really big enough to support multiple destinations like this?

I realize these are still rumors and hopefully they are still quite a few years away. I'd feel better if they test the waters with Hawaii rather than developing 2 or 3 off-site locations at once. If any (or all) of those locations don't draw significant year-round crowds, DVC will resort to fire sale tactics and increased competition for the theme park resorts.

I dont agree- IMO-Keeping DVC in florida only sounds a little shortsighted---I think that right now- th esetup is almost unfair- the Disney experience is only made accessible yearly to those of us who do not live in the Western states- Those of us who live in the western states and travel dvc can only do so EOY because of the expense and inconvenience- If their plans pull through - those of us wo own at different resorts- could move exclusively to disney

 

[nuts]

It really is simple...profits! Timeshare is a very profitable business. Disney made a mistake with Vero Beach and HHI. No, not the location...but rather their expectations. These sites sold well compared to the industry, but not compared to on-site locations. DVD now understands this. Build in Tahoe and they will sell. They will sell to West Coast families who like to ski. They won't sell as fast as on-site, but they will still sell, and not at a fire sale rate. They have hired folks from the industry who understand. DVD is learning patience means profits.

 

[JimMIA]

IMO-Keeping DVC in florida only sounds a little shortsighted---I think that right now- the setup is almost unfair- the Disney experience is only made accessible yearly to those of us who do not live in the Western states- Those of us who live in the western states and travel dvc can only do so EOY because of the expense and inconvenience-

I really doubt that the concept of "fairness" enters into DVC's calculations at all. DVC is a for-profit business, not a charity or social-service agency.

DVC obviously has a booming market for onsite WDW DVC properties. WDW is by far the biggest draw in the Disney constellation and DVC has proven to be a natural and VERY profitable fit. Whether it is sufficiently profitable at Disneyland, or in Hawaii, remains to be seen.

To me, the less "Disney" a venue is, the less attractive DVC becomes relative to their competitors. There is a real marketable advantage to being onsite at WDW. I think there is much less advantage to being onsite at DL CA, and I'm not sure what the rationale is for Hawaii. If I were considering a Hawaiian or Caribbean vacation, there would have to be some distinctive "Disney" advantage to make me choose DVC over a competitor. Both of those markets have literally hundreds of world-class resorts, and competing there is nothing like competing at WDW.

One concern I have is whether DVC has enough management horsepower to manage what they have now. They obviously put the lion's share of their effort into marketing and expanding. We can only hope that emphasis does not lead to a decline in the guest experience at existing resorts. That would be the greatest "unfairness" of all.

 

[sjdisneywedding]

If I were considering a Hawaiian or Caribbean vacation, there would have to be some distinctive "Disney" advantage to make me choose DVC over a competitor. Both of those markets have literally hundreds of world-class resorts, and competing there is nothing like competing at WDW.

there is..you can still get into WDW or DL or the other potential new places without having to go through the typical timeshare trading or renting.

you may not be able to get peak time periods at every resort, but I have little doubt that there would be something available somewhere in WDW most times of year

thats the benefit of a vacation club and with WDW as the main hub of this club, well thats a pretty good draw for many people.

with the size of SSR and a couple other larger DVC resorts resorts, and the draw that will occur from the off site WDW DVC resorts there will be plenty of room for those non WDW DVC owners to get in

 

[tjkraz]

I dont agree- IMO-Keeping DVC in florida only sounds a little shortsighted---I think that right now- th esetup is almost unfair- the Disney experience is only made accessible yearly to those of us who do not live in the Western states- Those of us who live in the western states and travel dvc can only do so EOY because of the expense and inconvenience- If their plans pull through - those of us wo own at different resorts- could move exclusively to disney

I really wan't trying to comment on the demand for other off-site locations. Disney is in a much better position than I am to make that determination.

What I AM saying is that I hope DVC has realistic (conservative) expectations for sales in these areas. I would rather they take 5-10 years to sell a smallish resort rather than getting nervous and starting to peddle the points at a discount to folks who really have no desire to actually visit those locations.

The Vero resort is around 170 rooms, and that was the end result after the development plan was downsized. It took 10 years to sell all of the points there, and that included DVC's heavy discounting near the end. By comparison, DVC can sell more than 170 units worth of points at WDW in less than a year's time.

That said, we could spend all day thinking of reasons why Vero was a disappointment. I am excited about Hawaii, but the prospect of developing two or three off-site resorts simultaneously makes me a bit nervous.

 

[shellbelle1971]

Back when DVC made its final push to sell the remaining Vero points, they offered discounts of at least $15 off per point in a time when the discount was $10 at the WDW resorts. And they frequently told buyers that they would never have to use their points at Vero.

But don't we already see similar tactics w/ SSR sales?

 

[tjkraz]

But don't we already see similar tactics w/ SSR sales?

That's far from exclusive to SSR. DVC has been known to tout the entire program, whether the property for sale is VB, SSR, AKV or any other.

What I find particularly disturbing in this case is the unknown demand for off-site combined with the possibility of up to 3 non-theme park destinations being marketed in a similar timeframe. Getting shut out of a specific resort is one thing, but now we're talking about the possibility of getting shut out of WDW altogether if demand for the off-sites isn't equal to supply.

Obviously this is all very speculative, but it's worth keeping an eye on.

 

[littlestar]

I think for DVC to be attractive to more than the "Disneyworld every year crowd" they need to expand to other locations. One of the draws with Marriott Vacation Club is their fine resorts with locations all over. With the latest purchase of our most recent Marriott, we received a booklet called "Guide to Marriott's Vacation Villa Rentals." This book is a little manual of all of Marriott's vacation club properties. It's quite impressive. I count 48 vacation club resorts listed in this booklet. And there are some new Marriotts that are not even listed yet. You can stay within the Marriott system and travel all over the world.

I hope DVC/Disney can pull it off with style/class. Hopefully the new resorts outside of the parks will be seen as boutique and extra special in their own way. I have to admit, I've often wished for a replica of Disney's Wilderness Lodge sitting in Gatlinburg with Disney service and theming. That's a little over a 6 hour drive for me. I'd like to be able to stay at a Disney resort without having to book plane fare every time.

 

[kend58]

I think the key to the viability of off WDW and away from the other Disney theme parks DVC sites is balance of WDW DVC owners trade desires and size or the non-theme park resorts. This assumes the Disney sales advantage is that the majority of non-theme park colocated buyers are thinking of trading into WDW as their prime or secondary (prime being uisng the actual resort they are buying at) reason to buy.

I believe they are doing Hawaii 1st because many DVC owners have traded (or at least tried to trade) via II to get Hawaii and would logically internally trade to use a Hawaii DVC in sufficient quantities to make that location viable. I think Tahoe and Carribean are being scouted and thought about because SKI locations and teh Carribean are the other relatively high trade out or attempted trade out destinations.

I believe DVD would like to switch the majority of II trades to internal better for Disney if DVD gets the sale and faciltates internal trades than just to collect the II trade fee's.

I think DVD expansion will happen in colocation with the other three Disney Parks (DLP, HKDL, DLT) and to provide non-theme park DVC destinations in vacation market segments with relatively high DVC II trade out stats.

Maybe I give DVD management too much credit but I think they already learned (or at least should have at HHI and Vero) that it doesn't necessarily sell (for high $$ and quickly at least) just because it says Disney in the resort name once they leave a theme park so I am pretty confident rational thought will be prevailing for now.

FWIW it was this type of internal trade flexibility that was a signifigant factor (the other signifigant factor being cost) when I was deciding between Marriott, or HGV or Starwood (SVN) or DVC for my families vacations. I still expect to work DVC into my retirement (10 years away) as opposed to family (kids in HS and college now) travel plans but haven't yet found the perfect entry mechanism.

 

[nunzia]

There may be lots of DVC members who would like to stay at a DVC resort near Lake Tahoe or the Caribbean. I would.

I question how many of them would actually buy at one of those locations. I wouldn't.

I would buy at Tahoe but not the Caribbean

 

[nunzia]

Having been to Tahoe on a few occassions (use to live a few hours away) I can say that I've never been overly impressed by the place. Maybe it was just my trips though. IMO there are other nicer places in Ca. The only reason that Tahoe sounds appealing is for the winter tourism. I wouldn't buy there.

I lived in Reno my growing up years and like Tahoe in the summer..It's a good thing we are all so different

 

[littlestar]

Probably the most awesome vacation club resort system of all would be Hyatt, Marriott, Hilton, Westin/Sheraton, DVC, etc., forming some kind of mini system where their brand names traded amongst each other.

 

[nuts]

Probably the most awesome vacation club resort system of all would be Hyatt, Marriott, Hilton, Westin/Sheraton, DVC, etc., forming some kind of mini system where their brand names traded amongst each other.

You might have good insight

 

[podsnel]

I honestly think that Disney is more interested in these type of locations simply to "round out" the DVC portfolio, offering more options that will appeal to a larger market segment. I think these resorts will be relatively small. It does not matter if a Lake Tahoe resort only has 60 units, Disney can still claim that DVC has a ski destination. Even if it takes them 6 years to sell it, so what? Having this additional destination can help sales overall at all locations because DVC is offering more options for its members. Imagin the Dream book with photos of a family at a property in Hawaii, you turn the page, and now you have a family skiing together. Resort possibilities like Tahoe and the Caribbean are more for marketing DVC as a well rounded program than anything else. (IMHO)

This is what I thought when I read the article and what I was thinking when I signed the papers- and it actually DOES appeal to me, as a new DVC member, to think that there will be Disney accomodations for me in other locations that I can trade points for at DVC rates. I also had heard from friends who have owned for years that the ONLY places they have EVER had trouble booking were Hawaii and the Caribbean- so Disney building there makes aLOT of sense to me, as well as giving people somewhere else to go on the left coast with Tahoe. I have to hope Disney has learned from the past and is clearly thinking about the future.

 

[benjaminb13]

I really doubt that the concept of "fairness" enters into DVC's calculations at all. DVC is a for-profit business, not a charity or social-service agency.

DVC obviously has a booming market for onsite WDW DVC properties. WDW is by far the biggest draw in the Disney constellation and DVC has proven to be a natural and VERY profitable fit. Whether it is sufficiently profitable at Disneyland, or in Hawaii, remains to be seen.

To me, the less "Disney" a venue is, the less attractive DVC becomes relative to their competitors. There is a real marketable advantage to being onsite at WDW. I think there is much less advantage to being onsite at DL CA, and I'm not sure what the rationale is for Hawaii. If I were considering a Hawaiian or Caribbean vacation, there would have to be some distinctive "Disney" advantage to make me choose DVC over a competitor. Both of those markets have literally hundreds of world-class resorts, and competing there is nothing like competing at WDW.

One concern I have is whether DVC has enough management horsepower to manage what they have now. They obviously put the lion's share of their effort into marketing and expanding. We can only hope that emphasis does not lead to a decline in the guest experience at existing resorts. That would be the greatest "unfairness" of all.

I really dont care whether or not the concept of fairness fits into the calculations of a for profit- social service agency like Disney- I was talking about how many view it in the west coast-
You are probably from Florida- so I can see why you would want DVC to stay local.
Anyway-
Disney has their cruise lines and this probably is a big part of their plan to expand
Disney cruise to hawaii/ the Carrebean/ florida/ West coast --
Everyone --from all over--- gets an opportunity to enjoy the experience-