DVC Moderate Resort Being Reported by WDWNT

[lockedoutlogic]

You're describing a location that doesn't seem ripe for adding DVC units... unless there would be some serious amenity uprgades.

That is exactly what I'm saying

 

[beer dave]

As a Tier 2 DVC, it could be promoted as luxurious accommodations & amenities with a MUCH lower buy-in point price of $100 per point, and a much lower buy-in requirement of ONLY 100 points. Weekday points per night could be as low as 6. Weekend points as low as 12. For 54/week in points during the lowest season(s) of the year, a family could stay in a studio for 13 nights, every year.

The luxury amenities would have to be alluring, such as a Storm Along Bay type mini-water park; Trader Sam's-type lounge; Dole whip stand; special table service restaurant.
Of course the canal access to DHS & Epcot would add to the desirability.

As a Tier 2 DVC, DVC bookings would be limited to Tier 2 ONLY. That would mean home resort only until NEW Tier 2s
are built, such as @ FQ/POR.

Even WITH a DIRECT buy-in of ONLY $10K affording families a 7-13 night stay annually,
the STRONG Resale market could cut-into Tier 2 sales.
Families could pay $80-$100/point for a Resale, and have the benefit of booking @ AKV or OKW @ 11 months, & still have enough points, and for ONLY a $10-12K Resale purchase.
Disney could likely further restrict Resale purchases, by limiting them to HOME RESORT ONLY bookings.

It's likely the CBR hotel guests would share the luxury DVC amenities.
They could create a new class of rooms, between Moderate & Deluxe,
and instead of charging $200-300, they could increase the prices to $300-$450 per night.

This all would be great--- except if they build what you have proposed in the bolded area-- what you end up with is a deluxe resort at which I would stay over SSR and OKW and probably VWL. And sometimes AKV----- No way would yor proposed resort be sub deluxe.

On the other hand, I hope they build what you are suggesting.

 

[beer dave]

OK - a few other comments to look at this logically:

1) Would Disney sell a "Low point cost" moderate DVC, meaning instead of $170 a point being $100 a point?

I agree-- no way.

2) Would Disney sell a "Lower point per night stay" moderate DVC, ?

I think of SSR and OKW as moderate DVC's already-- so CBV (like that?) could be the same point levels and they could sell it as a new dvc unit.

3) Would Disney create a "moderate" DVC category that would not exchange in with the other resorts?

And again-- no way.

The most logical thing - this won't actually be a "moderate" DVC.

Most likely not.

Sorry can't figure out how to use the multi quote feature.

 

[Planogirl]

This feels harebrained.

The amenities are lacking at CBR so they'd have to build more to satisfy DVC which in turn would likely be available (at least some) to the general public which would make CBR more desirable overall which would raise prices. And so on. CBR would still have small rooms and be too big and out of the way. I don't see it.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Most likely not.

Sorry can't figure out how to use the multi quote feature.

You have to go in and insert the brackets and commands before/after each part if you want to disect and comment

 

[lockedoutlogic]

This feels harebrained.

The amenities are lacking at CBR so they'd have to build more to satisfy DVC which in turn would likely be available (at least some) to the general public which would make CBR more desirable overall which would raise prices. And so on. CBR would still have small rooms and be too big and out of the way. I don't see it.

That is my fundamental problem as well.

I Know what they are thinking...sadly...it's the Caribbean has had one of the most loyal repeat customer bases since it opened - God knows why - and they are thinking that can be "converted" to a DVC bump.

Maybe...but the problem is the "old guard". They Came out of the ranks of the moderate base...and went into OKW, Boardwalk...and never looked back. The point were a better longterm deal than the rack.

Now you're gonna try to make the water flow "both directions"

Which is how a typhoon starts...I believe.

 

[umichigan10]

That is my fundamental problem as well.

I Know what they are thinking...sadly...it's the Caribbean has had one of the most loyal repeat customer bases since it opened - God knows why - and they are thinking that can be "converted" to a DVC bump.

Maybe...but the problem is the "old guard". They Came out of the ranks of the moderate base...and went into OKW, Boardwalk...and never looked back. The point were a better longterm deal than the rack.

Now you're gonna try to make the water flow "both directions"

Which is how a typhoon starts...I believe.

I think more like a maelstrom (pun intended) but agree with you 100%

 

[Reddog1134]

I just have to figure out how to reply to someones post from this thread and have it land on another.....

Like this?

 

[LAS2AMS]

The facilities of Caribbean, pop, and animation just don't cut it compared to what they built at the now upper end hotels from 71-2001.

They just don't. Way more effort and committment to detail went into those than any of the moderates and values.

And frankly...Caribbean is the worst designed hotel in Disney history. From a logistics and facility standpoint...it's super problematic for both the consumer and the owner.

In fact...port, Dixie and Coronado were all designed not in small parts to correct the flaws of Caribbean. There's a lot of evidence to support that claim...

...besides Disney admitting in at the moderates behind the wall for decades.

The Caribbean Beach and Grand Floridian were built simultaneously; the former cost an estimated $50M while the latter was $135M, despite being significantly smaller and having less than half the number of rooms. Initial rack rates at CBR were set at nearly half those of the lowest priced deluxe property (Disney Inn).

Put simply, the CBR was never designed to compete with the deluxe properties (despite what Wikipedia and these forums sometimes insist). When the CBR first opened, there was no full-service restaurant and the cafeteria-style food court was low-cost, charging less for the same items served at the snack bars of its deluxe properties. Amenities were also less -- for example, it cost less per hour to rent the same watercraft as the deluxe properties, and there was an abundance of low-cost options (like paddle boats) unique to the property. And the rooms were reminiscent of a Days Inn, complete with cheap furnishings.

That said, the CBR is a beautiful property with an abundance of activities and Disney asks for $200+/night for most of the year. I imagine that the DVC villas would be of new construction that's of much higher quality than that of the incumbent hotel. Quite frankly, I don't see why it would be such a poor idea -- there'd be a limited number of room and no infrastructure buildout, so it'd be a low-risk investment for Disney.

I don't see why it'd be any worse than the Saratoga Springs, which built new rooms but maintained pretty much everything else from the Disney Institute. We traveled to Disney a few times per year, and in the late 1990s the Disney Institute was my parents' hotel of choice -- not because it was good, but because it was cheap (room-only $60-$80 AP discounted rates for a one-bedroom bungalow). The property never felt like a true Disney resort to me then (not surprising given its history) nor does Saratoga Springs do so today.

 

[Planogirl]

The Caribbean Beach and Grand Floridian were built simultaneously; the former cost an estimated $50M while the latter was $135M, despite being significantly smaller and having less than half the number of rooms. Initial rack rates at CBR were set at nearly half those of the lowest priced deluxe property (Disney Inn).

Put simply, the CBR was never designed to compete with the deluxe properties (despite what Wikipedia and these forums sometimes insist). When the CBR first opened, there was no full-service restaurant and the cafeteria-style food court was low-cost, charging less for the same items served at the snack bars of its deluxe properties. Amenities were also less -- for example, it cost less per hour to rent the same watercraft as the deluxe properties, and there was an abundance of low-cost options (like paddle boats) unique to the property. And the rooms were reminiscent of a Days Inn, complete with cheap furnishings.

That said, the CBR is a beautiful property with an abundance of activities and Disney asks for $200+/night for most of the year. I imagine that the DVC villas would be of new construction that's of much higher quality than that of the incumbent hotel. Quite frankly, I don't see why it would be such a poor idea -- there'd be a limited number of room and no infrastructure buildout, so it'd be a low-risk investment for Disney.

I don't see why it'd be any worse than the Saratoga Springs, which built new rooms but maintained pretty much everything else from the Disney Institute. We traveled to Disney a few times per year, and in the late 1990s the Disney Institute was my parents' hotel of choice -- not because it was good, but because it was cheap (room-only $60-$80 AP discounted rates for a one-bedroom bungalow). The property never felt like a true Disney resort to me then (not surprising given its history) nor does Saratoga Springs do so today.

Location. I think that Saratoga Springs has a far better location.

 

[danikoski]

Maybe we've got it all wrong...maybe it's going to be a Star Wars hotel

 

[LAS2AMS]

Location. I think that Saratoga Springs has a far better location.

Great point, but overall I find SS to be comparable to one of the better timeshare properties off International drive, and very lacking compared to other resorts. This is largely a derivative of Disney's decision to keep the Institute's infrastructure, which was a budget attempt to theme the then-Village Resort. It's a shame Disney didn't build completely new, because the access and views of DS are stunning.

But with all the deluxe properties now having designated DVC villas, I'm not surprised Disney is turning toward the Moderates. The CBR, IMO, is a better resort than Saratoga Springs, and the villas would likely be new construction and comparable (as opposed to the traditional motor-lodge style). The CBR also seems to have a strong following -- room rates are often higher than the other moderates (and often excluded from promos) despite the conventional opinions that its the inferior of the group. A few hundred DVC villas (with points priced accordingly) seems like a low-risk investment.

I do wonder if Disney will ever move forward with converting the former River Country in DVC...

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Great point, but overall I find SS to be comparable to one of the better timeshare properties off International drive, and very lacking compared to other resorts. This is largely a derivative of Disney's decision to keep the Institute's infrastructure, which was a budget attempt to theme the then-Village Resort. It's a shame Disney didn't build completely new, because the access and views of DS are stunning.

But with all the deluxe properties now having designated DVC villas, I'm not surprised Disney is turning toward the Moderates. The CBR, IMO, is a better resort than Saratoga Springs, and the villas would likely be new construction and comparable (as opposed to the traditional motor-lodge style). The CBR also seems to have a strong following -- room rates are often higher than the other moderates (and often excluded from promos) despite the conventional opinions that its the inferior of the group. A few hundred DVC villas (with points priced accordingly) seems like a low-risk investment.

I do wonder if Disney will ever move forward with converting the former River Country in DVC...

What you're forgetting is that DVC owners don't really book Saratoga...we Certainly don't want another that's "similar" or "slightly better"

And Disney doesn't want one with such a tepid response. They sold it during the bubble...it would NEVER have been built or sold like it did otherwise.

They've had to add more facilities over time and it's still the "last minute choice"...

And don't think that Saratoga hasn't factored into the downtown Disney plans...guaranteed it did.

It's not a well thought plan...it kinda seems desperate...and could lead the development down a slippery slope they may not want to go near.

 

[LAS2AMS]

What you're forgetting is that DVC owners don't really book Saratoga...we Certainly don't want another that's "similar" or "slightly better"

And Disney doesn't want one with such a tepid response. They sold it during the bubble...it would NEVER have been built or sold like it did otherwise.

They've had to add more facilities over time and it's still the "last minute choice"...

And don't think that Saratoga hasn't factored into the downtown Disney plans...guaranteed it did.

It's not a well thought plan...it kinda seems desperate...and could lead the development down a slippery slope they may not want to go near.

The problem with Saratoga Springs is that Disney just winged the design. While Disney did plan on building a second DVC resort (Eagle Pines Resort), it found itself with a surplus of hotel capacity after 9/11. So Disney choose to convert the Disney Institute, which had been a total flop (low occupancy), into its second DVC resort. This made plenty of sense given that the rooms at the Institute were all one-bedroom and larger.

But the problem is that the Institute comprised of a hodgepodge of buildings built over time (as residences, corporate apartments and extended stay lodging). They were never intended to be a resort hotel, but Disney attempted to loosely tie them together as such in the mid-1980s. A decade later, Disney converted it into the Institute, featuring a budget Upstate NY theme but appearing more like a Florida retirement community.

Disney's initial plan was to convert the Institute to a DVC property as-is, repurposing some facilities and demolishing/rebuilding only the townhouses, which resided along prime real estate along the lake overlooking DS but not built to take advantage of such. In late 2002, renovations were well underway on the bungalows. Later, Disney opted to demolish & replace all of the accommodations but keep the Institute's footprint. Really is... SS was just poorly planned.

I don't see that problem with the CBR.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

The problem with Saratoga Springs is that Disney just winged the design. While Disney did plan on building a second DVC resort (Eagle Pines Resort), it found itself with a surplus of hotel capacity after 9/11. The Disney Institute was a flop (low occupancy) even when Disney was setting attendance records; as the rooms within the property were already built as extended stay, it was natural to convert the property into a DVC resort. And that was the initial plan -- renovate the Institute into a more themed DVC resort, repurposing some facilities. Only the former townhouses, which resided along the water facing DTD and didn't take advantage of their location as they were built before the DTD build-up, were set to be demolished & replaced. In fact, Disney did began renovating the former bungalows before abruptly deciding to demolish & rebuild all of the accommodations while maintaining the footprint & infrastructure of the Institute. Reality is... SS was just poorly planned.

I don't see that problem with the CBR.

I think Saratoga had more fundamental problems:

1. It was a failed property that was thrown together (that much we agree upon)
2. The had no DVC to sell at the time...only the reminants of the 90's properties and a small beach club unit. That's when DVC picked up steam - ironic that it was at the same time
As laughable bs credit, huh?
3. That was the Iger regime's first go around...they built it cheap, they built it too big...and it still "sold"...it has cause some awful decisions since..."just give them something" type moves...

...now they've overpriced themselves (public statistics indicate)...they've got no cohesive strategy...and frankly - Iger doesn't get it because he didn't suffer the pain of the first 10 years...some of which he was a stooge at abc...the rest he was mocked by his new boss/predecessor.

Saratoga was a big anomaly that didnt mean what the amateur tea leave readers thought...like avatar sequels

Caribbean...if some mongrelized "half exclusive" tract that is still overpriced...will be a mistake. The first glaring one not on Hawaii since Saratoga.

 

[LAS2AMS]

I think Saratoga had more fundamental problems:

1. It was a failed property that was thrown together (that much we agree upon)
2. The had no DVC to sell at the time...only the reminants of the 90's properties and a small beach club unit. That's when DVC picked up steam - ironic that it was at the same time
As laughable bs credit, huh?
3. That was the Iger regime's first go around...they built it cheap, they built it too big...and it still "sold"...it has cause some awful decisions since..."just give them something" type moves...

...now they've overpriced themselves (public statistics indicate)...they've got no cohesive strategy...and frankly - Iger doesn't get it because he didn't suffer the pain of the first 10 years...some of which he was a stooge at abc...the rest he was mocked by his new boss/predecessor.

Saratoga was a big anomaly that didnt mean what the amateur tea leave readers thought...like avatar sequels

Caribbean...if some mongrelized "half exclusive" tract that is still overpriced...will be a mistake. The first glaring one not on Hawaii since Saratoga.

The problem is that while timeshare sales freefell in the late 2000s/early 2010s, they came soaring back -- 2015 was a banner year and 2016 is expected to surpass it. The market's so hot I've been getting some ridiculous offers that I haven't seen since the mid-2000s. If Disney wants to take advantage of the market, it needs to increase its inventory. Building onto the CBR is a low-cost, low-risk solution that would also enable Disney to entice a price point who may not otherwise consider the DVC.

Long-term I expect Disney will transform Fort Wilderness into its third all-DVC resort (as has been rumored for nearly 6 years), but I doubt they'll take on a project of that scope until they're confident in the market.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

The problem is that while timeshare sales freefell in the late 2000s/early 2010s, they came soaring back -- 2015 was a banner year and 2016 is expected to surpass it. The market's so hot I've been getting some ridiculous offers that I haven't seen since the mid-2000s. If Disney wants to take advantage of the market, it needs to increase its inventory. Building onto the CBR is a low-cost, low-risk solution that would also enable Disney to entice a price point who may not otherwise consider the DVC.

Long-term I expect Disney will transform Fort Wilderness into its third all-DVC resort (as has been rumored for nearly 6 years), but I doubt they'll take on a project of that scope until they're confident in the market.

Timeshares? Or DVC?

DVC has not been selling well by surface indications. I can only assume well below thier projections. How did they not burn trough the Polynesian? That's almost unconscionable.

When you say "I have been getting ridiculous offers"...it questions a bit of your objectivity.

And let's face it...the economy is gonna crash soon. It's nearly an inevitability when the US presidential cycle has a disruption. That's a theory but a likely one.

 

[beer dave]

Location. I think that Saratoga Springs has a far better location.

Only if you like DS alot-- back in the PI days the location had some draw-- but give CBV a direct connect ot either park (especially to Studios) and the location becomes hands above SSR.

 

[beer dave]

What you're forgetting is that DVC owners don't really book Saratoga...we Certainly don't want another that's "similar" or "slightly better"

And Disney doesn't want one with such a tepid response. They sold it during the bubble...it would NEVER have been built or sold like it did otherwise.

They've had to add more facilities over time and it's still the "last minute choice"...

And don't think that Saratoga hasn't factored into the downtown Disney plans...guaranteed it did.

It's not a well thought plan...it kinda seems desperate...and could lead the development down a slippery slope they may not want to go near.

Maybe not you and I, but I think alot of people would like a slightly better version, especially if it comes with a similar point count... I haven't been "stuck" with SSR for a good while due to my predictable travel dates, but I would welcome a better or slightly better option if it arose-- right now I put VWL at a slightly better option to OKW and SSR.....What wouldn't CBV have compared to these locations anyway? All they need is a new building and a restaurant/ lounge.....

 

[LAS2AMS]

Timeshares? Or DVC?

DVC has not been selling well by surface indications. I can only assume well below thier projections. How did they not burn trough the Polynesian? That's almost unconscionable.

When you say "I have been getting ridiculous offers"...it questions a bit of your objectivity.

And let's face it...the economy is gonna crash soon. It's nearly an inevitability when the US presidential cycle has a disruption. That's a theory but a likely one.

The total timeshare market has been hot. I didn't clarify well, but the offers I'm referring to are marketing schemes developers offer to get you to tour a property. For example, Hilton offered me a 7-night stay at their Waikoloa Village for $799, including the resort fee, parking, breakfast for two and a $200 resort credit in exchange for attending a timeshare presentation. About the cheapest you could stay here for a week (including all fees and breakfast) isn't much less than $3K, and that's assuming you book at the absolute cheapest prices. Like I said, it's been a decade since we've seen these types of offers. Of course, Disney has never participated in this type of marketing (although they sometimes offer dinner for two for touring Aulani, most likely given its distant location from the Waikiki area and the need to entice somebody to relinquish a day of sun on a costly Hawaiian vacation) but I was referring to the market as a whole.

As for DVC not selling well, that's no longer true. The Polynesian has had several consecutive months of strong sales; last month was its second-best since the property opened up for sale. Offering a lower-priced CBR option to complement the Polly seems like a smart move on Disney's end.