DVC- the way forward?

[Sammie]

I don't think Hawaii was built just to attract Americans it was built to attract Japanese travelers. However that was prior to the earthquake which might have changed all their future plans which were greatly betting on Japanese interest in certain markets including CA and other locations.

A very large percentage of owners, (not DISers) use DVC to trade out. I figure DVC is looking at those popular trades to determine future locations. I personally think as Dean mentioned that DVC could possibly limit access to certain locations going forward.

In fact based on talks with DVC management, Chuck pretty much summed it up.

 

[Dean]

DVC has proven themselves ill equipped to sell a timeshare that has to be sold. VB and HH were sales failures. Unless DVD becomes more aggressive in both the sales process and in leading people to the sales system, even HI doesn't look all that good from a sales standpoint. There are some glimmers that they may be marketing a little more aggressively but marketing is only a slim piece of the pie. My fear is that the current HI option will be it. I doubt we'll ever see a National Harbour option. IMO, DVD's best bet for another off site option would be to find a hotel on Maui in a good location, raze it and build from the ground up. As Chuck points out, the good sites are occupied already. I hope I'm wrong, I'd prefer more options.

 

[DVC SSR Owner]

In a word; logistics.

I can come up with a hundred reasons why it wouldn't work. Don't get me wrong, the Disneyer in me likes the idea but the businessman in me screams no way. I'm not saying it's not possible. What I am thinking is that the logistics involved and the steps necessary to pull it off aren't worth the ROI. Business is all about ROI and the bottom line.

Will it happen one day? Maybe, IMO. Probably, even.
In my lifetime? Probably not. There's way too much low hangin' fruit to pick first, IMHO.

Well, I like the idea. They already own the land and they would have a captive audience to sell their stuff and food.

 

[tjkraz]

Well this thread was timely. National Harbor was officially scuttled today:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...ional-harbor/2011/11/25/gIQAM2OKxN_story.html

 

[aan1701]

Could they build on castaway cay and offer a land/ cruise package? That would be awesome. And add a 5th park there!

Ehhh...Count me out for that one.

Same here. After talking with those that live on the island on past cruises, There is no way I would want to be there after dark. They said the place gets invaded by huge bugs and you really can't be outside. So count me out of that one.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

Same here. After talking with those that live on the island on past cruises, There is no way I would want to be there after dark. They said the place gets invaded by huge bugs and you really can't be outside. So count me out of that one.

Gets windy sometimes too. Probably have to live on the southeast coast to fully appreciate windy.

Like I said, I wasn't exagerrating when I said a hundred different reasons.

 

[Brian Noble]

National Harbor was officially scuttled today:

Yes, I saw that too. Werner also has a piece on it over at Yesterland:

http://www.yesterland.com/harbor.html

It feels a little too early to say this is an indictment of Aulani---it has only been in active sales for a very short while. I'm not sure if this is continued fallout from the accounting disaster there, or just a change in strategic direction.

 

[Dean]

It feels a little too early to say this is an indictment of Aulani---it has only been in active sales for a very short while. I'm not sure if this is continued fallout from the accounting disaster there, or just a change in strategic direction.

Maybe but it's definitely a negative sign for future non park development. It doesn't mean they won't cherry pick for the right option (Maui) but it definitely suggests they aren't going to expand greatly into the general timeshare destination market as others including Marriott, Wyndham, Bluegreen and Hilton have. The worst part is they set themselves up for failure with their location choices for HH and VB and their laisse-fair approach to timeshare sales.

 

[BirdsOfPreyDave]

I might have agreed with the assertion that DVC is moving away from park locations... until I just read the Washington Post article that Disney has pulled out of the National Harbour project. Rumors that there would soon be a Washington DC DVC location seem to have just taken a big step backward.

 

[tjcj]

I think this announcement might be a good sign for moving forward with resorts outside the berm. The National Harbor project was a non starter from the start- someone just had to finally say so. Perhaps the new management is clearing the decks and preparing to move fwd!

 

[CMOORE185]

I think this announcement might be a good sign for moving forward with resorts outside the berm. The National Harbor project was a non starter from the start- someone just had to finally say so. Perhaps the new management is clearing the decks and preparing to move fwd!

I agree with this. I do not think this is a sign DVC is shying away from off site locations, I think it just means National Harbor was not a good site for DVC.

 

[tjkraz]

National Harbor wasn't a perfect location but it would have accomplished certain goals. Specifically, it would have allowed DVC to put up a flag in the DC area.

The problem is the closer you get to the "perfect" location, the higher the cost will be. Sure Disney could find some land in the vicinity of the National Mall but it's gonna cost a heck of a lot more than $12 million.

The more they pay for the land, the higher prices will be. And the more aggressive Disney will have to be in selling points. As Dean intimated, DVC's laid back sales approach has undoubtedly cost them sales compared to other developers. You want to see DVC become "just another timeshare"...wait until they have to get more aggressive in order to put up sales numbers. It's far too early to make a call on Aulani but I could easily see it going that direction. It took DVC 10 years to sell the 150 units at Vero Beach. I don't think higher-ups are going to give Claire 30 years to wrap up sales of nearly 500 units at Aulani.

As for National Harbor, it would have been a decent--albeit unspectacular--location that would have given DVC the ability to market Washington DC as another non-park option to families. If they could have made it profitable with 150-200 DVC units and been comfortable selling over 6-8 years, I would call it a nice addition.

I know that many feel DVC should stick to the parks. While that makes some sense, off-site locations can only help resale value in the long run IMO. One reason that people sell is because DVC no longer fits into their future. Growing the program so that it appeals to a broader audience opens new markets AND keeps current owners from selling. Fewer resale listings can only help prices. There is a finite market of buyers looking to visit Disney theme parks year-after-year for the next 4-5 decades.

 

[JimC]

The best ideas Disney had beyond the parks have been DCL and ABD. DCL was a natural step after proving interest in WDW/cruise vacations. And ABD is a great low cap, flexible extension of the trusted family vacation brand. DVC beyond the parks is a high cap business in a mature market loaded with high quality competitors who beat them on price. As much as I like options I don't believe it makes any sense. If you want high margins in this sector you adopt Marriott's business model.