My biggest concern with grouping the new and old rooms together is the potential for point reallocation. If a Studio is currently 120 pts per week will the new studios be 120 pts per week? What if the rooms in the main lodge are 160 pts/week and then they are the last to fill and they reallocate so all studios are 140 pts/week? Every new resort has had higher point req. so why wouldn't it be the same with these rooms? Also, I have the same concerns that folks have expressed with poly, pts are so high for bungalows that they are filled and then a reallocation brings down pt req for bungalows and studios go up. I have the same concern for the cabins, they will be very high pts and everyone will say, "I don't care, I don't plan on staying there" and then the points go up on the accommodations they are planning on using (Studio, 1 and 2 BR).
Generally, but not always, there has been some degree of point inflation when a new DVC has been rolled out. When VWL debuted in 2000, a two-bedroom villa was allotted 17,290 points. The next three DVC resorts that debuted after VWL -- BCV (17,050 points); SSR (15,225 points); AKV (16,290 points) -- were actually allotted less points. Lately, however, the point allotments have significantly increased. BLT and VGF generate 19,640 points and 23,420 points, respectively, per two-bedroom. PVB doesn't have two-bedroom villas, but its bungalows generate 24,120 points each.
Common sense tells me that if DVD had a choice, it would prefer not to be tied to the old VWL formula that generates only 17,290 points per two-bedroom villa. To put it in perspective, DVD has just over 4 million points it can sell at PVB. If DVD had been forced to use VWL's point formula when setting up PVB, it would have had only 2.9 million points it could sell.
But here is the catch: The number of points allotted to a DVC resort is determined by a formula that translates the underlying real estate interest into point values. As I read the master declarations of the DVC condominium associations, each DVC condo association has a real estate interest-to-points formula that is
applicable to the entire condo association. DVC has never used two formulas at the same resort. When Kidani Village was added to AKV, it used the same real estate interest-to-points formula as the existing Jambo House. Same thing happened when the Treehouse Villas were added to SSR.
The significance of being tied to a single formula is this: DVD can choose to incorporate the 'new' Wilderness villas & cabins into the existing VWL condo association, but then it must use the
existing real estate interest-to-points formula that would limit it to generating no more than the equivalent of 17,290 points per two-bedroom villa. By having the same formula, the
point chart for the expanded VWL could look much like it currently does.
OR, DVD can choose to create a 'new' Wilderness villas & cabins condo association that is a separate legal entity from the existing VWL. By having a new condo association, DVD could implement a new formula that allots a much larger number of points. Depending on the size of the 'new' Wilderness condo association, we could be talking about a difference of 1 million points or more. And at $165/point, that is a lot of money even to a multi billion dollar corporation like TWDC.
I suspect DVD would prefer the second option which involves setting up a separate condo association.
There are other options and variations I can see happening at VWL, but I'll save that for another thread.