How far and wide would you want DVC to expand?

[rutgers1]

Although I like that DVC currently has spots in places other than Disney World, I haven't had a chance to visit them yet. Considering RCI apparently isn't the best thing to trade into, I was wondering if DVC will ever get aggressive in building resorts in other places.

I would love to see at least 5 more spread across the United States. I would love to have a Disney "headquarters" in every corner of the country, as well as one plopped right in the middle. We are trying to run a race in every state, so having some more DVC destinations would be awesome.

 

[bookwormde]

Since I would only stay at WDW or DL since DVC points are so expensive I hope they do not. Now more on site resorts sure!!

 

[Chuck S]

The problems with offsite expansions is that the majority of currently popular travel destinations are already saturated with timeshares. DVC is not likely to build in a location where they will need to be price competitive, and that will take longer to recover the investment. Las Vegas, Branson, Colorado, the Bahamas, Mexican Riviera...all of these areas are already overbuilt timeshare-wise.

DVC would need to find an emerging travel destination, build, and hope it becomes a popular destination in the next few years. Given the economy, emerging destinations and developments are pretty much a high risk gamble.

 

[pavicich]

Curious as to the reasoning behind not wanting expansion? I see many feel this way and genuinely would like to understand the main reason-do those against expansion feel this way because it dilutes the brand?

 

[Kidanifan08]

I would be OK if Disney wants to expand their timeshare business beyond WDW property, but I would prefer that it not have a negative impact on making reservation at the WDW resorts. I fear that adding more DVC locations around the country would just make it even more difficult to get non-home resort reservations at the 7 month mark at WDW.

If they do expand, they should limit ownership at non-WDW resort to booking WDW resorts at the 4 or 5 month mark, or something less than 7 months. If your desire to use DVC is primarily to stay on property, then you should have to own on property.

 

[disneynutz]

For us staying anywhere other than WDW isn't the same. WDW has so much to see and do IMO it really isn't a fair comparison.

I wonder how popular the other resorts would be, Aulani hasn't been as popular as Disney expected.

Bill

 

[rutgers1]

I hadn't heard that Aulani isn't as popular. Does that mean that reservations can be gotten at 7 months easily?

I agree with those who say that it is fine as long as it doesn't affect our ability to get reservations in Disney World.

 

[mjc2003]

Any expansion outside WDW would simply result in more competition for on site accommodations, because ultimately the demand wouldn't be commensurate with that of WDW, thus driving costs per point down, making these destinations a cheaper "back door" into the on site properties and making reservations even more competitive. I am not for this at all.

My one exception would be the Caribbean; if done right, and put in the right place, such a destination would be very successful in my opinion.

 

[bwvBound]

I would prefer Disney expanded the BVTC program to increase the number of direct exchange options with qualified destinations/clubs.

 

[disneynutz]

I hadn't heard that Aulani isn't as popular. Does that mean that reservations can be gotten at 7 months easily?

I agree with those who say that it is fine as long as it doesn't affect our ability to get reservations in Disney World.

According to several Disney sources, sales have not been as expected. DVC reservations can still be a challenge because Disney only adds rooms to the DVC as sales are made.

Bill

 

[Escape Artist]

I would be OK if Disney wants to expand their timeshare business beyond WDW property, but I would prefer that it not have a negative impact on making reservation at the WDW resorts. I fear that adding more DVC locations around the country would just make it even more difficult to get non-home resort reservations at the 7 month mark at WDW.

If they do expand, they should limit ownership at non-WDW resort to booking WDW resorts at the 4 or 5 month mark, or something less than 7 months. If your desire to use DVC is primarily to stay on property, then you should have to own on property.

ITA. I also wish they would limit rentals to a tighter window, so real owners would have the first shot at being able to stay at the resorts we paid for!

I do wish Disney had gone ahead and built the DVC near Washington, DC. I was looking forward to staying there someday! But I don't see them doing any other off-property DVC's anytime soon. They just aren't as successful. Kind of like I couldn't wait for them to sail a Disney cruise ship out of Galveston, but they couldn't price it competitively to make it successful.

Bummer for us!

 

[Escape Artist]

My one exception would be the Caribbean; if done right, and put in the right place, such a destination would be very successful in my opinion.

That's a great idea! I'd vote for them to put a small, exclusive DVC property on Castaway Cay!

 

[Chuck S]

That's a great idea! I'd vote for them to put a small, exclusive DVC property on Castaway Cay!

Wouldn't that be hard to sell? It is a private island, public transportation to/from would be an issue. It just doesn't seem do-able from a practical standpoint.

 

[ssawka]

Now that DVC and ABD will be under the same VP, I would love to see ABD trips become available to DVC members at a reasonable number of points (unlike the cruises).

 

[Escape Artist]

Wouldn't that be hard to sell? It is a private island, public transportation to/from would be an issue. It just doesn't seem do-able from a practical standpoint.

If they made it tiny and exclusive, I bet they could make it work. I'd sure give it a shot!

 

[ssawka]

That's a great idea! I'd vote for them to put a small, exclusive DVC property on Castaway Cay!

As much as I would love to see this, I think it would ruin the uniqueness of the island. One of the things that is great about CC is the fact that the island is virtually untouched except for a few small buildings.

I also think that DCL would never do this. DCL has CC as an incentive to take a cruise. I don't think they are interested in DVC members going to CC unless they are on a cruise. They might be willing to do it if there was enough profit in it, however given the logistics that would be required, I think it would be cost prohibitive to make it affordable.

 

[dvc_john]

I wouldn't mind seeing DVC at Disneyland Paris or Tokyo Disneyland, or even Hong Kong Disneyland.

I do wish they had gone ahead and built the proposed New York City DVC.

 

[DebbieB]

I'd like to see an additional Disneyland DVC, VGC only has 48 rooms.

It would be difficult to sell offsite DVC's. How many people would actually buy a NYC DVC?

 

[Dean]

There are limited plusses and minuses. From a general membership standpoint the only negative I can think of is the competition at the 7 month window and for buyers at a given location the risks that one might buy a resort that will have increasing fees. Unfortunately DVD doesn't have a history of developing high demand off site properties. Historically they've tried to compromise too much on location and investment. They also haven't been aggressive enough for sales to make such locations successful from that direction.

 

[thptrek]

ITA. I also wish they would limit rentals to a tighter window, so real owners would have the first shot at being able to stay at the resorts we paid for!

Agree with this. Not make it punitive, still allow rental but maybe only at a 3/5 month window.