I bet someone knows this-(numbers question)

[StitchFan73]

So I was wondering if someone out there ran the numbers and knows the answer to this question.

If you put SSR and it's low price per point up against BLT and it's low maintenance fees, does one turn out to be a smarter purchase at some point?

And I know the old rule-buy where you love-but I am curious and I am sure someone has run these numbers. And be sure if I try and run them-they will be soooo wrong it will be comical.

 

[NewDCLGuy]

It all depends upon your assumtions. Depending upon what you assume ( and if you favor in resale value) it could go either way.

One thing that is clear is that the price difference is a lot smaller that it seems just looking at buy-in costs.

 

[bookwormde]

SSR resale ($60/pt) is the lowest cost per point when you amoratize the capital cost and allow for loss of income for contract cost and then add maintinance fees. It works out to a little less than $7/pt

bookwormde

 

[Deb & Bill]

SSR dues are bound to go up to pay for the new pool and the staff at the pool.

BLT is still being subsidized by the builder, so those dues will probably also go up when they start replacing furniture early or need to paint early.

 

[disneynutz]

So I was wondering if someone out there ran the numbers and knows the answer to this question.

If you put SSR and it's low price per point up against BLT and it's low maintenance fees, does one turn out to be a smarter purchase at some point?

And I know the old rule-buy where you love-but I am curious and I am sure someone has run these numbers. And be sure if I try and run them-they will be soooo wrong it will be comical.

IMHO BLT's low fees are temporary. After sell out, the fees will increase and on a different subject, the TOTWL will be opened to all and/or used for private parties.

Bill

 

[adminjedi]

We have a complete spreadsheet computing purchase cost per point, MF per point, principle cost, term (years of use), rate/yr (if $cost invested) and the resulting actual cost/yr/point.

Assuming the purchase cost here are the actual cost per point:
BWV @73=9.94
AKV @84=9.88
BCV @81=10.23
VB @50=9.74
OKW @55=8.32
BLT @114=9.99
VGC @97=9.23
SSR @70=8.40
Aulani @102=9.87

 

[StitchFan73]

We have a complete spreadsheet computing purchase cost per point, MF per point, principle cost, term (years of use), rate/yr (if $cost invested) and the resulting actual cost/yr/point.

Assuming the purchase cost here are the actual cost per point:
BWV @73=9.94
AKV @84=9.88
BCV @81=10.23
VB @50=9.74
OKW @55=8.32
BLT @114=9.99
VGC @97=9.23
SSR @70=8.40
Aulani @102=9.87

These are resale prices you're using?

If this game was played completely on Disneys' turf-meaning a direct buy would the numbers still look about the same?

And I know I am totally beating a dead horse-but my DH is a "I love it-where do I sign-nope I don't need to read nothing." kind of guy and I am more of a "Say it again...s-l-o-w-e-r." kinda gal. I have to be at peace with things-but I need to to torture myself a bit first

 

[adminjedi]

Those were assuming resale prices.
Buying direct assuming 100 pts at current prices:
BWV @115=12.57
AKV @112=11.45
BCV @115=12.36
VB @80=11.63
OKW @101=11.20
BLT @114=9.99
VGC @97=9.23
SSR @95=9.64
Aulani@106=10.09

 

[StitchFan73]

Those were assuming resale prices.
Buying direct assuming 100 pts at current prices:
BWV @115=12.57
AKV @112=11.45
BCV @115=12.36
VB @80=11.63
OKW @101=11.20
BLT @114=9.99
VBC @97=9.23
SSR @95=9.64
Aulani@106=10.09

Adminjedi-may I just say-you're the "stuff" Thank you very much for this

 

[adminjedi]

Adminjedi-may I just say-you're the "stuff" Thank you very much for this

Thanks. Must give spreadsheet credit to my DH - he is an engineer and math genius He is the keeper of our contracts!

 

[StitchFan73]

Thanks. Must give spreadsheet credit to my DH - he is an engineer and math genius He is the keeper of our contracts!

LOL-and humble too! In my house I am the one who is supposed to handle the fine print-so when I am confused we're really in the stew

 

[Dean]

I assume the above numbers start at todays maint fees and use the same inflation rate for each group. As disneynutz suggested, I think it's likely that the spread between BLT and other resorts is artificially low right now and will narrow over time. I doubt SSR dues will go up as they'll likely pay for the pool out of reserves and should be able to recoup that over time fairly easily with a specific increase.

 

[wdrl]

BLT is still being subsidized by the builder, so those dues will probably also go up when they start replacing furniture early or need to paint early.

BLT's MF are no longer being subsidized by DVD. In 2009, DVD subsidized BLT's MF at the rate of $0.0506 per point. But that subsidy was removed starting with the 2010 budget.

 

[Sandisw]

Adminjedi-may I just say-you're the "stuff" Thank you very much for this

To a certain extent, IMO, another number that needs to be considered is resale value.

I think that BLT will hold its value a longer than SSR and therefore, the potential to recoup money, if one would have to sell, should play a role if you are running the numbers.

Of course, for us, it was a no brainer. We paid about $5000 more for our BLT contracts then what we would have paid for the same points at SSR (resale). We realized even if we owned it for only 10 years and it was worth nothing in the end, we will have paid only $500 more each year for owning the place we know we love to be. If you consider the difference in MF's, that lowers to around $400 per year.

Since we plan to own for much longer than 10 years, the extra, when figured this way, was really nothing.

We are also the type of people who would not be happy just staying somewhere. Even though there is a lot of success getting BLT at 7 months (even with less notice then that), had we ever not gotten it, we would have been kicking ourselves.

Good luck!!!

 

[np4gp]

I don't know if anyone else has the same experience with SSR, but the only reason we won't buy there (despite possible $$ savings) is because we never have an issue getting a ressie there and don't figure we need the 12 month booking priority. We have been so lucky as to call same day on several occasions and get ressies for that night and it seems like whenever we can't get in somewhere else (we stay last minute a lot) SSR always comes through with a room. We have waitlisted BLT, on the other hand, twice. We are still hoping for the 2nd waitlist to come through for October So, IMO, I would buy someplace where the 12 month booking priority is worthwhile.

 

[NewDCLGuy]

IMHO BLT's low fees are temporary. After sell out, the fees will increase

DVC has earned some credibility with an almost 20 year track record at the WDW resorts. Over many years and many resorts, we've seen nothing innappropriate with the fees. No jumps other than the normal annual increases. (They haven't done as good a job at the off-site resorts, which might be worrisome to the Aulani buyers). Besides, almost all of BLT's "cheapness" can be explained by the high point-per-night costs, and that's not changing.

I think the most reasonable assumption is that BLT fees will grow at the same basic rate as other resorts.

 

[disneynutz]

DVC has earned some credibility with an almost 20 year track record at the WDW resorts. Over many years and many resorts, we've seen nothing innappropriate with the fees. No jumps other than the normal annual increases. (They haven't done as good a job at the off-site resorts, which might be worrisome to the Aulani buyers). Besides, almost all of BLT's "cheapness" can be explained by the high point-per-night costs, and that's not changing.

I think the most reasonable assumption is that BLT fees will grow at the same basic rate as other resorts.

We can hope that this will happen, but IMHO BLT was built by the new Disney. The new Disney is more focused on profit and less on doing business Walt's way.

BLT already has some major problems with the design of the HVAC system and the architecture amenities, design and furnishings. The building is less than a year old and the wear and tear is equal to a 5 year old building, that means additional costs to repair and replace. All of these costs were not forecasted are the responsibility of the members and will be paid with increased dues.

Bill

 

[Dean]

BLT's MF are no longer being subsidized by DVD. In 2009, DVD subsidized BLT's MF at the rate of $0.0506 per point. But that subsidy was removed starting with the 2010 budget.

But they are still artificially low IMO partly due to the fact that everything is new and maint is inherently less. It is my opinion that the spread will not stay as great as it is right now, we'll see.

 

[Deb & Bill]

I don't know if anyone else has the same experience with SSR, but the only reason we won't buy there (despite possible $$ savings) is because we never have an issue getting a ressie there and don't figure we need the 12 month booking priority. ...I would buy someplace where the 12 month booking priority is worthwhile.

Where are you getting 12 months booking priority? I think you mean 11 months.

 

[AirGoofy]

We bought SSR resale initially because it was the cheapest and we like the spread out resort style. We have 2 contracts and enough points for 2 trips at SSR a year. If you doing the THV at SSR, then you need the booking window. We have considered buying a BLT contract to have the alternate hotel style as well as proximity to the parks. But, the BLT prices have kept me away. We may still do it, but ...