Point differential for one. People might like to stay longer rather than “fancier.” And I like BLT and wouldn’t call it “lesser”, but that’s just me.
Agreed that there is subjectivity, but if a GFV owner thought that BLT was superior, they would have bought BLT.
Given that GFV resale owners paid significantly more for their contract than a BLT re-sale owner, I expect they see BLT as lesser. Why else pay an extra $30 per point if you don't view it as a better resort. You don't pay $160+ per point at GFV or Poly with the goal of often using those points at BLT.
Yes, sometimes people trade down to a cheaper
point chart -- But if that was common, then SSR and OKW would be super booked up. In reality, we know it's far more common to trade into a "better resort" than to trade down to a "lesser resort." We know that based on the inside-7-month availability. The lower chart properties have significantly better availability than the higher chart properties. With the caveat that lower point rooms book faster than higher point rooms, within a property. And the ultra high point rooms -- Poly Bungalows -- are very slow to book.
Point being, those at the most desirable resorts that already have very limited availability at 7 months -- It will only get worse.
As they will continue to have massive pressure to trade in, without ability/desire of owners to trade out.
Also there are more resorts to spread around at at 7 months for resale owners vs Riviera resale owners, with a total of one.
And there are far more resale owners trying to trade into GFV and Poly. Especially all those SSR owners who bought their points specifically as sleep around. The Riviera owner booking at 6 months into Rivieria no longer has to compete with all those SSR owners.
I think for Riviera and other restricted resort owners, it may be tougher to stay at the restricted home resorts than for other owners booking non restricted resorts. Of course, if a multitude more restricted resorts you can trade into are built, this may not be a problem anymore. But more resorts may mean your DVC value goes down if you have to sell, due to supply and demand.
That's already happening. Value as been trending down or stagnant for the last couple of years.
BLT average resale price: (I picked BLT as it's a longish contract that hasn't been in active sales over the last couple of years)
October 2022 - $166
Feb 2023 - $156
June 2023 - $156
February 2024 -- $132
June 2024 - $132
Feb 2025 - $134
June 2025 - $133
Is there really the demand out there for a ton more DVC resorts than already exist today? If so, parks will need more expansion.
There is enough demand when priced properly. It's just a question of price increases slowing down. Resale prices dropping, which is already happening.
My expectation in terms of resale pricing:
2042 resorts will see steadily dropping prices, as it really becomes a math equation of time left on contract.
With 2042 resorts being less desirable, there will be somewhat increased demand for the longer contracts. But there is also the ongoing massive expansion of DVC -- Lakeside Lodge will have a huge number of rooms to sell, and that's not likely to be their last resort.
So I expect 2042 resorts to see steady decline in pricing, while others may stagnate a bit.
By 2035ish, about 10 years from now... I expect Riviera will have the 3rd or 4th highest resale price among WDW DVC resorts. (GFV and Poly remaining as the top 2. I think Riv eventually surpasses BLT, and Riv and CCV battle it out for 3rd).
