Is 160 pp that bad?

[yitbos96bb]

We were SSR at about $80 I think. Your post sums up perfectly,

Interesting question - should be an interesting discussion.

To replicate what I have at the BWV, I'd have to come up with $40,000.

And that number of points would get me about half the nights I get at the BWV (assuming the point charts are similar to the VGF), or I can stay in a 1 bedroom at the BWV for what a studio would cost at the Poly.

We bought in 1999 (and got more than 40 years worth of points) and paid $65 per point, for a total buy-in of $16,250. That's 15 years ago and according to the BLS Inflation calculator, $16,250 in 1999 is equivalent to $23,033 in 2014. $65 is equivalent to $92.14.

So yes, for me, $160/point is bad - Disney is charging $68 /point over what inflation would suggest the price would be if only inflation were considered.

Looking forward to other perspectives.

 

[rfc0001]

I suspect that as more studios sleep five, this will go away. For sleeping five, a studio at VGF is a value over a one bedroom at another resort. And I don't think the room conversion at VWL is that well known yet.

VWL Studios sleep 5 as well and don't sell out before 7 mos despite being much cheaper than VGF. My theory of why this happens at VGF is people who bought at VGF since it was the only resort available and can only afford a Studio with it's inflated points, so book it at 11 mos, then swap out at 7 mos, by which point everything sells out quickly -- you can probably still grab them with a waitlist as a result, which may be the case for PVB assuming people buy there that don't always want to stay there.

 

[yitbos96bb]

I suspect that as more studios sleep five, this will go away. For sleeping five, a studio at VGF is a value over a one bedroom at another resort. And I don't think the room conversion at VWL is that well known yet.

Wait..what now on VWL room conversion?

 

[gmi3804]

Wait..what now on VWL room conversion?

I believe it's the addition of the Murphy bed to the VWL studios.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

Wait..what now on VWL room conversion?

During the refurb last March they added a Murphy bed to the studios and now allow 5 to be booked into them.

 

[rfc0001]

I believe it's the addition of the Murphy bed to the VWL studios.

During the refurb last March they added a Murphy bed to the studios and now allow 5 to be booked into them.

They also announced at annual meeting that BoardWalk and Beach Club Studio Villas will be getting 5th sleeper in 2015 -- in addition to existing VWL/VGF/PBV Studios, and OKW/AKV/BLT/VGF 1bdrms.

Complete description of every room type in my latest WDW Point Comparison Spreadsheet (open in Excel and however over points for room type for capacity/bed description).

 

[iluvthsgam]

You can easily compare any two DVC purchases (direct or resale, regardless of resort) by simply calculating:

1) Total purchase costs (incl. closing/excluding MFs) / total points remaining on contract
2) Adding MF/pt.

This gives you your actual cost of each point you spend this year.

E.g. assume you buy 1 PVB point @ $160, that's $160/52 points remaining on contract (assuming 2066 expiration) = $3.07. We don't know what MFs will be which is the other part of the equation, so let's assume the same as VGF ($5.52), so a total cost per point of $8.59 -- e.g. if you use 1 point this year that points will cost you $8.59 (your purchase cost divided by total points plus the maintenance cost for that same point).

This does not take into account the rising MF's each year, which obviously needs to be factored in if you are going to look past just "this year."

Also - MF's for Poly were released as $6.02pp.

 

[rfc0001]

This does not take into account the rising MF's each year, which obviously needs to be factored in if you are going to look past just "this year."

Also - MF's for Poly were released as $6.02pp.

Good point -- you want to look at resorts with low average % increases in MFs historically. Lowest are BWV, SSR, AUL -- excluding VGF which only has one year history.

As far as PVB MF -- makes cost per point $9 making it closer to VB resale @ $10 and farther from SSR resale @ $7. It's still a relatively good value for retail considering all other direct prices are much higher cost. At the end of the day it comes down to if you need to book PVB in the home window, which is anyone's guess right now. This is the cheapest it is going to be, and resale isn't going to be any cheaper, so if ensuring your can book PVB is important to you, then it's probably not a bad choice.

Personally, Studios aren't our thing, so I'll leave to chance when we get a Studio ressie -- it's not a huge priority for us, just something we want to do occasionally, and eventually it will come up. I'm not concerned about Bungalows, since I could only realistically afford a night in one (and I own a lot of points)--so not a consideration either way.

 

[crisi]

VWL Studios sleep 5 as well and don't sell out before 7 mos despite being much cheaper than VGF. My theory of why this happens at VGF is people who bought at VGF since it was the only resort available and can only afford a Studio with it's inflated points, so book it at 11 mos, then swap out at 7 mos, by which point everything sells out quickly -- you can probably still grab them with a waitlist as a result, which may be the case for PVB assuming people buy there that don't always want to stay there.

My theory is summed up by the post below yours. VWL studios sleep five was not exactly well communicated - and unless you were to - say read most of the threads on this board with some regularity - you might have missed it.

Plus GFV are new - they won't always be new - and VWL are - for a DVC resort - obscure - for some reason (I happen to love them) members don't tend to think about the resort. And GFV are small.

When BCV and BWV studios sleep five and 300+ sleep five studios open at the Poly, the world will start to change.

 

[Dean]

So rumors that the poly will be 160 per point.

Now, i know it is a two tier system; price per point, and points per night.

However:

Looking at VWL...resale is in the neighborhood of 80 per point. Boardwalk around that, BCV higher.

But they expire 24 years earlier. So they have about half the life. And are half the price.

So, while I do not like 160, it seems "about right", doesn't it?

I know AKV, OKW and SSR are "cheap" with later dates, but they are large resorts.

DVC has historically opened new resorts cheaper. Until VGF they simply offered retail price with a discount, for VGF they simply adjusted the price. VGF was less than BLT when it opened.

I think $160 doesn't sound that bad compared to the $180 some people expected. It also doesn't sound too bad compared to the *direct* prices of the other/older resorts - which is what DVC is banking on!

I think it prices more and more people out and makes DVC a poor choice for most potential buyers retail. It essentially puts DVC in the same group as many other timeshares, reasonable resale but poor to very poor retail. Maybe to a lessor degree. For VGF and the Poly (and BLT retail) it's really only reasonable for a subset that would pay the prices for those resorts anyway and essentially never a good idea for anyone looking just to get into the system.

 

[blondietink]

So, for $160.00 per point for current owners, you don't get a new build, you get something refurbished, plus you begin paying $6.02 pp member fees per year which will only continue to go up. And the points allocation for a bungalow are way beyond what, I dare say, an average person would be willing to pay for. Unless of course, they won the lottery or something.

Who's to say that once the opportunity for current owners to buy at $160 pp, the price will go up to totally new owners?

All in all, too high for me. Will stick with my cheap SSR points and hopefully trade in at 7 months if I want to stay at the Poly, or perhaps have a cash reservation just to try the novelty.

 

[Minniesgal]

It is all about perspective. I wouldn't pay 160 a point for me at these rates it is game over. However the Poly doesn't do it for me and studios are not what I bought DVC for. Maybe if it was a resort I love with one and two bedrooms I'd be more open. I paid 145 for a small amount of VGF points and I think that was my limit.

As for too expensive. I think Disney will manage to sell them so no they are not too expensive. They will only be too expensive when Disney cannot sell without discounting

 

[Minniesgal]

It's all relative -- rack rates were a 1/3 what they are now as well, which is where the saving buying timeshares is derived from.

Agree but I think k if we actually trended both the DVC curve would be steeper.

 

[Johnny D]

It is all about perspective. I wouldn't pay 160 a point for me at these rates it is game over. However the Poly doesn't do it for me and studios are not what I bought DVC for. Maybe if it was a resort I love with one and two bedrooms I'd be more open. I paid 145 for a small amount of VGF points and I think that was my limit.

As for too expensive. I think Disney will manage to sell them so no they are not too expensive. They will only be too expensive when Disney cannot sell without discounting

Agree 100%

 

[gmi3804]

Riding on the coattails of the original question: Is $6.02 too much for MF? It's certainly not the highest among DVC resorts. Is it too much because of the larger average point requirements? What am I missing?

 

[chalee94]

Riding on the coattails of the original question: Is $6.02 too much for MF? It's certainly not the highest among DVC resorts. Is it too much because of the larger average point requirements? What am I missing?

it's only "too much" if people refuse to buy because of it.

but it looks to me like the over-water bungalows with their plunge pools will require a lot of extra maintenance (since the studios won't be any tougher to clean/maintain than hotel rooms). naturally the PVB owners will also pick up the tab for some of the costs for the monorail and boat to MK.

i only hope the contract that allows disney to keep 10 of the bungalows for cash reservations means that the PVB owners are only paying maintenance on the 10 that they have access to...(assuming that report about the bungalows was true.)

 

[Msmithmd]

Riding on the coattails of the original question: Is $6.02 too much for MF? It's certainly not the highest among DVC resorts. Is it too much because of the larger average point requirements? What am I missing?

Just for kicks, I calculated out the following:

One week in a PVB studio, standard view, magic season (when a whole lot of folks travel): 169 points.

Buy-in: $27,040.

Total summed maintenance fees, on 169 points x 50 years, at a very conservative 3% inflation per year, starting at $6.02 per point: $115,777.

Net cost of lodging (assuming 3% dues inflation):$142,817.

Or, an overall average of $2,856 per year for your week in a standard view studio- obviously costing much less in the beginning and much more in the end, due to the compound inflation of dues.

Is that a savings over Poly standard view rack rates? Yes. But does it save anything approaching what DVC used to, when guides could have at least half a straight face when talking about seven year break-even scenarios? Nope.

So it isn't just the dues. It's the dues, plus the buy-in cost, plus the dramatically inflated point charts that started with BLT and only got worse with VGF/PVB.

One does wonder what percentage of buyers will think this through, versus what percent will say, "Ooh! Free ice cream and fast passes!"

 

[Dean]

it's only "too much" if people refuse to buy because of it.

but it looks to me like the over-water bungalows with their plunge pools will require a lot of extra maintenance (since the studios won't be any tougher to clean/maintain than hotel rooms). naturally the PVB owners will also pick up the tab for some of the costs for the monorail and boat to MK.

i only hope the contract that allows disney to keep 10 of the bungalows for cash reservations means that the PVB owners are only paying maintenance on the 10 that they have access to...(assuming that report about the bungalows was true.)

Even though the POS suggests it could be otherwise, my info suggests DVC pays maint fees on the points they own. IMO there really are a couple of ways to look at this. One is if people are willing to pay, it's not too much. From Disney's standpoint I would agree. However, I don't think it's applicable from a possible member purpose standpoint. Other than those that are really set on the high end options like VGF & the Poly with or without DVC, I think DVC really has priced themselves out of the market for almost all potential members.

Just for kicks, I calculated out the following:

One week in a PVB studio, standard view, magic season (when a whole lot of folks travel): 169 points.

Buy-in: $27,040.

Total summed maintenance fees, on 169 points x 50 years, at a very conservative 3% inflation per year, starting at $6.02 per point: $115,777.

Net cost of lodging (assuming 3% dues inflation):$142,817.

Or, an overall average of $2,856 per year for your week in a standard view studio- obviously costing much less in the beginning and much more in the end, due to the compound inflation of dues.

Is that a savings over Poly standard view rack rates? Yes. But does it save anything approaching what DVC used to, when guides could have at least half a straight face when talking about seven year break-even scenarios? Nope.

So it isn't just the dues. It's the dues, plus the buy-in cost, plus the dramatically inflated point charts that started with BLT and only got worse with VGF/PVB.

One does wonder what percentage of buyers will think this through, versus what percent will say, "Ooh! Free ice cream and fast passes!"

And that calculation ignores the time value of money component and potential discounts it appears. Using the calculation I'd use a 20% discount but for the who travel at times where there are less discounts, 10% is reasonable (and the lowest discount one should use in this calculation IMO).

 

[DVCcurious]

I like the post on top of mine but want to add to it. Rather than focusing on whether it's a savings vs rack rates, let's look at how good a deal it is vs comparable resorts.

PVB studio standard view magic season = 169 points
169 points X 6.02 maintenance cost = 1,017 per year

Compare with Grand Floridian standard studio magic season = 169 points
169 points X 5.52 maintenance cost = 933 per year

Compare with BLT Standard magic season = 139 points
139 points X 5.05 dues = 702 per year

Poly is the most expensive monorail DVC simply based on annual dues per a certain room type. It's 10% more expensive than GFV and 50% more expensive than BLT.

Now, I'm sure people love Poly more than Grand Floridian or Contemporary, but are there enough people who love it 10% more than GF or 50% more than Contemporary? Frankly if I was a high-end buyer who needed "the best" DVC I'd go with GFV and save the 10% over the cost for Polynesian. And if I wanted a monorail resort I'd have an impossible time justifying Poly over BLT.

 

[CarolMN]

....(snip)........Poly is the most expensive monorail DVC simply based on annual dues per a certain room type. It's 10% more expensive than GFV and 50% more expensive than BLT.

Now, I'm sure people love Poly more than Grand Floridian or Contemporary, but are there enough people who love it 10% more than GF or 50% more than Contemporary? Frankly if I was a high-end buyer who needed "the best" DVC I'd go with GFV and save the 10% over the cost for Polynesian. And if I wanted a monorail resort I'd have an impossible time justifying Poly over BLT.

IMO, the BLT studios are not comparable to the Poly or VGF studios. That's due to both size, bathroom arrangement and sleeping capacity.

Do "high-end buyers" who need the best routinely go after studios? I wonder.

IMO, the transportation options at the Poly (walk to TTC for EPCOT monorail and AK & DHS buses) are better than the VGF's. Also, if I couldn't get a VGF studio at 11 months for my preferred travel time (true right now at the VGF), the 10% premium for the Poly would be worth it to me, assuming that booking situation wasn't also true for the Poly.

In other words, it may not be only about the cost.