July direct sales

[DanCali]

Sleeping difference aside, the 1 bedroom provides almost double the space so IMO, it makes sense to have the difference it does.

By square footage, yes.

But that's definitely not how they price it with cash rates, which are probably much more reflective of actual demand and willingness to pay for the room types.

 

[Cyberc1978]

I read in some threads that they tried it with studios vs bungalows at PVB. I can see how that would get severe pushback from owners when the only option at that resort is a studio or bungalow at 7x the cost. But did they actually try it for studios vs. 1BRs? I don't know if that would be as unpopular, but if it's not allowed then it's not allowed.

If that was something they wanted to do, they certainly had the opportunity with new resorts like RIV and VDH, but even at those resorts the premium from studio to 1BR is ~100% (maybe just a bit less on average with the preferred views at VDH).

That'd be a huge increase on the majority of the membership, which mostly stays in studios.

Last I looked the average studio per night (factoring out the value season, holiday season and value/limited hard-to-get rooms) at BLT, BRV, CCV, BCV, BWV was ~17 points per night.

RIV comes in around ~18.

SSR, AKV and OKW between 13 and 14.

You start putting studios at 18 points per night starting, there's no point in having DVC. Just pay cash.

I just found an old spreadsheet from back when DVD tried to increase the points. When you see the numbers you will see that not only did DVD increase the points required to book the studios but they also increased the points for many 1brs.

 

[Sandisw]

By square footage, yes.

But that's definitely not how they price it with cash rates, which are probably much more reflective of actual demand and willingness to pay for the room types.

But DVC villas are not meant for cash sales…they are there to pay for trades, and rooms not booked by owners…not costing the ones booked on DVDs own points.

Because of that , it priced based on what the cash guest would pay and not for DVC owners. Most cash guests are not looking for the larger rooms.

So, I don’t actually see the two related in the same way.

Most

 

[BeachClub2014]

But DVC villas are not meant for cash sales…they are there to pay for trades, and rooms not booked by owners…not costing the ones booked on DVDs own points.

Because of that , it priced based on what the cash guest would pay and not for DVC owners. Most cash guests are not looking for the larger rooms.

So, I don’t actually see the two related in the same way.

Most

Taking a cocktail into the bedroom, shutting the door, and hiding from our teenagers was priceless and saved them from experiencing un-Disney-like behavior from Dad. Just sayin'......

 

[Sandisw]

Taking a cocktail into the bedroom, shutting the door, and hiding from our teenagers was priceless and saved them from experiencing un-Disney-like behavior from Dad. Just sayin'......

Maybe that’s why Disney priced them the way they do..give you a taste of how nice it is to have that!!! And the. You buy DVC

 

[Brian Noble]

They tried that a few years back and got a lot of push back from the DVC community.

I just found an old spreadsheet from back when DVD tried to increase the points. When you see the numbers you will see that not only did DVD increase the points required to book the studios but they also increased the points for many 1brs.

That was my recollection too: it's not that they increased studios and decreased 1BRs, it is that they increased both by increasing the lockoff premium.

That's just dumb, because there is no universe in which member demand justifies increasing 1BRs vs. 2BRs, because the 1BRs book last.

I suspect if they had increased studios and decreased 1BRs, a lot of people would still be upset, but maybe not everyone. There are some questions as to whether they can do this--especially at resorts with both lockoff and dedicated studios--but they already broke that assumed rule when they raised treehouses and lowered other rooms at SSR, because that rebalanced across units.

 

[sndral]

I was hoping that when VGF2 was offered for sale 17 months ago the sales figures of unrestricted VGF2 points would soundly trounce Riv restricted points sales figures & cause DVC to rethink the whole restricted point nonsense, not because I personally wanted to buy at Riv or even because I own a lot of restricted points - I don’t, but because I think restricting points devalues everyone’s ownership including the points I own elsewhere.
Alas, although in the 17 months VGF2 has been on sale it has outsold Riv for 11 of those months, w/ total VGF2 points sold @ 1,272,573 v. Riv @ 1,048,803, I don’t think the difference in sales between the two resorts is enough to cause DVC to rethink the restricted path they are on .

 

[DanCali]

I was hoping that when VGF2 was offered for sale 17 months ago the sales figures of unrestricted VGF2 points would soundly trounce Riv restricted points sales figures & cause DVC to rethink the whole restricted point nonsense, not because I personally wanted to buy at Riv or even because I own a lot of restricted points - I don’t, but because I think restricting points devalues everyone’s ownership including the points I own elsewhere.
Alas, although in the 17 months VGF2 has been on sale it has outsold Riv for 11 of those months, w/ total VGF2 points sold @ 1,272,573 v. Riv @ 1,048,803, I don’t think the difference in sales between the two resorts is enough to cause DVC to rethink the restricted path they are on .

But devaluing the ownership is good for DVD. They can pick up cheaper points at ROFR and recycle them at full price. The owner's and developer's interests really diverge on that front when the developer has ROFR.

The only time it maybe hurts them is when an informed potential buyer uses it as an excuse not to buy direct (and that same buyer would probably not have bought direct anyway, even if the resort was unrestricted). But they can keep thriving on all the other buyers who don't know about the resale market, or don't care about it because want Blue Card benefits or they foresee keeping the contract for decades.

 

[CarolynFH]

In regard to reallocating points costs, so that 1BR cost less than twice what studios cost, they can't do that for the existing resorts. But if Poly2 is a new condo association, they could set the relative costs at whatever amount they want - the new resort's point chart wouldn't be required to follow the model of the older resorts. So a 1BR could cost (for example) 1.5 times what a studio costs, if DVD wants to set it that way instead of according to square footage or whatever. It's up to DVD.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

I read in some threads that they tried it with studios vs bungalows at PVB. I can see how that would get severe pushback from owners when the only option at that resort is a studio or bungalow at 7x the cost. But did they actually try it for studios vs. 1BRs? I don't know if that would be as unpopular, but if it's not allowed then it's not allowed.

If that was something they wanted to do, they certainly had the opportunity with new resorts like RIV and VDH, but even at those resorts the premium from studio to 1BR is ~100% (maybe just a bit less on average with the preferred views at VDH).

There's been lots of concern posted about DVC reallocating at PVB between studios and Bungalows but that wasn't where DVC really did much. The number of points they'd be able to move off of Bungalows is hardly worth making studios that much more there if one really considers the ins and outs of doing that.
It was other locations and actually also was increasing points at the resorts using "lock-off premium" premise it was ok. Many resorts have dedicated studios and 1BR's that would mean that DVC was reallocating between units which the POS states is not allowed.

Appearances say DVD decided a 1BR was double the square footage and doubled the points. They must have felt triple the points of a studio for a 2BR was too much though.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

I was hoping that when VGF2 was offered for sale 17 months ago the sales figures of unrestricted VGF2 points would soundly trounce Riv restricted points sales figures & cause DVC to rethink the whole restricted point nonsense, not because I personally wanted to buy at Riv or even because I own a lot of restricted points - I don’t, but because I think restricting points devalues everyone’s ownership including the points I own elsewhere.
Alas, although in the 17 months VGF2 has been on sale it has outsold Riv for 11 of those months, w/ total VGF2 points sold @ 1,272,573 v. Riv @ 1,048,803, I don’t think the difference in sales between the two resorts is enough to cause DVC to rethink the restricted path they are on .

It would have been interesting had VGF2 been a more comparable development to RIV.

In the end though most DVC is sold to those who haven't looked into it much and the guides direct them. Create a side by side chart between 2 similar resorts and let the buyers decide from there? I wonder what would happen then.