Let's speculate about Polynesian some more!

[skier_pete]

Also giving those of us still around something to complain about.
.

If I'm around in 2070 - I'll be 101. I'll have plenty to complain about without this...

 

[jkips]

Then please explain to me why Disney chose to combine at VGF.

By much of the logic in this thread, Disney wants to keep going with the Resale restrictions, and now you propose the benefit of shortening the lease is nil. Then why combine VGF? Is it likely to help with sales? Only marginally - by combining they allow new members to book 1-, 2-, and 3- bedrooms.

I simply said the financial benefit today of getting the rooms back in year 42 vs year 50 isn't meaningful and gave the math behind it. There are plenty of other reasons why they could choose to combine Poly and why they ultimately did combine VGF. Those have been well articulated in this thread already.


I'm personally of the belief the new Poly tower will be part of the original association because it makes almost everything about selling, managing and explaining it easier. But I also understand why others think differently and am fully aware that Disney will not do something just because I think it makes more sense.

 

[aka Charles]

Stories I herd is they considered 1BR and 2BR for PVB longhouses, but it would have been easier to tear down and build new.

If they decide to tear down longhouses, they may want to start with the hotels first since they are 10-15 years older. This would be terrible for PVB and the tower owners, but a potential huge profit for Disney.

It’s very possible that they will start with the hotel side longhouses in the years leading up to the end of the PVB contract. Probably one longhouse at a time. I am sure they will need it, but how they do it could be great or could be terrible.
.

 

[aka Charles]

Then please explain to me why Disney chose to combine at VGF.

The addition of BPK to the VGF was an unusual situation.

Many of us believe that they did it as a quick flip to help DVC fill in a void left by the “pause” of Reflections, and, more importantly, to help the Grand Floridian hotel side.

Hotel bookings have been down at GF, and it needed a major remodel/refresh. It is hard for even Disney to justify a very expensive hotel renovation when the bookings are down.

DVC to the rescue.

The first renovation was BPK, with DVC paying for the planning, design, and development.

By “selling” BPK to DVC, the hotel got an influx of capital to help fund the renovation of the hotel side. And they could use the same plans that DVC already paid for.

It had to be done quickly in order to meet the goals of both DVC and the hotel side. Because of that, they didn’t have the time to redesign and construct 1BR, 2BR, or GV in the existing building. That led to the decision to just add it to VGF instead of making it a separate association.

Or at least that’s one theory.
.

 

[BrianLo]

Then please explain to me why Disney chose to combine at VGF.

BPK would not sell well as a sole product. There is a paucity of room 'options'. It very much is contingent marketing-wise on having access to the VGF1 tower and all of its rooms. I do agree, BPK on its own would especially be a terrible product on the resale market, the only thing it would be good for is a singular hotel room.

Poly2 is interesting in so far as it has the right room subtypes and infrastructure that it could be marketed and sold on its own. Of course there are many other reasons they might want to roll it in together. But Poly2 as its own association would still be a full product (to my eyes at least).

I think there is a strong consideration that they've already flipped from launching a small resort (VGF1) into a medium resort (Poly1) for them to have to launch a medium resort (VGF1+2) into a large resort (Poly1+2) in 40 odd years to give them pause. That's a lot of points they would have expiring back to back.

 

[zavandor]

Then please explain to me why Disney chose to combine at VGF.

By much of the logic in this thread, Disney wants to keep going with the Resale restrictions, and now you propose the benefit of shortening the lease is nil. Then why combine VGF? Is it likely to help with sales? Only marginally - by combining they allow new members to book 1-, 2-, and 3- bedrooms.

The length of the lease is not necessarily linked to the same/different association conundrum.
They could have a new association with 42 years left. I think there is a non zero chance of it happening.

 

[maui22]

If Poly tower is new and is given a 50 year lease, I wouldn't want to stay anywhere near the GF-Poly area in 40 years.
VGF expires in 40 years.
PVB expires in 42 years.
Poly tower would expire in 50 years.

That would be 10+ years of monorail having significant outages. Additionally, Polynesian resort would be a construction zone starting in 42 years.

GF-PVB construction while tower is in it's last 8-10 years? No thanks.

If it were me, I would want GF rehab done in 2 years. Then move the workers to Polynesian and do all the PVB+tower+resort work at once so it doens't impact the hotel/cash bookings for more than a decade.

 

[Hubalorian]

If Poly tower is new and is given a 50 year lease, I wouldn't want to stay anywhere near the GF-Poly area in 40 years.
VGF expires in 40 years.
PVB expires in 42 years.
Poly tower would expire in 50 years.

That would be 10+ years of monorail having significant outages. Additionally, Polynesian resort would be a construction zone starting in 42 years.

GF-PVB construction while tower is in it's last 8-10 years? No thanks.

If it were me, I would want GF rehab done in 2 years. Then move the workers to Polynesian and do all the PVB+tower+resort work at once so it doens't impact the hotel/cash bookings for more than a decade.

Is the poly tower being built now hurting the cash bookings/DVC stays at Gf and Poly?

 

[intamin]

Is the poly tower being built now hurting the cash bookings/DVC stays at Gf and Poly?

The tower is pretty far from the DVC portion of Poly so it shouldn't be affecting that but I'm not sure if most members realize that the tower is actually closer to VGF than the DVC portion of Poly

 

[Roughians_satchel]

BPK would not sell well as a sole product. There is a paucity of room 'options'. It very much is contingent marketing-wise on having access to the VGF1 tower and all of its rooms. I do agree, BPK on its own would especially be a terrible product on the resale market, the only thing it would be good for is a singular hotel room.

Poly2 is interesting in so far as it has the right room subtypes and infrastructure that it could be marketed and sold on its own. Of course there are many other reasons they might want to roll it in together. But Poly2 as its own association would still be a full product (to my eyes at least).

I think there is a strong consideration that they've already flipped from launching a small resort (VGF1) into a medium resort (Poly1) for them to have to launch a medium resort (VGF1+2) into a large resort (Poly1+2) in 40 odd years to give them pause. That's a lot of points they would have expiring back to back.

I don't think this bothers them in the slightest - having a bunch of points go offline at the same time. This will be after 2042 - if they can survive that - then the GF/Poly back to back is no big deal.

Plus, how much of the resorts would have to be remodeled/completed before they start selling the brand new, 50 year contracts? How much of it can they continue to rent for cash while they remodel other rooms?

 

[maui22]

Is the poly tower being built now hurting the cash bookings/DVC stays at Gf and Poly?

When VGF and PVB were built, there were posts of people saying they regularly booked these resorts, but were refusing to spend the money while construction was going on. Many who love the Polynesian follow a certain social media page. Back then it was flooded with many unhappy people.

During VGF construction, they either shut down the wedding chapel or offered discounts.

Monorail was also shutdown for periods during both VGF and PVB.

Tower construction, there have been people posting they were assigned into longhouses near there. They supposedly requested to be moved or received discounts.

With DVC, I think we get used to putting up with some things that would not be acceptable to someone spending several thousand dollars for a room. Example, DVC rooms can sometimes be worn and need a rehab where it's rare the hotel side can allow them to become equally worn.

 

[cbailey1616]

BPK would not sell well as a sole product. There is a paucity of room 'options'. It very much is contingent marketing-wise on having access to the VGF1 tower and all of its rooms. I do agree, BPK on its own would especially be a terrible product on the resale market, the only thing it would be good for is a singular hotel room.

Poly2 is interesting in so far as it has the right room subtypes and infrastructure that it could be marketed and sold on its own. Of course there are many other reasons they might want to roll it in together. But Poly2 as its own association would still be a full product (to my eyes at least).

I think there is a strong consideration that they've already flipped from launching a small resort (VGF1) into a medium resort (Poly1) for them to have to launch a medium resort (VGF1+2) into a large resort (Poly1+2) in 40 odd years to give them pause. That's a lot of points they would have expiring back to back.

Does it have the right infrastructure? I've only seen a couple renders and it seems like it just has a DVC pool. Id have to imagine there's some partnership with PBV if thats all they have.

I'm leaning towards a new association with the ability to use all Poly1's infrastructure. This will give Disney the best bang for their buck.

 

[Cabius]

Does it have the right infrastructure? I've only seen a couple renders and it seems like it just has a DVC pool. Id have to imagine there's some partnership with PBV if thats all they have.

I'm leaning towards a new association with the ability to use all Poly1's infrastructure. This will give Disney the best bang for their buck.

If you're talking about infrastructure like the signature Lava Pool, Monorail Stop, etc., my understanding is that those are owned by the hotel and that PVB pays for access to them. If it is a separate association, I assume that the Tower would also contract directly with the hotel, and there would be no need of an agreement between PVB1 and PVB2. (Not sure if PVB 'owns' the Oasis pool or not, in which case that may change, but it wouldn't really make a difference to us unless they decided to keep some pools exclusive.)

 

[intamin]

Talked to a guide today while at RIV, they said they had their annual meeting recently but still haven’t told them whether or not it’ll be the same association or different. They were able to check out the rooms though and saw the full renderings. His personal feelings were that it’d be the same since they haven’t called it #18 but called CFW #17 and also to fill the 1/2/3BR niche for Poly. Only time will tell

 

[BamaGuy44]

Talked to a guide today while at RIV, they said they had their annual meeting recently but still haven’t told them whether or not it’ll be the same association or different. They were able to check out the rooms though and saw the full renderings. His personal feelings were that it’d be the same since they haven’t called it #18 but called CFW #17 and also to fill the 1/2/3BR niche for Poly. Only time will tell

Yeah but what did the bus driver say?

 

[intamin]

Yeah but what did the bus driver say?

I’ll ask him on the ride back. I’m fully aware it’s pure speculation, I’m still hoping its a new association for reasons I’ve said before on here.

 

[tom1944]

If it’s the same association with the expected high point chart I will try to stay in a 1 bedroom every once in awhile.

 

[HyperspaceMountainPilot]

If it’s the same association with the expected high point chart I will try to stay in a 1 bedroom every once in awhile.

The only thing I am confident about is that it will be a high point chart whether or not it is a new association.

 

[cdirazonian]

I’m kinda hoping it’s new too, but for selfish reasons.

I like the original longhouse studios, more nostalgic to me. Bigger & with extra bath section, seems PVB2 studios might be smaller.

Selfishly don’t want a ton of competition to booking the originals if PVB2 doesn’t have enough studios.
Probably only saying this because we have direct pts we could use to book if new assoc. if we didn’t have those I’m sure I’d feel differently.

 

[intamin]

I’m kinda hoping it’s new too, but for selfish reasons.

I like the original longhouse studios, more nostalgic to me. Bigger & with extra bath section, seems PVB2 studios might be smaller.

Selfishly don’t want a ton of completion to booking the originals if PVB2 doesn’t have enough studios.
Probably only saying this because we have direct pts we could use to book if new assoc. if we didn’t have those I’m sure I’d feel differently.

It’s funny that as a prospective buyer in a few years we’re the opposite. We like the longhouses but don’t want those bungalow points attached to this new association when we can book the longhouses pretty regularly at 7 months with our resale points.