Major Disappointment with DVC

[DebbieB]

I would be totally shocked if they put a casino on Disney property. There's no way they would want to offend their bread and butter - the family.

The fact that they do not have a casino on the cruise ship, where they could legally do it, shows where they stand.

 

[DrBond007]

Perhaps an offsite resort will happen after the DVC addition at the contemporary and completion of SSR. Wouldn't a DVC cruise ship sell well given how many people use points for cruises, even at the poor exchange rate?



"May God Bless this wonderful day for democracy."

 

[snowbunny]

...after the DVC addition at the contemporary ..

Whoa....say what?

 

[tjkraz]

Whoa....say what?

The rumor has been floating around for upward of 18 months now. Don't hold your breath...

 

[tjkraz]

I would be totally shocked if they put a casino on Disney property. There's no way they would want to offend their bread and butter - the family.

I wouldn't be totally surprised to see it at Pleasure Island. I'm not much of a gambler (been to Vegas twice, and another casino once), but I certainly wouldn't be offended by it.

Someone mentioned the Boardwalk as one location that was considered. I think that would probably be a poor choice. But PI exists to cater to adults. They already have adult beverages and adult entertainment. Why not adult...recreation?

 

[CarolA]

Sorry, I think Disney should stick to what it does best. Disney!

I have no idea why they should go spend thier money on resorts in foreign countries or other locales. Considering the problems selling HH and Vero the concept doesn't appear to transfer well.

If you really want to stay other places you might be better off selling DVC and buying a cheaper TS for trading.

 

[Disney-Kim]

Its funny because I bought DVC with the intent of only going to Disney. We never really considered using it for other places. Although we will probably some day in the future. We wanted it as a way to be able to get to Disney and not spend so much money on lodging every trip. Which added up to around $15k for all our pre DVC trips.
I guess we were not looking at it as a "time share" and more of a sure bet of getting to WDW A LOT !!!

 

[Dean]

Just another example of reasons to read you paperwork and not assume too much or believe everything a timeshare salesperson tells you.

 

[KNWVIKING]

I'm in the "I'd buy Marriott" for the purpose of non Disney stays.

I think one of the problems with HH and VB is that they are not distination locations. I'd have prefered a Myrtle Beach location to HH and Daytona or Miami to VB. HH and VB are both great resorts if all you want to do is veg out.

I think if DVC expands off property it will make the 7 month window a huge gamble. One can argue that off property options will get on-property owners to stay off-site, but I don't know how realistic that is. One resounding theme of these boards is that we bought into DVC because we want to be in WDW, not elsewhere.

 

[PamOKW]

The Boardwalk area was a long-time coming to fruition -- at first it was going to be an old-time carnival type with roller coasters, etc. There was a boardwalk and a sign about "opening" for at least 5 years (with a date that was passed) before they actually started building what we have today. Around that time, Florida was voting on putting in casinos and I also heard the rumors that they might be included in the Boardwalk area. But, the casinos weren't permitted and I haven't heard anything since. Interesting about a survey at PI. I know people who would also like to see casinos on the cruise sihps.

 

[Granny]

What might be difficult to understand is that the financial model that Disney has built with DVC would be extremely difficult to sustain outside the borders of WDW.

People have paid a premium for 30 years to stay on-site at WDW instead of local hotels. And people pay that same premium for a timeshare on-site (DVC) instead of another Orlando timeshare.

But when DVC ventures off-property, it is competing in the highly competitive general timeshare industry. It doesn't have any inside edge other than the Disney name. Certainly, there would be far fewer people willing to pay a premium compared to other very nice timeshares. And there's no way they would sustain the same profits as they incur with the WDW DVC resorts.

And of course, with the WDW DVC resorts, they add to the financial model by capturing vacation entertainment, admissions and food money. They wouldn't see anything like that off-site.

I think that in 1992 Disney didn't really know what they had, or where they were going. They probably honestly did think they'd go to more off-site locations. I don't think they were trying to mislead buyers then.

The good news for anyone who bought in the early years.....you can sell your points now at a nifty profit, and will have enjoyed a lot of years of great vacations for a very low cost. Plus all those years of free admission.

So while someone might be disappointed, I can't think of many timeshares where you can basically come out on top after 13 years!

 

[DebbieB]

The Boardwalk area was a long-time coming to fruition -- at first it was going to be an old-time carnival type with roller coasters, etc. There was a boardwalk and a sign about "opening" for at least 5 years (with a date that was passed) before they actually started building what we have today. Around that time, Florida was voting on putting in casinos and I also heard the rumors that they might be included in the Boardwalk area. But, the casinos weren't permitted and I haven't heard anything since. Interesting about a survey at PI. I know people who would also like to see casinos on the cruise sihps.

On my first trip to WDW in 1994, I saw the Boardwalk sign when on the Mears shuttle, they were just excavating. I remember thinking that I saw it in a guidebook and thought it was done, but it wasn't. Little did I know what that piece of land would do to my life!

 

[KNWVIKING]

***" What might be difficult to understand is that the financial model that Disney has built with DVC would be extremely difficult to sustain outside the borders of WDW."***

Just to expand on that a bit, when DVC builds on property, they already own the dirt. At a top resort location, that dirt is very expensive. They also have a pretty easy time getting all the building permits they'll need on property.

 

[lllovell]

According to all of the reports the timeshare industry is booming. I think Disney would be successful if they select highly desirable locations and offer amenities families are looking for.

http://www.arda.org/consumer/stats/stats.htm
http://www.bizjournals.com/orlando/stories/2004/12/06/focus2.html
http://www.cendant.com/media/trends_information/trends_information.cgi/Hospitality+Services/223

Are they advertising SSR to the general public?
Hilton, Marriott and Starwood sent mailers to their hotel frequent guest members with specials rates for staying at the hotel or timeshare and attending a timeshare presentation. In order to take advantage of the offer both spouses had to attend and they were required to have a combined minimum income of specified amount. I’m sure Disney could easily advertise the latest DVC resort to recent hotel guest of the deluxe resorts that paid full rack rate.

I would truly hope that Disney doesn't resort to the "both spouses must attend" type of marketing. That is high pressure sales where they are trying to pin you down and not let you have any outs (like saying I need to talk to my spouse about this). I don't think that soliciting is a bad thing in general, but I am sure that most of their strategy now, which seems based on getting the attention of people actually AT Disney, says a lot about future plans. To me, it is an indication that they are staying focused on the WDW visitors.

 

[NYsHiddenMickey]

I may have a solution here- Everyone seems to think that Disney can't expand to "resort only"- type hotels, and should stick to resorts around the theme parks-- I have to disagree- Disney could expand to highly sought after areas and still tie the resort to a disney theme-- For example--Disney could open a resort in Hawaii (where everyone wants to go)-- It could be named "ohana" for example, and while maintaining the high standards of a DVC property, could also cater to kids with a lilo and stitch themed area/pool/etc. It is not impossible, and if given some thought, I am sure there are several options that Disney could explore.

Thats just one man's opinion..

 

[Beca]

I may have a solution here- Everyone seems to think that Disney can't expand to "resort only"- type hotels, and should stick to resorts around the theme parks-- I have to disagree- Disney could expand to highly sought after areas and still tie the resort to a disney theme-- For example--Disney could open a resort in Hawaii (where everyone wants to go)-- It could be named "ohana" for example, and while maintaining the high standards of a DVC property, could also cater to kids with a lilo and stitch themed area/pool/etc. It is not impossible, and if given some thought, I am sure there are several options that Disney could explore.

Thats just one man's opinion..

That's a really cute idea!!! Of course, Hawaii would certainly "fly" anyway...but, I might even want to go to Hawaii (right now...not high up on my list) if I could get "a little bit of Disney" in the process.



Beca

 

[DrTomorrow]

I may have a solution here- Everyone seems to think that Disney can't expand to "resort only"- type hotels, and should stick to resorts around the theme parks-- I have to disagree- Disney could expand to highly sought after areas and still tie the resort to a disney theme-- [...]

I agree that this is how they would have to do it: buy some land somewhere (preferably in a popular resort area, but that adds $$$) and make a "Disney Zone". Almost like a cruise ship, offering different alternatives for meals, shopping, entertainment, etc. Sort of like building a resort with a DTD/PI added on. Once again, though, that's already been done - Las Vegas springs to mind....

 

[DebbieB]

I would truly hope that Disney doesn't resort to the "both spouses must attend" type of marketing. That is high pressure sales where they are trying to pin you down and not let you have any outs (like saying I need to talk to my spouse about this). I don't think that soliciting is a bad thing in general, but I am sure that most of their strategy now, which seems based on getting the attention of people actually AT Disney, says a lot about future plans. To me, it is an indication that they are staying focused on the WDW visitors.

They already do. I know at HH they used to send out offers for a cheap 2 bedroom in the off season. Like $99 per night and 4th night free. You were required to attend the DVC presentation. In the fine print, it said if married both spouses must attend. A friend of mine and her husband joined this way 3 or 4 years ago (the two of them in a 2BR!). They had no intention of buying, just wanted the cheap getaway. They ended up buying, probably for the wrong reason. They really just want to do the non-Disney options. They could have bought into another timeshare much cheaper to tradeout. They even bought an add-on at VWL and have only been to WDW once in the 3 or 4 years. They have traded out to New Orleans, Key West, Upstate NY, NYC. I guess they were more comfortable with the Disney name, plus the fact that another friend & I are big DVC fans!

 

[KNWVIKING]

I think Disney could be successfull building Disney themed resort hotels in several locations, but not as timeshares. Allow DVC members to use points to stay there - at a fair exchange rate - and I think that would take some of the strain off booking at non home resorts as well as generate cash ressies.

I just can't get past someone buying a DVC timeshare and not wanting to use it the majority of the time at WDW or DL.

When we stayed at Niagara Falls (Canada side) a couple years ago in early Jan, Disney charactor lite displays were everywhere. DW and I both thought that if Disney built a resort hotel there it would be booked constantly. If DVC added a resort there, we probably stay there every few years or so, but we would never do an add-on.

 

[DrTomorrow]

It certainly seems that, while we'd like a DVC resort in a great location where we could use our points, there aren't a lot of us who'd want to buy there. Not surprising, considering that this is the DIS....