Moderate or Value Disney Resort as a DVC???

[CaptainMidnight]

How many night would you get for one point at pop century?
;-)

I think the points would be the same value and should be usable anywhere, the difference in economy vs deluxe would be represented by the number of points required per night per resort. Two points per night?

The idea of having many more studios to accomodate that demand is a good idea to.

 

[DeeP]

If it was only 2 pts per night and they made the rooms with a mini kitchenette like the studios, I think they would sell like hotcakes. Think about it, a family could get 2 rooms with 2 kitchenettes, 2 bathrooms, 2 tvs, 2 phones, more square footage than the existing stuidos for 28 pts a week, if all the nights were equal pts! That is one heck of a deal! I would stay there, get 1 room and stay for 2 weeks for 28 pts, boy you could really stretch out your pts this way!!!! I doubt it would only be 2 pts per night though.

 

[Werner Weiss]

Originally posted by Dean
From a DVC standpoint, I have trouble fitting it in directly. You would almost have to have a separate “Disney Cheap Club (DCC)” or whatever fancy name you could come up with.

Yes. I could see a differently branded timeshare product -- but not a cut-rate DVC resort.

A converted Disney moderate hotel would not have to consist entirely of small studios. Marriott has successfully converted hotel rooms in Kauai and Maui into timeshare units by adding connecting doors between rooms. Two hotel "bays" make a 1BR. Three hotel "bays" make a 2BR. One room has a kitchenette, table, and sleeper sofa; the second room has a king bed. The result is a 1BR, 2BA "villa." There are also 2BR, 3BA units. (For the 2BR units, the second bedroom has a double and a sleeper sofa, and can be locked off from the remainder of the 2BR unit.)

It wouldn't even need to be a point-based system. Disney could sell conventional one-week intervals. Done correctly, it could open a new market for people who want a "Piece of the Magic" but can't or won't pay the DVC asking price. The rooms would be smaller. There would not be any full kitchens. There would be no balconies. But if they started with any of the Disney moderate hotels, it would still be a nice resort with a great location.

 

[Dean]

I'm basing this on the current DVC points structure and comparing to Adventure season only. I'm also assuming a micro-fridge option. I guess I'd put the value resorts at around 3 points weeknights and 7-8 points weekends or about 30 points for a week (adventure). I'd put the moderates at about 6/15 or 60 points for a week. These points costs are comparable to the cheapest specials available in the last year or 2 if one assumes a DVC value of $10 per point. These are fairly rough approximations and the reason I mentioned the idea of a separate points system with a conversion, I simply don't see the alternate system fitting well into the points structure of DVC at present though I do see it as workable. I still see a minimum of 3 or 4 nights, the only question is whether to make it a set weelday/weekend or just have a minimum. I guess I'm still surprised Disney didn't do it that way initially for DVC.

Werner is correct that you could do some additional things like larger units. I considered that but decided not to go there as I see Disney targeting a different audience with a different idea of simply getting folks on property and having them spend as much additional monies as possible. That might even mean no microfridge, just a hotel room.

BTW, no reason this couldn't be expanded to the deluxe resorts as well. That means, as previously noted, that we might have a DC type option that was more realistic. We'd be giving up the daily maid service and the taxes. What to do about towels would be an issue unless they installed some type of community location for W/D, had a towel swap or some similar way to provide clean towels.

 

[fkj2]

We'd be giving up the daily maid service and the taxes

Dean, wouldn't that surely wreak havoc with the local economy?
A lot of people depend on the service industry for a paycheck and I could hardly imagine the state rolling over on the 11% reduction in taxes.

 

[Dean]

Originally posted by fkj2
Dean, wouldn't that surely wreak havoc with the local economy?
A lot of people depend on the service industry for a paycheck and I could hardly imagine the state rolling over on the 11% reduction in taxes.

The state would have no control over the tax situation once the timeshare were set up. They could only try to block the initial approval. My guess is they'd rather have the extra people in Orlando paying taxes on meals, gas, etc. As to the economy, I assume you mean less cleaning people/costs and the like. That's the way the ball bounces but remember at this point PC is not open and if it was, there'd still be a fair amount jobs in cleaning, front desk, bell services, restaurant/food court, maintenance, etc. I see it as a win/win from a tax and job standpoint. If there were any losses, they could be made up by normal attrition.

 

[PamOKW]

Just my random thoughts on this interesting idea...I would question whether people who are in the market for cut rate accomodations would lay out the base sum to join this new timeshare. What would be a guess at the buy-in and yearly dues figure? It seems as if a lot of All-Star fans don't even want to pay the regular rack rate but hold out for lower rates whenever possible. I also see many of them talking about how they pay in cash because they don't have/want credit cards. Would these customers have $8,000+ to plunk down in one swoop? Would they be willing to pay $300-$500 a year in fees? Also, how many people return over and over to the Value resorts? Many who frequented the Moderates have already seen the light and bumped up to the luxury of DVC. I would think these people would stick with the regular DVC and I'm not sure if Value folks can or would pre-pay vacations so far in advance.

 

[Granny]

Dean....as always, a provocative thread....good grist for the mill.

The concept is interesting...and the point structure would have to be as outlined, in the 30-40 points per week for Adventure season.

But think of how many current DVCers would love to be able to spend just a few points to stay weekends at All Stars instead of cash or off-site!

Also, the concept of DVCBudget having only a five month opportunity to trade out would be nice. But there would still be a lot of wrath from people who own at the current resorts if someone from the Cheapy DVC got their room at their home!!!

Interesting concept all around. With DVC selling like hotcakes and resort attendance flat to down, this would be an interesting idea to bounce around a DVD conference room.

And what a marketing challenge!

 

[Lisa P.]

I can see what you are saying, Dean. Something along the lines of Marriott Horizons... nice accommodations that appeal to middle income families, no in-room jacuzzi tubs, less elegant furnishings, higher density buildings, lower purchase cost than Marriott's traditional timeshares, somewhat reduced (delayed) tradeability to sister resorts.

It's been written that the timeshares in Hawaii aided that state's tourism industry during the recent year of reduced air travel. Timeshare owners are far more likely to return to their home resort during tough times than hotel visitors who may just switch to drive-to vacation destinations. Expanding DVC's target market could be one way to address this for WDW.

Personally, I doubt we would be interested in buying in to DVC at a "moderate" home resort. However, I think the general market for that would be huge! I doubt the owners who would choose to buy a "moderate" DVC resort would overrun DVC with deluxe reservations - not enough points. DVC could also delay their non-home resort booking window until 4-5 months ahead of travel.

As for whether they'd have enough money to buy in at all... they certainly would. For bargain hunters, such an option would be worthwhile. Think of it. $6,750 ($90/pt x 75 pts), plus $225/yr in maint ($3 x 75pts) and receive a week in a 1BR or more in a moderate studio - better than All Stars or offsite hotels.

The one thing I'd do differently at such a resort would be to offer an economical family suite... a 1BR that sleeps 6 w/mini-kitchen, murphy bed and a divided bathroom w/double sinks - sort of a variation on the Wilderness Cabins. This would draw those families w/children of both genders or w/3+ children who would otherwise avoid DVC due to the high cost of 2BRs for every trip. It would compete effectively with Doubletree Suites and HIFS, bringing more offsite families onsite. Just a thought.

 

[DeeP]

It seems as if a lot of All-Star fans don't even want to pay the regular rack rate but hold out for lower rates whenever possible. I also see many of them talking about how they pay in cash because they don't have/want credit cards. Would these customers have $8,000+ to plunk down in one swoop? Would they be willing to pay $300-$500 a year in fees? Also, how many people return over and over to the Value resorts? Many who frequented the Moderates have already seen the light and bumped up to the luxury of DVC. I would think these people would stick with the regular DVC and I'm not sure if Value folks can or would pre-pay vacations so far in advance.

Pam,
Let me preface this with saying I normally find your posts very informative, fair and statements that I value but............. Wow!!!!!!!! Some pretty big assuming and pompous statements are being made here! "They/All Star fans/them/these people/Value folks" might very well have much more financial means then many DVC members but just do not choose to spead it on deluxe resorts nor DVC memberships. Be careful with what one assumes! I am sure you have heard what the word assume is very frequently translated to--***-u-me. To assume that "They/Value folks, etc" do not have "$8,000+ to plunk down" nor would "they" have the annual dues or that the "value folks" possibly can not or would not pre pay vacations or have or want credit cards is a pretty big assumption and very pompous statements to make. I personally find this very offensive and I am a DVC member who has plunked down much more than $8,000+, paid cash for my DVC membership/pts and have never needed to finance any DVC pts I've purchased, I willing pay more than $300-$500 annual fees and have more credit cards and lines of credit than I could ever need, so these statements are not a insult directed at me. However, I still find them very offensive. Not to be on a tirade, but I sincerely hope these assumptions/ statements are not indicative of the impression DVC members give to others!!!!

 

[Dean]

I'm certain Pam meant nothing by her comments but was trying to make the point that some people, those that go to WDW for their Dream Vacation in a Value, might not even be able to afford the lower priced option. Assume the minimum were say 30 points EOY for a single room value. That's around $1800 (100*30*60%) buy in and fees of say $100 ($3.33*30) EOY or $3000 EY. IMO, it is not Disney's responsibility to make things affordable for everyone, God knows they haven't so far. If there's an option of Moderates, it certainly adds to the value and I too would have to consider using it either by exchanging or buying a small package if the choices were appropriate. Those who needed could get multple rooms, maybe even adjoining rooms even if no suites were in the program.

IMO, there are many ways to go with this idea. Combine rooms into lockoff suites, add moderates or maybe even deluxe resorts, different or the same length of ownership as DVC (maybe only 30 yrs), allow accelerated usage where you could use multiple years worth of points for a big trip every few years. What you would not get is direct and free acess to DVC, it would be reduced access both because of rule and because of not having enough points. No pool hoping, II exchanges, CC, DCL and the like. A limited DC could be in place for the other value and moderates and maybe even the deluxe resorts.

Lisa, in some ways it would be like Horizons but different in many ways. My first thought is really just a prepaid vacation plan at a hotel. It does also bring up the idea of a different Disney Branded regular timeshare. One with smaller rooms and less amenities. And I can see it being possible to do a conversion of PC to this concept as has been noted earlier.

Thanks to all for participating in my mental gymnastics. It was just a fun idea for me and I thought others might enjoy batting it around. I do think the idea has merit for Disney in many forms but whether it's worth it in the end to basically compete with themselves in this area in addition to DVC is their call.

 

[PamOKW]

DeeP I'm sorry if my thoughts came across as being pompous. I really meant more along the lines of how Dean sees my comments. I know lots of people stay at All-Star for a variety of reasons. Many a millionaire wouldn't waste a dime on excess space and many folks scrimp and save to spend one trip at the GF. Can't make assumptions about anyone.

My thought was just that if you could afford and thought $8,000 was a good idea to purchase into a timeshare, you might also be able to make the additional stretch and purchase the current DVC. How low could the price be for this new timeshare and what different group of people would be served? Many people who can afford DVC and still come to WDW every year have no interest in purchasing. Would the lower price for a lesser resort be the hook? Maybe it would.

I wouldn't want to see the "budget" group as part of the DVC. We've got a delicate balance already. It might be viable as a seperate entity.

 

[gmboy95]

i think anything is a good idea for the right price....if pop century where a dvc resort, and the points to stay there where markedly lower (like 5 points a night)....and the minimum to buy in was greatly reduced (maybe 75 points)...i think you then appeal to families who live check to check, and even some couples who think of DVC as a "family" type thing.

 

[GraceDVC]

We have two thoughts about the moderates being part of DVC:

First, for us, they don't need to be part of DVC; just reducing the points needed to switch to a moderate through the Disney Collection (say half of what it is now) would be a great incentive for us to go to them on occasion. We think the present points required to switch to a moderate are way too high, so we choose to go to the Contemporary when we wish to enjoy a different resort.

But, my sister- and brother-in-law love Port Orleans Riverside and would be quite excited if DVC offered a reduced-cost option when buying in. They are yearly vacationers to Orlando. They choose to spend their money on improving their main residence up north, but a smaller DVC buy-in option would be something they'd be interested in.

Seems to us that there is a limited market for the idea, but a stronger one to just reduce the points for present DVCers to switch to a moderate (not a Value resort).

 

[joepoe]

I still think increasing the number of studios at the new resorts and lowering the minimum point buy-in accomplishes capturing the the "moderate" market without diluting or confusing the DVC experience. I know as us baby boomers age, we are not always going to want or need 1 and 2 BR's anyway. Increase the studio inventory.

 

[Dean]

Originally posted by GraceDVC
First, for us, they don't need to be part of DVC; just reducing the points needed to switch to a moderate through the Disney Collection (say half of what it is now) would be a great incentive for us to go to them on occasion. We think the present points required to switch to a moderate are way too high, so we choose to go to the Contemporary when we wish to enjoy a different resort.

Unfortuantely, it's not possible with the current set up to make the moderates a reasonable amount of points. The way it's set now is that DVC negotiates a price with the resort(s) in question which is a discounted rack rate, maybe 10-20%. Then they take the points given up by a member and reserve room(s) which they rent through CRO. I'm assuming CRO takes a cut. The last I heard was that DVC was able to rent only about 75% of the rooms they had given to CRO and this was before 9/11.

If the moderate was part of DVC or a DVC type system, the trade could be a direct one without the other 2 external systems putting their hand into the pot. That way the moderate could be valued the appropriate number of points compared to DVC.

 

[Dean]

Originally posted by joepoe
I still think increasing the number of studios at the new resorts and lowering the minimum point buy-in accomplishes capturing the the "moderate" market without diluting or confusing the DVC experience. I know as us baby boomers age, we are not always going to want or need 1 and 2 BR's anyway. Increase the studio inventory.

I can see that point but suspect it does not fit into DVC well. I'm sure DVC already has data that directs them on what they should build. There are other factors like parking, resort density and the like. Remember that if a resort is mostly 2 BR units (like HH), DVC knows that not every group in a 2 BR will consist of 8 people. The one resort that comes close to this idea, VB, hasn't done well. Personally I think it would have done better on WDW property with this format. Maybe that's the ticket to build EP much like VB with an Inn.

A little history of DVC might help look at this issue. Remember than BW has few GV compared to OKW. The points penalty to reserve them is also more (150% compared to 120% at OKW). WLV and BCV have no GV but DI and EP (if it happens) will have them though we don't know how many. I assume the 150% penalty will continue but it somewhat depends on how the rooms are set up, how many they are and the like.

 

[GraceDVC]

Thank you Dean for explaining how the pricing of Disney Collection resorts comes about.

After giving more thought to moderates becoming DVC resorts, it can work out if the buy-in is at the same DVC current rate ($84), but the minimum reduced to 75 points. With the points needed to stay at the moderate halved, a family's cost would be only $6300 to buy in, and the lower nightly cost would afford a family a week's vacation every year. If they choose to go to a deluxe DVC, they can roll over one year's points (or borrow from the upcoming year). Deluxe DVC resort owners would then have the option to use less points occasionally by choosing to stay at one of the new moderate DVC resorts. It could work out for all.

 

[vernon]

Part of the magic of DVC is the flexibility it offers, offering a "timeshare" concept, be it part of DVC or DVC lite, that only offers a hotel room isn't going to offer people much flexibility in the future, and signing up for something like DVC is by it's nature a long term investment requires, IMHO, people to consider what happens if their situation changes. It's much easier to consider that at worst you might have to use a 1 bedroom for just 2 of you ( even if it's an uneconomical use of points) whereas if you are ALWAYS going to have a hotel room as your largest option you are going to face a much more difficult option. When comparing the two offerings ( DVC and DVC lite) one looks such a poor option I don't think it will sell, but it would negatively impact on people looking at buying DVC as it would give them too many options to think about. Often DVC purchases are lead by one partner being more keen than the other, I can see couples going round and round in circles debating which they should buy into , and ending up not buying either. IMHO it would be a bad business option for Disney to give people too much to think about.

Unless there is the option of larger room types I can't see it flying. Disney has had a spectacular success with DVC in it's current format, why change a winning formula with something that threatens to waterdown your original offering? I understand that you see Pop Century as a bit of a problem right now, but IMHO, it would take a lot of remodelling to make it viable as a timeshare. I also feel that when the ecomomy picks up and people feel more inclined to travel that particular problem is likely to decrease in importance. I also think that while PO could possibly make it as a DVC resort ( although as has been said it would require costly remodification) because it has a loyal customer base, Pop century doesn't have that benefit, so you are in effect hoping to sell to people who are customers of the All Stars. I hope this doesn't sound snobby, but IMHO while the All Stars does have a certain amount of loyal faithful, the main reason to stay at the All Stars is the fact they are the most economical. The vast majority of those people would like to try the mods and deluxes if their finances improve in the future. The others. that love the All Star, will want to continue staying at the All Star not a Pop Century DVC lite resort, IMHO you lose on both counts.

 

[DisneyWorld fanatic]

I did not have to time to read every reply to the original post so if I am repeating someone elses thoughts, sorry!!! There are my thoughts on this interesting debate.
1. If they were to develope a new or different type of time share using a value or moderate resort it would have to be entirely separate from the existing DVC. The reason we joined was that we love WDW and love staying at the premium resorts every year.
2. Obviously, the price would be less and that would not be fair to those of us that paid the DVC price to possibly be forced to stay in a moderate or value during the high volume seasons.
3. As far as the studios, I agree that they should build more of them as opposed to the 1 & 2 bedroom units. When we go on vacation, we dont need a kitchen and are in our room very little. The studio is just enough room for us and also allows us more flexibility with our points.

Jim