MS's confirmed no more Stormalong Bay hopping

[Johnnie Fedora]

The only picture I have seen is the one on the BCV's artists rendering that was mailed earlier this year. It looks like a standard rectangularish pool with concrete decking. I had hoped for more of a Stormalong Bay "feel" to the pool area at BCV.

 

[DVCDAVE]

Quite frankly, I don't uinderstand all the fuss. It is funny that there are 7 pages here, all about a pool.

SAB, and no pool hopping there, were widely expected long before BCV went on sale. It was discussed on these boards time and time again.

Further, and this is my opinion only, the BCV purchasers should go in to their transaction with eyes wide open and realize that they are buying in to a resort that already has an overcrowding problem at their pool, that WILL ONLY get worst as their resort sells out. This is clear logic.

Yes, SAB is a great pool and makes BCV an attractive purchase. BUT, what good is it if the crowds are unbearably overcrowded and you can't enjoy a little rest and relaxation ? Potential purchasers should think long and hard before making their decision at any resort, in particular SAB may be a major reason for some to buy, and avoid BCVs. Again, just my honest opinion, please don't flame me.

 

[JonHM]

Stormalong Bay, despite being immense for a resort pool, has limited resources. Up until now it has been supporting the Beach Club, the Yacht Club, and pool hopping DVC members. After July 1st, it will be supporting BC, YC AND 200 new Villas in BCV. Not 200 additional people, 200 additional units - that's a LOT of new people that SAB will now be supporting. I think that that alone will be pushing the limits of how many people SAB can support, particularly when the weather gets hot. IMHO, that is ALL that is behind the new policy, and it makes complete sense to me.

 

[DoeWDW]

DVCDave - no flames here!

We are new members at BCV and I am happy that only people staying at BC, YC & BCV will be using SAB.

However, I am glad that pool-hopping to other pools by DVC members will be allowed, precisely because of your point. If I want to just relax by a pool for a few hours and get a taste of another DVC resort AND leave the SAB crowds behind, I'll still be able to do that.

Doreen in PA

 

[DVCDAVE]

I didn't clearly state one point in my above post. I have no problem with SAB, and the ban on pool hopping there. I truely believe that MS and DVD has an obligation to make all guests experiences at the YC, BC and BCV as pleasurable as possible.

Yes I have pool hopped, and I always called ahead to whereever we went to make sure I could hop to that location. The ban on SAB, or for that matter a total ban on pool hopping wouldn't destroy my DVC experience one bit. There is always plenty to do at WDW to keep this family occupied, yet relaxed.

 

[disnefile]

DVC Dave,

I think you hit the nail on the head. The pool may become like the Magic Kingdom on a hot August day. There even may be 2 hour waits for the slide. They may have to put in a fast pass.

Kidding aside, there will be a real problem just for the people at the resort itself. People will have to use the quiet pools as I am sure this resort was not designed to have all of its guests at SAB.

Has anyone experienced the pool crowding at OKW. It seems everyone wants to be at the main pool, by the way, which does not have a slide. If you are not out there by 11am you can't get a seat. But, the quiet pools are often empty.

Pete

 

[DVCDAVE]

DISNEFILE;

I know exactly what you are talking about, and agree. Last March during our VWL stay we often went to the main pool to enjoy watching the activity, but couldn't get a chair. So, we walked back to the quiet pool to relax just the same. No complaint here ! Either way we enjoyed ourselves, it is just we would have preferred the main pool over the quiet. Sometimes, ya just enjoy a few hours of 'people watching'.

 

[manning]

According to real estate law. Only what is written in the contract is enforceable. So, if a guide says you can pool hop and it will never be taken away, it means nothing unless you can get the guide to put it into the contract and both parties sign it.

 

[Dumbo]

Doreen wrote:

>>If I want to just relax by a pool for a few hours and get a taste of another DVC resort AND leave the SAB crowds behind, I'll still be able to do that.<<

Doreen,

I agree. That's the way it should be. However after July 1 that all changes. If you are staying at Boardwalk Villas you will be not allowed to go over to SAB. Even on a cold January day when SAB may only be half full.

I don't have a problem with restricting pool hopping when the pool is at or near capacity. My frustration is that I am paying dues to support Luna Park pool that is allowed to be used by members staying at BCV, yet I can't use SAB when staying at my home resort.

Dumbo

 

[trishy]

Exactly. It's already written in the guidelines that poolhopping will not be allowed on certain days and "due to capacity constraints". They already had the option of limiting the amount of people at SAB. I just don't see why they needed to ban it indefinitely - even during low or normal capacity. I haven't been there when it's been crowded. My kids just love playing in the sandy pool - they love the walk over, too. I'm just disheartened to lose this feature of our DVC vacation. Though we still have the "Pennywise" pool as we call it (anyone get that?) it was nice to have another alternative with a slide. I can definitely see where resentment from BWV owners might escalate because of this decision. I think we may be the main poolhoppers to SAB. (?)

 

[CaptainMidnight]

I just don't see why they needed to ban it indefinitely - even during low or normal capacity.

I'd hate to see the SAB pool always completely full. I think that is an unreasonable expectation. I'm glad DVC management has taken steps to address this. BC + YC + BCV is really going to be stretching it, there are already plenty of reports of it being overcrowded prior to opening BCV. Look, just stay over at BCV when you want to use SAB, all DVC members are welcome in the 7 month window.

 

[DisneyHumbug]

Yes!! We think "Pennywise", too!!

 

[PKS44]

Originally posted by CaptainMidnight


I'd hate to see the SAB pool always completely full. I think that is an unreasonable expectation.

This kind of comment is a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the position that trishy put forth...and one with which I agree. I have NEVER seen SAB full. I am not saying it does not happen, I am saying at times it is very slow and such times should be open to hopping....As I stated, when we went poolhopping there on a very busy October weekend last year there were maybe 20 people there, 30 tops. The number of DVC members hopping there at any one time like that is negligible. No body said allow poolhopping to the point that SAB is always crowded...what we are saying is just limit it to times like when I was there when the addition of another 4 to 20 people is not going to make much of difference on the availability of chairs, etc...YC, BC BCV lodgers should expect to have priority--the great myth being put forth is that somehow the BCV addition will make SAB busy all the time...if they are so busy they are going to have to police it with wristbands or something like it...the pool has such an extensive border to guard that it will be way to easy to access it...anyway I don't doubt it will be busier-that is self-evident. I do not believe that 365 days a year, during all the 8 daily hours of SAB, it will be so busy that it cannot handle the handful of hoppers wanting to swim there, say midday, midweek, in January, for an example. This is what trishy was saying, I believe. A more logical and consistent policy would have recognized that while SAB is unlikely to be "on-line" for pool hopping very often, the blanket ban is unnecessarily inflexible. It is the sort of rigid thinking that typifies beaurocracies that have no faith in people... Unless DVC members have demonstrated some tendency to abuse the poolhopping privelege such a move is not just unnecessary, it is an insult...As far as I know, DVC members are an excellent group of guests and could have been expected to happily comply with a more flexible policy that would respect the special needs of guests at the SAB resorts. None of this logic will change the policy though- this move is salesmanship pure and simple..giving BCV buyers a "special" perk for owning and staying there- if it was not a selling point, why were guides touting this change in policy long before it became "official?"

 

[CaptainMidnight]

this move is salesmanship pure and simple..giving BCV buyers a "special" perk for owning and staying there

Nope, sorry, don't buy it. Nice try though. I think the limitations for SAB pool hopping are entirely reasonable based on capacity issues and not some big sales conspiracy plot. And I stand behind the point that I don't want SAB kept at near capacity, there should be slower times at the pool. Constantly flipping back and forth that it is available, not available, doesn't see like a good solution either. Again, come stay at BCV on points, all are welcome.

By the way, I appreciate the courtesy that differring views are being presented. on this issue. Nothing wrong with different views, and gaining a common understanding of both sides.

 

[nydizfan]

once again i need to respond to this. We all agree that most of the times SAB is very crowded . Or at least somewhat crowded.
But , if you go to the pool in the second week in sept, when we usually go , there is no one there. maybe 20 people. I will still go with my son. I cant see anyone( the cm) asking for id's. And i am a long standing dvc member . but i just dont see the harm. no flames please......dave

 

[PKS44]

Originally posted by CaptainMidnight
By the way, I appreciate the courtesy that differring views are being presented. on this issue. Nothing wrong with different views, and gaining a common understanding of both sides.

What is wrong and not helpful is stating and arguing with different views inaccurately- there is clearly no common understanding but a misunderstanding of the other views not helped when they are restated so inaccurately.

Originally posted by CaptainMidnight And I stand behind the point that I don't want SAB kept at near capacity, there should be slower times at the pool.[/

And who argued otherwise?

Then we all agree...and have not said anything that contradicts that point. No poster has said anything that even remotely represents a contrary view.... But the Captain keeps saying it as if someone has suggested otherwise....

I will try to state my position again even more clearly...IF poolhopping were allowed at certain slow times still, such as on weekdays, midday during slow season,etc. that would NOT make SAB at near capacity- or anywhere NEAR capacity---the pool would still have slow time, down time because the point is that there are probablyVERY FEW people poolhopping...the addition of poolhoppers at such times would have no meaningful impact on the pool capacity--- which is as it should be not just at SAB but also for any other pool...hoppers should not be hopping to any pool to the point that it brings it up to capacity or over capacity---that has always been the general idea behind the policy and should have remained the policy...

On again off again hopping to SAB is not at all what I suggested... they know when the pool is likely to be empty- midday, certain times of the year...they know when it is going to be very crowded and have pre-announced pool hopping suspension well in advance in the past...I think Disney's and Captain Midnight's position is unnecessarily inflexible and that a more realistic policy could have been fashioned EASILY...if they were interested in keeping current hoppers satisfied..but they have those members money...so who cares?


I still believe the way this policy was "sold" by guides long before it was official is proof that it is a sales tactic--( not a conspiracy-another misrepresentation of other's views-- never said that it was anything like a conspiracy)...if it's not a selling point then why are the salesman even mentioning it?

Originally posted by CaptainMidnight
Nope, sorry, don't buy it. Nice try though. I think the limitations for SAB pool hopping are entirely reasonable based on capacity issues and not some big sales conspiracy plot.

This is called the Argument of Personal Incredulity and is not a valid argument.... Whether the Captain, or I or anyone else "buys" it or not, is irrelevant. An individual's incredulity is not a counter argument. Everyone is free to believe or not believe anything-but that has no influence on the facts...I don't "buy" that year round blanket bans are reasonable based on capacity issues- but my not believing is not my argument...it is based on some assumed FACTS---maybe my statements about the influence of hopping on capacity are not correct...maybe a lot more people hop than I am assuming--then they would have a negative impact on capacity even at the slowest times...if so then the policy would be reasonable as the Captain argues---BUT if my assumptions are correct- and they are assumptions that the Captain has misrepresented -either misunderstood or completely ignored- then the policy is NOT reasonable. It is not based on any reasonable capacity issues..this is a testable situation-though the test is not going to happen because the sales pitch is settled. A poll on these boards while unscientific indicated that only a small percentage of people poolhop anyway...I believe that the motivated hoppers can still expect to hop to SAB at slow times without expecting enforcement of the new policy-and no one will be any worse or wiser for it...and if they are---don't do it.

Paul

 

[CaptainMidnight]

PKS44,
Well, I'm actually packing up the van to drive to Vero Beach, so I'm not going to invest time into responding to the eloquently stated points you raise, despite my disagreement with them.

I did not know the name of the aurgument approach I employed, I'd only seen it used before, thanks for the learning point. The unknown point that you base your aurgument on is how many people actually pool hop.

there are probablyVERY FEW people poolhopping

It may not be as few as you claim, and not as many as I think that may negatively impact capacity if limitations are not imposed. I am basing my views on reports I've read on these boards of lots of crowds at SAB, I do not have personal observations of how crowded it is at different times of the day, week or season. As a Beach Club Owner, I'm sure I'll be able to gain a greater understanding as I use the pool more often, although our next trip is scheduled for the busy christmas season. I must also confess that while I cannot label the aurgument strategy behind this point, I am very concerned about my familes ability to visit SAB and enjoy using the DVC resource of SAB that I have invested in through our purchase at this resort. My opinion is that the addition of BCV will probably be too much for the pool, and we'll be relegated to the quiet pool due to crowds. While I do not have data and crowd projections to support those concerns, or experience beyond those raising concerns about crowds on these boards. I made the decision to purchase at BCV knowing that the ability to comfortably use SAB may be limited during the peak seasons when we will most probably be traveling. Given those concerns and my perceptions of limited SAB availability, I welcome DVC taking steps to address SAB capacity concerns.

I'm sure this thread will be long dead by the time I return. Perhaps the policy will be modified. May all DVC members have a wonderful vacation, including and especially PKS44. Have a safe trip your next time out everyone.

 

[Dean]

The fact that the guides are using the change in their sales pitch means nothing, of course they will irregardless of the motivation of DVC in the pool hopping change. I too doubt the amount of pool hopping is minimal. I'm sure DVC and BC has data that tells how full the pool is based on time of year and week as well as a definite idea of what percentage are guests at BC, DVC pool hoppers and crashers. I bet management would share that data if one asks the right person. I stand on my belief that to police this issue to the extent it would require to open it up part of the time is unreasonable. The policy would look something like this "you can pool hop to SAB any weekday in September or October except for teacher planning days, minor or major holidays or when the wind blows from the east. The rest of the year you can pool hop from 8 am to 11 am or from 6 pm until closing but again only on weekdays and not during any week within 2 weeks of a major or minor holiday". LOL.

True, the only things that are close to facts that we actually know in this thread are that SAB is being closed to PH and that apparently the guides are using this. Whether they are being trying to be honest or just using it as a sales pitch is irrelavent. The rest is our individual assumptions of how much impact the DVC pool hopping and amount of pool crashing has as well as the "cost" of the enforcement and related determinations have.

 

[dougmatt]

This thread is just keeps going and going and going . Anyway in an effort to 'keep it going' I offer 2 points:

1) It would seem like many of the people posting on this thread on the side of 'happy with the change' are BC owners, and seldom pool hoppers. We PH every trip to WDW and most often end up at SAB. As my DW is a teacher we only travel during the PEAK PEAK PEAK times. Often when PH is suspended. Even then we go over to SAB and visit P-n-C. I have NEVER seen SAB at capacity! I have seen a lot of people there, but not all the chairs full, nor more than a 10 (- maybe 15) minute or so wait for the slide (and if you wait for a break the line dies down since noone wants to walk that far over and over.) Therefore the argument must be that the villas are going to add SIGNIFICANT pressure on the crowds at the pool, which is likely valid as DVC'rs spend much more time (by percentage) at the pools and other facilities than other travelers.

2) (the more important point) I have been told by my guide, and it is printed in the BC literature that SAB is 'currently' available to the BCV's, but not gauranteed. He has warned me that it could be pulled away in the future. This is pretty much the EXACT wording they used when they talked about PH'ing when I purchased. So if they take SAB off the PH list, or stop PH'ing all together, then IMHO it is only one small step further to take SAB away from BCV owners, who REALLY represent the pressure on the pool. YOU BCV owners have paid NOTHING for SAB (regardless of the earlier posters). You do NOT own SAB. Your dues do NOT pay to support SAB. You have a nice quiet pool . That sounds harsh, but it is the reality of the situation.

Be careful what you are so willing to 'give up' as it may be you giving it up some day.

MHO

Doug

 

[DVCLady]

Delete