Outrageous Bungalow Points: A Different Perspective

[jerseyduke]

Of course, that situation could result in a reallocation, making the studios more expensive.

Carol, this is true, but also a tad tricky. It depends on how many of each room type there is. If all 360 studios were the same (which they are not), they would have to lower the bungalows by 18 points per night, just to raise the studios 1 point! Now of course, this situation is alleviated by the fact that there will probably only be like 100 lake view rooms. Which I think would make the lake view rooms (as the smaller number) more vulnerable to a reallocation.

Were I a Poly owner, it would bother me NOT ONE BIT to find the bungalows available to cash guests, In fact, if DVC chooses to send DRC bungalows to pay for non-Poly resort owners' choices, it would still be a win for the Poly owners and the membership as a whole (assuming the Poly studios available at 7 months get booked, and I think they will).

It would if you could not get a studio you wanted! If (and this is a big if) all the points bought were going to studios, it would be the equivalent of Disney selling 460 studios, but only supplying 360 (About) Otherwise, it would help keep dues down with breakage revenue. (which audited or not, i question)

 

[Plutofan]

First of all, they declared 10 of the 20. That is 50 percent. That is about PAR for the course.

Second, as I have said in other posts, YOU DO NOT BUY the villas!

You buy into the PVB as a whole. While they are targeting people with more money, yes, it does not matter. Because you do not buy "bungalow points" or "studio points", you just buy points.

Those bungalows put 1 million more points up for sale! DVD, DVC make money by selling points. That's it. If the only people who ever book those are people with resale SSR points, they do not care. They sold the million points at 160 each, or more. Heck, they dont care if they stay empty as long as the points sell.

And maybe, just maybe a some people will buy in, small contracts, with the romantic notion of a weekend in one every third year.

It sounds like several years down the road Disney may have a PR nightmare. If the bungalows are not taken out on points then there will be a lot of extra points potentially going after studios. If people who bought Poly can not get studios because demand out strips supply then they will be upset paying $160 per point plus high maintenance fees for points that they will be using at the 7 month window to book non poly resorts. They would be better off paying a fraction of the cost and buying a non poly dvc resort through resale.

 

[Plutofan]

Remember of a portion of breakage lowers dues. The rest I believe may go back to Disney but I am not sure.

Breakage Income - As stated in the Condominium Documents, Disney Vacation Club Management Corp.
(“DVCMC”) rents, during the Breakage Period, certain accommodations that have not been reserved by
Members. The Association is entitled to receive, as breakage income, the proceeds of such rentals not to
exceed 2.5 percent of the aggregate of the Condominium Operating Budget (total operating expenses
less the sum of interest income and Member late fees and interest) and Capital Reserve Budget in each
calendar year.

 

[CarolMN]

......(snip).......It would if you could not get a studio you wanted! If (and this is a big if) all the points bought were going to studios, it would be the equivalent of Disney selling 460 studios, but only supplying 360 (About) Otherwise, it would help keep dues down with breakage revenue. (which audited or not, i question)

But I think I would get the studio, because the equivalent points for the bungalows aren't chasing after the studios, but used to pay for members' trade out of the resort.

 

[Jennasis]

IMO, the premiere "must-have" resort is GF. Not speaking of just DVC here...GF is the flagship. Sure the poly is an icon, just like CR, but it isn't THE resort.

I honestly would be shocked if the bungalows are full much of the time. No skin off my back if they are...bully for Disney. Just have no desire to stay there, and certainly not at the price point they are.

 

[MoreTravels]

The only way for average joes to reasonably stay at the bungalows is to own 1000 points Vero Beach resale contracts at $40 per point and you can own it for $40,000 instead of $160,000.

I don't see Hollywood stars or dotcom entrepreneurs owning DVC but then the recent TV show 'Million dollar listing' has shown them renting a beachside house for $200,000 per month without any complaint so anything is possible.

If you have $50 million is stocks, your annual stock dividends will already be enough to spend carelessly.

 

[julluvsdisney]

I think the joke is on the people that purchase at POLY . Disney will have the owners pay the crazy MF that off set disneys cost and rent the bungalows out for cash. No one is gonna Pay the prices for the bungalows. If the uber rich want to go to disney it's not gonna be via dvc. They are gonna stay club level with the works. Not pay for 50 years of the bungalows. I think disney blew it with the bungalows but I don't think the studios were totally insane . A little higher than I think they should be but nothing that makes it outrageous.

 

[crisi]

My guess is that Disney is figuring that they have a couple hundred thousand members now, a big portion who bought on emotion. Those people will book some once in a lifetime trip in the bungalows - not just Poly owners.

Your daughter's honeymoon trip - you'll bank and borrow three years of points to send her to the Poly bungalows. That retirement trip where the kids are in college but all those points you bought expecting grandkids don't need to be used yet. They don't need Poly owners to book them - they need several thousand someone's willing to splurge once in a while - that describes DVC members rather well.

Super high end visitors have the suites to book. And I'd think if the demand were high enough for the suites, they would have put more in during existing hotel reservations.

 

[CMOORE185]

My guess is that Disney is figuring that they have a couple hundred thousand members now, a big portion who bought on emotion. Those people will book some once in a lifetime trip in the bungalows - not just Poly owners.

Your daughter's honeymoon trip - you'll bank and borrow three years of points to send her to the Poly bungalows. That retirement trip where the kids are in college but all those points you bought expecting grandkids don't need to be used yet. They don't need Poly owners to book them - they need several thousand someone's willing to splurge once in a while - that describes DVC members rather well.

Super high end visitors have the suites to book. And I'd think if the demand were high enough for the suites, they would have put more in during existing hotel reservations.

Unless my daughter just had to have the bungalows I would book a one bedroom at the GFV's for a fraction of the bungalows. The GF is more of a honeymoon resort, and why would two people need a two bedroom for their honeymoon? That would just be a waste.

I also do not think one time bookers is enough to keep the bungalows booked throughout the year.

 

[elgerber]

Your daughter's honeymoon trip - you'll bank and borrow three years of points to send her to the Poly bungalows. .

Sadly 3 years of my points still wouldn't get me a bungalow, even in the lowest season.

 

[calleger]

The Bungalows are Disney's version of the Ford GT. It makes little sense for Ford to have a product geared toward the uber rich. However, by supplying that product it ups the perceived value of the rest of the offerings.

 

[conandrob240]

Points/prices are crazy

 

[holcomb-mania]

At $160/pt, I'll just send my daughter to Bora Bora.

 

[jerseyduke]

What he's implying is what someone on another thread came outright and said, it appears as though Disney (whichever arm) is using DVD to do the hotel building right now and getting DVC members to foot the bill.

This is exactly it. The Bungalows do not have to be targeted at anyone.

Points are points, and the Bungalows add about 1 million points to the Poly. If people only buy 150 point contracts, it does not matter, Disney will sell the bungalows in that way.

They built those things with 0 risk (how nice is that?) and if not a Poly DVC person books them, that is fine. Another DVC person will at 7 months. And if Not, DVC gets the money from the breakage.

I GUARANTEE that if those bungalows were a separate resort from the Poly, and sold separately, at least one of the following, if not both, would be true:

1. The points per night would be lower
2. There would not be 20 of them.

The flexibility of DVC (being able to get different types of rooms with the same points) gave Disney a way to take advantage of DVC here, and they did.

the Bungalows are about 25% of the Poly points. I think it is safe to say that disney will not sell 25% of the points to people targeting the bungalow.

This is what Disney does.

Next time you are at MK look at the engraved pavers (I admit to having one). Disney built a new walk way, and had the guests pay for it, and even made money by building the new walk way.

Poly owners wanting studios are going to pay for those Bungalows, and Disney is going to make money renting them.

Frankly, I think they could have made them more points per night.

 

[loveglobe]

Another thought is that maybe the bungalows are geared towards honeymooning couples. Why fly to Bora Bora where a burger costs $50US when you can get married AND have your over-the-water tropical paradise suite for less $$ (relatively speaking). If I were getting married at WDW that's where I'd want to spend my wedding night.

 

[KingRichard]

Lots of people have 3-500 points and will most likely rent 2-3 nights.

Just to try it once.

They will be filled!

 

[gdrj]

I didn't mean to imply that this kind of traveler would be purchasing DVC. They'll be renting these for cash from Disney.

And, with few exceptions, these bungalows are going to be the must-have accommodation for those who must have "the best" ON PROPERTY, and make no mistake, Poly is one of the iconic classic WDW resorts, along with CR. Never mind that you can get much better service and better appointed accommodations at the nearby Four Seasons. This is for the people who want to stay onsite in the best and don't care what it costs. I wouldn't be surprised if Disney doesn't dedicate any more of these units, in order to save them for those paying cash. This is not the kind of ultra-luxurious vacation that these travelers are going to expect; they're doing it for the kids.

I agree that the Bungalow's are not meant for the avg DVC'er, based on points charged. When you are looking at 20 Bungalow's out of 20,000 to 30,000 on-site hotel rooms, it is geared for a specific guest. Also with only 2 beds, they aren't looking for "Cousin Eddie" and the rest of the National Lampoon's Vacation family to roll up in the RV. These are for guests or Members who have money to spend. Similar but different to the Four Seasons "Suites" which range from 800 sq feet (sleeps 2 + 2 kids) to 3000 sq ft (that sleeps 2).

 

[Sammie]

It will be interesting to watch what happens for sure. I think Disney is very much aware of the market at the Polynesian. There are people with money that stay there and never stay any where else and have for years. They were never interested in DVC until now. As to whether DVC members will actually book the bungalows, I think they will for special events, honeymoons, anniversaries, etc. but not on a weekly basis. So yes there will be plenty of openings to rent a bungalow for cash.

Someone that is going to drop $100,000 for their daughter's wedding will think nothing of booking one. We had friends attend a $500,000 Disney wedding. The invitations came in a velvet box with a Swarovski Cinderella's Slipper

 

[beer dave]

Lots of people have 3-500 points and will most likely rent 2-3 nights.

Just to try it once.

They will be filled!

Not this guy. Spend my 4 trips a year for 3 nights? Never. If they are occupied at all it will be cash at least 75%. That is their plan.

 

[Dean]

There's lots of outrage over the high point requirements for the PVB Bungalows going on, so I thought I'd offer up a different viewpoint.

I agree the point requirements are outrageous compared to other DVC 2BRs (and even Grand Villas!), but there exists a market of super high-end WDW travelers who thinks nothing of reserving multiple rooms or suites at different WDW properties, and can drop $100,000 and more on a week's vacation for the extended family. They're the ones who get to stay in the Castle Suite, which is booked solid by these people months in advance. I don't even know how much a night there costs. They're the ones hiring the VIP Tour Guides. They're the ones who don't want to deal with the crowds, want "the best" accommodations in The World and are traveling with their kids and the kids' nannies. Hair-splitting about sleeping 8 vs. 12 in the Bungalow (how dare they!) is not a concern for these people: just get a second bungalow for the kids! The fact that they're only dedicating a small number of Bungalows to DVC inventory implies that Disney is banking on these high-end travelers reserving them for cash.

Clearly the target market for these accommodations is not the OKW 2BR guest who wants to spend just a few more points to stay at a WDW classic. I think the real winner here is the Studio guest who loves the Poly and is tired of trying to justify its soaring daily tariffs. For 22 points per night, either as an owner or a renter, you can stay at the Poly for (relative) cheap, at least compared to the regular daily rates. And maybe, just maybe, this will be good advertising for DVC, who will most likely pitch their product heavily to those uninitiated.

IMO we passed the line some time ago where DVC is no longer a viable option for most families, yet many still buy in and often finance. To me the line of reasonableness was passed with SSR based on the points costs compared to other options around that time or around when BLT started selling for the cash price pp. Still the old adage that something is worth what someone is willing to pay for it applies here. As long as the sheep continue to follow, DVD will continue to increase in cost. At the end of the day I can't fault DVD for anything they can sell or any member from buying anything they can afford (IMO pay cash). But I do reserve the right to make judgements in both areas as to reasonableness. The moment that DVD decides just to sit tight and not expand is the moment DVC starts to move downhill as a system.