Poly DVC expansion coming 2024!

[Matty B13]

I think resale restrictions are not on the radar of most new DVC members, as we can see from the RIV vs. VGF sales recently. Most new purchasers are probably still trying to figure out the whole Best UY, Point Charts, and Booking Windows and have no idea how the Resale Restrictions factor into a purchase equation. When your buying in to the DVC system, most people aren't thinking about a exit strategy, they are mostly trying to figure out if they can afford the purchase on a monthly bases. I know at least 2 of my contract that were fully loaded were sold by people who only owned them for about 3 years, and then realized they couldn't afford to make it to Disney every year and needed to sell. I'm guessing that most new buyers have really no idea what they are getting into with DVC, and the commitment to Disney.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

VGF had all the resort studios added to it with great applause from many new buyers. PVB originally was going to have the full compliment. It should become part of the existing association. I'd guess it's a decent chance that will be done. Far from a done deal but if I had to guess Disney would much rather have all DVC end at the same time at PVB.

 

[KimMcGowan]

It's outsold GFV because it's a far better price. If GFV were priced the same as RIV I bet it would sell way more. People go for the cheaper thing. If the new POLY tower is a new association with the restrictions but also the same price as RIV it will sell. If it has restrictions and is the same price as say GCV it won't.

I think this point is not discussed enough. There is not even an argument worth making that if Riviera was selling as well as GF than the promotions would be the same. Instead, they are having to offer a MUCH bigger discount. To me this says that the sales -with all things considered - are not even close to each other. Disney does not leave money on the table!
Don’t get me wrong, we stayed at Riviera in March and I loved it. However, I think Disney misjudged the publics willingness to accept the restrictions. Can they still get people to buy? Yes. Is it at numbers they expected? I don’t think so - and I think the increased discount proves that point.
In the end, I won’t buy Riviera, despite loving it, and the restrictions are 100% the reason.

 

[Jlo85]

I wonder if Disney really wants Poly to have as good of availability as it has today? It’s hard to sell people on a premium resort when people can just use SAPs to stay there.

I also tend to think that Poly being the only magic kingdom resort not being ROFR’d (excluding VGF, and that still got one ROFR) is also odd. It’s the best ‘deal’ of the MK resorts right now. That’s why I also question whether Poly2 will really have any negative impact on Poly1’s resale, it’s already relatively cheap. There doesn’t seem to be a good reason IMO to ROFR CCV at prices over recent PVB prices. Just seems intentional to me.

But my guess is that Disney probably isn’t even totally sure what they will do.

 

[lovethesun12]

I wonder if Disney really wants Poly to have as good of availability as it has today? It’s hard to sell people on a premium resort when people can just use SAPs to stay there.

I also tend to think that Poly being the only magic kingdom resort not being ROFR’d (excluding VGF, and that still got one ROFR) is also odd. It’s the best ‘deal’ of the MK resorts right now. That’s why I also question whether Poly2 will really have any negative impact on Poly1’s resale, it’s already relatively cheap. There doesn’t seem to be a good reason IMO to ROFR CCV at prices over recent PVB prices. Just seems intentional to me.

But my guess is that Disney probably isn’t even totally sure what they will do.

I feel the same way about the resort. Poly1 owners have no problems booking studios right now, and it's not too difficult to transfer in.

I've heard some people mention they wouldn't buy poly2 if it's the same association due to the question of availability, but I really think if it's the same association it would be equally as likely to help availability at poly2 (compared to different associations) and hurt availability at poly1 since the studios are usually the first to go. Of course this all depends on the layout of poly2.

 

[Sandisw]

I think this point is not discussed enough. There is not even an argument worth making that if Riviera was selling as well as GF than the promotions would be the same. Instead, that are having to offer a MUCH bigger discount. To me this says the sales -with all things considered - are not even close to each other. Disney does not leave money on the table!
Don’t get me wrong, we stayed at Riviera in March and I loved it. However, I think Disney misjudged the publics willingness to accept the restrictions. Can they still get people to buy? Yes, is it at numbers they expected? I don’t think so - and I think the increased discount proves that point.
In the end, I won’t buy Riviera, despite loving it, and the restrictions are 100% the reason.

I think when it’s mentioned regarding it selling more points it’s in relation to the restrictions conversion.

It’s still selling more points which means that DVD has found a way to make it competitive as a restricted resort against a non restricted one.

If the long term strategy is to have restrictions they now have some data that supports that move.

I agree that the move on incentives means they decided they wanted to make it even more attractive.

But I am confused how they would be disappointed with RIV selling over 80k but not be disappointed selling VGF in the 70ks.

IMO, with VDH and Poly tower looming, and RIV still having so many points, pricing to boost sales makes sense..

But, it still shows them that they can sell it as long as they are strategically pricing it.

Buyers had the choice between the two and the difference on 150 points right now is $1350. That is a drop in the bucket and not big enough that someone is choosing RIV with restrictions when they really want VGF.

 

[Sandisw]

I feel the same way about the resort. Poly1 owners have no problems booking studios right now, and it's not too difficult to transfer in.

I've heard some people mention they wouldn't buy poly2 if it's the same association due to the question of availability, but I really think if it's the same association it would be equally as likely to help availability at poly2 (compared to different associations) and hurt availability at poly1 since the studios are usually the first to go. Of course this all depends on the layout of poly2.

It all depends on if you want to be at PVB if getting what you want at Poly tower is difficult.

That is us. We don’t like the current set up at PVB and don’t stay there because of it.

So, if I am spending another $20k for Poly, I want the biggest advantage as I can to book the rooms there.

If the over 4 million points from PVB have home resort advantage as the about 2 million points there, then it dilutes my chances for what I want.

I expect it the point chart to be hefty but potentially some SV rooms that are more manageable.

So, if I am competing with PVB owners, then it’s not worth having the home resort advantage for me. I’ll take my chances at 7 months and instead buy more points at RIV.

 

[pianomanzano]

I wonder if Disney really wants Poly to have as good of availability as it has today? It’s hard to sell people on a premium resort when people can just use SAPs to stay there.

I think they could care less about what availability is like. They only care about availability at the 60 day mark when they can swoop in and rent DVC rooms as cash stays. They also don’t need to sell the resort to anyone because it’s already “sold out”.

 

[Jlo85]

I think they could care less about what availability is like. They only care about availability at the 60 day mark when they can swoop in and rent DVC rooms as cash stays. They also don’t need to sell the resort to anyone because it’s already “sold out”.

I just think availability makes the resort more exclusive, and Disney can sell it for more direct. Also, it can goad more members to buying additional points to get a 1BR or larger. I just think anything Disney can do to sell more points at a higher price, it will do, which is why the lack of ROFR is odd to me.

 

[Sandisw]

I just think availability makes the resort more exclusive, and Disney can sell it for more direct. Also, it can goad more members to buying additional points to get a 1BR or larger. I just think anything Disney can do to sell more points at a higher price, it will do, which is why the lack of ROFR is odd to me.

I think it’s just too early to read into the lack of ROfR right now in whether it’s going to be part of PVB or not.

One big reason for it to be a new association is so they can sell more direct points. If PVB is rolled in, people can just continue to pick up resale points.

But, if it’s the same, then they don’t need to start stock piling current PVB points from now when sales are at least 18 months away.

With VGF, they are deeding all new points to BPK..so any points owned at the current VGF are not part of what is being sold.

So, they won’t really have a need for current PVB points immediately as they will have plenty to sell attached to the new tower.

If it is a new association, then they won’t need PVB points at all.

If we haven’t gotten confirmation of new or same by next Spring, then I think what they do with ROFR could give us a clue.

 

[CarolynFH]

if I had to guess Disney would much rather have all DVC end at the same time at PVB.

There’s nothing to prevent setting up Poly2 as a completely new and separate condominium association that just happens to end on the same date that the PVB condominium association ends.

One big reason for it to be a new association is so they can sell more direct points. If PVB is rolled in, people can just continue to pick up resale points.

Yes, and they need to sell direct points to cover the construction costs of the new Poly2 tower (in addition to sales and marketing costs, of course).

 

[Jlo85]

I think it’s just too early to read into the lack of ROfR right now in whether it’s going to be part of PVB or not.

One big reason for it to be a new association is so they can sell more direct points. If PVB is rolled in, people can just continue to pick up resale points.

But, if it’s the same, then they don’t need to start stock piling current PVB points from now when sales are at least 18 months away.

With VGF, they are deeding all new points to BPK..so any points owned at the current VGF are not part of what is being sold.

So, they won’t really have a need for current PVB points immediately as they will have plenty to sell attached to the new tower.

If it is a new association, then they won’t need PVB points at all.

If we haven’t gotten confirmation of new or same by next Spring, then I think what they do with ROFR could give us a clue.

That makes sense. I often wonder if there is any methodology to the ROFR madness. I just do have trouble believing that Disney would let Poly resale for $150/point in normal conditions. That part of it just gives me pause, and why there seems to be some intention. It's the Poly, it should be up there with BLT and VGF. And I doubt they'd let Poly1 languish, there is just too much lost opportunity for profit there.

 

[CraigInPA]

That makes sense. I often wonder if there is any methodology to the ROFR madness. I just do have trouble believing that Disney would let Poly resale for $150/point in normal conditions. That part of it just gives me pause, and why there seems to be some intention. It's the Poly, it should be up there with BLT and VGF. And I doubt they'd let Poly1 languish, there is just too much lost opportunity for profit there.

The ROFR process is a game of arbitrage. When DVC sees a contract that they know they can sell quickly, or has a lot of existing current year points that they need, they'll snatch it up if the spread between their purchase price and sale price is sufficient to meet their profit expectations.

As for Poly, DVC isn't picking up ROFR points right now. It could be because they have a lot of them in stock. It could be because they don't want to sell resale points when they'll have millions of new Poly points in the next 18 months. It might be that they don't ROFR right now in order to drive the price down somewhat, so they can scoop up some 6 months from now at a cheaper price. It might be that they have 3 actively selling resorts right now and don't feel the need to play the ROFR card for Poly like they do at OKW (which, admittedly, looks like a long term play to buy up 2042 expiration contracts to convert them to 2057 contracts before 2042 arrives). Only DVC knows why it's not picking up Poly points.

Craig

 

[Sandisw]

That makes sense. I often wonder if there is any methodology to the ROFR madness. I just do have trouble believing that Disney would let Poly resale for $150/point in normal conditions. That part of it just gives me pause, and why there seems to be some intention. It's the Poly, it should be up there with BLT and VGF. And I doubt they'd let Poly1 languish, there is just too much lost opportunity for profit there.

DVD has reasons to ROFR. But they change all the time and the process is meant to be unpredictable.

Goals and reasons for it at certain resorts can be diffferent.

Keeping resale value up may be part of it but only if they need it to stay up to help direct sales.

Look at what is happening with SSR. Lots of points taken but not selling many. No idea why they want more of those points.

The past few years they have been more aggressive than in previous years. You could get SSR in the 90s just two years ago..ROfR didn’t kick in until the 80s.

Yet other resorts haven’t seen an almost $40 jump, because their prices were already at a rate they determined wasn’t worth buying.

That is why their are variables in play that can make DVD take or pass those contracts

 

[Nursemanit]

I still say VGF to RR is apples to oranges. The only similarities is the " Fancy factor" and even that VGF is more ornate vs more classic decor at RR.

One is Epcot One is MK
One is a Hotel one is separate buildings
One is new one is legacy / older

for me Epcot vs MK made me ignore everthing else even though I liked VGF1 better

I don't think we get any useful data from the comparison.

 

[Genie+]

It might be that they don't ROFR right now in order to drive the price down somewhat, so they can scoop up some 6 months from now at a cheaper price.

This is what I wondered. Maybe they’ll let it sink a little for the time being. As construction ramps up, possibly less interest in Poly resale for a while. Once Poly2 direct sales date is confirmed, they can target ROFR Poly1 for a few months to shorten up the gap between resale/direct. ROFR’ing Poly1 now would only make this method more costly to them in the long run. Just a theory…

 

[Rochester Disney Fan]

I'm hoping Poly is a new association just so the Bungalows aren't part of it.

 

[pianomanzano]

Three nights at rack rate for the bungalows is the same as ROFRing a 100 pt contract at 150/pt and those profits are immediate versus ROFRing and selling direct. That could play a role in the low ROFR rate at Poly.

 

[Jlo85]

Three nights at rack rate for the bungalows is the same as ROFRing a 100 pt contract at 150/pt and those profits are immediate versus ROFRing and selling direct. That could play a role in the low ROFR rate at Poly.

By that logic, though, wouldn’t they be overpaying for BLT on ROFR at $175/point?

I agree that ROFR is really hard to rationalize, I just tend to think it somewhat represents Disney’s profit potential at a given resort. So BLT has the highest profit potential, and therefore the highest ROFR. And I just have trouble believing that Poly doesn’t have similar profit potential to BLT. And if it’s not actually generating similar profit, that DVC will want to boost it via an expansion. It’s just such a marquee resort.

But as y’all mention there could be other factors in play. I just tend to think this isn’t ‘normal’, like something is going through DVCs mind.

 

[GoingSince1990]

For me, RIV style resale restrictions would be a complete deal-breaker. But selling the new points VGF2 style as part of the existing association would be an utterly compelling opportunity, just as attractive as VGF2.