Poly Expansion Watch

[BrianLa]

Looking forward to having 1BR and 2BR choices there. It's my favorite resort but with kids getting older (and bigger) the studios don't work for us anymore. It will be interesting to see if this is added to existing condo association or a new one. I would have no interest in adding on there if it is part of the same condo association. Why would I want to buy into the bungalow problem even if its watered down by the new tower. The mix of rooms would still be disproportionately studios making 1BR and 2BR tough to book even at 11-month mark as many existing Poly owners are also interested in the larger accommodations. Similar problem for VGF. They bought into a more balanced property which is now going to be disproportionately loaded with studios. I would not want to own VGF with the intention of booking 1BR or 2BR.

 

[kilik64]

Can someone explain the bungalow points problem that's referenced earlier in the thread? and how adding these new units to the existing association (or not) would alleviate it?
we own at the poly and would love to have a 1-bedroom option.

The resort can only have enough points to book up every room for the year. The problem with the bungalows is that they cost an exorbitant amount of points to stay in per night and thus for the year. So DVD was able to sell more total points because of them vs if they just had the studios only is one view. The other is the studios are cheaper because of the bungalows allowed them to sell more total points.

The thought some people might have with the new tower and it having 1br and 2br units, is they will attempt to move points across units to raise the point costs of studios, 1br, and 2br and lower the bungalow costs.

Thats my understanding of it all, someone correct me if thats not accurate.

 

[DVCSunDevil]

On another thread someone posted a really good point. Imagine if you recently bought Riviera direct because of FOMO for wanting to stay at future resorts. Then two new additions come to DVC, but they are added into already established associations…which means any recent resale owners can also stay at them. I would be pretty unhappy if that happened. And I would be asking why I bought Riviera direct.

 

[Sandisw]

On another thread someone posted a really good point. Imagine if you recently bought Riviera direct because of FOMO for wanting to stay at future resorts. Then two new additions come to DVC, but they are added into already established associations…which means any recent resale owners can also stay at them. I would be pretty unhappy if that happened. And I would be asking why I bought Riviera direct.

Which is why the lack of announcement this is the same association could be a clue.

Regardless, resale can’t stay at RIV so had that same person not bought there, they would be left out of that, I think a lot will be surprised if the restrictions for RIV stay if this becomes part of PvB.

 

[DVCSunDevil]

Which is why the lack of announcement this is the same association could be a clue.

Regardless, resale can’t stay at RIV so had that same person not bought there, they would be left out of that, I think a lot will be surprised if the restrictions for RIV stay if this becomes part of PvB.

Agreed. And I think I said it wrong now that I read your reply. I meant to say that if someone bought direct at any of the other on-Riviera resorts because of FOMO for staying at Riviera and any future “new” resorts, that person would probably be pretty aggravated if Poly2 does indeed get rolled into PVB.

Based on everything I have read and heard about the new PVB2, I would be shocked if it is rolled into the current PVB. I’m getting the feeling it will be a new association. But I am just guessing. It will be interesting to see, that’s for sure.

 

[wnielsen1]

Which is why the lack of announcement this is the same association could be a clue.

Regardless, resale can’t stay at RIV so had that same person not bought there, they would be left out of that, I think a lot will be surprised if the restrictions for RIV stay if this becomes part of PvB.

I have to agree. If they don't have restrictions on PVB2, there's a good chance RIV is getting the restrictions reversed. While the restrictions have probably caused people to buy direct, they have also caused people to not buy RIV. I am one of those who will not buy it and I have told my guide such. There are other ways to steer people to direct (a robust benefits program and an aggressive ROFR program are two examples). On the other hand, if PVB2 is a new association with restrictions, then we know it is here to stay.

 

[Sandisw]

Agreed. And I think I said it wrong now that I read your reply. I meant to say that if someone bought direct at any of the other on-Riviera resorts because of FOMO for staying at Riviera and any future “new” resorts, that person would probably be pretty aggravated if Poly2 does indeed get rolled into PVB.

Based on everything I have read and heard about the new PVB2, I would be shocked if it is rolled into the current PVB. I’m getting the feeling it will be a new association. But I am just guessing. It will be interesting to see, that’s for sure.

I am leaning that way. The only thing is future resorts is a long time so even if these two end up not considered that, plenty of time for more!

 

[DVCSunDevil]

I have to agree. If they don't have restrictions on PVB2, there's a good chance RIV is getting the restrictions reversed. While the restrictions have probably caused people to buy direct, they have also caused people to not buy RIV. I am one of those who will not buy it and I have told my guide such. There are other ways to steer people to direct (a robust benefits program and an aggressive ROFR program are two examples). On the other hand, if PVB2 is a new association with restrictions, then we know it is here to stay.

I agree with you and Sandisw that if POLY2 gets rolled into the current PVB association, then DVC absolutely has to remove the restrictions associated with Riviera. And that also is one of the reasons why I lean to POLY2 being a new association. I find it hard to believe that DVC is going to admit they were wrong with the Riviera restrictions. Can you imagine what a mess that would be? All the people who spent all that extra money buying direct who would have purchased resale. The people who love Riviera and wanted to buy there, but ended up “settling” and purchasing direct at a less favorite resort because they were worried about about the Riviera resale restrictions. Undoing the restrictions will lead to a lot of very unhappy members. The easier alternative is to make PVB2 a new association. It is much “cleaner” that way.

 

[Yinn]

What’s the advantage of cancelling reflections for this? I can understand VGF since it’s a conversion but this would be a new build right?

 

[CraigInPA]

I'm in the camp that the expansion at Poly will be rolled into the current Poly association. The chief reason is that the amount of legal work, filings, and ongoing reporting for a new association is going to be hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not a million dollars. The Riviera argument regarding resale restrictions is a non-starter. By the time this expansion is built, Riv will be sold out. Riv owners bought in with the restrictions, and there is now ample evidence that DVC doesn't care about hurt feelings, since the VGF expansion is part of the original VGF association. I'd also discount the possibility that the restrictions will be lifted as result of the Poly expansion.

There will be "all new" resorts built going forward, including the Disneyland Tower which is very likely to be a new association due to the circa 35 years remaining on VGC when the tower is completed. I expect that the Disneyland Tower will contain the Riviera restrictions.

 

[Sandisw]

What’s the advantage of cancelling reflections for this? I can understand VGF since it’s a conversion but this would be a new build right?

My only thought is that Reflections was to be both cash and DVC. This is just a new DVC resort so putting it at an existing location might have made more sense?

 

[DisneyOutsider]

What’s the advantage of cancelling reflections for this? I can understand VGF since it’s a conversion but this would be a new build right?

My only thought is that Reflections was to be both cash and DVC. This is just a new DVC resort so putting it at an existing location might have made more sense?

Another theory is they cancelled Reflections because they don't want to declare any new associations to give them time to decide whether they really want to follow through with these re-sale restrictions.

This of course assumes PVB2 is kept in the original association.

 

[New Mouse]

What’s the advantage of cancelling reflections for this? I can understand VGF since it’s a conversion but this would be a new build right?

Lower cost plus the ability to reduce the bungalow points disaster.

 

[DISJeff74]

Please ple

LOL! more like Courtyard Marriott Seven Seas Lagoon

The paid Individual Lighting Lane for the self-serve macadamia nut waffles on the “included” breakfast will be gone by 7:01am each day.

 

[Maynorfive]

The aesthetic just does not match with the heavily themed longhouses and great ceremonial house. I wish they would lean more on some of the original concept art for the large resort building. The bungalows have been a great looking addition.

 

[js]

If we are taking bets, I am going to say PV2 will be a separate association with restrictions.
Doesn't the restrictions benefit Disney for the future?

 

[HIRyeDVC]

If we are taking bets, I am going to say PV2 will be a separate association with restrictions.
Doesn't the restrictions benefit Disney for the future?

I personally think the restrictions hurt Disney in the long run. They hurt the resale value of DVC. A healthy resale market would make more people want to buy DVC both on the direct and the resale market.

 

[js]

I personally think the restrictions hurt Disney in the long run. They hurt the resale value of DVC. A healthy resale market would make more people want to buy DVC both on the direct and the resale market.

I agree to this too but wouldn't Disney like fewer resale contracts and just buy back directly from the initial owner?

I'm not sure, I really haven't done any homework or research, just my quick thoughts about the restrictions.

 

[DduzDis]

I agree to this too but wouldn't Disney like fewer resale contracts and just buy back directly from the initial owner?

I'm not sure, I really haven't done any homework or research, just my quick thoughts about the restrictions.

I think there needs to be some balance. Without a healthy resale market people (like me) may not be as quick to spend that much money for the long term. While I don't see it as an appreciating investment, it is nice to know I can get out relatively easily if something in our financial picture changes for the worse. Without a resale market and the availability to sell easily if we needed to, we would not have as many contracts (some resale; some direct) as we do.

 

[HIRyeDVC]

I agree to this too but wouldn't Disney like fewer resale contracts and just buy back directly from the initial owner?

I'm not sure, I really haven't done any homework or research, just my quick thoughts about the restrictions.

The biggest purchaser of resale contracts is Disney itself. Disney NEEDS a healthy resale market where individuals like you and I negotiate fair market prices on their behalf. It’s also in their best interest that DVC contracts retain value or else a lot of people wouldn’t buy. So many people buy 50 year direct contracts thinking they’ll never sell. But a lot can happen in that time and most people usually sell after 7-10 years. Disney is shooting itself in the foot with the restrictions. So many more people would buy Riviera if it didn’t have the restrictions IMO.