Poly Expansion Watch

[BeachClub2014]

But selling a contract WITH restrictions is reducing the sales as Riviera.

I see this sentiment often stated in different threads here on the Disboards, and there could be validity to the statement, but I wonder where is the evidence to support this supposition? Aside from anecdotal statements of folks here saying that they won't buy directly because of the restrictions, how do we know that the restrictions actually have a measurable impact on sales?

 

[UofMGuy423]

You could be right. Disney may not care. But selling a contract WITH restrictions is reducing the sales as Riviera. I’m sure they are disappointed it still isn’t sold out. Point being Disney may rethink their strategy. Buying direct knowing it will be harder to sell disincentivizes buying direct which isn’t what Disney considered. It will be interesting to see if PV2 is same association or not as that will say a lot about Disney’s current strategy. Good dialogue. Thanks for sharing.

I highly doubt they anticipated selling 7 million points in 36 months or less. They'd have to average 195K points sold a month at Riviera alone, which, I mean, come on....that's a tall order even without a pandemic shutting things down. With recent numbers for February 2022, Riviera is 40.2% sold out with gains in sales over the past 5 months.

I just don't see the numbers justifying DVD changing course on resale restrictions.

 

[DVCSunDevil]

I highly doubt they anticipated selling 7 million points in 36 months or less. They'd have to average 195K points sold a month at Riviera alone, which, I mean, come on....that's a tall order even without a pandemic shutting things down. With recent numbers for February 2022, Riviera is 40.2% sold out with gains in sales over the past 5 months.

I just don't see the numbers justifying DVD changing course on resale restrictions.

Exactly what I was thinking. A large portion of the time that Riviera has been available for purchase was during the pandemic. 2020 in particular was a really tough time for all DVC sales. But direct sales have been consistently picking up and the resort is 40% sold. That’s not bad at all. But time will tell. It certainly will be interesting to see the details on Poly2.

 

[aka Charles]

But the option to sell your contract isn’t guaranteed anywhere.

The option to sell your contract is guaranteed in Florida Real Estate Law.
But there is no guarantee that you will find a willing buyer at a price you want.

 

[DVCSunDevil]

The option to sell your contract is guaranteed in Florida Real Estate Law.
But there is no guarantee that you will find a willing buyer at a price you want.

Thank you. That was my point. One can always try to sell it, but they really can’t plan on reselling down the road for even what they initially paid for the contract. The perceived “safety net” of selling down the road isn’t guaranteed. I have said on this forum multiple times that, IMO, one shouldn’t plan on selling their contract when they are initially buying in.

 

[DVCSunDevil]

But…if the resale market driup- meaning the ability to sell your time share at a reasonable price is eliminated. Then, DVC is trending towards any other time share company.
What makes DVC unique besides being Disney of course is the ability to sell at some point. Most non-DVC time shares are basically given away from what I understand.
With that being said, they must be aware that a healthy resale market is a big differentiator for them. We would not have bought into DVC if it weren’t for the fact that we could sell for a reasonable price down the road

Another point to consider is that even if the resale restrictions have their intended result (hurting the resale market and getting people to buy direct), DVC still has a MAJOR differentiating factor over other timeshares. DVC contracts have an expiration date. This is a major draw to DVC compared to other timeshares. You are not locked in forever. Like Sandisw mentioned, most initial DVC buyers don’t even know about the resale market. Their initial contact is with a direct DVC guide and that is who they buy from. They buy without plans to sell, but the comforting factor is that there is an end date. DVC will always have ever advantage over other timeshares regardless if the resale prices drop because of restrictions.

 

[HIRyeDVC]

You could be right. Disney may not care. But selling a contract WITH restrictions is reducing the sales as Riviera. I’m sure they are disappointed it still isn’t sold out. Point being Disney may rethink their strategy. Buying direct knowing it will be harder to sell disincentivizes buying direct which isn’t what Disney considered. It will be interesting to see if PV2 is same association or not as that will say a lot about Disney’s current strategy. Good dialogue. Thanks for sharing.

I think Disney is fine with the sales pace of Riviera. Could it be better? Probably. But given the pandemic, inflation, and every else going on, the fact that direct sales numbers have been steadily increasing tells me Disney is doing ok with the pace of direct sales. Having said that, I firmly believe that a healthy resale market is generally good for Disney in the big scheme of things. But I also agree that Disney probably does not care about the resale market. Like everything else, their senior VPs are being short sighted, only caring about the near term bottom line to pad their promotion chances.

 

[Roughians_satchel]

No doubt this is correct. At what point in the Copper Creek timeline did they announce it would be a separate poroperty?

I was curious about this so I looked it up. DVC made their first announcement of the Copper Creek expansion in September, 2015. At that time, they stated it would be their 14th DVC property - indicating a new association. The wordage of the Poly release says nothing about a 17th property (behind Disneyland) - so I'm thinking it's the same association.

 

[Sandisw]

But…if the resale market driup- meaning the ability to sell your time share at a reasonable price is eliminated. Then, DVC is trending towards any other time share company.
What makes DVC unique besides being Disney of course is the ability to sell at some point. Most non-DVC time shares are basically given away from what I understand.
With that being said, they must be aware that a healthy resale market is a big differentiator for them. We would not have bought into DVC if it weren’t for the fact that we could sell for a reasonable price down the road.

A healthy resale market is important to Disney. A major differentiator for DVC compared with many other time shares is that the time share actually holds value. That is the case due to resale.
I suspect Disney makes solid money reselling via ROFR as well. This market wouldn’t exist either if it weren’t for resale. I totally agree Disney much prefers to sell direct as the restrictions incentivize some to do so. But no resale market would be bad for Disney.

I have to disagree that Disney cares about the resale market in terms of it being seen as something that holds value.

Disney makes the decisions they do regarding DVC and if it tanks the market, I think they would be fine with it.

However, I think they know that because DVC allows guests to offset the cost of cash stays to visit WDW they benefit from it.

I did not buy worrying about my resale value. If my contracts had tanked, my current 900 points would be made up of different home resorts instead of what I have.

But, because it did not it allowed me to sell and buy other ones. I think Disney knows that as long as there are parks, DVC will have some level of a resale market and will be more than happy to reap any benefits that come their way, but I do not believe decisions are made to keep it healthy. if anything, they are working hard to make it so buying resale is inferior to buying direct.

 

[Sandisw]

You could be right. Disney may not care. But selling a contract WITH restrictions is reducing the sales as Riviera. I’m sure they are disappointed it still isn’t sold out. Point being Disney may rethink their strategy. Buying direct knowing it will be harder to sell disincentivizes buying direct which isn’t what Disney considered. It will be interesting to see if PV2 is same association or not as that will say a lot about Disney’s current strategy. Good dialogue. Thanks for sharing.

The pricing of RIV and the incentives having been reduced over time doesn’t seem to support DVD is disappointed.

RIV has 6 million points…that is a lot of points to sell and that alone means it would take at least 4 years if it sold at record rates. Now enter the pandemic and you have to make some concessions.

RIV is for sure a different product but I find It hard to believe that DVD didn’t expect it to sell at a slower pace than previous resorts.

Given the restrictions it is holding its own and prior to the pandemic had some of the highest monthly sales of all the resorts.

Having said that, I do agree that DVD may decide to reverse course and if this new Poly tower is not made into a new association, then that would be a sign they have.

 

[BeachClub2014]

Having said that, I do agree that DVD may decide to reverse course and if this new Poly tower is not made into a new association, then that would be a sign they have.

Agreed. DVC may decide to reverse course, but I am personally not too optimistic that they will do so. The implementation of this policy feels like a long-term strategic decision and not a short-term tactical move.

The decision to include GFV2 into the existing GFV association can be viewed as a tactical, short-term move. Easy and inexpensive room conversion, create easily sellable points to meet pent-up demand, sell it at a great price, etc.
The Poly thing, with what little we know, sure seems like a strategic, long-term move. It is seemingly different than GFV2 in nearly every respect. That strongly suggests to me that Poly will be a whole new, stand-alone association with restrictions. I'm not sure that we should put too much stock in the fact that DVC didn't come right out and say either way in their press release.

We will find out soon enough, hopefully.

 

[cbyrne1174]

Another point to consider is that even if the resale restrictions have their intended result (hurting the resale market and getting people to buy direct), DVC still has a MAJOR differentiating factor over other timeshares. DVC contracts have an expiration date. This is a major draw to DVC compared to other timeshares. You are not locked in forever. Like Sandisw mentioned, most initial DVC buyers don’t even know about the resale market. Their initial contact is with a direct DVC guide and that is who they buy from. They buy without plans to sell, but the comforting factor is that there is an end date. DVC will always have ever advantage over other timeshares regardless if the resale prices drop because of restrictions.

Every major vacation club has tried to impliment "resale restrictions" in their own way and it never works. Disney is just late to the game. None of the "restrictions" really restrict the buyer in any system, unless they don't know how to use the system they bought into. They just need a FOMO scare tactic to push to people. That's all the restrictions are meant to do. I know this because I'm a resale buyer of all 3 major companies.

Marriott: Deeds purchased after 2010 can't be enrolled for points unless the resale buyer buys a retail point package to "enroll it". It's no big deal for me (a savvy resale buyer) because I can just buy a 2 bedroom lock off Platinum week at a low maintenance fee resort for less than $3000 all-in, split the lock off into 2 units (studio + 1 bedroom) and deposit both into Interval International and trade back up to a two 2 bedroom units by paying a small fee. For example, I scored a 2 bedroom lock off at Lakeshore Reserve (a 4 star luxury property that's attached to the JW and Ritz Carlton in Orlando) this summer for $1150 for the week using my studio as the trader. If I were to use Marriott's points system (DC trust points) for the same week, I would have to pay $2200 worth of maintenance fees. I also scored a 2 bedroom at Marriott's Frenchman's Cove (4 star beach front resort in St Thomas) this summer as well for $1150 all in. It costs DC trust points members $2000 in maintenance fees for that same week. Yet, when I attend owner updates, I'm constantly pushed that I'm "missing out" not having the flexibility of points to for stays that aren't exactly 7 nights. Well, that's what my 2 other memberships are for!


Club Wyndham: Resale owners have complete access to "Club Wyndham" properties, but can't access the 80 or so "Worldmark" properties and don't get their crappy "VIP benefits" that barely give anything extra and would take about 70 years to break even with the "benefits" they give you. Resale owners still get a free RCI account and can access the same inventory as retail owners. The only "restriction" they ever push me at owner updates is FOMO. "You don't have an account with full access". Well, that's what my other 2 ownerships are for!


Disney: "Hey, I know a cheaper way to entice people to buy retail without having to offer them any benefits of value! Let's look at what our 2 main competitors do! Let's just make them afraid of missing out on something even though it doesn't actually exist!" I purchased DVC after they blocked resale owners from Riviera and honestly I couldn't care less about it because it is so easy for me to rent out a small portion of the 800,000 Club Wyndham points that I aquired for less than $2,000 all-in at 50% above the maintenance fee cost and use that profit to rent into Riviera or DL tower. You could also rent out your DVC points and rent back into Riviera if you only own 1 system. I just prefer renting out Wyndham because it's the easiest. That's why I own in multiple systems!

I will get a lot of hate saying this, but owning resale in multiple systems is the way to go. You really do actually "miss out" by not doing so. This year, I sold 50 DVC points for $20/point and was able to cover most of what it costs me to exchange 105,000 of my Wyndham point into RCI to get one of the last few OKW rooms. So essentially, I have a week in a 1 bedroom at OKW this summer for 50 DVC points instead of 200 DVC points it takes as a DVC owner. It would cost me about $1300 to do the same with my Marriott. I will NEVER use DVC points to stay at OKW or SSR when it's half the price to use my Marriott. I will miss the days when it was only $1000/week with Wyndham.

Honestly, Disney is the one that makes me hesitate the most being resale BECAUSE of the buy in costs and the fact that they expire. Disney, Wyndham and Marriott will always have some value because of their quality, so not having an expiration isn't a big deal. I own about 8 weeks worth in Marriott/Wyndham and I make more in a month AS A TEACHER than I spent on aquiring everything. Do I take 8 weeks worth of vacations? No. I sell them and use the profit to pay for my own vacations.

Resale owners don't miss out, it's the people who dump insane amounts of money on their retail ownerships AND people who stick to 1 system that miss out.....on the good deals!

 

[cbyrne1174]

I think Poly2 is going to be in the same condo association because:
1. Poly needs 1 and 2 bedroom units
2. Disney already has a WDW property (Rivera) and DL property (DL Tower) to dangle in front of you and say "HEY LOOK AT WHERE YOU CAN'T STAY UNLESS YOU BUY DIRECTLY FROM ME!" It's all about creating that fear of missing out, which they already have with those 2 properties.

I do think that they will add a second BLT and make it a new condo association. Either that or sell BLT as an 15 year extended contract when they build the 2nd tower.

 

[BeachClub2014]

Every major vacation club has tried to impliment "resale restrictions" in their own way and it never works. Disney is just late to the game. None of the "restrictions" really restrict the buyer in any system, unless they don't know how to use the system they bought into. They just need a FOMO scare tactic to push to people. That's all the restrictions are meant to do. I know this because I'm a resale buyer of all 3 major companies.

Marriott: Deeds purchased after 2010 can't be enrolled for points unless the resale buyer buys a retail point package to "enroll it". It's no big deal for me (a savvy resale buyer) because I can just buy a 2 bedroom lock off Platinum week at a low maintenance fee resort for less than $3000 all-in, split the lock off into 2 units (studio + 1 bedroom) and deposit both into Interval International and trade back up to a two 2 bedroom units by paying a small fee. For example, I scored a 2 bedroom lock off at Lakeshore Reserve (a 4 star luxury property that's attached to the JW and Ritz Carlton in Orlando) this summer for $1150 for the week using my studio as the trader. If I were to use Marriott's points system (DC trust points) for the same week, I would have to pay $2200 worth of maintenance fees. I also scored a 2 bedroom at Marriott's Frenchman's Cove (4 star beach front resort in St Thomas) this summer as well for $1150 all in. It costs DC trust points members $2000 in maintenance fees for that same week. Yet, when I attend owner updates, I'm constantly pushed that I'm "missing out" not having the flexibility of points to for stays that aren't exactly 7 nights. Well, that's what my 2 other memberships are for!


Club Wyndham: Resale owners have complete access to "Club Wyndham" properties, but can't access the 80 or so "Worldmark" properties and don't get their crappy "VIP benefits" that barely give anything extra and would take about 70 years to break even with the "benefits" they give you. Resale owners still get a free RCI account and can access the same inventory as retail owners. The only "restriction" they ever push me at owner updates is FOMO. "You don't have an account with full access". Well, that's what my other 2 ownerships are for!


Disney: "Hey, I know a cheaper way to entice people to buy retail without having to offer them any benefits of value! Let's look at what our 2 main competitors do! Let's just make them afraid of missing out on something even though it doesn't actually exist!" I purchased DVC after they blocked resale owners from Riviera and honestly I couldn't care less about it because it is so easy for me to rent out a small portion of the 800,000 Club Wyndham points that I aquired for less than $2,000 all-in at 50% above the maintenance fee cost and use that profit to rent into Riviera or DL tower. You could also rent out your DVC points and rent back into Riviera if you only own 1 system. I just prefer renting out Wyndham because it's the easiest. That's why I own in multiple systems!

I will get a lot of hate saying this, but owning resale in multiple systems is the way to go. You really do actually "miss out" by not doing so. This year, I sold 50 DVC points for $20/point and was able to cover most of what it costs me to exchange 105,000 of my Wyndham point into RCI to get one of the last few OKW rooms. So essentially, I have a week in a 1 bedroom at OKW this summer for 50 DVC points instead of 200 DVC points it takes as a DVC owner. It would cost me about $1300 to do the same with my Marriott. I will NEVER use DVC points to stay at OKW or SSR when it's half the price to use my Marriott. I will miss the days when it was only $1000/week with Wyndham.

Honestly, Disney is the one that makes me hesitate the most being resale BECAUSE of the buy in costs and the fact that they expire. Disney, Wyndham and Marriott will always have some value because of their quality, so not having an expiration isn't a big deal. I own about 8 weeks worth in Marriott/Wyndham and I make more in a month AS A TEACHER than I spent on aquiring everything. Do I take 8 weeks worth of vacations? No. I sell them and use the profit to pay for my own vacations.

Resale owners don't miss out, it's the people who dump insane amounts of money on their retail ownerships AND people who stick to 1 system that miss out.....on the good deals!

Sounds like you've figured out how to win in three different systems and make it work for you. Good stuff.

 

[BamaGuy44]

So while this gets all the DVC owners all excited, in the end it's more hotel capacity with no park expansion. If Disney keeps going in this direction, putting in more rooms without expanding offerings/parks, the parks will become a nightmare.

I just dread the way this is going.

I'm not sure hotel space is any factor in WDW crowds. There are approximately 12876832746823 hotel rooms in a 10 mile radius. Nobody is staying away due to lack of hotel rooms.

 

[gopacers]

I'm disappointed by the incongruous look of the tower compared to the longhouses. It looks like generic resort mid rise hotel. The long houses are classic WDW. It's going to make the Great Ceremonial House look underwhelming.

 

[DVCSunDevil]

I'm disappointed by the incongruous look of the tower compared to the longhouses. It looks like generic resort mid rise hotel. The long houses are classic WDW. It's going to make the Great Ceremonial House look underwhelming.

This is something I just can’t get over either. How can Disney add an addition to an iconic resort like Polynesian that looks absolutely nothing like the rest of the resort? It’s so bizarre.

I love the theming of the WDW resorts. They are all unique and completely immerse you in the magic. If I didn’t want theming, I would stay off site (and save a lot of money, too). But when we go to WDW, we want to be immersed in the bubble. This new addition doesn’t match the theming of the Polynesian at all. Disney basically took a bland/sterile building that could easily be a Courtyard Marriott and is shoving it down our throats as the Polynesian. And Disney, please stop with the “this design was part of the original Polynesian design plans” stance. Because guess what…those original plans were scrapped for what is the current Polynesian. And for good reason, too.

At the end of the day, this new addition doesn’t match the Polynesian theming. Please change it before you break ground, Disney!!

 

[Sandisw]

This is something I just can’t get over either. How can Disney add an addition to an iconic resort like Polynesian that looks absolutely nothing like the rest of the resort? It’s so bizarre.

I love the theming of the WDW resorts. They are all unique and completely immerse you in the magic. If I didn’t want theming, I would stay off site (and save a lot of money, too). But when we go to WDW, we want to be immersed in the bubble. This new addition doesn’t match the theming of the Polynesian at all. Disney basically took a bland/sterile building that could easily be a Courtyard Marriott and is shoving it down our throats as the Polynesian. And Disney, please stop with the “this design was part of the original Polynesian design plans” stance. Because guess what…those original plans were scrapped for what is the current Polynesian. And for good reason, too.

At the end of the day, this new addition doesn’t match the Polynesian theming. Please change it before you break ground, Disney!!

Now see, I love the subtle tones of this new resort and do feel it complements the Poly. But, I am not someone who wants over the top theming anyway. It is why I love the look and design of RIV.

Design pictures can't always capture it truly and maybe it will be more 'themed' then we think when we get more details about it...which, to be honest, I don't expect for another year or so.

 

[cbyrne1174]

I'm not sure hotel space is any factor in WDW crowds. There are approximately 12876832746823 hotel rooms in a 10 mile radius. Nobody is staying away due to lack of hotel rooms.

They’ve also been pricing out the locals over time. I used to just keep my annual pass active every year, now I rotate them to every other year and get an annual pass somewhere else. I’ve actually stayed at a DVC and went to Universal because I didn’t have a Disney pass.

 

[DVCSunDevil]

Design pictures can't always capture it truly and maybe it will be more 'themed' then we think when we get more details about it...which, to be honest, I don't expect for another year or so.

I am really hoping you are right and the final design turns out to be more in line with the current Poly. From everything I have read and listened to, the overwhelming majority of those with a voice (podcasts, blogs, news, etc) are also hammering Disney regarding the Poly2 theming. Hopefully Disney listens.

I do not like over the top theming on every trip (actually, I don't think any Disney resort is "over the top"). That's one of the reasons we bought at BCV. It is themed extremely well in the chill style of a New England beach. The most important thing at any resort, IMO, is that the theming is consistent throughout the entire resort. Riviera has that...BC has that...GF has that...WL has that...BW has that...OKW has that...SSR has that. The theming should be consistent. This new Poly2 tower, at least from the drawings, isn't consistent at all with the rest of Polynesian. When I stay at Polynesian I just want that consistent Poly feel throughout the entire resort. That's why I stay there. Time will tell, though.