Projecting future resale values

[Stank]

Ironically, Walt might be wrong with his quote that Disney isn’t a museum; it might just might end up being that. Imagine wandering 5th century Rome where you see the Pantheon and Colosseum, but the city has long decayed and in decline. That’s Disney.

Disney seems to lack the cultural vitality of past. The brand seems to me more like running off the fumes of the glory days and the nostalgic pull. I question in 2040 or 2050 as the Boomers are gone, Gen X is aging out, if Disney carries that same imperative.

Disney is straddling two centuries. They don’t seem like a company that can pivot. I have family members who have worked with Disney on B2B and they’re astonished at how archaic Disney’s systems are. It’s like using Ask Jeeves on a Netscape browser in 2023.

I just think Disney won’t be able to pivot. They’re quickly alienating loyal customers by eroding goodwill (no annual passes for DVC members?, etc.). I think they’ve treated the customer base so poorly due to years of learned arrogance. Everyone in leadership within Disney is exactly this and they’re so far removed from classic Disney that even a new CEO won’t be able to fix the entrenched attitudes.

 

[Cfabar1]

Ironically, Walt might be wrong with his quote that Disney isn’t a museum; it might just might end up being that. Imagine wandering 5th century Rome where you see the Pantheon and Colosseum, but the city has long decayed and in decline. That’s Disney.

Disney seems to lack the cultural vitality of past. The brand seems to me more like running off the fumes of the glory days and the nostalgic pull. I question in 2040 or 2050 as the Boomers are gone, Gen X is aging out, if Disney carries that same imperative.

Disney is straddling two centuries. They don’t seem like a company that can pivot. I have family members who have worked with Disney on B2B and they’re astonished at how archaic Disney’s systems are. It’s like using Ask Jeeves on a Netscape browser in 2023.

I just think Disney won’t be able to pivot. They’re quickly alienating loyal customers by eroding goodwill (no annual passes for DVC members?, etc.). I think they’ve treated the customer base so poorly due to years of learned arrogance. Everyone in leadership within Disney is exactly this and they’re so far removed from classic Disney that even a new CEO won’t be able to fix the entrenched attitudes.

I usually agree with your comments, but I am going to push back slightly on these. I get what you are saying, however I find Disney to be incredibly relevant to the millennials and Gen Z. There is a whole group of children who were raised in the Disney Decade… They remember Full House going to the Grand Floridian, Delta Airlines being the Official Airline of WDW, American Express offering the “White Glove Treatment”, and the first Burger King, and then legendary McDonalds tie in with movies. They came of age with a series of classics - Little Mermaid, Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast, etc. They are now coming of age with children of their own, and are eager to pass on the Disney legacy. Disney is pivoting big time, especially enhancing their offerings to appeal to young boys with Star Wars and Marvel. In many ways, Disney has never been more relevant to young families and households than ever before.

Disney has lowered customer expectations - especially at the parks. They have also felt the need to pursue a strategy that may alienate some of their more conservative clients. However, to be honest, both of those are part of nearly every major corporation in America today. I stayed with Starwood Hotels for years and had amazing service… Then Marriott bought them up, and the Starwood difference quickly went away! I would argue, if anything, Disney has held onto a higher level of customer service longer than just about every major corporation. But yes, it is a lower standard of care.

Disney’s biggest problems at the parks right now are not related to service, they are operational - rides not working, staff not being present, and their other biggest concern is cost. Raising all the park workers wages may have been the right thing to do, but it has made Disney a more expensive park experience, and people are being priced out. There is a limit, after all, to how much people are willing to spend on a vacation. I believe cost, less so than demographic change, or people losing interest in Disney, is the single biggest limiting factor they are having right now.

 

[Spivey378]

Personally, I think that the sky is the limit and the future is bright for Disney!

 

[Brian Noble]

I find Disney to be incredibly relevant to the millennials and Gen Z.

For a certain swath of the US, a Disney trip is a childhood rite of passage. For another tranche, it is a class marker of aspirational consumption. Families from both groups are very likely to make a trip at some point when their kids are young. Some fraction of those people will get caught up in "the magic" and keep coming back for some number of years before they move on. (Perhaps paradoxically, it might be the second group that comes back more often, because of the aspirational nature of the trips, despite the fact that they are less able to easily afford it.)

None of those things is likely to change anytime soon.

So, as long as they keep making families with kids, Disney will have a continuously refreshed customer base. There is some reason to worry about a demographic pinch, but we seem to already be experiencing it--and that might be part of what's been behind Disney's pivot to a smaller but more profitable group of customers.

 

[ark101]

Disney is straddling two centuries. They don’t seem like a company that can pivot. I have family members who have worked with Disney on B2B and they’re astonished at how archaic Disney’s systems are. It’s like using Ask Jeeves on a Netscape browser in 2023.

Disney's technology stack is one of the most modern, and on par or even rivaling that of tech companies. Unsure what specific system you are referring to but you generalized it to 'Disney systems'.

Initially I saw your posts as a balance or a reality check to the Disney super fans. Now they seem ignorant. What are you trying to achieve with your posts really? Dissuade people from buying DVC or seeking validation from others on whatever you decided to do with DVC?

 

[Cfabar1]

Disney's technology stack is one of the most modern, and on par or even rivaling that of tech companies. Unsure what specific system you are referring to but you generalized it to 'Disney systems'.

Initially I saw your posts as a balance or a reality check to the Disney super fans. Now they seem ignorant. What are you trying to achieve with your posts really? Dissuade people from buying DVC or seeking validation from others on whatever you decided to do with DVC?

I’m not the OP, and I do not know the IT systems, or anything about it.

What I will say is using the Disney website is slow for me, and sometimes I have to work in circles to get done what I need. It does not feel “user friendly” to me on both the website and the MDE app. As the “end user” sometimes I feel like they could be more efficient.

But getting back to the topic, I struggle to see why the IT systems would be why someone would or would not buy DVC or go to WDW unless they were significantly worse than they are at present….

Their bigger issue is $217 pp with a 150 point minimum buy in is beyond unattainable for most families. I’m struggling to discern DVC’s strategy right now, and my guess is they’re trying to figure out their strategy post COVID and in an austerity time for the company too.

 

[tidefan]

I think part of the issue DVC is finding themselves in right now (and why I think they may slow down on the Poly2 pace) is that the experience that they are having with VGF2 doesn't seem to be matching what happened when they did their last expansion at Copper Creek. I think, but I may be mistaken, that Copper Creek sold out in about 2 years. I don't see that happening with VGF2. Also, because there were so many existing points at VGF1, with it in the SAME association, they are directly competing for the first time with resale points as CCV points, even though in proximity, were not the same as BRV points. However, the VGF points are the same. Why would someone NOT buy in resale at $40-50 less per point?

 

[Cfabar1]

I think part of the issue DVC is finding themselves in right now (and why I think they may slow down on the Poly2 pace) is that the experience that they are having with VGF2 doesn't seem to be matching what happened when they did their last expansion at Copper Creek. I think, but I may be mistaken, that Copper Creek sold out in about 2 years. I don't see that happening with VGF2. Also, because there were so many existing points at VGF1, with it in the SAME association, they are directly competing for the first time with resale points as CCV points, even though in proximity, were not the same as BRV points. However, the VGF points are the same. Why would someone NOT buy in resale at $40-50 less per point?

Yes, it is very hard to justify buying VGF direct right now - especially if you don’t care about blue card, or already have your 150 direct points. I don’t know enough about how many points are left to know how long it will take to sell through. I think the issues VGF has right now are:
1. They already sold VGF relatively recently so buyers could get in at that time
2. The points chart is not friendly
3. Younger buyers see same price per point as Riviera and see an extra 6 years of use, which is significant to them, and may be the difference between it being a “lifetime“ membership and it not being so.

 

[Cyberc1978]

3. Younger buyers see same price per point as Riviera and see an extra 6 years of use, which is significant to them, and may be the difference between it being a “lifetime“ membership and it not being so.

6 years is nothing when you compare 2064 vs 2070.

Same goes for BLT(2060) and CCV(2068). You don’t buy CCV if you like BLT because of the few extra years.

I do however agree that when it comes to the 2042 resorts, a longer expiration is more important.

 

[tidefan]

3. Younger buyers see same price per point as Riviera and see an extra 6 years of use, which is significant to them, and may be the difference between it being a “lifetime“ membership and it not being so.

I've always thought length of contract is a very important price consideration. Let's just say you could buy 200 points for $200 per point at RIV (2070) or VGF (2064). Let's also assume, just for fun, that you could get 2022 points at either.

RIV

$40,000 initial buy in divided by 9,800 points (200 points per year x 49 years) = $4.08 per point

VGF2

$40,000 initial buy in divided by 8,600 points (200 points per year x 43 years) = $4.65 per point

 

[DonMacGregor]

I've always thought length of contract is a very important price consideration. Let's just say you could buy 200 points for $200 per point at RIV (2070) or VGF (2064). Let's also assume, just for fun, that you could get 2022 points at either.

It's an important consideration, depending on your age. I'm 58, and obviously if I wait another year or so and buy in at VDH, I'll likely get points at around the same price as RR, PVB or Aulani, but with (probably) 50 years left on the contract. Sure, the extra years are great, but I'll be 110 years old by then, and my youngest will be 80...LOL He definitely wants to keep pour points, and he'll get them all at some point, but I'm not sure HIS grandkids will still want to be hitting WDW annually.

 

[tidefan]

It's an important consideration, depending on your age. I'm 58, and obviously if I wait another year or so and buy in at VDH, I'll likely get points at around the same price as RR, PVB or Aulani, but with (probably) 50 years left on the contract. Sure, the extra years are great, but I'll be 110 years old by then, and my youngest will be 80...LOL He definitely wants to keep pour points, and he'll get them all at some point, but I'm not sure HIS grandkids will still want to be hitting WDW annually.

Point taken, maybe the better example would have been spending $130 per point at BCV resale vs $130 per point at BLT...

 

[DonMacGregor]

Point taken, maybe the better example would have been spending $130 per point at BCV resale vs $130 per point at BLT...

Sure, that's a much more stark comparison, being that they are 18 years apart in expiry and both are reasonably close to be a compelling purchase for older buyers. Of course, BLT is still, on average, a good bit higher than BCV, so you do pay for those extra years, plus there is the weird BLT points chart as well that might cost more one week and less another.

 

[BeachClub2014]

I still argue that the delta in prices between resorts is negligible in the long run. Buy at the resort you love the most....it saves so much gnashing of the teeth and wringing of the hands. But hey, that's just me.

 

[intamin]

Point taken, maybe the better example would have been spending $130 per point at BCV resale vs $130 per point at BLT...

Even so, people who buy BCV right now know they're not doing it to get the best value DVC has to offer. Those people are buying because they want to stay at BCV plain and simple and don't want the stress of having to be on exactly at 7 months at 8AM IF the room they want is still available. Some also may see the 2042 expiration date as a good thing so that way they know their family members aren't straddled with paying dues. The value for them is in the memories they make with their family at their favorite Disney World resort.

As someone who is on the younger spectrum I imagine on these boards I personally would never buy into a 2042 resort but I can totally understand why people do.

 

[tom1944]

I still argue that the delta in prices between resorts is negligible in the long run. Buy at the resort you love the most....it saves so much gnashing of the teeth and wringing of the hands. But hey, that's just me.

None of the resorts move me significantly more than the others. I see benefits and disadvantages of all of them.

So I had 5 or 6 resorts I would be happy to purchase and while I am willing to pay more for some over others I did set a limit to that difference.

I included some 2042 resorts under consideration

 

[DonMacGregor]

Even so, people who buy BCV right now know they're not doing it to get the best value DVC has to offer. Those people are buying because they want to stay at BCV plain and simple and don't want the stress of having to be on exactly at 7 months at 8AM IF the room they want is still available. Some also may see the 2042 expiration date as a good thing so that way they know their family members aren't straddled with paying dues. The value for them is in the memories they make with their family at their favorite Disney World resort.

As someone who is on the younger spectrum I imagine on these boards I personally would never buy into a 2042 resort but I can totally understand why people do.

That's us for sure. Our first contract was SSR direct. Did it for the 2054 expiration date. We then started adding on at BRV, because we LOVE WL. All of the contracts have been small, and all but one have been resale, allowing us to unload in parts if we change our vacation preferences. We now own more than twice as many points at BRV (325) than SSR (and just added on 40 more at OKW because they were so cheap and loaded).

 

[Cfabar1]

We did not consider AKL because of the expiration date.

We have bought resale given the delta in prices, but are nervous about how worthwhile our points will be after 2042. However, we bought a resort we loved so we won’t mind too much if we are stuck there. Maybe add some on in whatever they sell as Beach Club 2.0.

 

[MsChristy12]

I'm not a DVC member yet, we are still lurking around so I'm looking at this from a difference perspective. Personally, the 2042 expiration doesn't bother me much and it won't be a deal breaker per se as long as we love the resort, and it's the right resale contract for us.

I'm not in my 20s, 19 yrs from now I have no clue what my life is going to be like. My husband and I don't look at DVC as an investment, to us it's more like pre-paid vacation with discounts and flexibilities Vs booking direct with Disney or renting points.

19 yrs isn't a short time but it's also not too long. You can have a child now and they'll be in college by then! If you're 100% a spreadsheet person and all you care it's #s, then the 2042 resorts aren't for you, period. Your value is based on actual dollars, not your emotions (sometimes that's not a bad thing though!) and the value will drastically go down when you look at the 2042 resorts. But when I think about my life, going on Disney vacations, if I can have 19 very happy years with our favorite DVC resort to called "home", I'll take that 19 yrs over 30 yrs of a different home resort that we're just "okay" with that saves us a few thousand dollars. Not everyone will agree but the way I look at the value of all things have to be a combo of $$, quality and our happiness.

 

[havoc315]

Where are you seeing the re-sale prices going short term?
You mentioned BCV and I too see them at $160 which is absurd but I also see them at $130 according to the ROFR

/C

I have no idea. This is a situation where long term is easier to predict than short term. In the long term, we know with certainty that the 2042 resorts will decline towards 0 by 2042.