Riviera vs CCV

[Spark65]

I wouldn't buy 300 points at one resort alone I would split between at least 2 resorts you'll find it easier to sell if you need to. It also gives you an 11 month booking advantage at 2 resorts if you like split stays which most seem to anyway I know I do .. it is like an adventure as well and it's easier than you think moving between resorts!

The transport option, like Sandi said above, is limited at CCV you will find RIV a better option if you add that into the equation. I would buy RIV direct and CCV resale if you decide to go that way so you don't have any restrictions and the incentives should be better at RIV.

Either way the decision you make should be your own so only let other opinions guide you. If you do decide to split your points between resorts buying direct pick the 2 you really want to stay at regardless of what others may say getting what you want at 7 months and the work and effort to make it possible may not be as easy as you think!

 

[Lva5]

Home resort does matter.. sometimes. The CCV studio availability issue sounds like it’s not a factor for you and it’s a wonderful resort. I think the two pair very nicely together.

We were facing a similar issue and split our points across both resorts - you get the same incentive level (300 in your case) for both resorts.

 

[Deb & Bill]

Does family size matter? we are a family of 5. Also do you really ever have issues booking anywhere? Is the 11m vs 7m that big of a deal?

With five you will always need at least a two bedroom villa at CCV. The studio and one bedroom only sleep four. 300 points would be a necessity to book at two bedroom all the time. I would not split up the points into 150 and 150.

 

[McCrae]

Resale is fairly easy. The only reasons to buy direct really is for the annual pass discount or ability to stay at Riviera.

Resale is going to save a bunch of money and is viewed pretty much the same as direct points just without the extra benefits you still can book most DVC resorts.

It’s not always the case that you will save money when you buy resale. It’s all about timing.

For sold out resorts i agree with you.

For resorts that are still being sold, especially at the beginning when no resale is available buying direct can be the best option.

The starting resale price can be higher than the initial direct price.

 

[masupo]

Maybe buy 150 direct at both! It would be nice to have 11 month booking at each resort.

The salesperson should not scare you away from resale. Here are the resale restrictions in a nutshell
You can use resale points at any resort except the RIV -this is effective for all resale contracts from 2019.
In terms of perks you need 125 direct points to get the blue card. That means 125 points for discount APs, discount on merch, access to epcot dvc lounge, access to dvc member events.
Only direct points can be used for DCL, but that is not a good use of poi ts in my opinion.
I also have a mix of resale and direct points.
You could do 150 direct at both CCV and riv. That gets you to 300 point discount.
Also look at the resale market.

In previous incentive periods, CCV and RIV had the same incentives and could be combined to reach a higher discount level.

The current incentives are different right now. You get more off per point at CCV. I don't think they can be combined. Buying both now would only get the 150 pt incentive at each.

The current incentives expire on 12/04. You can ask your guide to set everything up now & give a deposit. That will give you a 10 day recission period to research a little more about full direct, combining direct & resale or going full resale. You can cancel within the 10 days with no penalty.

You can ask them to split your purchase into two 150 pt contracts. That way you can decide if you want to drop one or keep both. People on the board recommend buying in multiple smaller contracts because they're easier to sell and usually get more per point.

I believe the current RIV incentives include them covering closing costs.

 

[sethschroeder]

It’s not always the case that you will save money when you buy resale. It’s all about timing.

For sold out resorts i agree with you.

For resorts that are still being sold, especially at the beginning when no resale is available buying direct can be the best option.

The starting resale price can be higher than the initial direct price.

It's so rare and wouldnt apply to anything at the current time either.

Just checked first resale site I went to both Riviera contracts were below the direct price with incentives.

With resale you need to hunt and possibly will hold off a while to buy but it will always be cheaper.

 

[havoc315]

New here and i am about to pull the trigger on 300 pts direct. I can't decide if we should go with Riviera vs Copper Creek. The starting ppt is higher on CC but the incentives are better.

I understand the restrictions on Riviera but really trying to understand the value of the home resort.

Just looking for some help understanding if home resort really matters and if it does/doesn't what should really be the factors considered in making the decisison

Home resort can matter A LOT or very little. Depends on how you book. All coming down to the 7-month to 11-month difference.
The key is home resort priority -- Some units book very very quickly. At Riviera, the Tower Studios will be gone right at the 11 month mark. At CCV, almost all the studios disappear around the 11 month mark.
If you want to travel at the busiest times of year.. Christmas, Easter, Thanksgiving, you'll find very limited inventory at the 7 month mark.
If you prefer to book your trips at 7-months or less, and you're extremely flexible in terms of resort and room choice, then home resort doesn't matter nearly as much. You'd have no trouble booking a 1 bedroom at almost any resort for August, at the 7-month mark.

Now personally, I prefer the Riviera direct over Copper Creek. Riviera points are cheaper and the rooms are larger. The downside of the Riviera is really the restrictions *IF* you ever choose to re-sell.

Anyway, most people will tell you, "buy where you want to stay." This is totally true, if you have an idea of where you want to stay. If you really don't care where you stay, then just load up on the cheapest points you can find.

 

[McCrae]

It's so rare and wouldnt apply to anything at the current time either.

Just checked first resale site I went to both Riviera contracts were below the direct price with incentives.

With resale you need to hunt and possibly will hold off a while to buy but it will always be cheaper.

It occurred with BLT, VGF and VGC. I agree it doesn’t happen regularly, but it does occur.

It’s all about timing.... resale typically gets cheaper once prices are above the first prices offered.

 

[sethschroeder]

It occurred with BLT, VGF and VGC. I agree it doesn’t happen regularly, but it does occur.

It’s all about timing.... resale typically gets cheaper once prices are above the first prices offered.

Correct but it happened on probably 5-10 resale contracts at those resorts? I am just guessing but its extremely rare and would not apply really at all to the OP.

I would also say this just goes back to the downside of resale which is you need to hunt for the contract and it can take a few months to find the right contract possibly for price/points/UY.

 

[Vulnox]

One thing to consider... although it can't be proven yet... is when people bring up resale restrictions on RIV and how they like to be able to change resorts on Resale, before Reflections was put on hold due to COVID, it seemed pretty well accepted that only RIV resales could trade into Reflections, and that the original DVC resorts would continue to lose trade out ability as new resorts were built AND I think more importantly, when the oldest original resorts get to end of contract, as those resorts likely won't just be demolished. They will likely get renovated and then new contracts sold, and unless Disney makes other decisions before then, odds are RIV/Reflects resale will be able to trade into those new contract Original DVC sites, and those new contract sites will be able to go into RIV. It basically helps Disney push new sales for those sites as they head into a soft DVC2.

Again, it's all guess work on our end as far as I know, but I think people saying RIV is a bad buy because resale has restrictions is only considering an immediate resale, in ten years we could have Reflections and maybe even another resort, and probably talk about some of the oldest original resorts being put back out on new contracts, and the math may change significantly.

 

[sethschroeder]

One thing to consider... although it can't be proven yet... is when people bring up resale restrictions on RIV and how they like to be able to change resorts on Resale, before Reflections was put on hold due to COVID, it seemed pretty well accepted that only RIV resales could trade into Reflections, and that the original DVC resorts would continue to lose trade out ability as new resorts were built AND I think more importantly, when the oldest original resorts get to end of contract, as those resorts likely won't just be demolished. They will likely get renovated and then new contracts sold, and unless Disney makes other decisions before then, odds are RIV/Reflects resale will be able to trade into those new contract Original DVC sites, and those new contract sites will be able to go into RIV. It basically helps Disney push new sales for those sites as they head into a soft DVC2.

Again, it's all guess work on our end as far as I know, but I think people saying RIV is a bad buy because resale has restrictions is only considering an immediate resale, in ten years we could have Reflections and maybe even another resort, and probably talk about some of the oldest original resorts being put back out on new contracts, and the math may change significantly.

I personally don't think that will be the case. I think it will be directly locked down to only Riviera in resale. I also think its the "safest" view since worst case you get those trade rights to the new resorts.

That being said I bought RIV. I will also say the resale restriction for me just means I can add-on resale for less in the future if I want to.

I have 300 points at RIV direct meaning I could easily bank and borrow to get 750-900 total points in a single year (more than enough). I can then add-on resale points which are locked down to Riviera. So I can still stay other places certain years and Riviera others and just use up the resale points for sure.

 

[havoc315]

I personally don't think that will be the case. I think it will be directly locked down to only Riviera in resale. I also think its the "safest" view since worst case you get those trade rights to the new resorts.

In my mind, there is no question that the resale restriction will be on all new resorts going forward. Makes no sense to limit it to just Riviera.

 

[sethschroeder]

In my mind, there is no question that the resale restriction will be on all new resorts going forward. Makes no sense to limit it to just Riviera.

Their point and I did see some discussion is that the resale restrictions make it so you can only stay in DVC 1.0 or 2.0 and not in the other. So RIV/DLT/REF resale gets to stay among all 3 resorts just like DVC 1.0 resorts can all stay at the other resorts in DVC 1.0

Just clarifying what some people are thinking. I never really agreed that was how it was going to work. I think when DLT goes on sale/opens the final answer will be out there though.

 

[Vulnox]

Their point and I did see some discussion is that the resale restrictions make it so you can only stay in DVC 1.0 or 2.0 and not in the other. So RIV/DLT/REF resale gets to stay among all 3 resorts just like DVC 1.0 resorts can all stay at the other resorts in DVC 1.0

Just clarifying what some people are thinking. I never really agreed that was how it was going to work. I think when DLT goes on sale/opens the final answer will be out there though.

Oh yeah, I guess I just think Disney is hurting themselves if they take the extra strict this resort only stance like you suggest. Our guide spent a lot of time emphasizing the ability to sell your contract, and if that market is almost dead because every resort is that resort only (this is in 20+ years of course), that seems like a much harder selling point to anyone that does even a little research into what that market looks like.

It seems like it's in Disney's interest to keep a semi-strong resale market so they can tell people they can get out and maybe break even overall if they used their points well. Without the ability to trade between resorts, I would think the resale market would almost get cut in half in terms of cost/pt.

 

[havoc315]

Their point and I did see some discussion is that the resale restrictions make it so you can only stay in DVC 1.0 or 2.0 and not in the other. So RIV/DLT/REF resale gets to stay among all 3 resorts just like DVC 1.0 resorts can all stay at the other resorts in DVC 1.0

Just clarifying what some people are thinking. I never really agreed that was how it was going to work. I think when DLT goes on sale/opens the final answer will be out there though.

Having read the contract pretty thoroughly from the perspective of an attorney, it is unlikely that Riviera re-sale buyers will get to stay in "DVC 2.0" resorts.
Basically, a new direct purchaser is actually buying 2 things: You're buying a deeded interest in the Riviera, where you can book starting at 11 months. And then you're also buying a membership into a DVC club, where you can trade points at 7 months.
The resale restriction is that you can only sell your deeded interest in the Riviera. But you can't resell your membership in the DVC club.

It *appears* that the future will be:
-Direct buyers can always use points in any DVC property. That's because they are members of the DVC club. And it would be in everyone's best interest to continue placing all new properties into the existing DVC club.
-DVC "1.0" (pre-Riviera) resale owners (pre-Jan 2019) are members of the DVC club. They will continue to get trade privileges in ALL current and future DVCs.
-DVC "1.0" re-sale buyers AFTER Jan 2019, are not full members of the DVC club. They can only trade into what we have terms DVC 1.0.
DVC 2.0 buyers -- Riviera and future resorts -- Direct buyers will be full members of the club, able to trade points into any property. But the DVC club membership cannot be resold, so resale buyers will be limited to only their home resort.

Moving forward in the long term.... Disney can see that in 10-20 years+, this creates a major incentive for direct purchases instead of resale.
In fact, the incentive might become so big, they start to get rid of other more costly incentives (AP discounts, moonlight magic events.)

 

[havoc315]

Oh yeah, I guess I just think Disney is hurting themselves if they take the extra strict this resort only stance like you suggest. Our guide spent a lot of time emphasizing the ability to sell your contract, and if that market is almost dead because every resort is that resort only (this is in 20+ years of course), that seems like a much harder selling point to anyone that does even a little research into what that market looks like.

It seems like it's in Disney's interest to keep a semi-strong resale market so they can tell people they can get out and maybe break even overall if they used their points well. Without the ability to trade between resorts, I would think the resale market would almost get cut in half in terms of cost/pt.

Disney would gain more than they would lose by weakening the resale market.
So right now, take a resort that sells direct for $195 per point (Animal Kingdom for example), and resale is about $120.
Disney right now, will exercise their right of first refusal at about $110.... and can turn around and make $85 of new profit by selling it.
Let's say resale of a similar resort, re-sale value is cut in half as you say -- Down to $60 per point. Disney can turn around, use ROFR at $50... and now get $145 in profit by turning it around.

Yes, it does benefit Disney for people to know their "investment" will hold value. But it also hurts Disney every time someone buys re-sale instead of direct. The main selling point remains -- "You'll save on magical vacations for the next 50 years . . . . . . but you'll have to buy directly from us for all the magic."

 

[Vulnox]

That last part seems drastic to me. The problem with that vision is:
By removing the ability to trade between resorts in resale, people that buy resale will of course book at their home resort year after year. This will make it nearly impossible for direct buyers to even trade out at the 7 month mark because every resort will be filled by their respective resale buyers taking their own home resorts at 11 months.

Add to that your mention of removing AP Discounts, Moonlight Magic, and you are left with basically no good reason to join direct AT ALL. If I can't trade out anyway at 7 months because all the resale buyers are stuck in their home resort so they are all filled up, then why pay the premium for Direct? I am just overpaying for the 11 month home resort booking. DVC is dead within a few years.

 

[havoc315]

That last part seems drastic to me. The problem with that vision is:
By removing the ability to trade between resorts in resale, people that buy resale will of course book at their home resort year after year. This will make it nearly impossible for direct buyers to even trade out at the 7 month mark because every resort will be filled by their respective resale buyers taking their own home resorts at 11 months.

Add to that your mention of removing AP Discounts, Moonlight Magic, and you are left with basically no good reason to join direct AT ALL. If I can't trade out anyway at 7 months because all the resale buyers are stuck in their home resort so they are all filled up, then why pay the premium for Direct? I am just overpaying for the 11 month home resort booking. DVC is dead within a few years.

Your first point -- No. Because most buyers will be buying direct. So the "filling up at 11 months" should be even less of an issue than it is today. Not more of an issue.
Second -- Why pay direct?? So that you can stay in 15 or 20 different DVC resorts! The whole point of the restriction is to crush the resale market, so there are very few resale buyers. There will be even more 7 month availability, not less. Especially at the new resorts!

Your logic is the equivalent of the Yogi Berra quote, "nobody goes to that restaurant anymore, it's too crowded"
Yes, people will buy direct -- because it will be the only way to get the biggest perk of all, the ability to stay in different resorts.

 

[Vulnox]

Your first point -- No. Because most buyers will be buying direct. So the "filling up at 11 months" should be even less of an issue than it is today. Not more of an issue.
Second -- Why pay direct?? So that you can stay in 15 or 20 different DVC resorts! The whole point of the restriction is to crush the resale market, so there are very few resale buyers. There will be even more 7 month availability, not less. Especially at the new resorts!

Your logic is the equivalent of the Yogi Berra quote, "nobody goes to that restaurant anymore, it's too crowded"
Yes, people will buy direct -- because it will be the only way to get the biggest perk of all, the ability to stay in different resorts.

I see where you are coming from, I guess it comes down to costs in that potential future. If Disney removes all benefit except trading between resorts, I still feel like that isn't a great incentive as you can already stay at a ton of resorts paying with cash, more resorts than you can if you are part of DVC even! A big draw of DVC is the potential to stay at nicer accommodations for a fairly static cost over a long period of time, plus you get access to reduced AP pricing! In your comment earlier, the future is a world where AP pricing can be dropped, so all you have left to entice people is access to resorts they can already stay at for (definitely high) rack rates, or just keep going to CB or AoA or whatever other far less expensive resort.

I just can't get past that the future you outlined doesn't seem sustainable, there is just too much of a "death by a thousand cuts" feel to it. People around here are already wary of RIV due to resale restrictions, you paint a picture of people willingly buying direct when those resale restrictions are at every resort, no more AP discount, no more MM, and ever increasing dues. Sure they will still sell DVC to some extent, but no way it retains its popularity, especially when the biggest supporters like this and other boards are filled with members or former members telling everyone to stay far away.

The only way I see that world working is if they add other benefits, like an unlimited or at least very generous park hopper, or some other big grab that really wouldn't cost Disney much but be super valuable to DVC Direct members.

But again, I know you have way more experience with all this than I do. My view just comes from my personal feelings of it. Already have trouble seeing a strong value proposition in DVC although I know it's there, if they completely dump the other benefits I can't see how they get new members at the current rate. Guess we will see!

 

[bobbiwoz]

Because your family could be in more types of villas at RIV. That’s the one I would buy.