ehh
the sound a shrug makes
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2019
- Messages
- 1,489
I think if the decision is based solely on precedent we'll probably see it in the same association. The only new association was CCV being separate from VWL/BRV. Despite that, the points chart is identical for corresponding accommodations when they really didn't need to (and probably shouldn't have?). I strongly suspect they went with a separate association because of the 2042 expiration of VWL/BRV, which would only provide 25 years of points/membership for CCV buyers when sales started in 2017 and would be a solid deterrent to sales.
Meanwhile, Kidani/Jambo, Treehouses/SSR, and VGF2/VGF all had 40+ years of points/membership for their add-ons/2nd waves. Poly2 will have more than 40 years (barring major setbacks in construction) and could be part of the Poly1 association without risking sales due to a 'short' contract.
I don't put much weight into 'they get nothing for their investment by allowing Poly1 owners to use Poly2' arguments--they're creating the same number of points in the resort regardless and they will sell the same number in the end. Rate of sale might be different, but the total number of points they sell will not be changed by whether Poly1 owners have access or not.
With that in mind, the rate of sale comes down to a contest of whether these two factors combine to be a net boost or net drag on sales:
- Poly1 rooms (and the massive number of studios) also being available for Poly2 buyers (probably a boost considering how popular studios are)
- Poly1 owners opting out of purchasing Poly2 because they already have enough Poly points (probably a drag)
On its face, I think those two factors are a net boost in sales, but only slightly. But it's really dependent on the room distribution of Poly2 as I'm assuming the large inventory of Poly studios would be a positive to Poly1+2 buyers.
The general direction recently is studio-heavy (see: VGF2+VGF, Poly1, VDH). Copper Creek has major studio booking problems during many months of the year due to only having ~13% of points allocated to studios with the anchor of 32% of points in cabins. I think they know they can't do that again. Riviera does a little better with closer to 20% of points allocated (very dependent on LOs) to studios/tower studios and have no cabin/bungalow anchors; this is the bare minimum a resort should have for studios these days.
If Poly2 has a healthy number of studios on its own, it'll likely be its own association and all the perks DVD gets from that: can push the points calendar more aggressively (Theme Park views anyone?) and allow them to implement resale restrictions. However, they also did push the points chart forward a bit with VGF2 Resort Studio Theme Park View rooms, so there might not be much there driving a new association.
If Poly2 is studio-lite, then clearly they're going to lean on Poly1's large inventory of studios and use Poly2 to expand offerings into 1BR/2BR/GV. An inverse of VGF2.
As a Poly1 owner I hope for a shared association. I started writing this post not optimistic about that, but after writing it all down, I think it will likely be a shared association. Either way I'm probably going to buy points for it ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Meanwhile, Kidani/Jambo, Treehouses/SSR, and VGF2/VGF all had 40+ years of points/membership for their add-ons/2nd waves. Poly2 will have more than 40 years (barring major setbacks in construction) and could be part of the Poly1 association without risking sales due to a 'short' contract.
I don't put much weight into 'they get nothing for their investment by allowing Poly1 owners to use Poly2' arguments--they're creating the same number of points in the resort regardless and they will sell the same number in the end. Rate of sale might be different, but the total number of points they sell will not be changed by whether Poly1 owners have access or not.
With that in mind, the rate of sale comes down to a contest of whether these two factors combine to be a net boost or net drag on sales:
- Poly1 rooms (and the massive number of studios) also being available for Poly2 buyers (probably a boost considering how popular studios are)
- Poly1 owners opting out of purchasing Poly2 because they already have enough Poly points (probably a drag)
On its face, I think those two factors are a net boost in sales, but only slightly. But it's really dependent on the room distribution of Poly2 as I'm assuming the large inventory of Poly studios would be a positive to Poly1+2 buyers.
The general direction recently is studio-heavy (see: VGF2+VGF, Poly1, VDH). Copper Creek has major studio booking problems during many months of the year due to only having ~13% of points allocated to studios with the anchor of 32% of points in cabins. I think they know they can't do that again. Riviera does a little better with closer to 20% of points allocated (very dependent on LOs) to studios/tower studios and have no cabin/bungalow anchors; this is the bare minimum a resort should have for studios these days.
If Poly2 has a healthy number of studios on its own, it'll likely be its own association and all the perks DVD gets from that: can push the points calendar more aggressively (Theme Park views anyone?) and allow them to implement resale restrictions. However, they also did push the points chart forward a bit with VGF2 Resort Studio Theme Park View rooms, so there might not be much there driving a new association.
If Poly2 is studio-lite, then clearly they're going to lean on Poly1's large inventory of studios and use Poly2 to expand offerings into 1BR/2BR/GV. An inverse of VGF2.
As a Poly1 owner I hope for a shared association. I started writing this post not optimistic about that, but after writing it all down, I think it will likely be a shared association. Either way I'm probably going to buy points for it ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
