SSR Truly Cheapest?

[treehugnmama]

We own at vb,ssr and okw. If the points were the same at ssr and okw I would still choose okw!! We love it.

We bought ssr for the treehouses but with the increase in points have no desire to return to tree houses. I have not stayed at ssr but we spend a day there every year.

We have also stayed at kidani and prefer okw. I guess we are lucky that our fav resort happens to be the lowest points. Second only to vero

 

[Mississippian]

I've always thought the point chart for SSR was too high and that it should have been nearly the same as OKW. If they had of done that it would have been a way more popular resort.

I agree that SSR is terribly overpriced, point wise. It actually should be slightly cheaper in terms of points than OKW as the units are smaller.

 

[skier_pete]

Actually, now that OKW has been brought into the discussion, it seems to me the absolutely cheapest way to go is to OWN at SSR but BOOK at OKW.

In this discussion, there's arguments that you have to OWN at AKV so that you can take advantage of the 11-month window on value rooms. However, when you look at the numbers, owning at SSR is about 20 % cheaper per point (based on maintenance fees). Staying at OKW does take roughly 15 % more points per night than AKV Value (Example, a week in dream in a 1-bedroom at AKV value is 179 pts, the same thing at OKW is 199 pts. However, if you use SSR maintenance fees to stay at OKW the cost is this:

1-bedroom value at AKV - $1069
1 bedroom villa at OKW on SSR points - $975

2-bedroom choice season (fall) value at AKV - $1271
2-bedroom choice season (fall) at OKW on SSR points - $1137

I calculated a few others, and every time OKW on SSR points was cheaper.

In addition, you can pretty much ALWAYS get into OKW at the 7-month mark, and USUALLY can get in at the 4-5 month mark. Whereas, the AKV values you generally have to book at the 11-month mark to get what you want.Plus you get bigger rooms for less money.

So, I've changed my mind. Owning AKV to stay in value rooms is not the cheapest. Owning SSR and staying OKW is.

 

[Dean]

We own at vb,ssr and okw. If the points were the same at ssr and okw I would still choose okw!! We love it.

We bought ssr for the treehouses but with the increase in points have no desire to return to tree houses. I have not stayed at ssr but we spend a day there every year.

We have also stayed at kidani and prefer okw. I guess we are lucky that our fav resort happens to be the lowest points. Second only to vero

This post illustrates the point I was making above, that there is a different between which resort to own and which one to use. Buying and owning OKW is more expensive than doing so for SSR. OKW is easy to get into as well any time of the year. So for anyone buying now and preferring OKW I'd compare OKW 2042, SSR 2054 & OKW 2057. I'd then look at the up front costs plus a minimum of a 10 yr window for dues adjusted for 4% inflation. Then you could compare the prices and decide where the values and costs lie. Cost wise, at break even in this equation, I'd buy SSR for any situation except possibly a routine GV or must have HH category because OKW is very easy to get into regardless planning at 7 months out. The reason is I believe it has less risk over the next 10-20 yrs related to dues increases and I believe OKW presents some major challenges and cost risk related to the 2042 transition. Thus I maintain that where you own doesn't make much or any difference from a usage standpoint where routine AKV, SSR or OKW usage is the subject for non specialty options. So one may as well own the best/cheapest option from a cost standpoint when in that situation OR possibly a higher end option to give access to something you might now have otherwise.

 

[skier_pete]

Thus I maintain that where you own doesn't make much or any difference from a usage standpoint where routine AKV, SSR or OKW usage is the subject for non specialty options. So one may as well own the best/cheapest option from a cost standpoint when in that situation OR possibly a higher end option to give access to something you might now have otherwise.

The one caveat to all that - you have to be happy with staying at OKW and/or SSR as a worst case. If you will never be satisfied unless you are staying at a monorail resort, then you wouldn't do this...this is only for the cheapest option.

I myself find OKW the absolutely least appealing DVC resort, but that is based only on having seen it, not having stayed there. I need to stay and SSR and OKW to really decide on an opinion. Right now we bought at AKV because we like it alot. I like it for a number of other reasons, including the option of staying in a value room. However, our first DVC stay will be SSR next month (YAY!). Because we got the freebie points that had to be used before Dec 1st, SSR was our only option. I am actually looking forward to it, though. If we genuinely like the resort, then I would definitely consider buying there if/when we expand our points ownership.

 

[Dean]

So, I've changed my mind. Owning AKV to stay in value rooms is not the cheapest. Owning SSR and staying OKW is.

Owning SSR, reserving OKW and trying for AKV value is going to be the cheapest purchase and usage. The problems with these discussions is we can only generalize and ignore personal preferences. The individual specifics often take precedence over the math and logic (many times when it shouldn't). One that routinely wants a 3 BR at OKW should like own there and that's likely the only situation where personal preference really should push one to buying OKW over SSR. Even then it's cheaper to get a 2 BR and studio, gives more options & protections, etc.

 

[Dean]

The one caveat to all that - you have to be happy with staying at OKW and/or SSR as a worst case. If you will never be satisfied unless you are staying at a monorail resort, then you wouldn't do this...this is only for the cheapest option.

Being happy staying at the home resort would be a plus but if price is a large part of the equation I think there are enough options that one would never have to stay there with planning and without wanting specialty options. We've seen several posts lately of those owning at SSR and never having stayed there. Obviously one would then need to look at other variables. That assumes one is booking day one 7 months out but if not, they likely shouldn't buy anyway for the group in question. Booking later tends to push you to OKW & SSR regardless of where you own.

Historically OKW has been our favorite, you really should try it. We've moved it to #2 in favor of AKV simply because my wife enjoys the animals and I also subscribe to the HWHL philosophy but there's not a resort we'd give as second thought staying at. The reality is that the DVC resorts are really fairly closely bunched. None, including VGF all things considered, are the top of the heap but all are fairly close to the top and fairly closely bunched. So all we're really talking are personal preference, personal finances and math of possible ownership at least for WDW. It's a little more complicated for the off property options esp HHI & VB.

 

[luckyman_apd]

Being happy staying at the home resort would be a plus but if price is a large part of the equation I think there are enough options that one would never have to stay there with planning and without wanting specialty options. We've seen several posts lately of those owning at SSR and never having stayed there. Obviously one would then need to look at other variables. That assumes one is booking day one 7 months out but if not, they likely shouldn't buy anyway for the group in question. Booking later tends to push you to OKW & SSR regardless of where you own.

Historically OKW has been our favorite, you really should try it. We've moved it to #2 in favor of AKV simply because my wife enjoys the animals and I also subscribe to the HWHL philosophy but there's not a resort we'd give as second thought staying at. The reality is that the DVC resorts are really fairly closely bunched. None, including VGF all things considered, are the top of the heap but all are fairly close to the top and fairly closely bunched. So all we're really talking are personal preference, personal finances and math of possible ownership at least for WDW. It's a little more complicated for the off property options esp HHI & VB.

I'm of the opinion that if finances are a big part of your equation, then SSR is a very viable option. My neighbor owns SSR and is jealous we bought BLT resale (we bought within 6 months of each other before we knew each other) and he bought direct....not knowing about resale. I paid slightly less for BLT and we have the same amount of points. Now, they JUST stayed at SSR for the first time this summer. Their other trips have been other resorts. So for them, they have the cheapest dues (next to BLT and I'm sure within 3 years SSR will be the cheapest) and they stay at other resorts. They actually had BWV originally this summer, but his mother in law (also a dvc owner) combined her points for a grand villa at SSR. They don't travel at heavy or peak times so they can stay almost anywhere at 7 months. We have gone at times where I feel we needed to own BLT to get it...so I paid the extra for BLT.....But SSR can work out for those looking for the cheapest....Just be prepared to not get other resorts. Like anything else.....As long as you know the expectations....you can't be disappointed. If you will be disappointed...then buy where you want to stay.