SSR ... why are points less than other resorts

[eporter66]

I also find the location to be a plus. We usually visit WDW during the off season, and some of the parks often close at 6 or 7. So - since we are so close to DTD - we can get back in the evening and just walk over for dinner - or browse the shops or hit a show.

 

[KANSAS]

Dean and all other senior DVC members

Please correct me if I am wrong. I thought OKW, had lower point requirements and by the way, larger rooms, than BCV,BWV&WL, because Disney, did not know, if DVC would succed. Disney was trying to get DVC, off to a good start and does not need to do this with SSR&S

 

[Werner Weiss]

Originally posted by KANSAS
Please correct me if I am wrong. I thought OKW, had lower point requirements and by the way, larger rooms, than BCV,BWV&WL, because Disney, did not know, if DVC would succed. Disney was trying to get DVC, off to a good start and does not need to do this with SSR&S

OKW had lower purchase prices and a generous purchase incentive (free passes through the end of 1999).

But the point structure was simply a mechanism to balance demand across seasons and between week days and weekends. It had nothing to do with any question about whether or not DVC would succeed. (How could it? It was the only DVC resort.)

When BWV opened, the points per night for Preferred View were higher than for OKW, reflecting the location, despite the smaller rooms at BWV. VWL and BCV used the same point structure as BWV Preferred View, presumably because the value was considered similar.

But SSR doesn't offer similar access to theme parks as BWV, VWL, and BCV. The point chart reflects this.

Some people will consider SSR to be an excellent use of points because they consider the access to Downtown Disney to be just as valuable as the access to theme parks from BWV, VWL, and BCV — yet the points per night are lower at SSR.

Other people will consider SSR a poor use of points because nights at SSR require more points than nights at OKW, even though the rooms are smaller (similar to BWV, VWL, and BCV) and the access to the theme parks is no better than from OKW.

The SSR chart has nothing to do with construction costs or any cost savings from reusing Disney Institute infrastructure. The chart should be, and is, an attempt to properly reflect the relative value.

 

[KANSAS]

Mr. Weiss
do you still have a website, that discusses, ex disney attractions??

 

[Werner Weiss]

Originally posted by KANSAS
Mr. Weiss
do you still have a website, that discusses, ex disney attractions??

Yes, just click on Yesterland in my signature.

 

[drusba]

You have OKW with the largest rooms and lowest point costs. The way they could justify charging higher points per night at BWV, BCV and VWL for smaller rooms was location and more hotel like amenities -- members who bought at those resorts will pay the higher point cost at those resorts per night over OKW despite smaller rooms. With SSR, the location is no better than OKW and some would say worse. The real issue was not whether they could charge the same points as BCV, VWL, or BWV, but how they could get away with having rooms smaller than OKW but charge more than OKW and still get large sales of the property to one of their important group of buyers -- existing members at the other resorts. They did that by giving it a better pool than OKW and some hotel like amenities and extending the end date.

As to query above concerning what was there before SSR, there were Disney Institute townhomes which were torn down.