As a cash paying guest (in December at BLT), I am not sure how I feel about not have access to certain aspects of my resort. I can honestly see both sides of this issue. My question for you folks is: What has been done at other DVC resorts? Are there amenities at those other places that the non-DVC members do not have access to?
If that is the case, I can see the rationale for making it DVC only... otherwise I am not so sure. (no offense meant to DVC members)
Please don't take this the wrong way, but please try to remember that "your" resort" is also "their" resort. BLT is a part of the Contemporary, as I pointed out earlier in this thread, just as VWL, BCV, BWV and AKV are part of their respective resorts. The only difference here is that the pool (which is indeed pretty small)
might be restricted to BLT guests (DVC members and paying guests) and the lounge
might be restricted to members -- people who have paid tens of thousands of dollars to own there. Putting it that way, does it really sound that unfair? Owners pay almost $20K for the smallest contract available (160 points) and then dues every year (dues which go to the upkeep of that building and grounds, among other things); is it so bad that one tiny part of the resort might possibly be reserved for them?
It was also pointed out by others earlier in this thread during the sky bridge discussion that if people don't pay extra for a concierge room, they don't get to use the concierge amenities. I don't think that restricting the lounge to paying owners is that different.
And the fact is, owners may never set foot in that lounge. When BWV was being built, "The Attic" lounge was advertised as part of the package. But when it opened, the powers that be changed their minds and it became available only to private parties/weddings/receptions, etc. Not even DVC members (who had been promised it) had access.
So right now, everything is speculation 'til BLT actually opens. Any CM giving out different information is misinformed and doing guests a disservice.
