The demise of unrestricted resorts, by year.

[eticketplease]

If DVC sticks to this policy, it’s going to limit flexibility for those who don’t own directly through them.

I think that is what they are trying to achieve to get people to buy directly through them.

They can highlight that you can stay at any DVC resort subject to availability when buying straight from us.

 

[Tatebeck]

I feel like as time marches on and more and more resorts enter the "restricted" territory SAP will be a mute point and people will just go back to the mantra of "Buy Where you want to stay"

I see people either
1. Not adding on more points
2. Adding on Direct anywhere
3. Adding on Resale but only to add to their current home resort(s) since they won't be able to go anywhere else with them.

Unless it is an extremely popular like BCV 2.0 or BWV 2.0 I don't think too many people will be buying standalone restricted resale

Yep, they want to get rid of the cheap resale SAP options, If you want to see all the resorts, they will make you buy direct eventually.

A smallish resale contract at a resort you own direct points at really is one of the best hacks. Lower your overall point cost for the resort, then bank and borrow when you know you want to stay at that resort and save the direct points for direct SAP. I may get some eventually for our RIV contracts. And maybe sell BWV before it expires to get a little something back out of it. We got a good deal on it at $99pp so even after a few years we may be able to offload it and break even still.

 

[Brian Noble]

The plural of anecdote is not data, but...

I would never, ever have purchased directly from DVD prior to 2019, because I did not need to spend thousands (and thousands) of dollars so that the tapstyles would turn purple and welcome me home.

Now? Purple tapstyles!

I don't think too many people will be buying standalone restricted resale

I think this depends on the price. If they are cheap enough, someone will bite.

 

[wilkydelts]

I understand the arguement of certain post 2042 resorts needing updated point charts when they go to get sold again, but SSR and OKW post 2054/57 are going to have to have the reasonable point charts in comparision to the other resorts or they will never be purchased. DVC has to be reasonable, point charts and price points can not just keep increasing without rebuke.

 

[Girlstar30]

It's not that I don't like it. It's still a WDW deluxe resort and I would rather be at any of those than at home lol. But I do like others much more.

I just never understand why someone would make a large purchase and buy a deeded real estate interest at a resort they do not want to stay at when the only thing guaranteed in that contract is to be able to stay at that very resort. Just having the chance to maybe change out resorts at 7 months unless Disney changes it seems risky when you can just buy at a resort you want to stay at.

None of this applies if you truly love SSR of course. If you love SSR it is indeed a great deal.

Because without it I couldn't have 100 extra points to play with for 1 and 2 bedrooms at a cheaper price, with cheaper maintenance fees, and that lasts almost as long as my other two more desirable to me contracts.

It's a great buy right now and Disney can do a lot of things that would make this product undesirable to me. If they limited us to just one resort, I wouldn't buy any contract and wouldn't want to keep my contracts, that's why I dont buy Riviera resale. If I successfully pass ROFR and I can successfully book VGF and PIT at less than 7 months like I have this year with my SAP+ points then the job can and is being accomplished.

18 years is a long time that's almost half of my life time. If I can enjoy these resorts for just half of my current lifetime I will be so happy

 

[Tatebeck]

Because without it I couldn't have 100 extra points to play with for 1 and 2 bedrooms at a cheaper price, with cheaper maintenance fees, and that lasts almost as long as my other two more desirable to me contracts.

It's a great buy right now and Disney can do a lot of things that would make this product undesirable to me. If they limited us to just one resort, I wouldn't buy any contract and wouldn't want to keep my contracts, that's why I dont buy Riviera resale. If I successfully pass ROFR and I can successfully book VGF and PIT at less than 7 months like I have this year with my SAP+ points then the job can and is being accomplished.

18 years is a long time that's almost half of my life time. If I can enjoy these resorts for just half of my current lifetime I will be so happy

If you were always going to book the most expensive 1BR at PIT or VGF every time anyway, then getting in at 7 months with SSR is indeed savings each time you do it. But it wont work every time and will likely get harder over time, even for 1BR which is usually the easiest. If you are fine with staying at SSR or eating a loss on an SSR contract if everyone tries to get out of their contracts if/when 7 month availability tightens up then that is an option you may be okay with. I just don't get the gamble myself. As the saying goes the juice just isn't worth the squeeze to me when there are other options out there. If it was SSR resale vs current Direct points as the only options then that would be a different story and even I would buy SSR. But there are a lot of other good options in a close enough price range.

As most members know, the cheapest views usually book first. So if you would normally book the cheapest view (even if it was a 1BR) but you end up having to book a more expensive view to get availability at 7 months, with a quick look that can range from an extra 54 up to 145 extra points for a week at the more expensive view(s) at Poly/VGF in the 1BR. If you have to use a bunch of extra points each time you stay like that, you may not end up saving anything, or maybe even spending more even with the cheap points. An extra 54 to 145 points each time and their dues can eat into that savings or the "extra" points you got by going with SSR very quickly. This difference will be less with the studios, and more with the 2BRs.

A member can buy the more expensive points even at VGF or Poly, but book the cheaper view room and still come out ahead. And with VGF or Poly you would get an extra 10 or 12 years. In 2054 you could sell the contract and get some money back when SSR members are left with nothing. And the whole time this member would always have the option of booking the better view if they wished, and wouldn't have to gamble on unknown long term 7 month availability.

It's multifactorial and every member has to make their choices.

Edit: Also some of the options actually have cheaper dues than SSR. Like BLT and Poly

 

[Girlstar30]

If you were always going to book the most expensive 1BR at PIT or VGF every time anyway, then getting in at 7 months with SSR is indeed savings each time you do it. But it wont work every time and will likely get harder over time, even for 1BR which is usually the easiest. If you are fine with staying at SSR or eating a loss on an SSR contract if everyone tries to get out of their contracts if/when 7 month availability tightens up then that is an option you may be okay with. I just don't get the gamble myself. As the saying goes the juice just isn't worth the squeeze to me when there are other options out there. If it was SSR resale vs current Direct points as the only options then that would be a different story and even I would buy SSR. But there are a lot of other good options in a close enough price range.

As most members know, the cheapest views usually book first. So if you would normally book the cheapest view (even if it was a 1BR) but you end up having to book a more expensive view to get availability at 7 months, with a quick look that can range from an extra 54 up to 145 extra points for a week at the more expensive view(s) at Poly/VGF in the 1BR. If you have to use a bunch of extra points each time you stay like that, you may not end up saving anything, or maybe even spending more even with the cheap points. An extra 54 to 145 points each time and their dues can eat into that savings or the "extra" points you got by going with SSR very quickly. This difference will be less with the studios, and more with the 2BRs.

A member can buy the more expensive points even at VGF or Poly, but book the cheaper view room and still come out ahead. And with VGF or Poly you would get an extra 10 or 12 years. In 2054 you could sell the contract and get some money back when SSR members are left with nothing. And the whole time this member would always have the option of booking the better view if they wished, and wouldn't have to gamble on unknown long term 7 month availability.

It's multifactorial and every member has to make their choices.

Edit: Also some of the options actually have cheaper dues than SSR. Like BLT and Poly

I guess for those that don't have flexibility and want the cheapest room then, yes, it doesn't make sense. For those with flexibility, like 1 bedrooms and the best views (ie myself ) it makes sense

 

[Tatebeck]

I guess for those that don't have flexibility and want the cheapest room then, yes, it doesn't make sense. For those with flexibility, like 1 bedrooms and the best views (ie myself ) it makes sense

Yeah, the SSR SAP member has to be more flexible and then willing to stay at SSR if they strike out because the points themselves end up being less flexible.

 

[Girlstar30]

Yeah, the SSR SAP member has to be more flexible and then willing to stay at SSR if they strike out because the points are less flexible.

If i strike out too many times it's back to the drawing board

 

[Brian Noble]

I know SSR is the red-headed stepchild of DVC, but I really like it.

The vibe of the resort is quiet, understated elegance. It does not hit you over the head with "THE THEME! HERE'S THE THEME!", but it is there if you are still enough to listen. It is second only to the Wilderness Lodge/Fort for walking paths. There are two great feature pools. The renovated rooms are great. The CS is better than average, and there are more good restaurants than you can shake a stick at within an easy-ish stroll over at Disney Springs.

 

[jolynne28]

It's not that I don't like it. It's still a WDW deluxe resort and I would rather be at any of those than at home lol. But I do like others much more.

I just never understand why someone would make a large purchase and buy a deeded real estate interest at a resort they do not want to stay at when the only thing guaranteed in that contract is to be able to stay at that very resort. Just having the chance to maybe change out resorts at 7 months unless Disney changes it seems risky when you can just buy at a resort you want to stay at.

None of this applies if you truly love SSR of course. If you love SSR it is indeed a great deal.

I think this all goes back to someone's previous statement on this thread or another about value. I got a great deal on our first contract, which was SSR, and I've stayed at every resort but OKW, BLT, and RIV on those points, which currently work out to $11.34/pt. And I will be able to do that easily for the next 17 years. After that, all of our kids will be in their 20's, so if swapping isn't as easy DH and I will be just fine staying there.

I also drive an 11 year old minivan. Not b/c we can't afford a new car, but b/c it's been paid off since year 1, we've never had any issues with it, and cars are utilitarian to me, they get me and my family where we need to go. A car is not a luxury item for me, but for a lot of people they are and that's their own choice. DVC is obviously a luxury item, but maybe SSR is an old reliable Honda. I'm good with that, the contract works for us right now in the way we want it to. When/if that changes, we can make a choice as to how we want to proceed.

I feel like I remember at some point you stating or inferring that you are early/mid 30's, married, no kids? If I'm getting you confused with someone else, my apologies. And there's no judgement being passed here. If your life stays that way, then you have an amazing DVC portfolio that you and your partner will enjoy for decades. But should kids come into the picture down the road, it will definitely alter the landscape of your vacations. Sure, they're free for the first few years, but when you start having to buy park and plane tickets and meals the cost of your trips is going to skyrocket. Renting a stroller, Bibbidi Bobbidi Boutique , character dining, balloons, souvenirs, dole whips if you're raising them right...piles of cash. Not to mention the inevitable illness that will force you to delay or cancel a trip, putting points in dreaded holding.

If we had started our DVC adventure prior to kids I'm sure it might have looked more similar to your approach. But it's apparently going to cost us around $900K to raise these little humans, so we have to make some sacrifices when it comes to our luxury purchases.

 

[Brian Noble]

it's apparently going to cost us around $900K to raise these little humans

I bet it's more.

I spent almost a third of that on two undergraduate degrees. And that was cheap; they paid in-state tuition. If they'd gone out of state or private, double that.

Every once in a while, a faculty candidate asks me if we get a tuition benefit for our kids. My answer: "We do, It's called in-state tution, and it is one heck of a deal."

 

[jolynne28]

I bet it's more.

I spent almost a third of that on two undergraduate degrees. And that was cheap; they paid in-state tuition. If they'd gone out of state or private, double that.

Every once in a while, a faculty candidate asks me if we get a tuition benefit for our kids. My answer: "We do, It's called in-state tution, and it is one heck of a deal."

No doubt, I'm just quoting a recently published article. I assumed that was only getting them to 18. One thing Fl is doing right is the Bright Futures Scholarship, so hopefully tuition will be covered in state.

 

[Tatebeck]

I think this all goes back to someone's previous statement on this thread or another about value. I got a great deal on our first contract, which was SSR, and I've stayed at every resort but OKW, BLT, and RIV on those points, which currently work out to $11.34/pt. And I will be able to do that easily for the next 17 years. After that, all of our kids will be in their 20's, so if swapping isn't as easy DH and I will be just fine staying there.

I also drive an 11 year old minivan. Not b/c we can't afford a new car, but b/c it's been paid off since year 1, we've never had any issues with it, and cars are utilitarian to me, they get me and my family where we need to go. A car is not a luxury item for me, but for a lot of people they are and that's their own choice. DVC is obviously a luxury item, but maybe SSR is an old reliable Honda. I'm good with that, the contract works for us right now in the way we want it to. When/if that changes, we can make a choice as to how we want to proceed.

I feel like I remember at some point you stating or inferring that you are early/mid 30's, married, no kids? If I'm getting you confused with someone else, my apologies. And there's no judgement being passed here. If your life stays that way, then you have an amazing DVC portfolio that you and your partner will enjoy for decades. But should kids come into the picture down the road, it will definitely alter the landscape of your vacations. Sure, they're free for the first few years, but when you start having to buy park and plane tickets and meals the cost of your trips is going to skyrocket. Renting a stroller, Bibbidi Bobbidi Boutique , character dining, balloons, souvenirs, dole whips if you're raising them right...piles of cash. Not to mention the inevitable illness that will force you to delay or cancel a trip, putting points in dreaded holding.

If we had started our DVC adventure prior to kids I'm sure it might have looked more similar to your approach. But it's apparently going to cost us around $900K to raise these little humans, so we have to make some sacrifices when it comes to our luxury purchases.

That sounds like me and I think I have said that somewhere so you are probably remembering correctly lol.

If/when kids come I don't think my outlook will change all that much though other than the timing of our trips. And I think that's when you would want a better home resort advantage anyway right? When you become less flexible as a member.

I have resorts that I like and a mix that are fairly future-proof with direct and resale, and all are paid off so it's only dues. Even after all of our purchases we are lucky enough to not really be hurting for money and are well set up for the future. House almost paid off (less than 3 years left), good retirement accounts, etc. And I can rent some points out when we need a break or can't make it.

And is that 900k per kid or total for all your kids? 900k per kid would be an extra 50k per year from 0-18 seems wildly excessive and I'm sure it can easily be done for much less. Sure you could spend that, but you don't have to. People raise whole families on less after all. The first few years are obviously very expensive, even more so if you have to buy formula and/or pay for childcare of course, but after that there's no way 50k per year should hold.

 

[cruisehopeful]

I know SSR is the red-headed stepchild of DVC, but I really like it.

The vibe of the resort is quiet, understated elegance. It does not hit you over the head with "THE THEME! HERE'S THE THEME!", but it is there if you are still enough to listen. It is second only to the Wilderness Lodge/Fort for walking paths. There are two great feature pools. The renovated rooms are great. The CS is better than average, and there are more good restaurants than you can shake a stick at within an easy-ish stroll over at Disney Springs.

Speaking as someone who has never been to SSR, it looks like a great place. Maybe it's because I only travel with adults, but it looks ideal for those of us who need to chill out once in a while. I completely understand the bus hate, though, especially for those traveling with children. When I see the negative posts about SSR, I always chuckle to myself. I'm over here with my expensive points, looking forward to trading them for SSR.

 

[New Mouse]

I think there's a point in this timeline where direct purchases tank bc resale value is too low due to restrictions. DVC sells well in part because it has maintained its value for 30 years. Once that's gone, no one is paying $250 a point.

 

[wilkydelts]

I think there's a point in this timeline where direct purchases tank bc resale value is too low due to restrictions. DVC sells well in part because it has maintained its value for 30 years. Once that's gone, no one is paying $250 a point.

Exactly! One of the biggest aspects that appealed to me was the value I retain in resale as an escape clause. I always know I have an emergency hatch of worst case 50%-60% of my purchase price for at least the next 12-15 years. Restricted resale does not seem to hold the same value.

 

[Brian Noble]

Folks, Marriott sells points that are worth 25% on the resale market. Wyndham does with a resale market of 10%. Charitably.

And the price points are not wildly different.

Disney will have no problem selling timeshares, no matter what the resale market holds.

 

[that1jeff]

Disney will have no problem selling timeshares, no matter what the resale market holds.

Yup.

Every year people complain when Disney raises prices on any of the services/entertainment they provide. Theme parks, DVC, merch, food, any paid extras, etc. Whatever it is. Yet the masses keep coming (and paying). I can't remember the last time I visited Disneyland and didn't see at least a couple VIP tours happening. I don't see DVC being any different.

Some close friends of mine we're recently on a Disney cruise. They texted me in the middle of their cruise about DVC. One was sold and the other wanted to do more research. I downloaded tons of info on them via text. The point being, one of them was in the pixie dust and totally ready to buy. Resale value was not even a consideration. There will be plenty of those kind of buyers for Disney to sell to.

 

[kilik64]

Folks, Marriott sells points that are worth 25% on the resale market. Wyndham does with a resale market of 10%. Charitably.

And the price points are not wildly different.

Disney will have no problem selling timeshares, no matter what the resale market holds.

Timeshares are bought, not sold as you say.