Are DVC units not decorated the same as the cash rooms because Disney wants them to look like a timeshare or is it because of the cost? Since the cost is paid for by the owners, why don't they offer better amenities/décor.
Personally I think it's all about the cost. We are still coming out of tough economic times and I don't believe DVC was willing to be overly aggressive when it comes to spending owners money.
Even today, there are cries of fraud and deception when dues increase by 5-6% instead of the anticipated 2-3%. During the worst of the recession, some owners were of the opinion that dues should have decreased year-over-year.
Could it be that they don't want the DVC rooms competing with their cash rooms so they maintain a noticeable difference?
DVC villa rooms are marketed to cash guests, too. If you book on waltdisneyworld.com, DVC resort options will be presented right alongside hotel alternatives. Those willing to pay cash for a villa see the same 20-30% room discounts, "free dining" offers, etc.
Honestly, no I don't believe there is a specific plan to keep villas looking inferior.
IMO, it's simply a case of two different groups making decisions which best serve their own interest. On the hotel side, you have resort managers and higher-ups who know they must meet certain guest expectations given the prices charged. Even 5 years ago, you couldn't put a 21" tube TV in a hotel room which runs $400-600 per night.
On the DVC side you have managers who must answer for the annual dues costs. They are bound to take a more measured approach to room upgrades.
And there's the Jim Lewis factor. Even soft goods rehabs at DVC resorts take 3 years to pull together. Lewis has only been gone for about 20 months so we are probably still seeing the results of his decisions.
When the Saratoga Springs refurb started last year, rooms were being outfitted with redesigned comforters--not duvets or triple sheets but the slick, heavy comforter blankets we are all familiar with. Then at the December '12 annual meeting, DVC announced they were going to begin phasing-out the comforters and going with the triple sheet approach. (And DVC is paying for the conversion.)
The immediate reaction to this is to wonder why money was wasted at SSR. In hindsight, it seems likely that Jim Lewis had approved the purchase of new comforters while his replacement, Claire Bilby, later decided to go the triple-sheet route.
When it comes right down to it, a small group of managers are making decisions on behalf of all DVC owners. And few decisions will be universally embraced. Even in this example, the triple sheets sound like a nice improvement but if it adds another 1-1.5% to annual dues for added labor and cleaning costs, some will immediately grab their torches and pitchforks.
Personally I would rather pay a little more for better quality...particularly during rehabs since they are so infrequent and the dollars can be spread over an extended period. Several aspects of the OKW rehab came under fire from owners. If memory serves, some pieces of furniture were re-painted rather than being replaced and the bathrooms were barely touched.
When rehabs on that scale occur once every 15-20 years, and the costs are shared by tens-of-thousands of owners, seems wise to just spend a little more money and do it right rather than cutting corners. Hopefully this was just a Jim Lewis philosophy and we'll see a different approach going forward.