VGF 2 points usage question

[Ssplashhmtn]

For everyone?

Okay, in the sense that everyone fantasizes they, too, can live in a castle, find their very own happily ever after, enjoy endless wealth, etc. Sure, I agree. The GF, like Disney itself, encourages such fantasies.

The reality is that most of us buying into VGF are trying to get a smattering of GF goodies cheaper over years of returns.

If we weren't, I bet we'd be booking suites instead of multi-bedroom villas.

VGF is a nice stay, but it ain't no Royal Palm Club by a long shot--in more ways than one. And the people regularly booking the GF's full-service rooms and suites, I'm betting, aren't envying us at VGF.

I have the complete opposite viewpoint on VGF vs your sentiment. They are both nice (and we miss the club food), but after years of paying for GF hotel rooms or suites, in RPC or more often sugarloaf, we bought VGF specifically because it felt like an upgrade.

DVC rooms vs GF hotel rooms:

Villas:





GF Hotel Room:

 

[DonMacGregor]

This “crown jewel” or snootiness or whatever is just matching what has to be the new DVC sales strategy. This is EXPENSIVE.

The sales pitch, even for RIV, is all pure luxury and deluxe and blah blah blah. You don’t sell an extra mortgage payment trying to sell the idea of bringing a sandwich, like the old DVC was about. I mean, there’s not even the AP math we used to do every day here, justifying five figures in commitment for a few hundred bucks thrown in on APs that don’t even exist anymore. Did I mention deluxe? Heart of the action? Luxury?

Extra mortgage payment? Where, Panama? Let’s be real here. It’s a car payment at best.

 

[BeachClub2014]

Now that I've read that the GF is really for the snooty crowd, I've dug through the back of my closet and found my snooty pants so I can stay there.

Yes, tongue firmly planted in cheek.

 

[nuhusky123]

Now that I've read that the GF is really for the snooty crowd, I've dug through the back of my closet and found my snooty pants so I can stay there.

Yes, tongue firmly planted in cheek.

Yes but only if one is lolling about and has no plans to use the mk walkway to get to the park

the one thing I’ll add that isn’t a jest, the whole point of staying at vgf is it’s proximity to mk may you walk, boat or rail over. Were it not where it is I doubt any of us would care to buy. Because it is where it is anyone who buys intends to capitalize on the location and visit mk

 

[nuhusky123]

This “crown jewel” or snootiness or whatever is just matching what has to be the new DVC sales strategy. This is EXPENSIVE.

The sales pitch, even for RIV, is all pure luxury and deluxe and blah blah blah. You don’t sell an extra mortgage payment trying to sell the idea of bringing a sandwich, like the old DVC was about. I mean, there’s not even the AP math we used to do every day here, justifying five figures in commitment for a few hundred bucks thrown in on APs that don’t even exist anymore. Did I mention deluxe? Heart of the action? Luxury?

Regardless having woken to the news of Russia invading Ukraine the us and world will witness increased costs especially fuel for heat and cars. Inflation may increase as well, our stock portfolios will be crushed in the short term. dvc will be impacted by this war in that there is now massive financial uncertainty in global markets and any thought of $255 is nonsense now, people won’t be able to afford it

 

[Matty B13]

Yes but only if one is lolling about and has no plans to use the mk walkway to get to the park

If you have tried getting on the monorail at the GF in the early morning to get to MK, you will realized how big a deal the walkway from GF to MK is. I think we had 2 or 3 full monorails pass us at the GF, and then finally gave up and heading for the boats, only to wait to load on the second boat to dock. They don't hold monorail cars at Poly or the TCC for GF guests.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

I am just not convinced that being added to VGF is all of a sudden going to change the typical DVC buyer to the extent that they only want these glorified hotel rooms.

I think the typical DVC buyer ALREADY wants these glorified hotel rooms. A DVC buyer isn't a typical timeshare buyer who happens to also like Disney. They're a Disney resorts superfan who happens to buy into a timeshare. Some people are 1BR+ buyers, and I'm not talking about them. But the people who buy studio-sized contracts are buying because they want a prepaid Disney HOTEL room for the next 50 years, not because they prefer a "studio villa" accomodation type. They're buying because they like the structure of the DVC program, not because they want a kitchenette.

 

[RamblinWreck]

I think the typical DVC buyer ALREADY wants these glorified hotel rooms. A DVC buyer isn't a typical timeshare buyer who happens to also like Disney. They're a Disney resorts superfan who happens to buy into a timeshare. Some people are 1BR+ buyers, and I'm not talking about them. But the people who buy studio-sized contracts are buying because they want a prepaid Disney HOTEL room for the next 50 years, not because they prefer a "studio villa" accomodation type. They're buying because they like the structure of the DVC program, not because they want a kitchenette.

My gut says you are absolutely correct on this.

But I suppose we’ll find out soon enough!

 

[CarolMN]

But I suppose we’ll find out soon enough!

And then what will we have to argue about? Facts ruin more good arguments!

 

[Sandisw]

I think the typical DVC buyer ALREADY wants these glorified hotel rooms. A DVC buyer isn't a typical timeshare buyer who happens to also like Disney. They're a Disney resorts superfan who happens to buy into a timeshare. Some people are 1BR+ buyers, and I'm not talking about them. But the people who buy studio-sized contracts are buying because they want a prepaid Disney HOTEL room for the next 50 years, not because they prefer a "studio villa" accomodation type. They're buying because they like the structure of the DVC program, not because they want a kitchenette.

I guess this is where we differ in our assessment. With close to 2 million points, say the average contract size of 200, you are could be adding close to 10k of new owners.

Those new owners will impact booking patterns on the current villas, that’s a given.

The only unknown is whether that is going to be a negative, positive, or neutral impact.

At this point, my opinion is there will be negative consequences in some form on some of the rooms.

Again, time will tell once sales and booking starts!

 

[sethschroeder]

Am I the only one that believes Disney is king of metrics, people moving, and sales? Maybe I have too much faith that they're trying to sell what they know their customers want to buy?

They are selling what they can make the easiest money on which is zero reconfiguration and just a cheap facelift of the rooms.

I do understand the disconnect between what current VGF1 owners want to be sold on 3/3/22 vs. what potential VGF2 customers want to buy on 3/3/22.

I will be shocked if the new buyer isnt taken to look at a 2BR and the GV in the original building. I will also be shocked if they don't outline the value of there being rooms of all sizes. The VGF2 buyers will be presented with all the VGF2 benefit of rooms types as well.

Of course. I'm not trying to say that it's so obviously an upgrade in every way that everyone should prefer it. And if they were converting existing DS to RS I could understand existing owners being upset. I'm just saying that the people framing it as a clear and universal downgrade that will distort the balance of the points chart are making a huge jump to conclusions.

Isn't it like a 425% increase to new rooms? Of course it distorts the balance. You need less than 20% of members to like the old studios for it not to impact the balance. Anytime a category shrinks to a small subset of the resort it will be harder to book unless its high end rooms like the Bungalows or Grand Villas.

So even if you think the new rooms are nicer you would need to have 3 of your 4 other friends who own at DVC saying the same thing.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

I guess this is where we differ in our assessment. With close to 2 million points, say the average contract size of 200, you are could be adding close to 10k of new owners.

Those new owners will impact booking patterns on the current villas, that’s a given.

The only unknown is whether that is going to be a negative, positive, or neutral impact.

At this point, my opinion is there will be negative consequences in some form on some of the rooms.

Again, time will tell once sales and booking starts!

Question on the points chart...

I understand how Disney can rebalance points between seasons, but I'm always a little fuzzy on what they're allowed to do between room types. If it turns out you're right, and that DS demand is significantly higher than RS demand, such that DS becomes very difficult to book with the new pool of owners, could (would? must?) Disney adjust the points charts so that DS were more expensive than RS? I imagine this is the worst case scenario for VGF1 owners.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

I have the complete opposite viewpoint on VGF vs your sentiment. They are both nice (and we miss the club food), but after years of paying for GF hotel rooms or suites, in RPC or more often sugarloaf, we bought VGF specifically because it felt like an upgrade.

DVC rooms vs GF hotel rooms:

Villas:

View attachment 649787

View attachment 649788

GF Hotel Room:

View attachment 649789

It's a little bit unfair to pick rooms that are in two different spots in their refresh cycles. Personally, I'll never feel "upgraded" in accommodations that require me to make my own bed and vacuum my own floors. I love DVC, and I'm very happy I bought, but in terms of "Deluxe-ness," I'd rank Disney accommodations something like:

1. DCL concierge
2. DCL standard
3. Aulani cash
4. Grand Cal cash
5. Disneyland Hotel
6. WDW Deluxe cash (incl. HHI and VBR cash)
7. DVC
8. Ft. Wilderness Cabins
9. WDW Moderate / Paradise Pier
10. WDW Value

 

[Sandisw]

Question on the points chart...

I understand how Disney can rebalance points between seasons, but I'm always a little fuzzy on what they're allowed to do between room types. If it turns out you're right, and that DS demand is significantly higher than RS demand, such that DS becomes very difficult to book with the new pool of owners, could (would? must?) Disney adjust the points charts so that DS were more expensive than RS? I imagine this is the worst case scenario for VGF1 owners.

Some are adamant they are not allowed to do this but IMO, I think the language is vague because much of what I can find in the timeshare law refers to the selling of points and what is the maximum that can be sold per unit.

They did reallocate at SSR among the treehouses but have never been challenged on it so can’t say if it would stand up to a legal challenge. I personally think DVC would come out ahead.

So, I do think I’d they see an imbalance in the room types, they will try to adjust them if they believe they are on legal footing and won’t get the push back.

Having said that, more owners are involved with watching DVC with a critical eye and May fight such a move if they feel strongly it is not legal.

ETA: Because some of the studios are part of a 2 bedroom lock off, they could adjust VGF1 points around units to raise studios, lower 1 bedrooms and not touch the points at the new building which is definitely legal and allowed.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Some are adamant they are not allowed to do this but IMO, I think the language is vague because much of what I can find in the timeshare law refers to the selling of points and what is the maximum that can be sold per unit.

They did reallocate at SSR among the treehouses but have never been challenged on it so can’t say if it would stand up. I personally think DVC would win in the end.

So, I do think I’d they see an imbalance in the room types, they will try to adjust them if they believe they are on legal footing and won’t get the push back.

Having said that, more owners are involved with watching DVC with a critical eye and May fight such a move if they feel strongly it is not legal.

Good point about the Treehouses. The Standard/Preferred split is also pretty new at SSR, right? And I assume they could do something similar between Kidani and Jambo, not that the AKV points chart isn't already complicated enough.

 

[Sandisw]

Good point about the Treehouses. The Standard/Preferred split is also pretty new at SSR, right? And I assume they could do something similar between Kidani and Jambo, not that the AKV points chart isn't already complicated enough.

i added a comment above after you posted.

I forgot about that SV vs PV but yes, that was implemented later but don’t remember when.

The key to the issue is the term unit and it’s definition. A unit can be made up of several rooms, etc and the total points sold for the unit, once assigned and sold, can’t change.

The big question is whether that also applies to the points chart for the resort and use.

I think it’s complicated issue. I don’t know enough of how each section of SSR..not counting the treehouses as we know those were added later…is comprised in terms of size and units for the change to happen.

But, they can make changes at VGF1 to raise studios without pulling points from BPK building to offset the cost of each.

I think some were hoping they would make the RS less points so that the demand for the current studios would be tempered.

It is why I get the concern of current VGF owners as it’s a small resort. If these were added to a resort with hundreds of rooms, not 47, it be less of an issue.

But 202 rooms, all one size, and slightly different, changes the make up in a big way.

I do think this is why some had wished they were deluxe studios with the same amenities because then it would not matter if one filled up for those who want deluxe over resort.

 

[RamblinWreck]

I guess this is where we differ in our assessment. With close to 2 million points, say the average contract size of 200, you are could be adding close to 10k of new owners.

Those new owners will impact booking patterns on the current villas, that’s a given.

The only unknown is whether that is going to be a negative, positive, or neutral impact.

At this point, my opinion is there will be negative consequences in some form on some of the rooms.

Again, time will tell once sales and booking starts!

Oh, I wouldn't give up on the argument that quickly!

With a shiny new building into the mix that nearly every DVC owner has the ability to try to book at 7 months if they want to, we may not really know how it will affect availability for a few years.

Just remember this phrase everyone if your predictions start looking wrong right out of the gate. "I wasn't wrong, I was just early!"

 

[tidefan]

Question on the points chart...

I understand how Disney can rebalance points between seasons, but I'm always a little fuzzy on what they're allowed to do between room types. If it turns out you're right, and that DS demand is significantly higher than RS demand, such that DS becomes very difficult to book with the new pool of owners, could (would? must?) Disney adjust the points charts so that DS were more expensive than RS? I imagine this is the worst case scenario for VGF1 owners.

This is 100% what I am afraid of...

 

[CaptainAmerica]

This is 100% what I am afraid of...

Glass half-full, my friend. It could just as easily go the other way, where everyone is dying to get into the Resort Studios and it ends up being the DS that take a price cut.

 

[RamblinWreck]

Question on the points chart...

I understand how Disney can rebalance points between seasons, but I'm always a little fuzzy on what they're allowed to do between room types. If it turns out you're right, and that DS demand is significantly higher than RS demand, such that DS becomes very difficult to book with the new pool of owners, could (would? must?) Disney adjust the points charts so that DS were more expensive than RS? I imagine this is the worst case scenario for VGF1 owners.

Would they even be allowed to do that? I'm thinking they'd run into some serious issues with that. I'm not one of the most knowledgeable people about DVC contracts and the like, but I believe they aren't able to raise the overall points that it would take to book out a unit. And with the clear distinction between the old building and the new building, they wouldn't be slipping this past anyone.