Well, it's happening, can't get VWL or BCV at 7month window, and I own at both!!!!!

[Muushka]

As I read through this thread, it makes me wonder. How many people will 'over book' their DVC vacation due to home resort being unavailable at 9 months? For example:

We always go to VWL in December. Say I am not sure which week I want, so I go ahead and book 2 or 3 separate vacations, and wait until I knew for sure which one I would want. And to take it a step further, when I figure out which I want, I figure I may as well sell those other reservations and make a few bucks. This is sure a slippery slope we are headed on. Not sure what the answer is, but it will get worse before it gets better.

PS I promise I will not over-book and sell my reservation during favored times. I wish everyone would do the same.

 

[shantay1008]

Okay, so where is Therese's pesky little niece/nephew who was bored one night and resurrected this old thread? Isn't anyone else seeing the humor in this?!?

Beca, I think you hit the nail on the head as usual when you described how the posting process sometimes works on here!

I wonder how many people really do consult the internet before purchasing DVC? It would be interesting to know how the stuff talked about on here influences buyers and sellers. To be honest, it didn't occur to me to research the net before we made our purchase back in '04. I wonder if we would have done anything differently if we had.... It's sort of tough to say, really.
Shannon

 

[zum]

Funny There are no Villas available through DVC during your time period But you can book as many Villas as you like through central reseravtions do you believe they only hold back 2-4% ?

 

[LIFERBABE]

Funny There are no Villas available through DVC during your time period But you can book as many Villas as you like through central reseravtions do you believe they only hold back 2-4% ?

They hold back 2-4% plus exchanges. That could increase the number of rooms available thru CRO.

Example, many people used points to book the upcoming DVC member cruise. Those points need to be converted to CRO reservations to pay for the cruise. That's alot of points=Alot of rooms.

 

[gjw007]

Wow! So much passion. I have just booked Boardwalk for my December stay, so depending on the times, there are still availabilities after the 7-month window. With more members, and it doesn't matter the size or the number new resorts, there will be increased competiton to book at a specific resort at the 7-month window. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that a smaller resort will fill before a larger resort.

As an SSR owner, I plan to stay mostly at SSR but given the passion that some members here have for the other resorts, I felt the desire to stay at some of them to see if I had missed something as I completely rejected DVC when I first looked at it when BCV was being sold. I have stayed at VWL and enjoyed my stay. I will, as mentioned, be staying at Boardwalk the week before Xmas. If possible, next year I will try to reserve at BCV. If I read the tone correctly on some of the comments (such as stay only at the resort that you bought), I would be denied that ability if they had the ability to make changes. Which of course, self-defeats DVC.

 

[rinkwide]

...I wonder how many people really do consult the internet before purchasing DVC? It would be interesting to know how the stuff talked about on here influences buyers and sellers...

It's a lot less than many around here might think. In my experience - having chatted with fellow members I've happened upon in the parks, resorts and whatnot - only about 3 out of 5 DVCers have ever heard of DrTomorrow. Pretty sad, really.

 

[Chuck S]

If I read the tone correctly on some of the comments (such as stay only at the resort that you bought), I would be denied that ability if they had the ability to make changes. Which of course, self-defeats DVC.

Actually, DVC can restrict us to booking only our home resort. This is extremely unlikely, of course, but they do have the ability to do so by our contracts. I imagine we may see his put into effect about 2040, to control bookings during the last years of the original DVC resorts. Of course, there may be no problem, even then...who knows. But just clarifying that DVC does have the ability to do that.

Just as they can restrict an individuals usage of points if the building they own is destroyed by some sort of catastrophe. They seemed to try to plan for all the "what ifs" they could when they designed the program.

 

[Dean]

Is it possible that Disney did plan ahead, and thought that SSR was going to be there best resort ever, and that so many people would want to stay there that they had to build such a large resort? they surely did surveys and interveiws etc to get the pulse of the people they always have. And its possible it just did not pan out the way they exspected it too.

LOL, only in fantasy land. I don't think you really believe that's the case.

I don't know this but when they changed the point structure at BWV, did they lower for the std and keep the current point structure the same for the preferred/BW view? Or did they keep the point structure the same for the std view and raise for the preferred/BW view? Or a little of both?

ETA:
PS (and this is just a general PS, not to any specific poster)
I still think SSR is still in the awkward teen phase. It hasn't quite come into its own yet. But they are listening and with the added Turf Club (which looks really really nice btw) and a few other things here and there. It needs time to come into its own.

They lowered the points for the SV and kept the rest the same. This essentially reduced the total points sold there and was a benefit to those that had bought there. No question that SSR is still evolving and there are opportunities to improve it. The restaurant is only crumbs though. IMO, there's not enough they could do at this point that would rectify the situation.

Well, FWIW, no matter where they built the resort, the addition of a new resort and thousands of new members is going to impact the usage of all the other DVC resorts. It's one of the selling points of DVC that you are not bound to stay in your home resort.

So the most recently built resort is SSR. If the most recently built resort had been The Contemporary Villas, there still would have been a large influx of new members, all of whom the "older" members are now competing with for rooms.

To a degree any new resort will affect the 7 month window one way or another. But if the demand is equal to the other resorts, it will have a zero end effect. As many people will trade in as out and it could be the same as prior to that resort or even better for everyone. ANY resort where members trade out more than the average when excluding that resort will affect the 7 month window in a negative manner. And any resort that is more in demand that the rest will have the opposite affect. SSR is almost as big now at BWV, BCV and VWL put together and when completed and sold, will be around 20% larger.

As I read through this thread, it makes me wonder. How many people will 'over book' their DVC vacation due to home resort being unavailable at 9 months?

IF you mean booking longer than they might need or two different unit sizes or different weeks until they know what they need, a lot of people do that. And it appears more are doing it now it appears than previously.

 

[littlestar]

Please leave us happy VWL owners out of this discussion...no need to bring off topic complaints about its pool into this thread, is there?

We know we have a small resort (one more reason to love it) and yes, it was as big as they could make it with the property and zoning restrictions.

Now, back to the discussion in process...

Amen, brother, preach it. I'm a VERY happy VWL owner and I like her just the way she is. Home sweet home (tucked close to the main lodge, but yet so peaceful and serene).

 

[Beca]

I do think there are things that DVC could do to make SSR the Flagship resort. But, unfortunately....they are not cost effective.

A few of my ideas (which don't count for anything) are:

1) Adding a SAB as the second theme pool, and allowing NO pool hopping there.

2) Purchasing the movie theatre, and offering "free Disney movies", as well as adding on to the building to make a child care center, or

2) Adding a "Hoop de doo" style "live review" dinner there, or even better...a Disney story show (like Aladdin at DL) in the theatre.

3) Spending the $$$$ to make SSR a monorail resort

4) Adding a REAL horse arena there...with nighttime dinner shows (like Medieval times) that are "Victorian based" rather than Medieval. And, in the daytime, offer horse rides, and even Dressage lessons. They could also have horse races, where when you win, you win Disney merchandise...not money.

The issue with SSR is that with the size of the complex, the higher cost of points than OKW, but a more remote location than others, there is no "niche" for SSR that draws a large number of people. No matter what DVC adds to their resorts, they will always be competing with the lure of the parks as the "destination of choice". If they want to make SSR the true flagship, they either need to:
1) Improve access to the parks...thus, the monorail (which would make it the only DVC resort on the monorail)

or

2) Make it a "destination" to rival the parks. I do think that is what DVC was thinking when they placed it so close to DTD, but DTD does not compare to being right next to a park.

I do think SSR will come into its own, in time....but, partially due to its size, it will be the last place people will try to book because they will think they can "always stay there"...that fact alone makes SSR less desirable....and, that is really not fair to anyone, especially when you consider that SSR owners are paying more to own there than any DVC member has done in the initial offerings of any other DVC resort.

Personally, I would LOVE to see SSR become its own little "Mackinac Island"...where the place just becomes gracefully elegant in the evenings....where you could say, "Who wants to go to the parks when there is so much to do here?" I mean....we all get tired of going to the parks...having a serene, elegant retreat that truly is a "world of its own" would be a GREAT option. And, with all the space at SSR, it is DVC's best option for doing so. Someone suggested an "elegant" Mary Poppins theme...I think that would be REALLY cool. There is so much possibility there!!



Beca

 

[Chuck S]

Here's an interesting thought. Let's suppose for this scenario the resorts are the same size. Let's say that Resort 1 fully books during the priority window, with 30% of those bookings wanting to change to resort 2 at 7 months. Then let's say Resort 2 also books during the priority window, with 30% wanting to change to Resort 1 at 7 months. No one will cancel their ressie unless there is availability. Now we hear..."OMG, nothing available at 7 months", when in reality, there are an equal number of people at both resorts wanting to switch but unwilling to cancel until the other resort become available. It is a standoff. I just wonder how often something like that happens, and if it, too, could be part of the problem?

 

[Sammie]

When comes down to it, we are all one big happy family!
::cop:

I would hate to even know who is who in that line-up and you left me out.

 

[Chuck S]

.... Adding a "Hoop de doo" style "live review" dinner there, or even better...a Disney story show (like Aladdin at DL) in the theatre.

Beca

Excellent suggestion, WDW could use a fresh Dinner Show...or if nothing else, a reincarnation of Broadway at the Top that used to be where CA Grill is now. Or even some play having to do with the "horse" theme of the resort.

 

[Chuck S]

This thread is having less & less to do with vacation planning, I'm moving it to Mousecellaneous.

 

[Sammie]

I do think there are things that DVC could do to make SSR the Flagship resort. But, unfortunately....they are not cost effective.

A few of my ideas (which don't count for anything) are:

1) Adding a SAB as the second theme pool, and allowing NO pool hopping there.

2) Purchasing the movie theatre, and offering "free Disney movies", as well as adding on to the building to make a child care center, or

2) Adding a "Hoop de doo" style "live review" dinner there, or even better...a Disney story show (like Aladdin at DL) in the theatre.

3) Spending the $$$$ to make SSR a monorail resort

4) Adding a REAL horse arena there...with nighttime dinner shows (like Medieval times) that are "Victorian based" rather than Medieval. And, in the daytime, offer horse rides, and even Dressage lessons. They could also have horse races, where when you win, you win Disney merchandise...not money.

The issue with SSR is that with the size of the complex, the higher cost of points than OKW, but a more remote location than others, there is no "niche" for SSR that draws a large number of people. No matter what DVC adds to their resorts, they will always be competing with the lure of the parks as the "destination of choice". If they want to make SSR the true flagship, they either need to:
1) Improve access to the parks...thus, the monorail (which would make it the only DVC resort on the monorail)

or

2) Make it a "destination" to rival the parks. I do think that is what DVC was thinking when they placed it so close to DTD, but DTD does not compare to being right next to a park.

I do think SSR will come into its own, in time....but, partially due to its size, it will be the last place people will try to book because they will think they can "always stay there"...that fact alone makes SSR less desirable....and, that is really not fair to anyone, especially when you consider that SSR owners are paying more to own there than any DVC member has done in the initial offerings of any other DVC resort.

Personally, I would LOVE to see SSR become its own little "Mackinac Island"...where the place just becomes gracefully elegant in the evenings....where you could say, "Who wants to go to the parks when there is so much to do here?" I mean....we all get tired of going to the parks...having a serene, elegant retreat that truly is a "world of its own" would be a GREAT option. And, with all the space at SSR, it is DVC's best option for doing so. Someone suggested an "elegant" Mary Poppins theme...I think that would be REALLY cool. There is so much possibility there!!



Beca

No disrespect and since you said you could handle the discussions here, this is the type of post I think makes SSR owners get hostile. Why do you think it needs fixing? Most and myself included like it the way it is. It's not broke.

I do not care for the BWV, but I would never try to get it fixed so I would like it. Many do like it and I can respect that and think they should leave it as it, so that those that love will be happy.

I truly just do not understand why some on this forum can't respect that many SSR owners are very happy there, and most that complain either don't own there or just like to stir the pot to get a response.

There will never be another SAB, and more than likely never any monorail expansion. I could care less for some major dinner theater attraction, what we love about SSR is the peace and quiet and the "remote" location. Which takes all of 15 minutes to get anywhere. No one has the factual information to state SSR is not being bought and used by many happy DVC members. I just do not understand why anyone thinks that is the case.

No one is making someone that does not own at SSR stay there. If a member waits too late to get their own resort and that is all that is available they can only blame themselves.

 

[Dean]

Here's an interesting thought. Let's suppose for this scenario the resorts are the same size. Let's say that Resort 1 fully books during the priority window, with 30% of those bookings wanting to change to resort 2 at 7 months. Then let's say Resort 2 also books during the priority window, with 30% wanting to change to Resort 1 at 7 months. No one will cancel their ressie unless there is availability. Now we hear..."OMG, nothing available at 7 months", when in reality, there are an equal number of people at both resorts wanting to switch but unwilling to cancel until the other resort become available. It is a standoff. I just wonder how often something like that happens, and if it, too, could be part of the problem?

It happens all the time. With II, they can handle this as long as both parties get what they want. With DVC, there's no "search" options, just a wait list. Of course one could try for direct exchanges but that's hit or miss at best. The problem is that each person would also have to be at the top of the wait list to match them up as one transaction.

No disrespect and since you said you could handle the discussions here, this is the type of post I think makes SSR owners get hostile. Why do you think it needs fixing? Most and myself included like it the way it is. It's not broke.

Broke would be too strong a word, lacking in comparison might be a better position, at least in my view. If that's bashing, so be it.

I do not care for the BWV, but I would never try to get it fixed so I would like it. Many do like it and I can respect that and think they should leave it as it, so that those that love will be happy.

We all have our preferences but that should not deter us from sharing our opinions.

I truly just do not understand why some on this forum can't respect that many SSR owners are very happy there, and most that complain either don't own there or just like to stir the pot to get a response.

Neither from my standpoint, simply an intellectual discussion of pros and cons. Frankly I do not believe that the majority of owners at SSR bought because they loved SSR and only wanted to stay there. Same might be true for all DVC resorts to one degree or another, however I feel that a lower percentage of owners feel as you do about SSR compared to at least BCV, BWV & VWL, likely even OKW but to a lessor degree. That's cool, if you like it stay there. I don't care for BCV and love BWV and they are similar in many ways.

No one is making someone that does not own at SSR stay there. If a member waits too late to get their own resort and that is all that is available they can only blame themselves.

One can and should book during the home resort priority hence the buy where you want to stay mantra.

 

[Beca]

No disrespect and since you said you could handle the discussions here, this is the type of post I think makes SSR owners get hostile. Why do you think it needs fixing? Most and myself included like it the way it is. It's not broke.

I do not care for the BWV, but I would never try to get it fixed so I would like it. Many do like it and I can respect that and think they should leave it as it, so that those that love will be happy.

I truly just do not understand why some on this forum can't respect that many SSR owners are very happy there, and most that complain either don't own there or just like to stir the pot to get a response.

There will never be another SAB, and more than likely never any monorail expansion. I could care less for some major dinner theater attraction, what we love about SSR is the peace and quiet and the "remote" location. Which takes all of 15 minutes to get anywhere. No one has the factual information to state SSR is not being bought and used by many happy DVC members. I just do not understand why anyone thinks that is the case.

No one is making someone that does not own at SSR stay there. If a member waits too late to get their own resort and that is all that is available they can only blame themselves.

Sorry, Sammie...I don't mean to offend. However, if SSR is going to be 30% of the DVC rooms, I think it would be nice if it had enough amenities for 30% of DVC owners to say it is their 1st choice of a resort. I don't think that right now, that would be a true statement.

The truth of the matter is, that the more a resort has to OFFER, the more people will want to stay there...whether or not they choose to take advantage of it.

I do think that there are some who love SSR EXACTLY the way it is, but I think there are many who think improvements can be made. There are also many who think improvements can be made at ALL the DVC resorts, and as a BCV owner, I would certainly not mind at all if DVC chose to improve BCV in some way (such as "improving" the Marketplace like they did. And, I would certainly applaud enlarging B&C). I don't think there are very many SSR owners who are saying, "Man, I wish they hadn't put in the turf club....it really stinks that they did that." Maybe I am wrong....maybe you really liked the remoteness, and wish they would stop adding amenities to your resort. But, FWIW...I don't think people keep talking of improving SSR because it is an inferior resort, but because it is still being built, and sold....it would be very easy for DVC to ADD things to SSR, and they have....such as the Turf club restaurant. They are listening, so maybe we should be talking.

BTW, someone suggested earlier (I think it was Crisi), that WDW should re-open Ariel's at BCV. I would never suggest that someone was saying BCV was inferior because they feel that BCV "needs" Ariel's to re-open to be a great resort, but I certainly agree that having another restaurant (especially one themed after The Little Mermaid) would be a big plus!!!

Sorry if I offended...I am not saying the resort is bad....but, like all DVC resorts, it could be better for MANY people.



Beca

 

[2Princes2Princesses]

I personally think SSR has alot to offer. We bought DVC BECAUSE of SSR. I am trying out a studio at BWV in September, much to the annoyance of my husband, who did not want to stay there.

For February, I considered OKW (and will still be lobbying to try it on another trip) but my family, including my mom, who stayed at SSR with us in May was really mad and wanted SSR.

We love the remoteness (which is why I think they will also like the spread out community feel of OKW) and the activities are great. And while the resort has a remote feel, even I am bummed that we won't have the access to DTD in September that we are used to. I am trying to get everyone to agree to try the other resorts, just so we can say we did it. And we probably won't try BCV, I just don't feel it is worth the hassle of trying to book day by day at 7 mos. OKW is actually the only place besides BWV I REALLY want to try out.

I agree that the size of the resort may make it harder for those (who own at BCV, VWL, and BWV) who cannot book at 11 mos and have to wait til the window opens. For our fall trip, it is hard for us to do that as well, since DH's vacation varies in the fall and he does not find out until Feb when he has off.

To add a huge themed pool that draws alot of people or to add multiple restaurants or things like that.....well, that is not why I bought SSR. I bought it because I love it the way it is. Had I wanted the hustle and bustle, I would have bought at BWV or BCV through resale.

We are adding on when we stay at SSR in February. DH has already told me that even if the next DVC is on the steps of the castle...he wants the add on at SSR.

I think the guides need to encourage prospective buyers to stay at SSR, experience what it does have to offer, and get them to fall in love with it like we did, NOT to tell them..."Oh, buy here, stay at BCV" I do think that contributes to the problem, more so than SSR being lacking in some way.

I do get my panties in a bunch about the SSR bashing too. It is such a great resort and we just love it so much, that of course I get defensive. But I think it would be this way with anything. If SSR came first and was smaller, and they added a HUGE wing onto BCV, there would be SSR owners on here complaining about not being able to get a room at SSR and how BCV was too big or noisy or whatever. So I take it all with a grain of salt. If you have never stayed at SSR, try it. You may find you love it, I have seen some who were pleasantly surprised. If you have stayed and don't like it, that is your opinion and I am glad you at least gave it a shot.

I personally am awaiting the fireworks if DVC opens a monorail resort. Because that will be booked like hotcakes at 7 months out, so anyone who cannot make ressies in the priority window will be SOL.

 

[HUFF590]

I personally think SSR has alot to offer. We bought DVC BECAUSE of SSR. I am trying out a studio at BWV in September, much to the annoyance of my husband, who did not want to stay there.

For February, I considered OKW (and will still be lobbying to try it on another trip) but my family, including my mom, who stayed at SSR with us in May was really mad and wanted SSR.

We love the remoteness (which is why I think they will also like the spread out community feel of OKW) and the activities are great. And while the resort has a remote feel, even I am bummed that we won't have the access to DTD in September that we are used to. I am trying to get everyone to agree to try the other resorts, just so we can say we did it. And we probably won't try BCV, I just don't feel it is worth the hassle of trying to book day by day at 7 mos. OKW is actually the only place besides BWV I REALLY want to try out.

I agree that the size of the resort may make it harder for those (who own at BCV, VWL, and BWV) who cannot book at 11 mos and have to wait til the window opens. For our fall trip, it is hard for us to do that as well, since DH's vacation varies in the fall and he does not find out until Feb when he has off.

To add a huge themed pool that draws alot of people or to add multiple restaurants or things like that.....well, that is not why I bought SSR. I bought it because I love it the way it is. Had I wanted the hustle and bustle, I would have bought at BWV or BCV through resale.

We are adding on when we stay at SSR in February. DH has already told me that even if the next DVC is on the steps of the castle...he wants the add on at SSR.

I think the guides need to encourage prospective buyers to stay at SSR, experience what it does have to offer, and get them to fall in love with it like we did, NOT to tell them..."Oh, buy here, stay at BCV" I do think that contributes to the problem, more so than SSR being lacking in some way.

I do get my panties in a bunch about the SSR bashing too. It is such a great resort and we just love it so much, that of course I get defensive. But I think it would be this way with anything. If SSR came first and was smaller, and they added a HUGE wing onto BCV, there would be SSR owners on here complaining about not being able to get a room at SSR and how BCV was too big or noisy or whatever. So I take it all with a grain of salt. If you have never stayed at SSR, try it. You may find you love it, I have seen some who were pleasantly surprised. If you have stayed and don't like it, that is your opinion and I am glad you at least gave it a shot.

I personally am awaiting the fireworks if DVC opens a monorail resort. Because that will be booked like hotcakes at 7 months out, so anyone who cannot make ressies in the priority window will be SOL.

Alot of SSR owners feel this way, its hard to believe but we really do like it the way it is, I like it even better now with the Turf Club. It is laid back, but guess what? A five minute walk and you have all the hustle and bustle you want at DTD.

 

[Sammie]

Beca, not offended really, just think that it comes across on these forums, not necessarily your post but others, that SSR is inferior. I just do not see that. It is different, but different is not inferior. It's large, but that is ok too.

I am all for improvements. I have no problem with the addition of the Turf Club, I used to really enjoy Seasons when it was in that location. I don't want them to add something that will take away from the quietness of the resort, as it is probably what we like best. Which is a reason we really like OKW.

I guess my point is that some wonder why SSR owners get defensive, and by the way we don't own there at this time, considering an addon.

If I said the one thing about the Yacht and Beach Club resort that I dislike the most was the addition of DVC, I am sure some would get defensive about that. I just think it is natural when one really likes something to be somewhat protective of others wanting to change it.