What is rationale for multiple end dates of DVC resorts?

Granny

Yeah, I'm a guy
Joined
Jul 25, 2001
Messages
14,432
This is inspired by a comment from 3DisneyKids on the AKV point chart thread. It is apparent that AKV will have an end date of 2057 compared to 2054 for SSR and 2042 for all other DVC resorts. This is a departure from how the first the first six DVC resorts were sold from 1992 - 2004 (?) where they all had the same expiration date of 2042.

It appears that Disney will now stagger the expiration dates to approximately 50 years after beginning sales for each new resort? So we'll have multiple resort expiration dates for the various resorts?

Anyone care to venture a guess on why Disney would deviate from it's pattern of selling multiple resorts with a common end date?

I thought DVC II (2054) would cover the AKV and probably the next DVC after that. Clearly Disney has historical records that show that it can sell out resorts even with only as few as 38 years on a new contract (though admittedly that was BCV which has huge demand).

I was just surprised to see the difference. Don't you all agree that it will really undermine closing out SSR sales if a new resort opens with a longer contract period? It would seem that they would have to have a different price structure for each of the two resorts.

I thought it was curious. Anyone else?
 
they can sell it quicker and easier if 50 years until the end of the lease.

the ROFR will kept the prices up - plus each DVC resort has sold for more than the last.

the older resorts will still be a better bargin than new ones - but Disney will kept the prices up enough.

I think this was annouced when SSR starting selling. that each new DVC resort will start with 50 years.

I want to see if they stick to it with a CRV or any of the hotels along the monrail. sometimes what they say and what they do are two different things. besides guessing that they would want CRV back alot sooner than either SSR or AKV.

DVC is nothing if not flexible.
 
Although I am old enough that the 50 years will do us no good, I think it is a smart marketing move on Disney's part...one less hurdle to leap over when making the decision to purchase. You feel you get more of your money's worth. They have already made oodles of money on SSR and will sell the remaining availability due to discounted price and favorable DT location versus the higher AKV pricing and remote location. I think the last 2-5 years of "DVC I" will be interesting as everyone fights to get their points used. They may need to restrict DVC II and "DVC III?" from trading into DVC I resorts to keep everyone happy. By having the newer resorts end at 50 years after each opening, that will smooth reservation problems as each resort ends their contract period at a different time rather than a large group like DVC I.
 
It will improve sales and likely result in a higher price per point in the long run. But I also see it as a commitment to the program ongoing, which is a good thing for all members I think. IF AKL comes out with the same end date as SSR, I think that's likely the life of DVC. If it truly comes out as a new 50 years, it likely means that DVC will still be going strong late in the time of the older resorts and likely suggests a continued commitment not only to the newer resorts but the older ones as well and possibly to other new resorts coming on board. Certainly a lot could happen in 30-40 years that could change all this but at least it gives us a glimpse into their long range thinking/planning.
 

Dean...that's kind of where my thinking was heading too. It might also signal that Disney has recognized that they might not want to have several resorts revert to them all at one time. If it is on-going, they will have the equivalent of 6 "new" resorts to re-sell (or do whatever) in 2042. They might prefer the idea of rolling the expiration dates so they can make those decisions one resort at a time.

I agree, it will also support new sales, and also supports a price differential between (for example) AKV new and SSR close out sales.

I just found it odd that they chose to do this at this fairly advanced stage of the game. Perhaps, as Dean suggests, they are starting to firm up their concepts of what DVC will be doing in another 35 years or so.

Anybody else have any thoughts about it?
 
Somewhat on the heels of what has already been said, I think they kept the 2042 date for the first 6 resorts so that Disney had a fixed "out-date" at which they could completely disband the program and walk away.

That future may still have been in question when SSR opened, but I think even Disney realizes that 38-year contracts would have been tough to market.

Now they may be seeing it as a self-sustaining enterprise--keep building right up to 2042 and then start selling the same points over again.
 
tjkraz said:
Now they may be seeing it as a self-sustaining enterprise--keep building right up to 2042 and then start selling the same points over again.
I think so too, and it would be easier to have steady sales income over many years if they stagger the end dates. Can you imagine in, say, 2038 if they offer extenstions/resales of the first six resorts? That's a whole bunch of points coming onto the market at one time!

I can only imagine the threads on the internet (or whatever else is there) at that time! :teeth:
 
Pennyguy23 said:
What is DVC II , DVCIII?

well DVC II was surpose to start with SSR. (the new 50 year time) - but if Disney changes it to every resort gets 50 years. then even the older resorts can exchange to EVERYTHING.

pretty wonderful.

no offense but you except Disney to look at the long, long term. I don't think they even care that they will get 6 resorts back at once. I think this decision was based on sales. and sales only.

what the sales want from our company - they generally get.
 
I feel it shows a long term commitment to DVC. I also agree that it is a good marketing tool to sell NEW resorts. That is where the money is.
 
Pennyguy23 said:
What is DVC II , DVCIII?
Actually it's a term coined her on these boards to designate some people's view of how they think the WDW DVC timeshares will be segregated in some way. The truth is there never has been any segregation from DVC, only the two current ending dates. With many timeshare systems resorts come and they go. Marriott adds new ones and have let some 9 or so go over the years. Other than when a resort drops out of the DVC system at or near the end of any expiration time, there is no reason to worry about which resort is which other than home resort priority. You simply have your 11 month home resort priority and your 7 month non home resort window for the other resorts in the system for when you are reserving.
 
Dean said:
Actually it's a term coined her on these boards to designate some people's view of how they think the WDW DVC timeshares will be segregated in some way. The truth is there never has been any segregation from DVC, only the two current ending dates. With many timeshare systems resorts come and they go. Marriott adds new ones and have let some 9 or so go over the years. Other than when a resort drops out of the DVC system at or near the end of any expiration time, there is no reason to worry about which resort is which other than home resort priority. You simply have your 11 month home resort priority and your 7 month non home resort window for the other resorts in the system for when you are reserving.


Thanks Dean. This distinction between DVC I and II made no sense to me at all.
 
dumbo71 said:
Thanks Dean. This distinction between DVC I and II made no sense to me at all.
I probably should have gone further. Some wondered if DVC would create a totally or almost totally separate system based on the expiration date. The existing members would have little or no access to the new system. Since there's no reason to do so with the home resort priority and given that the resorts are close enough overall not to create a problem. The problem would arise if DVC created a resort or series of resorts (or perks) that were so much different as to make it unfair to give equal access. Anything too far up or down could potentially fall into this area. Say DVC wanted to create a value type vacation ownership such as was discussed here a few years ago in regards to Pop Century. Or say DVC decided to create a Ritz Carlton or Four Seasons type timeshare at GF or at DL. I personally think they could make it work fairly easily within the current framework as long as they kept the overall perks the same. All they'd have to do is manipulate the number of points required to balance the demand, home resort priority is already part of the package. Even if they wanted to offer some special perks, they could do so as part of the sales process much like the free park passes for OKW and VB early on and still keep the resort in DVC itself. AKL has the potential to fall into this category with the ? of concierge. Personally I don't think it'll happen but some seem to.
 
I always thought of DVC I and DVC II as shorthand for the resorts with 2042 expiration dates (DVC I) and those with a later one. Easier to type than the "original 6 DVC resorts". Of course, I also thought that Disney would sell 3-4 resorts with the 2054 expiration date so I thought DVC II would have more resorts in it than just SSR.

We may need a new shorthand for the 2042 expiration date resorts.

As for the staggered end dates, I like the idea of Disney taking a longer term commitment to DVC. That means that things like member perks and such won't necessarily diminish if they quit building and selling new resorts. I'd have to say that a multi-year permanent customer base of 100,000 owners and their families has to be the envy of any destination resort.
 
Granny said:
I always thought of DVC I and DVC II as shorthand for the resorts with 2042 expiration dates (DVC I) and those with a later one. Easier to type than the "original 6 DVC resorts". Of course, I also thought that Disney would sell 3-4 resorts with the 2054 expiration date so I thought DVC II would have more resorts in it than just SSR.
That is how I thought of DVC I and II as well. Much easier to type "DVC I" than to list all the resorts with a 2042 end date!
 



















DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest

Back
Top