Who is really going buy DVC Hawaii???

[Dean]

so is everyone thinking that this resort will be selling for more than the current BLT point price? And the points will be double the regular dvc resort points?
I am in cali and before purch. dvc I went to hawaii annually at thanksgiving. Which is NOT considered a "holiday" time period on the island although I'm sure disney will market the points in their high season or holiday time slot. I was looking forward to a possible add on and using my current points to add hawaii back into the fold as a vacation option. After reading this thread..I don't know anymore.

However all of the people posting about airfare are right on the money. It is much less expensive for me to travel to hawaii (5hr flt) than WDW (5hr flt). Which really confuses me.

Of course my biggest hope is that they bring back the 25 point min. purch if you are a current member. Raising it to 100 when VGC opened was wrong. I just want the 11 month window ya know!~

Not I, I expect the dues to be high but the price per point and total points to be in line with BLT Magic most of the year.

 

[BWV Dreamin]

Not I, I expect the dues to be high but the price per point and total points to be in line with BLT Magic most of the year.

I think if this were to come to fruition, it would be devestating for sales. While this would be the ultimate scenario, I think DVC will hide the true "costs"by subsidizing the MF's greatly during sales. They would have to do something along these lines.

 

[stopher1]

Of course my biggest hope is that they bring back the 25 point min. purch if you are a current member. Raising it to 100 when VGC opened was wrong. I just want the 11 month window ya know!~

You can do that, it was changed back months ago. 25 point add-on purchases for cash. 50 is the minimum to finance.

 

[JenSop]

I didn't read through ALL of the posts, but wanted to add that we would very much consider an add-on in Hawaii.

DH made his first trip there this past summer with friends and said it was life changing. He is already convinced that we will add on there. (Although in truth it depends on the money...)

But the models and artist renderings look just beautiful.

 

[Horace Horsecollar]

I think if this were to come to fruition, it would be devestating for sales. While this would be the ultimate scenario, I think DVC will hide the true "costs"by subsidizing the MF's greatly during sales. They would have to do something along these lines.

Timeshare developers, including Disney, subsidize maintenance fees for early buyers to reflect the number of units at full build-out. That way, early buyers are not penalized.

For example, if a feature pool area will eventually serve 400 villas, but only 100 villas have been built and sold, those buyers don't have to pay 4 times as much for the cost of staffing and operating the pool as they will eventually pay. Instead, the cost is calculated as if the resort were complete.

Timeshare developers normally do NOT subsidize maintenance fees to purposely mislead buyers. In fact, that would probably be illegal in most states.

 

[BWV Dreamin]

There is always some level of deception with these timeshare sales, and DVC is no exception. They already did yhis last year with the BLT owners and changing up the points chart... changed the min buy in to 100 points than a month later, changed it back to 50. All promos are different even when offered at the same time. Their bottom line is SALES. Now Disney has not been as aggressive as others in the past, but I look for this to change. There will be some tactic employed if MF's are truely 6 or higher per point. Po-tA-to, Po-tAAA-to.

Timeshare developers, including Disney, subsidize maintenance fees for early buyers to reflect the number of units at full build-out. That way, early buyers are not penalized.

For example, if a feature pool area will eventually serve 400 villas, but only 100 villas have been built and sold, those buyers don't have to pay 4 times as much for the cost of staffing and operating the pool as they will eventually pay. Instead, the cost is calculated as if the resort were complete.

Timeshare developers normally do NOT subsidize maintenance fees to purposely mislead buyers. In fact, that would probably be illegal in most states.

 

[dianeschlicht]

While we try to go to Hawaii once every 5 years Oahu is not our most fav. island. We usually only spend about 2 or 3 nights there each trip before moving on. We will likely TRY IT OUT if we can get in at 7 months but I have my doubts that we will be able to "afford" it if they make it too point intensive. This is especially true for us since we'd rather pay cash to be on Maui!!!! We are "points challenged" and if it's anywhere close to what they want for VGC we won't spend more than a few weeknights there. Our points are too precious to waste. That said, if it should turn out by some miracle to be "affordable" for us and we LIKE it but have trouble getting in at 7 months...we'll see. But I keep going back to the thought that we'd rather be on Maui....and I really don't think we'll be able to afford it.

Pretty much my sentiment too,except that I wouldn't really care if it was Maui, Kauai, or Hawaii. I DO think I'll use the DVC Oahu location for the beginning and end of trips though. We also usually spend a day on the front and a couple on the end of each Hawaii trip on Oahu, so I can see using the DVC offering for that if the points aren't exhorbitant. I'm thinking they are going to be too high for us though.

 

[Dean]

There is always some level of deception with these timeshare sales, and DVC is no exception. They already did yhis last year with the BLT owners and changing up the points chart... changed the min buy in to 100 points than a month later, changed it back to 50. All promos are different even when offered at the same time. Their bottom line is SALES. Now Disney has not been as aggressive as others in the past, but I look for this to change. There will be some tactic employed if MF's are truely 6 or higher per point. Po-tA-to, Po-tAAA-to.

I think my view is somewhere in between. DVC has to pay dues for the rooms they own. While the real costs may be higher per point for a phased project, it shouldn't be for a non phase project like BLT. I think that often there is a purposeful intent to keep the costs down to make them look artificially low. I've never seen that issue with DVC and the subsidy at BLT wasn't enough to cause that distortion. However, the reallocation and change in min wasn't a planned move to sell then change later, it was simply that the different systems paths crossed at the wrong time.