Why is everyone so concerned with the new Poly tower

[Sandisw]

Why does it matter if they're new or existing buyers? The points are points regardless of who has them.

Because of volume. The add ons we have seen with VGF are unique. People didn’t add on at VGF because it only lacked restrictions ..it’s because people wanted that resort…plus by pricing it as they did, people chose direct over resale which does come with restrictions.

The majority of sales are in fact new buyers and not those adding on to their memberships. You are not going to sell a lot of DVC to current owners at the same rate you are going to get new people to join.

So it definitely matters. That is why I believe..and just an educated guess..that May data will show the current resorts much closer together in sales data.

And, my points are related to DVD removing resale restrictions. If that group of buyers doesn’t seem to care as much, then it gives DVD a reason to keep them in place..which is what I think they will do and why I’m 93% convinced Poly tower will have them.

Now, if we continue to see this large of a gap between the two? Then DVD may decide to reconsider.

But the data we have now is just too skewed for those owners who jumped in on the first month.

 

[Sandisw]

Imagine all the hell that will break loose if Poly2 restricts their pool to only Poly2 owners and tell the Poly1 owners..."no pool for you"

The only restriction they could put for that pool would be those staying at the tower.

But, I can’t imagine, it won’t be the same language as current PVB.

Right to use all pools at the resort. All the current pools at Poly are not common elements of PVB..they belong to the Polly village resort..which is why owners pay a share to maintain but don’t own in the same way they do at like RIV which is DVC only.

So, the question will be how this is declared. If it’s declared as a common element of the tower then it’s costs are paid via dues alone and not shared. That would lead you to believe it will be a new resort too.

If it’s not, and becomes part of the Poly resort, then it can be a shared expense between DVC and the cash side, like is currently what happens.

ETA. Just thinking. AKV has a pool at Kidani that was added with it but the other pool was there. How was the Kidsni pool declared? And how it is funded. Does Disney contribute?

 

[Sandisw]

Would you pls remind me what is the possible timeline to get the confirmation on whether it is new or current association, and possible timeline for sales?
Thanks!

Probably not for quite a long time. I’d venture not until 2023 at the earliest.

 

[EYL]

We own at Poly and bought knowing it was only studios and bought points knowing we were booking studios... I would imagine most poly owners did this, so I don't think you are going to have a zillion poly owners going for 1 and 2 bedrooms at the 11 month booking window causing a big issue IF this becomes the same association. Sure the 7 month window will be tricky if resale owners are allowed to book there, but the 7 month window is already tricky... depending on villa size and time of year it is hard to switch to other resorts.

This is us, and I'm truly on the fence about whether the New Poly is in the same association or not. We bought Poly in 2019 to book Lake View Studios for the direct view of the MK and the nightly fireworks straight from our balcony (or from inside our room). The short walk from the DVC buildings to TTC is so convenient for transportation. With 380 studios, I can pretty much book a week-long vacation at 10 months (sometimes even shorter) and be okay. On one hand, I don't want the New Poly to be in the same association since studios are the first to go, and the extra points could mean additional 11 month competition at the Original Poly. On the other hand, it would be nice if New Poly were the same association so that in the off-chance that I'd like a 1BR at the New Poly, I can book it at 11 months. But either way, I'd be fine with my Original Poly points.

 

[EYL]

Imagine all the hell that will break loose if Poly2 restricts their pool to only Poly2 owners and tell the Poly1 owners..."no pool for you"

I don't own at CCV or BRV, so this may be a "dumb question", but did they build a pool when CCV was built and did they lock BRV out? Just checking for precedence...

 

[xdan0920]

I don't own at CCV or BRV, so this may be a "dumb question", but did they build a pool when CCV was built and did they lock BRV out? Just checking for precedence...

They did, and they didn't.

 

[Sandisw]

I don't own at CCV or BRV, so this may be a "dumb question", but did they build a pool when CCV was built and did they lock BRV out? Just checking for precedence...

All the pools were there and owned by Disney. Same with the current pools at Poly. They belong to Disney and not part of PvB.

Same as VGF. We get right to use pools but that can be changed at any time.

CCV was simply rooms in the lodge converted and then have the same right to use pools and amenities of WL that BRV owners do.

However, the pool at BLT was declared as part of that resort and why it’s limited to only those sta at BLT. Full costs are paid by owners.

 

[Jwaire]

I don't own at CCV or BRV, so this may be a "dumb question", but did they build a pool when CCV was built and did they lock BRV out? Just checking for precedence...

The BRV pool was already there. It was built when BRV (originally known as the Villas at Wilderness Lodge) was built. However, they completely redid it when Copper Creek was built and both associations (along with cash guests) can use it.

Regardless if Poly Tower is part of PVB or not, they're not going to lock people out of the new pool. Hotel (cash) guests are going to be facing it. It will be available for every Poly guest, just like the themed Volcano pool and current "quiet" pool will be available to Poly Tower guests.

 

[sethschroeder]

If you think that the "hit" to Poly 1 would only be $15-20 AND you don't care about staying at Poly 2 wouldn't that argue for buying a fully loaded Poly 1 contract now? You could get 2-3 years worth of point use between now and then, valued at roughly $20pt - MF (around $8/year). So conservatively that might be worth $24-36, plus the "value" of being in charge of your own reservations. We can argue about time value of money but I also think about time value of vacations.

This isn't applicable to us but I can absolutely see how it could work for a different family.

I have already brought this up previously. While I think POLY will be hit from a price perspective in various way (its hard to say it wont be) you still make up for that difference through with the money you already got out of the DVC contract. The thing that would make me more hesitant now though is the impending financial situation in the US.

Because I don't think resale will be negatively impacted enough to offset the amount of points you would be able to use between now and POLY2 launch. You could then sell POLY1 at that time and buy POLY2 with the incentives that run.

You could right now possibly get 20/21/22/23/24/25 points all used before you sell your contract if you happen to find someone who banked all their UY20 points in to UY21 which the contract would currently be in.

Lets say you just get the UY21 points in full. You are talking about 500 points where you only pay MFs that you otherwise would not have. I wouldn't say to do it but if you rented out all those points you would make like $8-$10/point easily and bring in $4000-$5000 dropping the price per point $40-$50 compared to what you bought it for (obviously not a investment but just showing the "value" of the points gained).

They did, and they didn't.

Nah CCV did not do anything except possibly a pool update if you want to attribute that to CCV. The "CCV Pool" is just the resort pool as the CCV rooms replaced one wing of the hotel rooms (just like at VGF they replaced hotel rooms that already existed).

 

[xdan0920]

I have already brought this up previously. While I think POLY will be hit from a price perspective in various way (its hard to say it wont be) you still make up for that difference through with the money you already got out of the DVC contract. The thing that would make me more hesitant now though is the impending financial situation in the US.







Nah CCV did not do anything except possibly a pool update if you want to attribute that to CCV. The "CCV Pool" is just the resort pool as the CCV rooms replaced one wing of the hotel rooms (just like at VGF they replaced hotel rooms that already existed).

Didn’t they Reno the pool and declare it as a CCV pool though? Without blocking out regular resort guests?

 

[redboat45]

Didn’t they Reno the pool and declare it as a CCV pool though? Without blocking out regular resort guests?

no. It's a Boulder Ridge pool if anything. They did re-do the pool but it is not a CCV pool.

 

[Sandisw]

Didn’t they Reno the pool and declare it as a CCV pool though? Without blocking out regular resort guests?

I don’t have those POS documents, but that is where you would find the language for the pool for BRV…but the main pool is part of WL as it existed before CCV.

In order for it to be part of DVC, it Would be a declared as a comment element.

 

[RoseGold]

People didn’t add on at VGF because it only lacked restrictions ..it’s because people wanted that resort…plus by pricing it as they did, people chose direct over resale which does come with restrictions.

I'm sure lots of people wanted VGF, but I think there was and still is a great mathematical case for VGF as SAP direct points. If I had been in the market for resale when VGF dropped, I would have gone direct, and that's not something I say lightly.

RIV/CCV as the only things offered for a long time has a lot of drawbacks. A monorail or Epcot resort is a big change. I'm sure there were plenty of buyers who wanted anything but Riviera.

 

[Sandisw]

I'm sure lots of people wanted VGF, but I think there was and still is a great mathematical case for VGF as SAP direct points. If I had been in the market for resale when VGF dropped, I would have gone direct, and that's not something I say lightly.

RIV/CCV as the only things offered for a long time has a lot of drawbacks. A monorail or Epcot resort is a big change. I'm sure there were plenty of buyers who wanted anything but Riviera.

Right, but the point was people did not choose VGF only because it lacked resale restrictions. I would even bet that the majority of people who added on or bought it didn’t even consider that aspect.

Plenty of people went the way of RIV too…93k is pretty strong month.

 

[RoseGold]

I would even say that the majority of people who added on or bought it didn’t even consider that aspect.

Well, I guess we will know the answer to that in the Poly2 drop!

 

[Sandisw]

Well, I guess we will know the answer to that in the Poly2 drop!

I agree and I bet that it sells well if it comes with the restrictions, just like VDH will.

Mays sales numbers will give even more info on what buyers are ultimately choosing. My new prediction is that the robust VGF sales will show DVD that they can sell a resort for less than 50 years and with restrictions at the same time.

 

[CarolMN]

IMO, the only reason VGF2 was added to the original VGF association was that DVC wanted/needed something to sell right away. Redoing hotel rooms is a lot quicker than building new, and most likely required fewer permits and a lot less paperwork than a new association. DVD has sold several resorts with less than a 50 year expiration, basically every resort sold after OKW and before SSR. That list includes VB, HHI, BWV, VWL & BCV, which only had 40 years when it first went on sale. The only real negative for DVD, was giving up the resale restrictions. Since Poly2 is a new build at least 2 years away from occupancy, there is a lot more time to set up a new association that will include the resale restrictions. IMO, A new association is the most likely option because I believe the resale restrictions are a long term strategy.

 

[RKS03]

With VGF2 being only studios, I’m sure many buyers wouldn’t have bought if the couldn’t have booked VGF1. I wouldn’t have. However Poly2 wouldn’t have that issue for potential buyers since it includes a variety of rooms.

 

[Sandisw]

With VGF2 being only studios, I’m sure many buyers wouldn’t have bought if the couldn’t have booked VGF1. I wouldn’t have. However Poly2 wouldn’t have that issue for potential buyers.

That is me. I would not have bought without access to larger rooms. And, other than some weeks in December and a few nights here or there, those rooms have not sold out, even with them now open to everyone for booking.

That tells me that initial interest isn’t that high, yet.

 

[SLThomas318]

I also wonder how the studios at VGF2 not being a traditional studio with a kitchenette play into all of this as well. Maybe I'm in the minority, but when we do stay in a studio we like having a microwave and toaster so we can do a quick breakfast in the room. For us, the higher points and lack of kitchenette were a deterrent...

Am I the only one thinking that them not announcing what POLY2 will be (new association vs. part of old) is the biggest clue? If they had announced that it would be part of the current poly association then wouldn't everyone just start buying resale now?

It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out for sure!