Why is everyone so concerned with the new Poly tower

[DVCsloth]

Really has nothing to do with the bungalows for us. I wouldn't want to have to compete with owners who control 4-million PVB points for one and two-bedroom units in the Tower. So far, that has been the primary reason stated for current PVB owners to want the Tower to be in the same association.

You would be competing with them for the new studios as well.

 

[EYL]

You would be competing with them for the new studios as well.

We bought PVB 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). We are happy and know what to expect there. While I have been wavering, now I actually don't want the Poly Tower to be in the same association. Studios are typically the first to go, and the extra points from the Tower could mean additional 11-8 month competition at the Original PVB for me.

Yes, I fully understand those on this board who are adding on are looking for bigger units. But those walking in the parks stopping at a DVC booth are mostly "hotel room people" and are buying for a studios. I'd rather that competition stay in the Tower as a separate association...

We have our "bigger unit" fix since we bought RIV for 1BRs and love it!

 

[RoseGold]

We bought PVB 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). We are happy and know what to expect there. While I have been wavering, now I actually don't want the Poly Tower to be in the same association. Studios are typically the first to go, and the extra points from the Tower could mean additional 11-8 month competition at the Original PVB for me.

I can see this. It's the opposite problem of existing VGF owners. If everyone is cheap and wants the cheapest points and a studio, which is what the general DVC booking patterns show, the obvious first thing to go is Poly1.

 

[RichVIII]

Its also hard not to look at VDH and how pods and studios dominate the mix. Look at VGF2 and nothing but studios (I know it was a cheap flip and doing more would have taken longer) but I it also makes the argument that if it is a new association, it would have to be much like VDH for new buyers. If it will be the same, it would make sense to make it bigger room heavy to balance the resort, but That also doesn’t make a lot of sense either. I go back on forth since we love Poly and will consider buying direct at some point.

 

[pianomanzano]

Its also hard not to look at VDH and how pods and studios dominate the mix. Look at VGF2 and nothing but studios (I know it was a cheap flip and doing more would have taken longer) but I it also makes the argument that if it is a new association, it would have to be much like VDH for new buyers. If it will be the same, it would make sense to make it bigger room heavy to balance the resort, but That also doesn’t make a lot of sense either. I go back on forth since we love Poly and will consider buying direct at some point.

Does it though? Looking at VGF1 there’s only 47 studios there, all lock offs. I could see it being a new association for Poly Tower and not so studio heavy if they were to follow a balance similar to VGF1.

 

[ehh]

We bought PVB 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). We are happy and know what to expect there. While I have been wavering, now I actually don't want the Poly Tower to be in the same association. Studios are typically the first to go, and the extra points from the Tower could mean additional 11-8 month competition at the Original PVB for me.

Yes, I fully understand those on this board who are adding on are looking for bigger units. But those walking in the parks stopping at a DVC booth are mostly "hotel room people" and are buying for a studios. I'd rather that competition stay in the Tower as a separate association...

And this is why I think it will be the same association (barring a high ratio of deluxe studios in the Poly2).

From a marketing perspective they can have their cake and eat it too:

• Can market to 'hotel room people' that Poly-combined has tons of well regarded studios
  • "You get home resort booking advantage to this great new Tower, plus all the existing studios that people love...you get 2 home resorts for the price of one"
• Can market to 'big room people' that Poly now has big rooms
  • "This is the first time the Poly has had bigger rooms [we don't talk about the Bungalows], think of the Poly vibe but now you can comfortably fit your whole family in a 2BR"
  • "Oh you're an existing Poly owner? You probably need more points for those bigger rooms, better add on! "
• To the semi-informed they can say the 'Bungalow effect' has been diluted because there's now more non-Bungalow points

I don't think most buyers, let alone first-time buyers, think about booking competition effects much (and if they do, Guides aren't always forthcoming). Even if buyers do think about competition effects, it's usually a secondary consideration and is very easy to rationalize away ("I'll just wake up early 11 months out"). And it should be a secondary consideration for most--on this forum the number one answer for "Which resort should I buy at?" is "Buy where you want to stay". And that's the right answer. People want to stay at the Poly and a combined association allows them to market even more Poly.

When you really examine it like a lot on this forum do you see the downsides, but in terms of being informed and which factors matter in a purchasing decision, this group on this forum is not the norm or remotely indicative of it. If you know some DVC-curious people or DVC owners that aren't into the weeds of ownership, think about what will sell easier to them, which one they will instinctively want more: Combo Poly or Split Poly.

And if you think Split Poly is easier to sell, think about how much negative marketing and rationalization ("well no, you can't book there but THEY can't book here either" or "oh but it's always easy to book there at 7 months") will need to be done to make that happen compared to Combo Poly.

 

[MarkNC2Disney]

We bought PVB 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). We are happy and know what to expect there. While I have been wavering, now I actually don't want the Poly Tower to be in the same association. Studios are typically the first to go, and the extra points from the Tower could mean additional 11-8 month competition at the Original PVB for me.

Yes, I fully understand those on this board who are adding on are looking for bigger units. But those walking in the parks stopping at a DVC booth are mostly "hotel room people" and are buying for a studios. I'd rather that competition stay in the Tower as a separate association...

We have our "bigger unit" fix since we bought RIV for 1BRs and love it!

This is us.

New association or not, I just want the Poly tower to be “right-sized” as far as amenities. Don’t further strain the Volcano pool and GCH, which are already overcrowded. Poly Tower at minimum needs to stand on its own as far as dining, transportation, pool, etc.

 

[Sandisw]

And this is why I think it will be the same association (barring a high ratio of deluxe studios in the Poly2).

From a marketing perspective they can have their cake and eat it too:

• Can market to 'hotel room people' that Poly-combined has tons of well regarded studios
  • "You get home resort booking advantage to this great new Tower, plus all the existing studios that people love...you get 2 home resorts for the price of one"
• Can market to 'big room people' that Poly now has big rooms
  • "This is the first time the Poly has had bigger rooms [we don't talk about the Bungalows], think of the Poly vibe but now you can comfortably fit your whole family in a 2BR"
  • "Oh you're an existing Poly owner? You probably need more points for those bigger rooms, better add on! "
• To the semi-informed they can say the 'Bungalow effect' has been diluted because there's now more non-Bungalow points

I don't think most buyers, let alone first-time buyers, think about booking competition effects much (and if they do, Guides aren't always forthcoming). Even if buyers do think about competition effects, it's usually a secondary consideration and is very easy to rationalize away ("I'll just wake up early 11 months out"). And it should be a secondary consideration for most--on this forum the number one answer for "Which resort should I buy at?" is "Buy where you want to stay". And that's the right answer. People want to stay at the Poly and a combined association allows them to market even more Poly.

When you really examine it like a lot on this forum do you see the downsides, but in terms of being informed and which factors matter in a purchasing decision, this group on this forum is not the norm or remotely indicative of it. If you know some DVC-curious people or DVC owners that aren't into the weeds of ownership, think about what will sell easier to them, which one they will instinctively want more: Combo Poly or Split Poly.

And if you think Split Poly is easier to sell, think about how much negative marketing and rationalization ("well no, you can't book there but THEY can't book here either" or "oh but it's always easy to book there at 7 months") will need to be done to make that happen compared to Combo Poly.

I will just add that they push the 7 month trading as a big benefit so I don’t think it would be awkward at all to say, “ Absolutely you get to book there at 7 months out just like all the rest but you will get priority at the tower”.

Plenty of PVB owners will have access to the tower at 7 months if it’s a new association as only those points bought resale since 2019 would be blocked out.

But what they can share is that current resale buyers can’t compete for rooms so buying direct gives you exclude access. …which could also be a great marketing strategy.


As long as the tower has all room sizes they can book Poly still as a new association so either way, those that want to stay there won’t have any issue since Poly studios are available to trade into pretty easily

While new buyers don’t necessarily know the ins and outs of it, guides do a very good job at selling the program as you can have it all.

Why do you think they share the point charts at other resorts to show how far points can go?

If all one, what is the answer when asked “I heard I can buy this cheaper resale, is that true?

 

[Sandisw]

This is us.

New association or not, I just want the Poly tower to be “right-sized” as far as amenities. Don’t further strain the Volcano pool and GCH, which are already overcrowded. Poly Tower at minimum needs to stand on its own as far as dining, transportation, pool, etc.

Those guests will have access to the pools if it’s the same association since that is what the POS says.

And i am sure that the tower guests will as well because Poly hotel is going to want their cash guests who are overlooking the tower pool to have access to that.

They are not going to want to shut any guests staying at the resort..from any of the pools, etc there

 

[Paul Stupin]

And this is why I think it will be the same association (barring a high ratio of deluxe studios in the Poly2).

From a marketing perspective they can have their cake and eat it too:

• Can market to 'hotel room people' that Poly-combined has tons of well regarded studios
  • "You get home resort booking advantage to this great new Tower, plus all the existing studios that people love...you get 2 home resorts for the price of one"
• Can market to 'big room people' that Poly now has big rooms
  • "This is the first time the Poly has had bigger rooms [we don't talk about the Bungalows], think of the Poly vibe but now you can comfortably fit your whole family in a 2BR"
  • "Oh you're an existing Poly owner? You probably need more points for those bigger rooms, better add on! "
• To the semi-informed they can say the 'Bungalow effect' has been diluted because there's now more non-Bungalow points

I don't think most buyers, let alone first-time buyers, think about booking competition effects much (and if they do, Guides aren't always forthcoming). Even if buyers do think about competition effects, it's usually a secondary consideration and is very easy to rationalize away ("I'll just wake up early 11 months out"). And it should be a secondary consideration for most--on this forum the number one answer for "Which resort should I buy at?" is "Buy where you want to stay". And that's the right answer. People want to stay at the Poly and a combined association allows them to market even more Poly.

When you really examine it like a lot on this forum do you see the downsides, but in terms of being informed and which factors matter in a purchasing decision, this group on this forum is not the norm or remotely indicative of it. If you know some DVC-curious people or DVC owners that aren't into the weeds of ownership, think about what will sell easier to them, which one they will instinctively want more: Combo Poly or Split Poly.

And if you think Split Poly is easier to sell, think about how much negative marketing and rationalization ("well no, you can't book there but THEY can't book here either" or "oh but it's always easy to book there at 7 months") will need to be done to make that happen compared to Combo Poly.

Split Poly, though, might not be quite as difficult a concept for new buyers to understand as you describe, seeing that BRV and CCV have now coexisted for years.

Again, just my opinion, don’t mean to offend anyone, but I think Poly1 has a bit of a dated look, some might say motel-like, which might not be appealing to new buyers either. Many of them might be more interested in the sleeker, more contemporary new tower, in which case the notion of it being it’s own resort might be more appealing.

The other factor you’re not considering is whether or not DVD intends to implement resale restrictions on new construction resorts. In the long run, if Disney sticks with them, the restrictions will potentially undermine the resale market and give buyers more reason to purchase direct. Its a long range strategy, and there are lots of different opinions as to how all this will play out.

 

[SLThomas318]

This is us.

New association or not, I just want the Poly tower to be “right-sized” as far as amenities. Don’t further strain the Volcano pool and GCH, which are already overcrowded. Poly Tower at minimum needs to stand on its own as far as dining, transportation, pool, etc.

YES! As current poly owners this is our concern too. We love the studios and vibe of the "old" poly. All of our points are direct, so if it's a new association we'll try our luck at 7 months IF the new tower has something that appeals to us. I just don't want this to further crowd the resort because they don't build or skimp on the amenities.

 

[Sandisw]

Here is another wild thought…Poly tower is a new association but DVD also keeps PVB on hand, puts in great incentives on that to make it closer in price to the new tower and offer both?

PVB resale owners pre 2019 could add on at PVB direct and have more points to book the tower at 7 months.

 

[Jlo85]

YES! As current poly owners this is our concern too. We love the studios and vibe of the "old" poly. All of our points are direct, so if it's a new association we'll try our luck at 7 months IF the new tower has something that appeals to us. I just don't want this to further crowd the resort because they don't build or skimp on the amenities.

I wonder how much this plays into Disney's add-on marketing. I wonder how many people have had to add-on at Riviera because the studios are never available. I know a lot of people 'walk' the reservations, but I can't imagine people want to do that for long if they can afford to add-on.

All to say that I think low studio availability might be by-design to 'strongly encourage' minimum point owners to add-on. A problem they may be fixing with Poly2.

 

[SLThomas318]

I wonder how much this plays into Disney's add-on marketing. I wonder how many people have had to add-on at Riviera because the studios are never available. I know a lot of people 'walk' the reservations, but I can't imagine people want to do that for long if they can afford to add-on.

All to say that I think low studio availability might be by-design to 'strongly encourage' minimum point owners to add-on. A problem they may be fixing with Poly2.

Haha.... our first contract was 100 points at CC with plans to use it around Thanksgiving for a studio... their plan must work because we are up to 340!

 

[ehh]

As long as the tower has all room sizes they can book Poly still as a new association so either way, those that want to stay there won’t have any issue since Poly studios are available to trade into pretty easily

Total speculation on my part, but I wouldn't be surprised if Poly2 has very few Deluxe Studios (1 bed, 1 pulldown) and instead has mostly/entirely Resort Studios (2 beds). Depends on the Resort Studio reception at VGF2.

Resort Studios being the lock-off portion of a 2BRLO is probably better for most 2BR families anyway. And if they have both available they can then market both.

Split Poly, though, might not be quite as difficult a concept for new buyers to understand as you describe, seeing that BRV and CCV have now coexisted for years.

BRV expires 2042, CCV went on sale in 2017 and CCV expires 2068. Very different circumstances and a Combo WL was probably off the table from the get-go because of the 2042 expiration date. But it does show they can absolutely have success splitting them.

But what they can share is that current resale buyers can’t compete for rooms so buying direct gives you exclude access. …which could also be a great marketing strategy.

This is a good example of negative marketing, where the positive for you is that someone else is disadvantaged--a legitimate, albeit defensive tactic. But it's ultimately easier to just say "you get both!"

Again, just my opinion, don’t mean to offend anyone, but I think Poly1 has a bit of a dated look, some might say motel-like, which might not be appealing to new buyers either. Many of them might be more interested in the sleeker, more contemporary new tower, in which case the notion of it being it’s own resort might be more appealing.

Difference in tastes is great rationalization to split them. But it's ultimately easier to just say "you get both!"

I will just add that they push the 7 month trading as a big benefit so I don’t think it would be awkward at all to say, “ Absolutely you get to book there at 7 months out just like all the rest but you will get priority at the tower”.

Proficiency selling the 7 month trading is a great rationalization to split them. But it's ultimately easier to just say "you get both!"

The other factor you’re not considering is whether or not DVD intends to implement resale restrictions on new construction resorts. In the long run, if Disney sticks with them, the restrictions will potentially undermine the resale market and give buyers more reason to purchase direct. Its a long range strategy, and there are lots of different opinions as to how all this will play out.

I intentionally didn't talk about the rational merits of splitting/combining. Restrictions are a factor. Everything in this thread is a factor and has been rehashed over and over. I don't feel like there's a clear winner on the rational merits alone, though I lean slightly toward splitting being the right choice for more guests and because it allows Disney to restrict resale.

However, considering their primary goal is to sell this product and not just make it the most rational decision it can be for the highest number of buyers, there needs to be room made for irrationality. For the most part, a factor that isn't really being talked about is the sales marketing perspective, which is very comfortable with irrationality. From this perspective, I think there's a clear winner: "you get both!"

 

[ehh]

And for a personal angle on this, as a Poly owner I don't even know what I want.

It'd probably be nice to have 11m booking advantage in the Tower. And it would also be very nice to add-on more direct Poly1 points at an incentivized price.

Though from a purely rational perspective, I don't know if I would use the 11m advantage at Poly2. The studios would need to be Deluxe Studios for them to be appealing to us. If the studios are Resort Studios we would not book them (having two permanent beds in a single-bay room is a negative for us). We think 1BR generally are a poor value and only book them 1-2 nights per year. But being able to book 2BR at 11m could be very nice.

And I can't figure out if adding more buyers would hurt or harm the availability of the current studios. Considering most Poly1 buyers should have known they were buying into just Studios and Bungalows, probably harm? Don't like that.

 

[EYL]

If all one, what is the answer when asked “I heard I can buy this cheaper resale, is that true?

While I get what you're saying here, this is the one question that Guides should have experience answering because before January 2019, this was the question that they needed a good answer to. Also, DVC can lower the price point with incentives to make direct much more attractive than resale.

I do hope for a different association, but I fear that it will be the same...

 

[Sandisw]

I wonder how much this plays into Disney's add-on marketing. I wonder how many people have had to add-on at Riviera because the studios are never available. I know a lot of people 'walk' the reservations, but I can't imagine people want to do that for long if they can afford to add-on.

All to say that I think low studio availability might be by-design to 'strongly encourage' minimum point owners to add-on. A problem they may be fixing with Poly2.

So far, there has not been a problem getting a studio at RIV as an owner. Tower studios and SV go pretty fast but never a shortage for PV when booking it 11 months.

I have not yet had a problem reserving a SV studio at 11 months for any time I’d the year.

Even had two booked at 11 months for early Dec without walking..ended up changing to a 2 bedroom a few weeks later but still got one.

People having difficulty so far are those trying at 7 months and don’t own there.

 

[Sandisw]

Total speculation on my part, but I wouldn't be surprised if Poly2 has very few Deluxe Studios (1 bed, 1 pulldown) and instead has mostly/entirely Resort Studios (2 beds). Depends on the Resort Studio reception at VGF2.

Resort Studios being the lock-off portion of a 2BRLO is probably better for most 2BR families anyway. And if they have both available they can then market both.


BRV expires 2042, CCV went on sale in 2017 and CCV expires 2068. Very different circumstances and a Combo WL was probably off the table from the get-go because of the 2042 expiration date. But it does show they can absolutely have success splitting them.


This is a good example of negative marketing, where the positive for you is that someone else is disadvantaged--a legitimate, albeit defensive tactic. But it's ultimately easier to just say "you get both!"


Difference in tastes is great rationalization to split them. But it's ultimately easier to just say "you get both!"


Proficiency selling the 7 month trading is a great rationalization to split them. But it's ultimately easier to just say "you get both!"


I intentionally didn't talk about the rational merits of splitting/combining. Restrictions are a factor. Everything in this thread is a factor and has been rehashed over and over. I don't feel like there's a clear winner on the rational merits alone, though I lean slightly toward splitting being the right choice for more guests and because it allows Disney to restrict resale.

However, considering their primary goal is to sell this product and not just make it the most rational decision it can be for the highest number of buyers, there needs to be room made for irrationality. For the most part, a factor that isn't really being talked about is the sales marketing perspective, which is very comfortable with irrationality. From this perspective, I think there's a clear winner: "you get both!"

Not if they want to continue the 10 year strategy of making resale an inferior product.

They have worked hard at that and adding restrictions was a big one

I just don’t see them giving that up just yet when the current sales are showing that a restricted resort can do pretty well against others when the price is right.

So, while some think having PVB is a big selling point, I actually don’t because those new buyers are going to see the new rooms at the tower and all it has to offer and won’t be focused on what is already there, and they can say “yes, you can absolutely book either resort with your direct points..the tower first and the others later..so you have access to the best of all worlds.”

As you said, the expiration was a big reason for CCV and BRV , but they still had to explain you weren’t getting home advantage at both and had no problem selling CCV.

So, it’s going to come down to that and if they want to abandon, then it will make sense to combine.

 

[Jlo85]

So far, there has not been a problem getting a studio at RIV as an owner. Tower studios and SV go pretty fast but never a shortage for PV when booking it 11 months.

I follow Jen Lefforge on YT, and she talked about needing to walk her tower studios reservations at Riviera. I hear similar things about the value studios at AKV. Again, my guess is that Disney intends to make availability for cheaper rooms limited to encourage add-ons. That’s why I think the resort studio complaints about VGF are kind of misplaced. I think Disney’s plans is that most buyers initially buy for a studio, but pretty soon they’ll want bigger. And that’s something that’s hard to do at PVB right now since the bungalows are such a huge step up.