Why not SSR?

[kikiq]

There is a running path? I couldn't find it when I was there. I ended up running on the street, which was tough when a bus would go by and I'd have to dive onto the grass.

My DD and DB run around the lake, then over to the Grandstand area to the water to OKW to DTD, through DTD to the Congress Park area along the water following the path and sidewalk to the Springs and back around the lake. My DB says that he would like to add the THV loop next time. It is one of the reasons we bought there. I thought they would like running around the Boardwalk area but they both say while it's nice, too many people and too many loops to get their miles in. Our family is use to the condo style resorts of Colorado, so SSR isn't that big to us.

 

[rutgers1]

I'll have to give it some more thought/planning before I go running there next time.....I like the loop by BCV/BWV, though I totally understand if someone felt it was too small and monotonous. I tend to only run 3 miles when I am on vacation, so it isn't that bad. If I were trying to get 6 miles in, that loop would drive me nuts. In that scenario, I would probably head out around Swan/Dolphin and take some detours toward the theme parks, etc, just to get some different views.

Is the path linked here on the disneyrunning.com site pathway or road?

Even if it is a path, I still think that SSR should have done more to give it more of a resort feel. As I said earlier, if it were smaller and catering to a niche, it would be fine. However, considering how huge it is, there should be more to interest the masses.......Case in point is AKV. It is a beautiful resort with a really neat theme. If it were right next to a theme park (walking distance), it would probably be the most popular resort. Yet BLT (which the average person thinks is less themed and less to "look" at) is more popular based on its proximity to Magic Kingdom. Well, if AKV isn't as popular as you'd think despite having a neat theme and animals right outside your window, then how did they expect SSR to be popular?

 

[silmarg]

As a broad generality SSR gets a bad rap in the DVC community. The pundits say its too big, too far from any park, and has transportation issues.

I've stayed there for 9 nights and its quite lovely. We only had transportation issues once (it happened to be on a day we were headed to Hoop Dee Doo and waited for a looong time for an MK bus) but i would argue the busses at SSR are no different than any other resort... sometimes you have an unusually long wait - it happens.

I was on the fence about where to buy DVC on the resale market and was leaning SSR. After staying there, I knew the bad rap it gets was over done and I took the plunge and bout @$67 about 10 months ago. Since then, prices are down several dollars per point.

I think the low price of SSR has to do with the fact that the resort has so many points associated with it and were being marketed right before the credit markets bombed. This mix makes for a large, motivated selling block now.

I say, bid low and be patient, 'cause it seems like DVD ain't gonna ROFR any SSR contracts anymore (I think mine were the last ones ROFRd last January @ $65). I think $50 would pass today.

 

[hakepb]

See in your situation, I would buy more at VGC, as you will probably use points there more often. I own at VWL, and when I plan last minute, I can ALWAYS get into SSR (never tried THV). How difficult is it to transfer into VGC with SSR points? I do enjoy SSR, we like to walk, and have walked to downtown, OKW, THV and around the golf course, very pleasant.

In general that statement is true about SSR availability, but I would worry about Christmas week availability at any WDW resort if you had to book @ 7 months. And as mentioned you want SSR for THV

 

[Dean]

As a broad generality SSR gets a bad rap in the DVC community. The pundits say its too big, too far from any park, and has transportation issues.

From a direct discussion of the resort standpoint, there are 2 components, buying there vs staying there. They really are separate decisions though anyone that buys there needs to be comfortable staying there. However, often when SSR is discussed, there is a third and main issue and that is the affect of SSR and it's points on the system. The reality is that SSR overall has a lower demand than the other WDW resorts, even taking THV into account. This gives a higher % of owners there looking at 7 months and given the size of SSR, this is a LOT of points. There has been a significant change in the landscape at 7 months out and less due to the addition of SSR. The affect has actually been enough to affect the reservation patterns of some even back to the 11 month window of non SSR resorts as they found they couldn't get what they wanted and had gotten in the past on shorter notice.

I don't consider any of these to be a problem but I do believe they are reality. One simply needs to plan ahead and reserve 11 months out and use the wait list when necessary. And it's not doom and gloom as the realities of SSR are a benefit for some, namely off site DVC owners, those looking for cash discounts for such accommodations and those looking to trade in through RCI. Plus, the more members, the more stable (if not lower) the dues are.

If the rumored resort happens, it very well be more of the same. If it does happen at the size, location and theming as rumored, it will almost certainly put significantly more pressure on the 7 month window options. That is if DVC doesn't make it part of a DVC II (along with the Poly and/or GF) and exclude all of us unless we pay a fee or buy more points.

 

[tomandrobin]

I just don't see a two tier DVC system with the resorts. Two tier with direct vs resale contracts....yes.

The River Country Resort, or whatever it would be called, doesn't present anything that would appeal to me. But until the full details are released, I'll hold my final verdict.

 

[silmarg]

From a direct discussion of the resort standpoint, there are 2 components, buying there vs staying there. They really are separate decisions though anyone that buys there needs to be comfortable staying there. However, often when SSR is discussed, there is a third and main issue and that is the affect of SSR and it's points on the system. The reality is that SSR overall has a lower demand than the other WDW resorts, even taking THV into account. This gives a higher % of owners there looking at 7 months and given the size of SSR, this is a LOT of points.

Point well taken Dean. Many resale buyers buy at SSR with the intention of mainly using them at other DVC properties. I suppose you could argue I am one of them (though I am certainly in the camp that SSR is not a "bad" resort). But I am looking forward at staying at all the DVC resorts - God willing.

That said, while I dont know that many DVC owners personally, I get the sense that most dont use their points at their home resorts - with the possible exception of BLT (but those would be interesting stats to look at). But I would hypothesize that SSR (and prob OKW) would have the lowest home resort utilization rates.

 

[a742246]

SSR is a very good resort and it will only get better especially with the planned upgrades in DTD next year. My only complaint is that they charge
12.75 a day for use of their steam room and saunas while beach club, BWV and the rest of DVC doesn't. Why?????

 

[tomandrobin]

But I would hypothesize that SSR (and prob OKW) would have the lowest home resort utilization rates.

Actually, they have to be the same.......if 5% of SSR/OKW owners trade out to other DVC resorts, that means 5% of them must also trade out. You can only trade into another resort if that resort also traded out. If everyone utilized their home resort, there would be no trades into the other resorts.

 

[tomandrobin]

My only complaint is that they charge
12.75 a day for use of their steam room and saunas while beach club, BWV and the rest of DVC doesn't. Why?????

The steam room and sauna is not part of Saratoga, its part of the spa. The spa is a separate entity, not owned by the resort.

 

[a742246]

Thank you for the reply.

 

[Dean]

I just don't see a two tier DVC system with the resorts. Two tier with direct vs resale contracts....yes.

The River Country Resort, or whatever it would be called, doesn't present anything that would appeal to me. But until the full details are released, I'll hold my final verdict.

Tom, I think a qualified vs nonqualified system is VERY likely, I think a new system with crossover is likely about 10-20% chance of happening and a VIP system maybe 5%. I am confident DVC could develop the site you refer to and make it desirable enough to fit in the system at least to the level that SSR has.

Lest anyone points it out, one could say the same things about OKW, VB & HH; we'll see about HI later but possibly there as well. The differences for SSR are that it was last (therefore additive) and that the number of points involved compared to the demand is overwhelming even compared to OKW. Comparing SSR to OKW it's more than just the size difference. I'd venture to guess that it's 4 or 5 SSR point to 1 OKW (points hunting at 7 months) but it could be even worse than that. The reasons for the fundamental differences are the points schedule, esp when you look at the GV, and that there seems to be more of an emotional attachment to OKW than SSR at present.

SSR is a very good resort and it will only get better especially with the planned upgrades in DTD next year. My only complaint is that they charge
12.75 a day for use of their steam room and saunas while beach club, BWV and the rest of DVC doesn't. Why?????

They don't charge for them, the company that leases that space does. At those other locations, the spaces are owned and maintained by the resort (members). Certainly SSR could (and possibly should) try to contract for those services to be provided but there would be an extra cost that would raise dues.

Point well taken Dean. Many resale buyers buy at SSR with the intention of mainly using them at other DVC properties. I suppose you could argue I am one of them (though I am certainly in the camp that SSR is not a "bad" resort). But I am looking forward at staying at all the DVC resorts - God willing.

That said, while I dont know that many DVC owners personally, I get the sense that most dont use their points at their home resorts - with the possible exception of BLT (but those would be interesting stats to look at). But I would hypothesize that SSR (and prob OKW) would have the lowest home resort utilization rates.

There are no bad resorts within the DVC system. Even when someone says "I'd never stay at X resort", it's all relative. There's not a single one of us that would avoid our least favorite resort if that was all we could get and we didn't have other choices. I realize many see me as anti SSR because I am willing to post the negatives but that's far from the case. The reality is that were I buying in right now, SSR is almost certainly where I'd buy due to the cost/value analysis but I'd be looking elsewhere more often than I now do. That all may change coming up, possibly 1 Jan.

None of us know the true % of how people use or plan to use their points in terms of home resort vs none home resort. My sense is somewhat different than yours in that it's my belief that most owners at BLT, BWV, AKV, BCV, VWL & even OKW do plan to use their points at the home resort before the 7 month window opens though I'm sure the % will vary by resort. VB & HH are likely the only 2 resorts where it's significantly under 50%. Remember that even when someone hopes to get something at 7 months, they often will book at the home resort at 11 months, this creates 2 sets of numbers of usage, anticipated usage vs actual usage. Those 2 sets of numbers are going to be significantly different at some resorts like SSR and not that much different at a resort on the other end like BCV.

Also, there are several different reasons why one may end up planning to use as you do (own SSR but stay elsewhere a significant portion of the time). These include that they bought SSR with this in mind, that they bought and later realized they preferred elsewhere, that they bought and new resorts came along or that they bought because that was what DVD was selling at the time. I realize the first one offends some people.

 

[silmarg]

Actually, they have to be the same.......if 5% of SSR/OKW owners trade out to other DVC resorts, that means 5% of them must also trade out. You can only trade into another resort if that resort also traded out. If everyone utilized their home resort, there would be no trades into the other resorts.

I am not so sure about that. 5% of SSR is more than 5% of other resorts. Not to mention, SSR and OKW usually have availability, so they must be the ones trading out more often - or simply not using their points.

Plus when I call and ask for a room at another DVC resort, they don't check that someone from that resort has traded out - they just check to see if there is a room available.

I would think the resorts that are more difficult to get a ressie in (BLT / BCV) are more utilized by their owners while those that are easier to get (SSR / OKW and to a lesser extent AKV) are less utilized by their owners.

 

[Dean]

Actually, they have to be the same.......if 5% of SSR/OKW owners trade out to other DVC resorts, that means 5% of them must also trade out. You can only trade into another resort if that resort also traded out. If everyone utilized their home resort, there would be no trades into the other resorts.

Tom, it's true that you have only X units available at 7 months but that doesn't mean that the % of those trading out from each resort is the same. Not only that, it's actually the % of owners trying to trade out that's important, not the % that are successful. Those who own at more in demand resorts are more likely to reserve at 11 months and keep what they have if they are not successful. Thus the chances of trading in to some resorts is significantly less than others.

Here's an illustration for one of the problems they have with the WL as it fits in to this discussion. Say you and I have the same dates at BLT & BCV and each of us wants the other one for the same dates. On the surface you say just match them and complete both transactions and that's what II and RCI would likely do, however with DVC they can't do that unless both you and I are at the top of the WL. And if they did do that not only would it not help those others on the WL, it would actually hurt them and make it more unlikely that they'd match.

 

[tomandrobin]

I know the discussion goes around and round.....Only DVC has the "real" answers and percentages. The rest of us just sit here and theorize on everything else.

I think the DVC will either do one of two things. First, eliminate 7 months exchanges for resale contracts. So the resort you buy resale, is the only resort you can stay. Second, would be to install a "perk" system based on the number on the number of points bought direct from Disney. Either of these would get the desired effect Disney is looking for.

 

[Tink6666]

We bought into SSR via a resale contract. We have stayed at the resort a couple times and really like the feel of the resort. We are looking forward to the new pool addition also. We are one of those who have booked other resorts at the 7 month point, mostly to try the different resorts. We stayed at WLV last summer since it was my parents first time at WDW and we wanted them to be closer to MK. We are trying Kidani Village this next summer to see how that is. Next year we would love to go to Aulani, but realize that since it is new we may not be able to get in. We are looking forward to trying boardwalk, beach club and hilton head in the coming years.

As far as the lower cost, extended years, and low annual dues...this is what helped us afford to finally purchase into DVC.

If you can't afford the $100+ prices per point, but can at $65 per point then this is a great way to buy in!

 

[tomandrobin]

Thus the chances of trading in to some resorts is significantly less than others.

True....sometimes when I try to simplify my answers, the answers actually come across distorted.

 

[Dean]

I know the discussion goes around and round.....Only DVC has the "real" answers and percentages. The rest of us just sit here and theorize on everything else.

I think the DVC will either do one of two things. First, eliminate 7 months exchanges for resale contracts. So the resort you buy resale, is the only resort you can stay. Second, would be to install a "perk" system based on the number on the number of points bought direct from Disney. Either of these would get the desired effect Disney is looking for.

While only DVC has the actual details, I believe we have more than enough info to draw accurate conclusions. As I noted previously, I don't think they can eliminate included club benefits for existing resorts. They could do so for new resorts but they'd have to create a separate system with crossover benefits for some.

 

[Dean]

IMO, DVC left a lot on the table at SSR that could have shifted the demand significantly. There are some things they could likely do now but most options that I see as the best ones would not be feasible at this point. Some of the options that I think they could have done include the following.

• Have a points structure closer to OKW. I realize why they didn't but the decision to have higher points than OKW has contributed to this issue.
• I think under building parking would have been a plus.
• I feel that one thing they could have done would have been to have lake houses, say 3-5 bedroom options.
• Horses, carriage rides on site would likely have been too risky and costly but would have been nice.
• While the pool is nice, it could have been so much more. I doubt the pool being added will fit the bill either but it will help some I'm sure.

I'm sure we could come up with many other options. And we could certainly come up with such lists for each and every other resort as well.

 

[LIFERBABE]

Is the path linked here on the disneyrunning.com site pathway or road?

Even if it is a path, I still think that SSR should have done more to give it more of a resort feel. As I said earlier, if it were smaller and catering to a niche, it would be fine. However, considering how huge it is, there should be more to interest the masses.......Case in point is AKV. It is a beautiful resort with a really neat theme. If it were right next to a theme park (walking distance), it would probably be the most popular resort. Yet BLT (which the average person thinks is less themed and less to "look" at) is more popular based on its proximity to Magic Kingdom. Well, if AKV isn't as popular as you'd think despite having a neat theme and animals right outside your window, then how did they expect SSR to be popular?

That's a path. It does not list the Grandstand or THV path or DTD