Why SSR over AKL for "value"

[Bullseye]

Animal Kingdom Lodge feels isolated to me and I've only stayed there once and it's my dead last choice. I'd rather stay offsite at one of the vacation clubs at Hilton, Marriott or Sheraton than Animal Kingdom. So SSR was definitely more attractive to me than Animal Kingdom Lodge. Everybody feels differently about the DVC resorts, that's for sure. I also feel the dues will continue to climb higher because of the animals.

You're certainly right about members motives for DVC preference being different. We're waiting to clear ROFR right now on some AKV points and we actually like AKV because it is remote and out of the hustle and bustle of the park area. I didn't even know AKV was considered a value choice We're just buying there because it's where we like to stay and it has a longer shelf life than BCV.

 

[crisi]

Animal Kingdom Lodge feels isolated to me and I've only stayed there once and it's my dead last choice. I'd rather stay offsite at one of the vacation clubs at Hilton, Marriott or Sheraton than Animal Kingdom. So SSR was definitely more attractive to me than Animal Kingdom Lodge. Everybody feels differently about the DVC resorts, that's for sure. I also feel the dues will continue to climb higher because of the animals.

I feel that way about SSR, VAKL and OKW. I wouldn't own any of them. I know I want to have the majority of my stays at VWL or BWV - and those are really the only two resorts with any appeal to me to own (and HHI). And the only resort we own at is BWV, because frankly, we don't need more points than the few we have. Even with those we appear to have entered the "rental years."

(I do want to stay at VAKL - the size makes that not an issue)

I also have no interest in VGF. Little in BLT. And we tried BCV and decided that it didn't have advantages for us over BWV which is our home resort.

I don't have vacations to waste trying resorts I'm predisposed not to like to see if I happen to be wrong - we spend only about a quarter of our vacations - probably less than that - at WDW. I will say I've visited OKW, which convinced me that I'm unlikely to book it unless I have a need for that sort of resort (I would have booked it had the Girl Scouts picked Disney over Hilton Head - I think it would have been great for that use) and I visited SSR, and love the pool and hate the spread out nature of the resort.

 

[Dean]

Some of it is emotionally tied too .
We absolutely hate SSR , and it would be painful every year to pay MF's for SSR . So we chose the next most "economical" WDW DVC resort , AKV . While we love AKV, and could use our points at most other locations at 7 months, we would not be unhappy if for some unforeseen reason AKV is the only DVC resort we were allowed to book in the future. After staying at SSR one time, we could care less if we ever go back again, and even paying the annual MF's at SSR would be difficult emotionally (for us) .
So if you dont ever want to be stuck at SSR (like us) , buy at a DVC location where you wouldnt mind being "stuck" at .
I feel AKL is the next in line for value after SSR . Even more so if you choose the value rooms.

That's quite a price tag related to emotions alone to not be willing to buy cheaper points that would do just as well for most people as the more expensive ones. I'd have to run the numbers but I'd be willing to bet that BLT is in the same ball park on long term costs as AKV with a higher residual value and more options and OKW would be cheaper than AKV. The thing that OKW brings on a positive would be the cheaper GV options that might not be available 7 months out, but on the negative side would be the dues risk once 2042 approaches.

 

[disneynutz]

That's quite a price tag related to emotions alone to not be willing to buy cheaper points that would do just as well for most people as the more expensive ones. I'd have to run the numbers but I'd be willing to bet that BLT is in the same ball park on long term costs as AKV with a higher residual value and more options and OKW would be cheaper than AKV. The thing that OKW brings on a positive would be the cheaper GV options that might not be available 7 months out, but on the negative side would be the dues risk once 2042 approaches.

Price tag and emotions, 2 things that don't seem to matter much when used in conjunction with Disney.

Bill

 

[Dean]

Price tag and emotions, 2 things that don't seem to matter much when used in conjunction with Disney.

Bill

One can certainly cost you more of the other, esp where Disney is concerned and often with no real benefit.

 

[Syndrome]

That's quite a price tag related to emotions alone to not be willing to buy cheaper points that would do just as well for most people as the more expensive ones. I'd have to run the numbers but I'd be willing to bet that BLT is in the same ball park on long term costs as AKV with a higher residual value and more options and OKW would be cheaper than AKV. The thing that OKW brings on a positive would be the cheaper GV options that might not be available 7 months out, but on the negative side would be the dues risk once 2042 approaches.

Agreed about the BLT thing. I think, at least right now, BLT may be the smartest DVC purchase . But ........... BLT has had a higher percentage of MF increase over AKV over the past few years. It will be interesting to see if that trend keeps up .

And ............. of coarse this is ALL emotionally tied . Otherwise non of us would be going to WDW AT ALL . WDW has something that no other place has ...........even if you cant describe it. That costs money ............no matter how frugal we try to be .

So, for us (and I assume a lot of other people) value has more to do with JUST the bottom line and how "cheap" you can buy into DVC . Value is not just a monetary figure alone. We go to WDW to enjoy ourselves , and to not worry on a daily about "how much this is costing us" . Honestly ...........its disposable income .......... for all of us. I think I can pretty much say without hesitation, that WDW is not the cheapest vacation spot anyway. We dont vacation at WDW to save money. For us, its a big win , just to be able to stay in bigger accommodations (DVC) , and for a bit less $$$ than the traditional deluxe rooms. We are way more comfortable, and the added value is the money savings .

For us ...........AKV was not our first choice , but it was a balance of what we liked and what was also a good value. We also like BCV , but have a hard time finding the value for what the resale prices and end date are .

Also, if there is ever a time we want to go to WDW and not get park tickets (which we have already done) , AKV feels like a vacation spot that works well without even visiting the parks ( the same could be said about any DVC resort, depending on likes and dislikes) .

Anyway .............not really arguing what DVC is the cheapest overall .........just pointing out that , for a lot of people "Value" is not just the monetary figure alone. Value does not equal "cheapest" .

 

[Dean]

Agreed about the BLT thing. I think, at least right now, BLT may be the smartest DVC purchase . But ........... BLT has had a higher percentage of MF increase over AKV over the past few years. It will be interesting to see if that trend keeps up .

And ............. of coarse this is ALL emotionally tied . Otherwise non of us would be going to WDW AT ALL . WDW has something that no other place has ...........even if you cant describe it. That costs money ............no matter how frugal we try to be .

So, for us (and I assume a lot of other people) value has more to do with JUST the bottom line and how "cheap" you can buy into DVC . Value is not just a monetary figure alone. We go to WDW to enjoy ourselves , and to not worry on a daily about "how much this is costing us" . Honestly we could care less ...........its disposable income .......... for all of us. I think I can pretty much say without hesitation, that WDW is not the cheapest vacation spot anyway. We dont vacation at WDW to save money. For us, its a big win , to be able to stay in bigger accommodations (DVC) , and for a bit less $$$ than the traditional deluxe rooms. We are way more comfortable, and the added value is the money savings .

For us ...........AKV was not our first choice , but it was a balance of what we liked and what was also a good value. We also like BCV , but have a hard time finding the value for what the resale prices and end date are .

Also, if there is ever a time we want to go to WDW and not get park tickets (which we have already done) , AKV feels like a vacation spot that works well without even visiting the parks ( the same could be said about any DVC resort, depending on likes and dislikes) .

Anyway .............not really arguing what DVC is the cheapest overall .........just pointing out that , for a lot of people "Value" is not just the monetary figure alone. Value does not equal "cheapest" .

In principle I agree, however, I feel far too many people let their emotions get the best of them and cause them to make a lessor choice. I'm not saying that's the case in your situation but as a rule, my posts on such subjects are directed by several facts, here are the ones that come to mind right now.

• First and foremost I make every attempt to address the principles involved rather than a specific person/situation. That way it can be applied more broadly and I reduce the risk of giving advice that might be misconstrued. And I do not worry if someone who made different choices will offended, it's their right to make those decisions. Example, I say crashing the pool is wrong and you do so routinely. If you speak to principle, it's not a personal attack and if one isn't willing to speak to the principle, we never get anywhere in the discussion.
• That a large % of people looking to buy in don't know what they don't know.
• That rarely will their long term preferences match what they think the will be long term.
• That emotions often cause people to make a less than stellar choice and not uncommonly, a poor one. I do not subscribe to the theory that if one is happy with it that automatically makes it a good choice.
• That many if not most underestimate the long term cost and risk of buying a timeshare, and that DVC is not an exception.
• That it's essentially impossible to put another person's emotions/preferences into a formula so I concentrate more on the nuts and bolts.
• That being able to make the payments is not the same as being able to afford the item, basically if you couldn't pay cash, you can't afford it.
• That you need to be able to plan at least 7 months out routinely to make DVC reasonable.
• That the TMV is an important consideration in such a transaction.
• And likely one of the most important, that the cost/value/fit of DVC for a given family is made on the buy in decisions.

Basically I aim for the best case scenario so people have the information. I'd be foolish not to realize that every situation is a little different and that there are MANY other factors for a given family that have to be added to the equation.

I would disagree with you on one point you made and maybe you didn't mean it quite this way, but you basically said that since it's lost money anyway, don't worry about the cost. My view would be to worry about the cost AND value both up front and otherwise as well as the other factors up front so you don't have to do so nearly as much later (example, buying more points retail to cruise is always a bad idea). It's far better to delay or never buy DVC when it makes sense than to make a bad choice.

That's the direction I come from and how I orient my posts. Hopefully I hit my intended mark most of the time.

 

[MountainMouse]

Problem is that until you stay at the different resorts you really don't know how they feel or fit. You may dislike SSR, others may find AKV out of the way and boring after awhile. We bought BLT before staying there and we just don't care for the place, we enjoy SSR and find the ponds and lake views more enjoyable than a savanna view. Bill

Obviously is each individual's preference, but what is it that you didn't like about BLT? Never stayed myself, but been at the Contemporary. Not my favorite hotel (I like WL better), but as long as we're pushing strollers it's my preferred pick.

 

[disneynutz]

Obviously is each individual's preference, but what is it that you didn't like about BLT? Never stayed myself, but been at the Contemporary. Not my favorite hotel (I like WL better), but as long as we're pushing strollers it's my preferred pick.

I guess theming is the first thing. Plastic cabinets, sterile look to the place reminds me of a medical building. Staying there several times we felt like we were staying in any high-rise hotel.

At BLT we feel like we are visiting, at BWV we feel like we are at home, at VWL we feel like we are on a relaxing vacation.

The quality of furnishings and materials are an expensive disappointment.

DVD would tell prospective buyers that the dues at BLT were the lowest but after sales ended, the dues were raised with 6% plus increases for the last 2 years, where will they level off?

The TP views are over-rated IMO. Parking lot, top of space mountain, castle in the distance. The lake view is better but inside the "C" you are across from other rooms.

Easy walk to MK is the only real positive but how many years will you have strollers and for how long will the MK be your favorite park? We find ourselves staying at the Epcot resorts more and more.

Bill

 

[MountainMouse]

I guess theming is the first thing. Plastic cabinets, sterile look to the place reminds me of a medical building. Staying there several times we felt like we were staying in any high-rise hotel. At BLT we feel like we are visiting, at BWV we feel like we are at home, at VWL we feel like we are on a relaxing vacation. The quality of furnishings and materials are an expensive disappointment. DVD would tell prospective buyers that the dues at BLT were the lowest but after sales ended, the dues were raised with 6% plus increases for the last 2 years, where will they level off? The TP views are over-rated IMO. Parking lot, top of space mountain, castle in the distance. The lake view is better but inside the "C" you are across from other rooms. Easy walk to MK is the only real positive but how many years will you have strollers and for how long will the MK be your favorite park? We find ourselves staying at the Epcot resorts more and more. Bill

I appreciate the input. We're new at this and just waiting on our first contract to come through. We ended up choosing BLT which is why I asked what you didn't like about it. I share most of your opinions especially about the quality of the finishings. Contemporary isn't our style, especially at Disney. That said, we were moved from WL to CR last trip because of the construction to the pool at WL. The ease of getting to and leaving the MK sold us on that location. Would be nice if they would build a bridge/walkway from WL, I don't mind a longer walk. Decided on BLT over a cheaper resort because the savings weren't enough for us to give up the 11 month window and I figured if I regretted it I could sell it. Well priced BLT contracts seem to go fast, may be true of all properties.

 

[AirGoofy]

If we did it over again today we would buy SSR and use the points to learn the DVC system, stay at different resorts and experience the difficulties if any booking at our favorite times.

Later if necessary, sell SSR and buy our favorite resorts to guarantee the ability to stay where we want, when we want.

Bill

While we didn't have this plan going into it, this is what we did. We initially bought into SSR resale for the lower initial buy in and dues. And, while we enjoyed SSR, it was not our preferred home resort. We stayed in all of them (except VGF) and then purchased a BWV resale and sold the SSR resale.

 

[Dean]

While we didn't have this plan going into it, this is what we did. We initially bought into SSR resale for the lower initial buy in and dues. And, while we enjoyed SSR, it was not our preferred home resort. We stayed in all of them (except VGF) and then purchased a BWV resale and sold the SSR resale.

A variation that's even better for many, is to underbuy at say SSR. Maybe buy 150 when you really need 20-250. Then buy an add on or second contract at the then preferred destination.

 

[MountainMouse]

A variation that's even better for many, is to underbuy at say SSR. Maybe buy 150 when you really need 20-250. Then buy an add on or second contract at the then preferred destination.

This is an option I think we should have explored more before offering. Long term we wanted a 1BR in the summer at BLT so we went for that amount of points. Truthfully we may be fine with a studio, always have been fine with normal hotel rooms in the past. Also, we haven't always gone every year before. That said I'm still ok with what we've done. It gives flexibility in other areas. If I want to get a two bedroom occasionally I can and if I want to rent points to offset fees I can.

 

[bakerworld]

We own at AKL and use most of our pts at BC - sometimes other venues. We always clip a value at 11 months and then change at 7 mons - this works for the BC only from mid-Jan to early Sept. We don't bother to trade out on the years we do not have park tickets. Our spring trips are mostly baseball and resort driven.

We also own at BL figuring the incentive, the SV rooms and the annual dues worked but the annual does have risen fairly quickly which has caused our original strategy to go off rails slightly. Still the SV rooms help.

Frankly there is a line where buying 'fiscally' and ending up with a home venue that you're not really thrilled meet. At that point only you can decide what works. Frankly, I don't see us staying at SSR or OKW many times - both of which I like but their far out, you better stock your kitchen because there's no after hours food unless you've bought the car, and the point value per room aren't as good as other venues.

 

[DizBub]

We also own at BL figuring the incentive, the SV rooms and the annual dues worked but the annual does have risen fairly quickly which has caused our original strategy to go off rails slightly. Still the SV rooms help.

Frankly there is a line where buying 'fiscally' and ending up with a home venue that you're not really thrilled meet. At that point only you can decide what works. Frankly, I don't see us staying at SSR or OKW many times - both of which I like but their far out, you better stock your kitchen because there's no after hours food unless you've bought the car, and the point value per room aren't as good as other venues.

This exactly. We own at BLT and only get the standard view villas. We are oddballs in that we really enjoy SSR and OKW but just don't feel the need to own there because they do have the most availability. But the nice part about OKW is that they are consistently the lowest point villas overall, not just a few.

Strongly considering a small AKV resale contract just to be able to book a value 1 bedroom every other year even though AKV is probably our least favorite. Thought about BWV for the standard views but already have BCV.

 

[Dean]

This is an option I think we should have explored more before offering. Long term we wanted a 1BR in the summer at BLT so we went for that amount of points. Truthfully we may be fine with a studio, always have been fine with normal hotel rooms in the past. Also, we haven't always gone every year before. That said I'm still ok with what we've done. It gives flexibility in other areas. If I want to get a two bedroom occasionally I can and if I want to rent points to offset fees I can.

There's really no perfect option and when it seems like there is, there will be a different scenario in the future. Enjoy your membership.

 

[AirGoofy]

A variation that's even better for many, is to underbuy at say SSR. Maybe buy 150 when you really need 20-250. Then buy an add on or second contract at the then preferred destination.

That's an intriguing idea. It's too late now for me, but that would have been something to consider. It would take more contract managing - banking/ borrowing - and even more with a second resale contract with a different UY. I wonder how many DVC timeshare owners really would want to keep up with that? That would be even more challenging to explain to a first time buyer.

 

[Dean]

That's an intriguing idea. It's too late now for me, but that would have been something to consider. It would take more contract managing - banking/ borrowing - and even more with a second resale contract with a different UY. I wonder how many DVC timeshare owners really would want to keep up with that? That would be even more challenging to explain to a first time buyer.

Variations on the principle works for a number of situations. Maybe your kids are little but later you'll need a larger unit, or maybe you decide to go twice a yr instead of once most years and need more points, etc. It's almost always better to add on than sell and re-buy because of the costs of selling. The one caveat is this advice generally assumes one is getting a good deal up front, usually excluding smaller contracts under 150 or so. But one does have to look at the situation and compare buying say 300 points now to 150 now and 150 later or a variation.

For most dealing with multiple home resorts under a single master is a lot easier than I believe you're thinking it is and even for multiple master contracts, it isn't that much of an issue. But it is more confusing for the novice. It does allow one to ease in and delay many final long term decisions for a few yrs where you'd be likely to make much better decisions. And there are many ways to stretch points if needed.

 

[crisi]

That's an intriguing idea. It's too late now for me, but that would have been something to consider. It would take more contract managing - banking/ borrowing - and even more with a second resale contract with a different UY. I wonder how many DVC timeshare owners really would want to keep up with that? That would be even more challenging to explain to a first time buyer.

For those that go to Disney often enough to make multiple contract across multiple resorts and a few hundred points or more a good deal, it isn't a lot of bother. The planning and administration is easy for people who have tackled Disney parks like Patton on D-Day.

However, there is another risk - which is that you'll buy, add on during the peak of your Disney/DVC obsession, then as the kids grow, or you discover different vacation destinations, or your circumstances change in other ways, you don't make nearly the use of the points. You can rent them, or sell them, but often having kept the capital invested would have been a better deal.

There are a lot of members here who at one time owned a lot more points than they own now - and are still enjoying Disney and DVC. They just don't need the points they once did. If you own and use those "extra" points for long enough to get your money's worth out of them, its still a good deal.

But it may be just as good a deal to rent extra points for the few years your kids are old enough to need a bigger unit, but haven't gotten into the "there isn't any time to travel with sports, drama, school, their busy social lives" stage.

(We just slammed into this wall. The Spring Break trip we were toying with turned into a baseball retreat for my baseball playing son and a trip to Broadway for my daughter and the drama club. The Summer Camp play, plus my daughter's camping commitments to Scouts, and my son's Summer baseball schedule puts Summer out of the question. There is no way you pull a girl taking three AP courses as a 9th grader out of school for a week - or - the other end - my son, who needs to be in class every day to maintain his B average and has trouble if he is out ill for a day - and not have the blink of a failing grade so he can continue to suit up for sports. Christmas is sacred with my family - can't travel then....Even the long weekend we had planned for a short getaway nearby disappeared in my job and my daughter's rehearsal schedule.)

 

[djohn06]

For me it doesn't make sense to buy into SSR "to save" in this current environment. You can buy AKV now for the same price as SSR and get 3 more years. Plus if you ever need to sell points, not too many people are asking to buy SSR beyond the 7 month mark like AKV. Typically, you can command a premium for selling AKV points beyond 7 months. On SSR it's much harder to do that.

There are times when it can be difficult to get into a certain category at AKV too. To me the fact that I can buy less points than SSR, enjoy a 11 month booking window, sell my points 7 months in advance at a place most people want to stay is huge.

The difference in points between an animal kingdom value 2 bedroom vs SSR 2 bedroom is 49 points during dream season. That's a significant difference. You have to buy 49 additional points which will cost you another $3500 to $4000. I just bought a 100 point add on at AKV loaded for $73. Since both resorts are about the same in price, I felt no need to to buy 125 SSR points to get the same room class.

The maint fees are lower at SSR. I get that. But, AKV has too many feature to ignore. Also to those who say it's only 3 more years, sell your points for 3 years and I'm pretty sure you can pay 6 to 8 years worth of maint fees. That alone is like throwing 4k to 5k away on a 100 point contract. Don't see how anyone leaves this out as a factor.