WWYD?? Add on at AKV or GFV?

[DisFanatic]

Thanks everyone for your insights! We only need 25 points to make our vacation work for us and have had no luck in the resale market, finding a 25 AKV with our use year its like finding a needle in a haystack.
I asked the question since both resorts are the same price right now..
We have decided to add at AKV... As it doesn't make sense to have a couple nights at GFV when we could have an extra night or two at AKV CL at the 11 month mark...

 

[nd43]

Thanks everyone for your insights! We only need 25 points to make our vacation work for us and have had no luck in the resale market, finding a 25 AKV with our use year its like finding a needle in a haystack.
I asked the question since both resorts are the same price right now..
We have decided to add at AKV... As it doesn't make sense to have a couple nights at GFV when we could have an extra night or two at AKV CL at the 11 month mark...

I certainly think you made a good choice (for whatever that is worth!).

I think keeping the single contract together and just trying VGF at 7 months when you want to try it is the way to go with a 25 pt add on.

You will need most of those 200+ points to stay at VGF. For our first two reservations at VGF, we had to use 991 points (gulp!). So, now I have almost no points left through 2015 and we just started with DVC!

 

[Dean]

Thanks everyone for your insights! We only need 25 points to make our vacation work for us and have had no luck in the resale market, finding a 25 AKV with our use year its like finding a needle in a haystack.
I asked the question since both resorts are the same price right now..
We have decided to add at AKV... As it doesn't make sense to have a couple nights at GFV when we could have an extra night or two at AKV CL at the 11 month mark...

I think that's a reasonable option if you only need 25 points but what about going a little bigger and looking for up to say 60 points, it's be more dues but close to the same purchase price.

 

[DisFanatic]

I think that's a reasonable option if you only need 25 points but what about going a little bigger and looking for up to say 60 points, it's be more dues but close to the same purchase price.

We don't need 60 points right now, just DH and myself... Plus, if I do not have to give additional money to Disney in the form of dues.. Even better

 

[Sur]

I totally agree that sometimes a small add-on is all an owner needs, but I don't quite understand the pull of a 25-point contract at an entirely new resort (especially one as point-heavy as VGF).

We just wanted a night, here and there, to go to Victoria & Albert's, have a leisurely meal, and head back for a good night's sleep in a beautiful room (with a kitchen or kitchenette to keep the party going perhaps).

I know, it's hard to imagine all the considerations of people's needs, they are so varied.

Thanks everyone for your insights! We only need 25 points to make our vacation work for us and have had no luck in the resale market, finding a 25 AKV with our use year its like finding a needle in a haystack.
I asked the question since both resorts are the same price right now..
We have decided to add at AKV... As it doesn't make sense to have a couple nights at GFV when we could have an extra night or two at AKV CL at the 11 month mark...

I hope MSUmom sees this, as she was on the ROFR board, mentioned selling her AKV points, and was surprised that it was snatched up quickly. THIS is why people buy fast! http://www.disboards.com/showpost.php?p=48666185&postcount=3001

 

[Nabas]

I would not, under any circumstances, buy AKV direct right now. The price:value ratio is so far out of whack that it is a financial disaster.

Just interested, can you elaborate?

 

[Dean]

We don't need 60 points right now, just DH and myself... Plus, if I do not have to give additional money to Disney in the form of dues.. Even better

Here's my thinking on your situation. AKV points are barely over half retail and the fees are fairly high there. If you really only need 25 points but not enough you could not make good use of 50 to 60, you're likely best off doing nothing. It's easy to stretch 200 to 225 and just as easy to use up 250 for most. Certainly an extra 25 (50 total) will be an additional $125 roughly over just the 25 points every year. I don't see adding 25 points resale as a reasonable value for the situation as described. That said, if you are only going to add 25 or so, retail vs resale likely doesn't matter due to the higher final cost of smaller resale and finding the right UY/size. Good luck and enjoy whatever you decide.

 

[Dean]

Just interested, can you elaborate?

I can't speak for ELMC and I might not be quite so absolute, but I do have thoughts on this subject along the same lines. Some resorts are far more desirable than others as determined by price and/or availability resale. I'll limit my thoughts to on property only. IMO, SSR/OKW/AKV are generally much cheaper resale than retail and have reasonable availability enough that there's more seller competition. The principles apply fairly well to BWV & VWL and a little less to BCV it seems. Two absolutes that I do endorse are never finance DVC and that there's nothing of value lost with resale given the current restrictions (never say never but this is pretty close). Back when the price difference was 20% between resale and retail I think reasonable people could go either way. However, I do not share that opinion currently for resorts available for around half and for contract sizes of sufficient size (say 100 or greater maybe less). My thoughts, YMMV.

 

[Nabas]

I can't speak for ELMC and I might not be quite so absolute, but I do have thoughts on this subject along the same lines. Some resorts are far more desirable than others as determined by price and/or availability resale. I'll limit my thoughts to on property only. IMO, SSR/OKW/AKV are generally much cheaper resale than retail and have reasonable availability enough that there's more seller competition. The principles apply fairly well to BWV & VWL and a little less to BCV it seems. Two absolutes that I do endorse are never finance DVC and that there's nothing of value lost with resale given the current restrictions (never say never but this is pretty close). Back when the price difference was 20% between resale and retail I think reasonable people could go either way. However, I do not share that opinion currently for resorts available for around half and for contract sizes of sufficient size (say 100 or greater maybe less). My thoughts, YMMV.

ELMC's original comment was aimed specifically at AKV. In general, I think his comment applies fairly equally to all DVC resorts. For example, BCV, BWV, VWL, SSR, and OKW are all being sold direct at $130/point. BLT is being sold for $165/point. AKV, with incentives, is under $130/point.

Meanwhile, having been closely tracking resale prices for some time, I know that BLT is the only resort with an asking price significantly above the others (current median asking price is $104/point) while OKW is the only resort with an asking price significantly below the others (current median asking price is $70/point). The other 5 WDW DVC resorts currently being offered for resale having median asking prices in the range of $79/point (SSR) to $86/point (BCV). AKV is at $80/point despite the fact that WDW is actively selling it direct, which tends to drive down resale prices.

So while I don't disagree with ELMC's comment in general, I am trying to understand why AKV was singled out. It seems to me that most DVC resorts have similar direct-vs-resale spreads while AKV contracts run an extra 15 years compared to "classic" DVC resorts.

Just trying to understand if and why ELMC thinks AKV is a unusually bad value compared to the other resorts. Maybe he specifically mentioned AKV because it's the only resort that Disney is actively selling that's also available on the resale market, or because the OP was specifically asking about AKV and VGF.

 

[Dean]

ELMC's original comment was aimed specifically at AKV. In general, I think his comment applies fairly equally to all DVC resorts. For example, BCV, BWV, VWL, SSR, and OKW are all being sold direct at $130/point. BLT is being sold for $165/point. AKV, with incentives, is under $130/point.

Meanwhile, having been closely tracking resale prices for some time, I know that BLT is the only resort with an asking price significantly above the others (current median asking price is $104/point) while OKW is the only resort with an asking price significantly below the others (current median asking price is $70/point). The other 5 WDW DVC resorts currently being offered for resale having median asking prices in the range of $79/point (SSR) to $86/point (BCV). AKV is at $80/point despite the fact that WDW is actively selling it direct, which tends to drive down resale prices.

So while I don't disagree with ELMC's comment in general, I am trying to understand why AKV was singled out. It seems to me that most DVC resorts have similar direct-vs-resale spreads while AKV contracts run an extra 15 years compared to "classic" DVC resorts.

Just trying to understand if and why ELMC thinks AKV is a unusually bad value compared to the other resorts. Maybe he specifically mentioned AKV because it's the only resort that Disney is actively selling that's also available on the resale market, or because the OP was specifically asking about AKV and VGF.

IMO, it does not apply equally across all resorts because of availability and cost differences inherent to some vs others but it does apply in general to many of the resorts. The larger the difference and the large the points package, the more it applies, IMO. I think it does apply to everything except HI, CA & GF ignoring very small packages. I think $80 is high for AKV unless you're talking small contracts only. Current listings above are consistently below that as asking price and that's an increase over a few months ago, a somewhat temporary increase, IMO. I think assigning a value of $70 for a normal package is being generous. That doesn't mean I think they are all equal or all an equal value at the prices (resale or retail) currently available. There are also special issues with each options. VB & HH issues are well chronicled. The 2042 expiration is a consideration for any buyer though more related to price than actually reasonableness otherwise, IMO. AKV has the concierge and value rooms, BWV has the standard view, BCV has the 2 queen, etc.

Again, I can't speak for others but I'd guess it's context since the OP was specifically asking AKV or GF, that was my understanding when I read it and when I reread it today.

 

[Nabas]

IMO, it does not apply equally across all resorts because of availability and cost differences inherent to some vs others but it does apply in general to many of the resorts. The larger the difference and the large the points package, the more it applies, IMO. I think it does apply to everything except HI, CA & GF ignoring very small packages. I think $80 is high for AKV unless you're talking small contracts only. Current listings above are consistently below that as asking price and that's an increase over a few months ago, a somewhat temporary increase, IMO. I think assigning a value of $70 for a normal package is being generous. That doesn't mean I think they are all equal or all an equal value at the prices (resale or retail) currently available. There are also special issues with each options. VB & HH issues are well chronicled. The 2042 expiration is a consideration for any buyer though more related to price than actually reasonableness otherwise, IMO. AKV has the concierge and value rooms, BWV has the standard view, BCV has the 2 queen, etc.

Again, I can't speak for others but I'd guess it's context since the OP was specifically asking AKV or GF, that was my understanding when I read it and when I reread it today.

Thanks. Going back and rereading ELMC's post, I think you're right. He was discussing purchasing AKV directly explicitly because the OP was asking about AKV and VGF.

There currently are 41 AKV listings on the 7 reseller sites I track. Median asking price is $80/point. Median contract size being offered is 200 points.

Two of the major DVC resellers (don't think I can mention them by name on this forum) have some crazy asking prices for AKV so that's what's driving the median up. But those websites also have some crazy asking prices for some other WDW resorts.

My theory is that some crazy resale prices are being asked by some recent BLT, AKV, and SSR direct-sale purchasers. Not because they are going to get those prices but, after having made recent purchases that they financed and no longer can afford, they are desperate to cover their loans. The foreclosure rate at these 3 resorts remains relatively high.

Overall, median asking price for AKV has been around $80/point for the last month. In April and May, it was closer to $75/month.

Median asking prices at BCV and BWV have climbed by a similar $5/point (up to about $86/point for BCV and $84/point for BWV) while VWL has remained surprisingly flat at $80/point.

Resale inventory is incredibly tight right now at BCV and VWL but then these are the two smallest resale properties on the market.

BLT resales have climbed the most in recent months, and asking prices are now up to a median of $104/point on contracts of median size of 160 points.

 

[ELMC]

Thanks. Going back and rereading ELMC's post, I think you're right. He was discussing purchasing AKV directly explicitly because the OP was asking about AKV and VGF.

Sorry I left you hanging by not answering your question. Yes, I was speaking specifically to AKV because that was the other option for the OP. I do think that as you mentioned, several of the other resorts offered also present challenges due to the high direct price. It has been said before and it bears repeating, that there are other factors to consider when deciding to purchase. For those that refuse to buy resale, the only two choices are paying direct prices or not owning. So while it is difficult to justify a direct purchase from a financial perspective, there are many other ways that it makes sense to people.