The Spirited 8th Wonder (WDW's Future & You!)

[Stitchon]

As far as stores I would rather go to the Tanger outlets by my house.

For that matter I don't know why anyone would shop while at WDW unless is was a one off store or something really out of the ordinary?????

So many people dislike the idea of putting more pedestrian, well-known stores at the Springs, but I think it would be a great thing. Right now, Disney Springs is far too touristy and not chic or attractive to people like me; and i'm one of those millenials the empty suits like to throw around in their statistics.

I also think that the Orlando retail scene is very fragmented, with Millenia housing the expensive brands and Florida Mall with the more accessible brands. If a property were to combine the two demographics, they'd have a winner. That's what I'm genuinely hoping Disney Springs does, but i'm not holding my breath.

 

[bhg469]

Man, I've seen Spirit allude to DVC people reading his threads. I really hope that is true, because it would be an eye opening experience. I think the most positive comments I've read about DVC (and I'll admit I've not read every post in the thread) was basically:
We like it because it's convenient.

Not the rooms, the amenities, the experience, any of that. Just "it's close to the parks and not typically hideous".

The problem is this forum, while very popular and informative, is a small segment of their target demographics. They are banking in new, uninformed dvc clients that might not know any better. I honestly think they're looking down on us and that they're smarter.

 

[SpaceMountain77]

Man, I've seen Spirit allude to DVC people reading his threads. I really hope that is true, because it would be an eye opening experience. I think the most positive comments I've read about DVC (and I'll admit I've not read every post in the thread) was basically:
We like it because it's convenient.

Not the rooms, the amenities, the experience, any of that. Just "it's close to the parks and not typically hideous".

No matter what a DVC guide or loyalist tells you, it is not a matter of securing a lifetime of memories year after year; it is the convenience. Please know there is nothing convenient about trying to switch resorts at the 7-month mark. Convenience, for me, is simply access.

 

[SpaceMountain77]

You know what's funny, though, I keep waiting for them to put themed rooms ON property! LOL.

I was eagerly awaiting the Haunted Mansion rooms that seem to have dematerialized. Something like that just might get me to stay on property again. Though, seeing how "meh" the Pirates ones turned out, probably was better left undone.

It always amazes me how bland Disney resorts are. The "nicer" they get the blander they are. I know that big old crass statues aren't really the best theming, but it's the best the entire resort really has, and it's in the "values" no less, in terms of Disney/magical unless you are Tom Cruise and can reserve the castle suite.

While I don't mean to suggest that characters invade all the resorts (gosh knows, folks need a break from all that, too) but when I think of some of the neat stuff that could be done - the Haunted Mansion rooms were a good start - it's just like they aren't even trying, any more than they are in the parks.

Honestly, I think the Haunted Mansion rooms were a missed opportunity. Also, the execution surprised me.

I thought the Haunted Mansion inspired rooms would be located in the Acadian, Magnolia, Oak and/or Parterre estates as a nod to Disneyland, whose Haunted Mansion is a southern plantation home.

Moreover, I thought the Royal Rooms would be located in the French Quarter because of the greater thematic tie to Tiana and the Princess & the Frog.

 

[GoofGoof]

Man, I've seen Spirit allude to DVC people reading his threads. I really hope that is true, because it would be an eye opening experience. I think the most positive comments I've read about DVC (and I'll admit I've not read every post in the thread) was basically:
We like it because it's convenient.

Not the rooms, the amenities, the experience, any of that. Just "it's close to the parks and not typically hideous".

I looked at DVC ownership as a way to stay on property but still have a condo not just a studio hotel room. No way was I paying cash rates for a suite at a deluxe resort and I'm not a fan of the values. Just too crowded. It was an economical way for me to get a 1 or 2 bedroom condo.

The kids programs and activity centers are pretty good compared to most timeshares. There is a lot to do at WDW so I admit I rarely use them, but we stayed at Hilton Head recently and used a lot more of them. Very nice people and well done programs. The kids had a lot of fun. The campfire and marshmallow roast at night and the outdoor movies were a big hit. I would say DVC is a notch above your typical timeshare resort with activities. It should be because it generally costs more.

 

[phi2134]

I think that is a problem that Disney refuses to address. BLT never should have been built without its own dedicated lobby/check in and even a food service locale (let's leave the often empty Top of the World out of it for now).

Adding DVC always adds a strain to the resort unless it's a Saratoga Springs (dedicated DVC) or complete expansion like Kidani Village.

The Beach Club went from legit 4-star plus resort to rundown and unkempt as soon as the Villas went in. I went from staying there regularly to not returning. And just walking through it last week confirmed to me that staying away is a smart move.

What do you think the problem with the Beach Club is exactly? I have stayed there a lot in the past, probably 7-10 times, but not recently. I am going back in september, but staying in the villas with my family. Last time my parents went, they were extremely disappointed in the room. It was a corner around the lobby area and they said it looked like they just took mismatched furniture and threw it in there. They are actually being comped one night in the villas for telling them they were extremely unhappy with the room.

 

[SpaceMountain77]

I looked at DVC ownership as a way to stay on property but still have a condo not just a studio hotel room. No way was I paying cash rates for a suite at a deluxe resort and I'm not a fan of the values. Just too crowded. It was an economical way for me to get a 1 or 2 bedroom condo.

This too, is why I purchased. However, I prefer time over space.

Instead of booking an AKV 1-bedroom value or standard for a week, I prefer to book an AKV studio value or standard for 2 weeks.

 

[SpaceMountain77]

What do you think the problem with the Beach Club is exactly? I have stayed there a lot in the past, probably 7-10 times, but not recently. I am going back in september, but staying in the villas with my family. Last time my parents went, they were extremely disappointed in the room. It was a corner around the lobby area and they said it looked like they just took mismatched furniture and threw it in there. They are actually being comped one night in the villas for telling them they were extremely unhappy with the room.

If you really want to see mismatched furniture, then you should check out the BWV studios. The nightstand is black and white, dresser is maple, bistro table is green, headboard is white and sofa green. Did I mention the pink accent wall?

 

[homerdance]

Yet it's a STANDARD room Obviously Disney can not demo and start over with properties every decade to keep up with the latest 'new guy on the block' - but the point was to illustrate more contemporary designs and show that Disney's "rehabs" people gush over are at best attempting to keep up with trends.. instead of creating them.

If people want another comparison closer to home for Disney... The Raddison LBV.. which is right next to Crossroads basically (Horrible traffic area tho!).

View attachment 59420

This huge room easily slept my family of five comfortably and had modern amenities in the bathroom like a basin sink, etc. The rate on the web right now for a room tomorrow.. $139

For ROOMS... Disney's generally lack. I'm not saying they need to match this price... location is worth paying for... but services and rooms? Disney is way behind.

And this place does't charge a resort fee either.

 

[AEfx]

The problem is this forum, while very popular and informative, is a small segment of their target demographics. They are banking in new, uninformed dvc clients that might not know any better. I honestly think they're looking down on us and that they're smarter.

Thing is, a lot of us do live in the real world most of the time - and for the life of me I can't figure out where the demand for more DVC is coming from.

Eventually, they have to hit bottom somewhere - because the audience for these just cannot be infinite.

I know folks from all walks of life, many of them who can afford such things (really afford them - I tend to think that if one has to finance leasing in to DVC, it may not really be in their price range, but as we all know folks buy vehicles and homes all the time that are really out of their means). And I cannot figure out where all these folks are coming from. I mean, I get that the points can be used a lot of different places (which, to be honest, is sad in and of itself - that a huge benefit is that you can stay somewhere other than Disney - no wonder the parks are ignored so badly), but even then - I just don't get it, unless you are someone who goes to WDW most years and stays in Deluxes to begin with.

First, the folks that can afford it generally aren't the types of regularly visiting WDW guests year after year. Most people of a certain financial point I've found look down on Disney for more than the occasional "we have to take the kids at least once" excursion.

Second, it is not an "investment" - most folks I know that buy timeshares do so as a functional investment. A DVC is a club, by it's very nature it loses equity every year until it expires. A real timeshare can be sold, often at a profit, and can be passed down to heirs, etc., as it's actually partial ownership. I just don't see how *that* many folks want to lease the "magic" for the prices they charge.

Is it really so many "low information" leasers or folks who finance it away? I just don't see that many folks gambling on the future like that (especially since I believe there is no cap on how much "maintenance" Disney can continue to charge for the life of the lease).

What am I missing here? I get some folks love Disney and it works for them - more power to 'em - but I just don't see that being this vast audience they can continue to get to sign long-term leases on vacation points.

(edited for clarity)

 

[Nemo14]

Thing is, a lot of us do live in the real world most of the time - and for the life of me I can't figure out where the demand for more DVC is coming from.

Eventually, they have to hit bottom somewhere - because the audience for these just cannot be infinite.

I know folks from all walks of life, many of them who can afford such things (really afford them - I tend to think that if one has to finance leasing in to DVC, it may not really be in their price range, but as we all know folks buy vehicles and homes all the time that are really out of their means). And I cannot figure out where all these folks are coming from. I mean, I get that the points can be used a lot of different places (which, to be honest, is sad in and of itself - that a huge benefit is that you can stay somewhere other than Disney - no wonder the parks are ignored so badly), but even then - I just don't get it, unless you are someone who goes to WDW most years and stays in Deluxes to begin with.

First, the folks that can afford it generally aren't the types of regularly visiting WDW guests to begin with - year after year. Most people of a certain financial point I've found look down on Disney for more than the occasional "we have to take the kids at least once" excursion.

Second, it is not an "investment" - most folks I know that buy timeshares do so as a functional investment. A DVC is a club, by it's very nature it loses equity every year until it expires. It can be sold, often at a profit, and can be passed down to heirs, etc., as it's actually partial ownership. I just don't see how *that* many folks want to lease the "magic" for the prices they charge.

Is it really so many "low information" leasers or folks who finance it away? I just don't see that many folks gambling on the future like that (especially since I believe there is no cap on how much "maintenance" Disney can continue to charge for the life of the lease).

What am I missing here? I get some folks love Disney and it works for them - more power to 'em - but I just don't see that being this vast audience they can continue to get to sign long-term leases on vacation points.

It's for Magical Memories, didn't you know?

 

[bhg469]

Thing is, a lot of us do live in the real world most of the time - and for the life of me I can't figure out where the demand for more DVC is coming from.

Eventually, they have to hit bottom somewhere - because the audience for these just cannot be infinite.

I know folks from all walks of life, many of them who can afford such things (really afford them - I tend to think that if one has to finance leasing in to DVC, it may not really be in their price range, but as we all know folks buy vehicles and homes all the time that are really out of their means). And I cannot figure out where all these folks are coming from. I mean, I get that the points can be used a lot of different places (which, to be honest, is sad in and of itself - that a huge benefit is that you can stay somewhere other than Disney - no wonder the parks are ignored so badly), but even then - I just don't get it, unless you are someone who goes to WDW most years and stays in Deluxes to begin with.

First, the folks that can afford it generally aren't the types of regularly visiting WDW guests to begin with - year after year. Most people of a certain financial point I've found look down on Disney for more than the occasional "we have to take the kids at least once" excursion.

Second, it is not an "investment" - most folks I know that buy timeshares do so as a functional investment. A DVC is a club, by it's very nature it loses equity every year until it expires. It can be sold, often at a profit, and can be passed down to heirs, etc., as it's actually partial ownership. I just don't see how *that* many folks want to lease the "magic" for the prices they charge.

Is it really so many "low information" leasers or folks who finance it away? I just don't see that many folks gambling on the future like that (especially since I believe there is no cap on how much "maintenance" Disney can continue to charge for the life of the lease).

What am I missing here? I get some folks love Disney and it works for them - more power to 'em - but I just don't see that being this vast audience they can continue to get to sign long-term leases on vacation points.

The people who got in the first few years are probably real happy investment wise. Much like bit coin early adopters. At this point though, you're only going in if you're not concerned about money at all. I agree with you, demand is coming from somewhere and I don't understand how.

 

[GoofGoof]

Second, it is not an "investment" - most folks I know that buy timeshares do so as a functional investment. A DVC is a club, by it's very nature it loses equity every year until it expires. A real timeshare can be sold, often at a profit, and can be passed down to heirs, etc., as it's actually partial ownership. I just don't see how *that* many folks want to lease the "magic" for the prices they charge.

You know people who buy timeshares as an investment? The ones you see sold for $1 on eBay if someone is willing to just pick up the maintenance fees? Timeshares in general are not a great investment if you plan to hold them to resell. There are some exceptions. DVC holds resale value as well or better than most timeshares on the market.

For the record DVC points can be resold and passed down to heirs. You still get a deed when you buy.

 

[Tigger1988]

The people who got in the first few years are probably real happy investment wise. Much like bit coin early adopters. At this point though, you're only going in if you're not concerned about money at all. I agree with you, demand is coming from somewhere and I don't understand how.

We did and we are. Easily paid for itself within the first 10 years of ownership.

 

[AEfx]

You know people who buy timeshares as an investment? The ones you see sold for $1 on eBay if someone is willing to just pick up the maintenance fees? Timeshares in general are not a great investment if you plan to hold them to resell. There are some exceptions. DVC holds resale value as well or better than most timeshares on the market.

For the record DVC points can be resold and passed down to heirs. You still get a deed when you buy.

But it also has a firm date on it when it's absolutely worthless.

To be fair, I said "functional" investment - as in something they can use that does not automatically depreciate in value like a DVC membership. Second, I realize that the membership can be given to heirs - but I was talking about as an asset that can be owned. This is a lease. A deed denotes ownership - permanent, ownership. That's unlike a DVC membership. Disney may give a piece of paper that says "deed" on it, but that's not the type of deed I was talking about. I'm sure just as many folks have to resell DVC memberships because they can't keep up with the maintenance fees, either.

Regardless, I get how it works for some folks. Like I said, that's great - but I question how many more folks out there will buy-in before the market for these is saturated.

 

[GoofGoof]

But it also has a firm date on it when it's absolutely worthless.

To be fair, I said "functional" investment - as in something they can use that does not automatically depreciate in value like a DVC membership. Second, I realize that the membership can be given to heirs - but I was talking about as an asset that can be owned. This is a lease. A deed denotes ownership - permanent, ownership. That's unlike a DVC membership. Disney may give a piece of paper that says "deed" on it, but that's not the type of deed I was talking about. I'm sure just as many folks have to resell DVC memberships because they can't keep up with the maintenance fees, either.

Regardless, I get how it works for some folks. Like I said, that's great - but I question how many more folks out there will buy-in before the market for these is saturated.

I guess we will find out. They don't appear to be stopping building them

 

[SpaceMountain77]

You know people who buy timeshares as an investment? The ones you see sold for $1 on eBay if someone is willing to just pick up the maintenance fees? Timeshares in general are not a great investment if you plan to hold them to resell. There are some exceptions. DVC holds resale value as well or better than most timeshares on the market.

For the record DVC points can be resold and passed down to heirs. You still get a deed when you buy.

One DVC representative encouraged me to buy BLT at $155 a point because it was a good investment. With each year that passes, points are used and the contract depreciates in value. I never understood the investment smoke and mirrors sideshow. Moreover, if you think that BLT points can eventually be sold for more than $200 per point, then Tinkerbell must be hand-delivering your pixie dust.

 

[AEfx]

I guess we will find out. They don't appear to be stopping building them

Well exactly, LOL, that's the point. Basically, WDW is moving out of the theme park business and into the leasing business, apparently more and more. If they keep up at this rate, we're going to have ghost town resorts where folks are using their points elsewhere, and parks that can't attract folks to spend the big bucks on the empty rooms left by them.

 

[GoofGoof]

Well exactly, LOL, that's the point. Basically, WDW is moving out of the theme park business and into the leasing business, apparently more and more. If they keep up at this rate, we're going to have ghost town resorts where folks are using their points elsewhere, and parks that can't attract folks to spend the big bucks on the empty rooms left by them.

With 25,000+ rooms WDW left the them park business years ago. They have been in the hotel business. They are now canabalizing their future hotel business by selling part of it off.

I can't predict the future, but trading into DVC from another timeshare is still one of the hardest things to do. There is quite a bit of demand. If DVC owners trade out through RCI their rooms are still filled just with someone who trades in. DVC resorts run at 95% occupancy.

 

[BrerJon]

For that matter I don't know why anyone would shop while at WDW unless is was a one off store or something really out of the ordinary?????

That's true for Americans, but not for many guests from overseas, for whom the ordinary isn't ordinary. They go in their droves to the other malls in Orlando because they offer plenty of stores they can't get back home. All Disney is doing is keeping them on property when they do so.