Magenta Panther
Well-Known Member
If Disney built a VC hotel that looked like a castle, then I would buy into it. As it is, I'll just use the resorts when I visit the World.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Is This Rumor Credible (This Time)?
- Thread starter dreamscometrue
- Start date
If Disney built a VC hotel that looked like a castle, then I would buy into it. As it is, I'll just use the resorts when I visit the World.
Captain Chaos
Well-Known Member
I'm a DVC owner and I am NOT a fan of any DVC units added to any pavilions in World Showcase... Nope, not at all...
lentesta
Premium Member
Not only is DVC profitable, but Disney includes it in its "Parks and Resorts" category for accounting, which makes the parks look good. Every finance person I've ever talked to says Disney will continue to build DVC for a long time, because it helps boost their theme park numbers.
As for Fort Wilderness, I've heard for a couple of years it's on the short list after the Grand Floridian is done. (I'd heard the Poly, too, but that there were issues with the site.)
The test balloon at Fort Wilderness is kind of unusual.
Len
MissMorrow
Active Member
Why not resurrect the Ventian or Persian resorts instead? My biggest issue with DVC, aside from the relentless building, is the latching on to existing resorts. With the exception of the Boardwalk and maybe AKV, they never really look like they belong.
flynnibus
Premium Member
Then it would be much like DisneySea... you can make the exterior look like it belongs if you try.
Pentacat
Well-Known Member
I have to say of all the crazy Resort ideas this is the least plausible of all of them. There's no way they can possibly "pretty up" those back stage areas behind the WS pavilions enough to make it acceptable for guests. I could totally see a DVC Resort connected to Epcot (think DL Grand Californian) but small scale 3-5 units in each Pavillion would be a logistics nightmare. Of course they could charge whatever they wanted to bring the Golden Oak crowd right into the park so never say never.
jt04
Well-Known Member
I have to say that I think they could do this right and the average guest would not even know they were there. They could be blended in to the architecture and add 'depth' and detail to the pavilions. It would take the best Imagineering techniques to do right but it could be done in a way that improves WS in my opinion.
disneyeater
Active Member
I would absolutely buy into this.
Captain Chaos
Well-Known Member
It would have to be done right... Has to be perfect... And they can't get perfect, no one can... I'd rather more attractions in World Showcase than DVC villas... No, I don't think this would not improve World Showcase at all... But I'd have to wait to see any concept art... Like I said, they would have to do it right...
Gregoryp73
Active Member
You would most definitely have to redo the whole backstage area because of needing to preserve views....I could them incorporate back stage area into the first couple floors of some of these buildings...
Could you imagine what a lagoon view would entail (and cost)??
And I wonder if it would be one huge DVC that Blended as it changed with lands? Japanese DVC....Italian DVC....Morrocon DVC??? Yes please!
fngoofy
Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by fngoofy
It's not a national park, its a resort. There are 50 sq miles and if they started now and never stopped it would take 400 years to fill.
Profit and bottom line are what pay for WDW and are the reason it exists at all. You don't see not-for-profits doing many resorts do you?
Sounds like you need to visit yellowstone instead of WDW for your next vacation, justsayinsall.
Sure.
I stand corrected. I just looked at Google maps and it appears to be 38 sq mi.
I'm not sure when you conducted your survey of developable land, but I have never seen a plan showing that "most of of WDW's developable land is either already spoken for or planned for"
Even if that is the case, it takes them 2+ years to build something like Everest or the new Fantasyland, even a whole park like AK took 3yrs just to build I think.
You could rubber stamp AK 50 time on the land available (at least), so.... maybe 400 years is a bit over the top, 150 years is more like it. That's if they start building today and never stop for 150 years. And at the end of that time we'd have 54 amusement parks and 600 resorts...and that would be bad because?
Creative business is what makes the Disney engine go round. Walt was a dreamer, a dreamer with a business. Sure Roy handled the books, but Walt sure wasn't giving anything away, EVER.
Think DVC type resorts are a new thing? Google Mineral King Ski resort.
Shoot, WDW having the Contemp and Poly on property were the start.
The parks are fantastic and the resorts are awesome.
It's not a national park, its a resort. There are 50 sq miles and if they started now and never stopped it would take 400 years to fill.
Profit and bottom line are what pay for WDW and are the reason it exists at all. You don't see not-for-profits doing many resorts do you?
Sounds like you need to visit yellowstone instead of WDW for your next vacation, justsayinsall.
Sure.
I stand corrected. I just looked at Google maps and it appears to be 38 sq mi.
I'm not sure when you conducted your survey of developable land, but I have never seen a plan showing that "most of of WDW's developable land is either already spoken for or planned for"
Even if that is the case, it takes them 2+ years to build something like Everest or the new Fantasyland, even a whole park like AK took 3yrs just to build I think.
You could rubber stamp AK 50 time on the land available (at least), so.... maybe 400 years is a bit over the top, 150 years is more like it. That's if they start building today and never stop for 150 years. And at the end of that time we'd have 54 amusement parks and 600 resorts...and that would be bad because?
Creative business is what makes the Disney engine go round. Walt was a dreamer, a dreamer with a business. Sure Roy handled the books, but Walt sure wasn't giving anything away, EVER.
Think DVC type resorts are a new thing? Google Mineral King Ski resort.
Shoot, WDW having the Contemp and Poly on property were the start.
The parks are fantastic and the resorts are awesome.
Zac Skellington
Well-Known Member
Personally, I feel Disney missed the boat when they built the EPCOT resorts as they are. I have nothing against the BW, BC, or YC, but they could have been built anywhere. What if instead, they had built a true World Showcase Resort Area? Imagine having the Asian, Venetian, Persian, and Mediterranean, etc. as extensions of WS.
Furthermore, guests of those resorts (and DVC), could have exclusive early entry into WS. Maybe 7-8AM for breakfast in Germany?
Furthermore, guests of those resorts (and DVC), could have exclusive early entry into WS. Maybe 7-8AM for breakfast in Germany?
In looking at google maps, there are only a few that wouldn't require major backstage renovations. In Canada, you could redo and add-on to the current "hotel" that is already there. Wouldn't be very big, but they could do it. The United Kingdom has an area adjacent to it, but they would have to shoehorn something really small there. France has quite a bit of room, so would not be hard to add on there. Morocco would work as well. Japan and America would work if they build something over the canal. Italy and Germany have a few things back there, but nothing that could not move fairly easily. Of course, there is the completely blank area next to Germany that should have been a new pavilion years ago. So then the last 3, China, Norway, and Mexico all have huge buildings behind them that I don't think Disney would be crazy about relocating. Of course, I can't tell the real height of these buildings, so it's possible that something could be built over the top and around them to hide them from guests. Well, except for Test Track, which is right behind Mexico!
So would each resort have it's own special entrance to EPCOT? Just wondering.
Same here.
I bought my DVC at OKW in 1998 (could have bought BW--am I sorry about that? maybe a teeny bit) and I've gotten a great deal over the years.
I would absolutely not buy DVC now at the rates they're charging. No way. I think the current cost of ownership is driving all these new resorts, as the more memberships they sell, the harder it is to get a room at the existing resorts, so they have to build more, not only to continue the nice fat revenue stream that DVC represents, but to keep up with the number of owners looking for accommodations.
I agree that the parks should be the product that's driving DVC sales, but it seems to be the DVC resorts themselves, and newer DVC owners seem to be content with that. Do I think it's cool that I can now stay at the Contemporary using points, and that I'll soon be able to do the same at Grand Floridian? For what I paid, yeah, I think its cool, but I wouldn't cry if they weren't building on to all the deluxe resorts. If I were buying today, though, I'd pretty much expect it!
Even as a DVC owner, I think they're overbuilding DVC.
Captain Chaos
Well-Known Member
IF they can integrate it into looking like the pavilion, and you wouldn't know they were resort villas, then maybe... But DVC villas attached to World Showcase pavilions is NOT what World Showcase needs... World Showcase needs 2 more countries, more attractions... not DVC villas...
raven
Well-Known Member
You just may hear about something down the road if you wish hard enough. :animwink:
The size of the Hotel Frontenac (Canada) is only as wide as Le Cellier restaurant if you've ever been in there. It's VERY small. And this building is already being used for Illuminations lasers and air handling rooms for the restaurant below.
The area beside Germany that everyone always seems to think is a waste of space is a buffer zone for the fireworks/propane storage area on the marina and is required by law for safety reasons. No guests can occupy that area as long as explosives are stored in the area. I've explained this many times in threads and still no one will believe me.
As far as DVCs going into other places in WS, it has been looked at in many aspects.
WDW1974
Well-Known Member
What bothers me most about this thread (not that anyone asked, not that I care that no one asked) is that it is all about DVCing WDW ...
WDW was a better place and a more upscale one 20 years ago. Is DVC the cause of the decline? Of course not. Is it a factor? Absolutely.
The thought of where DVC units could be placed in/around EPCOT presupposes that it actually is a good idea ... as the park sits and rots year after year (beyond additional and lucrative food and beverage locations added).
I suppose everyone forgets that 20 years ago timeshare had a reputation akin to a Ponzi scheme today and was run out of boilerroom operations to hook rube tourists. Now, since Disney, Marriott, Hilton and the like have joined in, it has given the business a legitimacy it never had before.
But I don't know about you guys/gals, but I don't go to WDW to be impressed by the variety of timeshare options. Maybe there's something wrong with me!
WDW was a better place and a more upscale one 20 years ago. Is DVC the cause of the decline? Of course not. Is it a factor? Absolutely.
The thought of where DVC units could be placed in/around EPCOT presupposes that it actually is a good idea ... as the park sits and rots year after year (beyond additional and lucrative food and beverage locations added).
I suppose everyone forgets that 20 years ago timeshare had a reputation akin to a Ponzi scheme today and was run out of boilerroom operations to hook rube tourists. Now, since Disney, Marriott, Hilton and the like have joined in, it has given the business a legitimacy it never had before.
But I don't know about you guys/gals, but I don't go to WDW to be impressed by the variety of timeshare options. Maybe there's something wrong with me!
Nooooooooooooooooo :lookaroun
(I know the quote is taken out of context, but it was too hard to resist.
)
xdan0920
Think for yourselfer
You are way over simplifying this. Much of the land is not developable. Much of the land has already been sold off. Much of the land has already been developed. Much of the land needs to stay as is to be a buffer between resorts, parks, facilities.
I am sure someone (definitely Martin) has a map showing what has been used, what can't be used, ect...