Disneyland hotels have been maxed as far as occupancy and pricing for at least a decade. Within this time frame, DVC doesn't make sense as long as they can continue to pull $300+ a night for their 400 sq ft rooms. DVC rooms are typically twice that size for a 1BR. So unless they can manage more than double the price for a DVC, it's not a good trade off as long as occupancy is solid. If local attendance falls as much as they're trying for (major push to rid the park of pASSholes), then demand for longer stays at the hotels will only increase once people (like me) see a reason to go back to Disneyland after the local scourge has been dealt with. I've actually seen a lot of talk from friends, family and other acquaintances that just won't do to Disneyland right now because of the parking, food, and queueing problems that all stem from the hardcore locals. Disneyland will be more hospitable for tourists once that's all been addressed. If that happens, I don't see much of a reason for DVC and it's high maintenance costs/lower per sq foot margins any time soon at DLR.
You almost had me. Certainly, the load levels at the price points that Disney is able to command in Anaheim are Reason No. 1 as to why you don't see more DVC. It simply would be bad business (if you didn't hear, Disney is a business! Shocking, I know, because all fans assume it's a charity.) to add DVC inventory over traditional hotel units.
BUT ... when you start dissing the locals (yeah, some are definitely a problem ... but that's like saying some Americans are a problem ... in every group you have bad) and stating Disney is trying to rid itself of the locals where I start diverging. The reality is that Disney created the AP problem and it could stop it tomorrow. You simply end the program entirely. People want to visit? They pay for 1-2-3-4-5 days. They're locals? You take 25% off the cost. Maybe even offer a frequent Guest program like the old Subway cards where you bought nine sandwiches and the tenth was free.
Too drastic? Likely. But that's why I started with it. ... Disney has all these allegedly 'cheap' APs that are anything but. When Disneyland had $89 APs, maybe people had a point with parents dropping kids off like at the mall (a famous Al Lutz refrain from the late 90s-early 00s era). But when your least expensive AP is pushing $400 and the not-so-long-ago $199 PAP is over $1,000 and people are still buying them up, Disney isn't stupid. They are trying to change Passholder habits, not get rid of a guaranteed income stream (and, despite popular theory, APers do spend on food and crap). As soon as Disney saw a little softness in the market with the Star Wars construction and 60th hangover, they immediately restarted the suspended sales of the SoCal AP (second least expensive option). They also made the SoCal resident offer much better in 2017 than 2016. In other words, they aren't overly concerned about crowding and the like and they'd like to sell more passes at the higher price points if they could.
One big issue -- parking -- is something that has really been an issue since about 2005 and one that has been passed like a hot potato from one DLR Prez to the next. Now, finally they starting work on a second structure when the reality is it should have been open a decade ago. Once that opens, and with the moving of security, I think crowding won't be nearly as bad a factor.
Of course, what really should have happened was the mythical third gate with the Star Wars product and, possibly, Marvel as well. But ... Disney and Iger are very risk averse and opening another park is always a risk.
One of the few I know. I've found it to be more reasonable in costs includeing the flight then wdw.
