News Disney Riviera Resort announced

[peter11435]

No. It’s part of the monorail resort complex.

Just like the Y&B and Boardwalk are part of the same complex.

You’re just making stuff up to match your statement now.

So are pop/art part of this moderate resort complex you’re referring to? Or does the presence of a single moderate resort mean that the entire area is now a moderate resort complex? Why not call it a skyliner resort complex? You defined one by a mode of transportation why define the other by a financial metric? Why not the barefoot bay complex?

If you’re going to say that Riviera is part of a moderate resort complex simply because it’s adjacent to one then the opposite must also be true. I guess CBR must now be considerate part of a DVC complex? CBR part of a deluxe villa complex?

 

[JoeCamel]

I think photos show it was the lack of appropriate fixing to the wall, not the construction of the wall, that was the problem? At least for the single Murphy bed, which was the one that fell on the lady.

As for whatever has sparked the “do not use the wall bed” - I don’t know if that is a precaution or if another issue was discovered.

I believe he meant that if the wall had been constructed with framed mounting points they would have been able to secure the beds to the walls. As it is they tried an inadequate fastener to do the job and it failed.

 

[peter11435]

I believe he meant that if the wall had been constructed with framed mounting points they would have been able to secure the beds to the walls. As it is they tried an inadequate fastener to do the job and it failed.

We haven’t seen inside the wall. Is it not possible that appropriate blocking was built into the wall but was in the wrong location? Either the installation of the blocking, the installation of the bed, or the manufacturing of the bed resulted in the blocking and fasteners not lining up?

 

[drizgirl]

We haven’t seen inside the wall. Is it not possible that appropriate blocking was built into the wall but was in the wrong location? Either the installation of the blocking, the installation of the bed, or the manufacturing of the bed resulted in the blocking and fasteners not lining up?

Not sure why that would even matter. It's an epic fail regardless.

I'm really curious to see how/when they resolve this.

Are they really expecting people to pay $600/night to have a mattress laying on the floor in the middle of the room their entire trip? Are they refunding (or partially refunding) points and/or dollars. Honestly, I'd get more value in a room at Pop if it means I don't have a mattress laying on the floor in the middle of the room.

 

[peter11435]

Not sure why that would even matter. It's an epic fail regardless.

I'm really curious to see how/when they resolve this.

Are they really expecting people to pay $600/night to have a mattress laying on the floor in the middle of the room their entire trip? Are they refunding (or partially refunding) points and/or dollars. Honestly, I'd get more value in a room at Pop if it means I don't have a mattress laying on the floor in the middle of the room.

Why would understanding why a failure happened not matter. It certainly matters when it comes to implementing a solution.

There’s a huge difference between them making no attempt to properly secure the bed, and an attempt being made with proper blocking but a mistake happening along the way where things didn’t line up.

Did someone think proper securement was unnecessary or too expensive, or was it intended but improperly executed? Was the mistake in the design of the wall, the fault of the contractor who built the wall, the vendor who manufactured the bed itself, or the contractor who installed the bed. There are many questions and they all matter.

 

[drizgirl]

Why would understanding why a failure happened not matter. It certainly matters when it comes to implementing a solution.

There’s a huge difference between them making no attempt to properly secure the bed, and an attempt being made with proper blocking but a mistake happening along the way where things didn’t line up.

Did someone think proper securement was unnecessary or too expensive, or was it intended but improperly executed? Was the mistake in the design of the wall, the fault of the contractor who built the wall, the vendor who manufactured the bed itself, or the contractor who installed the bed. There are many questions and they all matter.

Oh, they definitely need to know where the failure happened. But there's no excuse for it happening. I'm not an engineer, nor do I play one on TV. I didn't even stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. But even I know it was crazy stupid to install those the way they did.

 

[peter11435]

Oh, they definitely need to know where the failure happened. But there's no excuse for it happening. I'm not an engineer, nor do I play one on TV. I didn't even stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. But even I know it was crazy stupid to install those the way they did.

I’m not saying there’s an excuse. But again there’s a huge difference between blatantly not properly securing the unit, and intending to properly secure it and an error along the way resulting in things not correctly aligning. One shows intent to do things right and one shows negligence from the start.

 

[drizgirl]

I’m not saying there’s an excuse. But again there’s a huge difference between blatantly not properly securing the unit, and intending to properly secure it and an error along the way resulting in things not correctly aligning. One shows intent to do things right and one shows negligence from the start.

I would agree if the attempt was even remotely reasonable. It wasn't.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I think photos show it was the lack of appropriate fixing to the wall, not the construction of the wall, that was the problem? At least for the single Murphy bed, which was the one that fell on the lady.

As for whatever has sparked the “do not use the wall bed” - I don’t know if that is a precaution or if another issue was discovered.

What appears to be drywall anchors, which are not what should have been used, are visible in the photo. Even with two layers of gypsum wallboard (drywall), that is only 1” of thickness and appropriate blocking would have been hit during installation of those anchors.

We haven’t seen inside the wall. Is it not possible that appropriate blocking was built into the wall but was in the wrong location? Either the installation of the blocking, the installation of the bed, or the manufacturing of the bed resulted in the blocking and fasteners not lining up?

Blocking should not be in a very specific location. The whole point is that you’re providing sufficient area to allow for construction tolerances. The photos seem to show drywall anchors which makes this distinction you’re after rather nonexistent as the lack of blocking available for attachment seems to be known.

 

[xdan0920]

In that case AKL and the All Stars are part of the same complex. Is that a value resort complex?

The resorts are grouped by area, certainly. And AKL, Coronado and the All Stars are the WDW Animal Kingdom Area resorts.

A complex has a different meaning to many. I think that’s where your views differ from most other people’s.

I would absolutely say the Yacht and Beach Club resorts are a complex. All facilities are available to guests of both resorts. But the Boardwalk guests cannot use the Y&B Resort facilities (gym, pool) and is therefore not part of the same complex.

Same for Fort Wilderness and Wilderness Lodge. Or indeed the Poly and GF.

But of course lines get blurred. Contemporary and Bay Lake are arguably part of the same complex, and yet pool sharing is a one-way street in this case.

It’s mind numbing the pedantic nature of this argument.

You’re just making stuff up to match your statement now.

So are pop/art part of this moderate resort complex you’re referring to? Or does the presence of a single moderate resort mean that the entire area is now a moderate resort complex? Why not call it a skyliner resort complex? You defined one by a mode of transportation why define the other by a financial metric? Why not the barefoot bay complex?

If you’re going to say that Riviera is part of a moderate resort complex simply because it’s adjacent to one then the opposite must also be true. I guess CBR must now be considerate part of a DVC complex? CBR part of a deluxe villa complex?

I am using common sense and a very general view. These resorts are built on top of one another, are clearly defined in a map area. Share a walking path. It’s a complex. They don’t share amenities, but they are certainly grouped together.

Ask around, see how many other normal people view these things.

 

[peter11435]

It’s mind numbing the pedantic nature of this argument.

I am using common sense and a very general view. These resorts are built on top of one another, are clearly defined in a map area. Share a walking path. It’s a complex. They don’t share amenities, but they are certainly grouped together.

Ask around, see how many other normal people view these things.

You’re right. It is mind numbing that you seem incapable of mentally separating this resort from it’s adjacent neighbor. Yes they are a complex, yes they are grouped together. But it’s ridiculous to label the complex a moderate complex when clearly a moderate resort is only one part of the complex.

I’ve seen enough of your posts to know that yours is always the superior opinion and the only one that matters.

 

[xdan0920]

You’re right. It is mind numbing that you seem incapable of mentally separating this resort from it’s adjacent neighbor. Yes they are a complex, yes they are grouped together. But it’s ridiculous to label the complex a moderate complex when clearly a moderate resort is only one part of the complex.

I’ve seen enough of your posts to know that yours is always the superior opinion and the only one that matters.

Weird for you to say that, when I literally have said multiple times in this thread that my opinion of this resort means jack squat. It’s selling, people are buying, it’s a success if not a rousing one. My opinion is a fart in the wind.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

In that case AKL and the All Stars are part of the same complex. Is that a value resort complex?

The resorts are grouped by area, certainly. And AKL, Coronado and the All Stars are the WDW Animal Kingdom Area resorts.

A complex has a different meaning to many. I think that’s where your views differ from most other people’s.

I would absolutely say the Yacht and Beach Club resorts are a complex. All facilities are available to guests of both resorts. But the Boardwalk guests cannot use the Y&B Resort facilities (gym, pool) and is therefore not part of the same complex.

Same for Fort Wilderness and Wilderness Lodge. Or indeed the Poly and GF.

But of course lines get blurred. Contemporary and Bay Lake are arguably part of the same complex, and yet pool sharing is a one-way street in this case.

Riviera is literally built on top of former Caribbean Beach rooms. You can't get any closer.

You have to drive to get between AKL and All-Stars. They're building a mile long sidewalk to get from Grand Floridian to MK. They are not a part of the same complex. They're close, but they did not tear down a section of Adventureland to build Grand Floridian on that spot. The Disneyland Hotel in Paris, the Grand Californian and the MiraCoasta are better examples of being part of their parks.

Bay Lake Tower is built on the site of the North Garden wing, and part of Contemporary, just like many other DVC properties.

Riviera is like Beach Club Villas or the Villas at Wilderness Lodge. Except this time they're selling it as another property despite taking the same construction approach as other DVC locations by removing existing rooms and replacing them with new time shares. Riviera is essentially "The Villas at Disney's Caribbean Beach Resort".

 

[carolina_yankee]

Of course it’s not productive. Do you honestly think anyone here believes they are gonna tear down the resort because we don’t like it? It’s a discussion board though, and we are discussing the resort. Like you said, it doesn’t amount to a hill of beans though. DVC is bullet proof, as I’ve said multiple times.
You want to buy here? Go ahead. Plenty of people already are. I’m sure they are quite proud to add the Riviera to their DVC portfolios.

It's not really a discussion, more of a jack-hammering of a particular point of view using extreme descriptives like "dump" or a total misunderstanding of the site by linking it with its neighbor. They share no entrance, no buses, no amenities. One has absolutely nothing to do with the other, but yes, they are next to each other and you can see each other.

I would never argue that Riviera is an excellent execution of theme. I would never argue that the Murphy beds aren't a problem, but there is a history that makes it par for the course (which is a whole other discussion regarding Disney and DVC), and at least this is recoverable. One really has to wonder which architect/imagineer/DVC exec thought people would love bathrooms without sinks or locking doors at BLT. Yet they did. And correcting that cost a pretty penny.

As for design, I would think based on the announced theming, it would look a bit more like the France Pavilion. However, the resort, as a resort, is nice from everything I've seen. I'll know more after my stay in a month.

Personally, I find BLT no more exciting or themed than any Southeast Florida high-rise condo-plex, and OKW, to me, is nearly identical to a condo complex a friend has in Savannah (save for the colors). CCV is in a beautifully themed resort but the CCV component has virtually nothing that says it's Disney, or even wilderness. My 1 BR had absolutely no Disney IP of any kind in any of the art or details, yet its really very nice and popular.

Some Disney resorts have better theming execution than others. However, poor theming execution doesn't make it a "bad" resort. As for purchasing, I'm done with my current contracts. Between price and restrictions, there are valid reasons to proceed carefully with a Riviera purchase apart from discussion of theme. But again, DVC isn't for everybody and different people look for different things.

I guess I have a hard time understanding something is a discussion when the stakes seem to be "all or nothing."

 

[nickys]

Riviera is literally built on top of former Caribbean Beach rooms. You can't get any closer.

You have to drive to get between AKL and All-Stars. They're building a mile long sidewalk to get from Grand Floridian to MK. They are not a part of the same complex. They're close, but they did not tear down a section of Adventureland to build Grand Floridian on that spot. The Disneyland Hotel in Paris, the Grand Californian and the MiraCoasta are better examples of being part of their parks.

Bay Lake Tower is built on the site of the North Garden wing, and part of Contemporary, just like many other DVC properties.

Riviera is like Beach Club Villas or the Villas at Wilderness Lodge. Except this time they're selling it as another property despite taking the same construction approach as other DVC locations by removing existing rooms and replacing them with new time shares. Riviera is essentially "The Villas at Disney's Caribbean Beach Resort".

I agree, except for that last sentence.

They share none of the facilities at CBR, not even the Skyliner station. The only other examples that are comparable are OKW and Saratoga, which are totally stand-alone resorts.

Kidani is an interesting case, because it too is self-contained, has all the amenities it needs in it’s own building but yet is counted as part of AKL - mainly because there weren’t enough rooms not being filled at AKL that they wanted to convert. If you buy at AKL or Kidani, you have one home resort (well, except when the booking system glitches with alarming regularity). And yet they provided all the amenities at the newly built DVC lodge, including the gym.

Every other DVC property (Bay Lake, GFV, Poly, BCV, BW, BRV, CCV) are named as part of their “sister” WDW Resort.

Riviera joins OKW and Saratoga as being named as a unique, stand-alone DVC resort. Crucially, this means Riviera maintenance fees will not contribute a penny towards CBR’s expenses. And ultimately that’s what differentiates a stand-alone Resort from one that is considered part of a sister resort.

 

[Lensman]

I would hazard a guess that if Riviera works out, they'll build out around Barefoot Bay, though that would mean that the resorts would either have the Skyliner passing through them or would be a moderately long walk across the bay to a Skyliner station.

At any rate, I do wonder what Disney's long-term plans are for CBR? I bet it does include upgrading to higher-priced tower accomodations and lighter theming - both of which will garner lots of contentious argument here on the forums.

 

[MisterPenguin]

I would hazard a guess that if Riviera works out, they'll build out around Barefoot Bay, though that would mean that the resorts would either have the Skyliner passing through them or would be a moderately long walk across the bay to a Skyliner station.

At any rate, I do wonder what Disney's long-term plans are for CBR? I bet it does include upgrading to higher-priced tower accomodations and lighter theming - both of which will garner lots of contentious argument here on the forums.

Barefoot Bay is surrounded by resort. You mean more demolish and build towers?

 

[Lensman]

Barefoot Bay is surrounded by resort. You mean more demolish and build towers?

Yes, thus getting rid of the "moderate" resort that "surrounds" Riviera causing cognitive dissonance and emotional disturbances in the Force.

 

[carolina_yankee]

I would hazard a guess that if Riviera works out, they'll build out around Barefoot Bay, though that would mean that the resorts would either have the Skyliner passing through them or would be a moderately long walk across the bay to a Skyliner station.

At any rate, I do wonder what Disney's long-term plans are for CBR? I bet it does include upgrading to higher-priced tower accomodations and lighter theming - both of which will garner lots of contentious argument here on the forums.

A long, long, long time ago on the RADP Usenet group, a poster with credible insider reputation noted that there were possible DVC locations at every moderate. Obviously plans change, but one wonders how long the Port Orleans resorts are safe from some sort of reconfiguration considering that both CSR and Caribbean have had major additions or subtractions.

 

[mmascari]

Why would understanding why a failure happened not matter. It certainly matters when it comes to implementing a solution.

There’s a huge difference between them making no attempt to properly secure the bed, and an attempt being made with proper blocking but a mistake happening along the way where things didn’t line up.

Doesn’t matter to the person under the failed bed. It’s a failure in QC that created a dangerous situation where they were injured.

That it created a danger and not an inconvenience is a difference. One could argue removing use has changed it from a danger into an inconvenience. Still a pretty big one at $600 a night.

Did someone think proper securement was unnecessary or too expensive, or was it intended but improperly executed? Was the mistake in the design of the wall, the fault of the contractor who built the wall, the vendor who manufactured the bed itself, or the contractor who installed the bed. There are many questions and they all matter.

All of these are about where the problem occurred, how many different QC groups missed it, and where blame may exist. They’ll also impact how expensive the fix is. It could be anything from replacing all the beds, tearing down wall sections and rebuilding, to removing all the fold out beds and reducing room capacity. That last option would be a disaster. None of them are quick fixes either. I wouldn’t book a stay that needs that space until after it’s resolved, which could be months, longer, or never.

Still, none of those matter to the person under the failed bed.