New DVC Resort

[Tom]

Can't believe we're four pages in, and I'm the first to mention it, but...

There was talk online about a year ago, complete with a drawing, of the GF receiving a DVC wing where the spa or racket club (or both) currently sits. The talk was that they were going to add a very small number of DVC rooms in this location (a la Grand Californian in Anaheim), then rebuild/replace the spa/racquet club in another location close by.

Seems to me that would make total sense, and would be built much faster than an entire new resort. They could break ground on a small DVC wing at the GF and the rumored FW add at the same time... Be able to start selling the GF points much earlier than the FW points, and have them close to sold out by the time the FW resort was complete.

Truthfully, I'll be more surprised if this DOESN'T happen than if it does. :shrug:

Good point.

I, personally, would love a few DVC rooms at the GF, because I'll never be able to stay there otherwise.

My wife really wants some DVC rooms at the Poly, but it's landlocked, which means they'd have to absorb a current longhouse...and then we end up with another Jambo House (small, poorly laid out rooms because they tried to utilize the footprints of standard rooms).

 

[TinkerBelle8878]

Maybe its just me but it feels like DVC is overtaking everything. And soon non DVC members will be edged out. Enough building DVCs with existing resorts. Y&BC never needed it, now its a crowded eyesore. I stayed there a few times before DVC arrived there. Now, that's one of the last places on property I'd book.

Contemporary used to be a really cool looking building and now with BLT, looks silly. Getting rid of the other garden wing is in effect stopping anyone from staying at the resort for which that was a more affordable option. Then there is no other accomodation except for the pricey tower. And I'm sure prices on that won't be lowered.

I shudder at the thought of DVC coming to Poly and overcrowding that area. Its nice as is. Making 20 more longhouses will just ruin it.

But if they want to build a new, non attached DVC, its no skin off my nose. I'd prefer it. I know many will disagree but just like everything else it will get oversaturated and people will realize its not worth it. Its basic economics. The less you have the more people want them. The more you build and the more overran it is, the less people want to spend their money on it. Its still new enough that people haven't tired of it yet.

I wish the money would just be spent on the parks. There are all of those empty Epcot pavillions that need fixing. There's a great deal that would probably bring more visitors in that way than DVC.

 

[walt-sent-me]

DVC Mainstreet. To the stage right side of the monorail station, if the audience is sitting in the lagoon. Why not? Immediate entrance to MK, immediate access to monorail. Spend the night overseeing Magic Kingdom. Closer than the Contemporary. There's something similar to this in Cali. I'm just saying........

 

[SeaCastle]

DVC Mainstreet. To the stage right side of the monorail station, if the audience is sitting in the lagoon. Why not? Immediate entrance to MK, immediate access to monorail. Spend the night overseeing Magic Kingdom. Closer than the Contemporary. There's something similar to this in Cali. I'm just saying........

I'm not sure what you think is similar to that in Cali, but you're not too far off - the Exposition Hall area/Gulf Hospitality House was designed to be the entrance to a Victorian-themed hotel built off of Main Street, which never materialized. I believe the concept was the brainchild of the Grand Floridian Beach Resort, but Widen Your World does a better job explaining this: http://www.omniluxe.net/wyw/hsphouse.htm

 

[walt-sent-me]

The Grand Californian sits adjacent to the two parks at the Disneyland Resort. Closer than any of our WDW resorts, with the exception maybe of the Contemporary....as far as proximity is concerned. I'd rather stay on property at WDW than at Disneyland. A DVC at Mainstreet would be an E ticket resort in my opinion.

 

[Biff215]

Maybe its just me but it feels like DVC is overtaking everything. And soon non DVC members will be edged out. Enough building DVCs with existing resorts. Y&BC never needed it, now its a crowded eyesore. I stayed there a few times before DVC arrived there. Now, that's one of the last places on property I'd book.

Contemporary used to be a really cool looking building and now with BLT, looks silly. Getting rid of the other garden wing is in effect stopping anyone from staying at the resort for which that was a more affordable option. Then there is no other accomodation except for the pricey tower. And I'm sure prices on that won't be lowered.

I shudder at the thought of DVC coming to Poly and overcrowding that area. Its nice as is. Making 20 more longhouses will just ruin it.

But if they want to build a new, non attached DVC, its no skin off my nose. I'd prefer it. I know many will disagree but just like everything else it will get oversaturated and people will realize its not worth it. Its basic economics. The less you have the more people want them. The more you build and the more overran it is, the less people want to spend their money on it. Its still new enough that people haven't tired of it yet.

I wish the money would just be spent on the parks. There are all of those empty Epcot pavillions that need fixing. There's a great deal that would probably bring more visitors in that way than DVC.

DVC won't be over-saturated until people stop buying in, which clearly has not happened as of yet. I agree that this point will eventually come at WDW, which is also why I think we will continue to see off-property resorts like in Hawaii.

And again, please remember that DVC money is very different than WDW money, so the parks aren't losing out.

 

[sbkline]

DVC won't be over-saturated until people stop buying in, which clearly has not happened as of yet. I agree that this point will eventually come at WDW, which is also why I think we will continue to see off-property resorts like in Hawaii.

And again, please remember that DVC money is very different than WDW money, so the parks aren't losing out.

No matter how "different" DVC money is from "WDW" money, one could always argue that they could still cut the DVC fund and transfer some of that money over to the WDW fund, couldn't they? I mean, isn't it kind of like me creating two savings accounts; one as my general savings account, and the other as my "WDW vacation fund" account? If people accuse me of wasting money on all these WDW trips, I could argue "yes, but that's all coming out of my WDW savings account, not my general savings account. They could then counter argue "yes, but you chose to have two seperate accounts, and you could always close that WDW account and put that towards your regular savings account, and quit wasting money on WDW". So ultimately, it comes down to the same thing in the end...allocating a certain amount of money towards one thing when they could always choose to re-allocate that money to something else.

For what it's worth, my example was hypothetical. I don't really have a "WDW savings account", but I thought that was a good example to illustrate my point.

 

[Tom]

No matter how "different" DVC money is from "WDW" money, one could always argue that they could still cut the DVC fund and transfer some of that money over to the WDW fund, couldn't they? I mean, isn't it kind of like me creating two savings accounts; one as my general savings account, and the other as my "WDW vacation fund" account? If people accuse me of wasting money on all these WDW trips, I could argue "yes, but that's all coming out of my WDW savings account, not my general savings account. They could then counter argue "yes, but you chose to have two seperate accounts, and you could always close that WDW account and put that towards your regular savings account, and quit wasting money on WDW". So ultimately, it comes down to the same thing in the end...allocating a certain amount of money towards one thing when they could always choose to re-allocate that money to something else.

For what it's worth, my example was hypothetical. I don't really have a "WDW savings account", but I thought that was a good example to illustrate my point.

Again, what you say holds true with all of the other divisions of the company, but the actual DVC company is organized differently and must abide by its own set of laws and regs.

Any of the money collected from residents in the form of maintenance dues from the members goes into a "pot" that it strictly guarded.

Now, when they generate profit after selling a new resort, sure, that's "Disney's" money, and they can probably do with it what they wish. But on paper, they still need to show it as income on that profit center.

 

[bgraham34]

I know I spoke with a DVC guide a year or so back and he was telling me that there were quite a few people interested in DVC but since the GF did not have DVC they did not want to buy into it. He told me this was from people staying at the GF.

 

[Tom]

I know I spoke with a DVC guide a year or so back and he was telling me that there were quite a few people interested in DVC but since the GF did not have DVC they did not want to buy into it. He told me this was from people staying at the GF.

Yeah, everyone has their favorite resort, and just expects DVC to build at "their" resort.

It's a lot cheaper and easier for DVC to build adjacent to or in conjunction with one of the Deluxe Resorts, since the infrastructure and support is already there. Building stand-alone DVC Resorts is a heck of a lot more expensive and requires a lot more red tape.

That's why I predict we'll see more annexes before we see more stand-alones. They'll just go around and hijack a building or wing or two at the remaining Deluxes (Poly, GF) and attempt to turn old guest rooms into DVC-quality rooms.

Fortunately, this scenario won't inundate those resorts with "more people" - which was the fear of someone posting above. There isn't room to add buildings at the Poly - it's landlocked. They would just take over a longhouse.

GF has space, because they could move some of the service buildings to the south, and add guest rooms where things like the spa are now. But a Resort the size of GF can handle the extra guests, in my opinion.

 

[jt04]

Yeah, everyone has their favorite resort, and just expects DVC to build at "their" resort.

It's a lot cheaper and easier for DVC to build adjacent to or in conjunction with one of the Deluxe Resorts, since the infrastructure and support is already there. Building stand-alone DVC Resorts is a heck of a lot more expensive and requires a lot more red tape.

That's why I predict we'll see more annexes before we see more stand-alones. They'll just go around and hijack a building or wing or two at the remaining Deluxes (Poly, GF) and attempt to turn old guest rooms into DVC-quality rooms.

Fortunately, this scenario won't inundate those resorts with "more people" - which was the fear of someone posting above. There isn't room to add buildings at the Poly - it's landlocked. They would just take over a longhouse.

GF has space, because they could move some of the service buildings to the south, and add guest rooms where things like the spa are now. But a Resort the size of GF can handle the extra guests, in my opinion.

I am not so sure Poly is landlocked. There are two potential options for expanding it if they choose to. And I still think people should not dismiss the idea of the land where the TTC currently sits being developed into something entirely different. Something that can generate revenue.

 

[Tom]

I am not so sure Poly is landlocked. There are two potential options for expanding it if they choose to. And I still think people should not dismiss the idea of the land where the TTC currently sits being developed into something entirely different. Something that can generate revenue.

They'd have to move the Poly's parking across the street to the Golf Course to fit another building. Or maybe ONE more small building between the west longhouses and the dinner show building.

I'm not on board with the TTC idea. The obvious location for a monorail resort is where the Mediterranean one was supposed to go, between TTC and Contemp. There's no reason to go to the immense trouble or expense of doing anything with the TTC. It's fine as it is, and the space it's sitting on isn't that valuable. It's way too close to the Poly for another resort, and the logistics of moving the monorail platform just make it absurd.

 

[bdinger]

We attended a DVC Open House back in October. As our guide was showing us the BLT and AKL models they have, one of the questions I asked him was if there was any truth to the rumor of DVC building at the Grand Floridian. (It was something I had read here a while back.) He didn't say one way or the other but he did smile and say I was pretty well informed.

Take it for what it's worth.

 

[Pioneer Hall]

We attended a DVC Open House back in October. As our guide was showing us the BLT and AKL models they have, one of the questions I asked him was if there was any truth to the rumor of DVC building at the Grand Floridian. (It was something I had read here a while back.) He didn't say one way or the other but he did smile and say I was pretty well informed.

The guide has been with the company for a while, and does other work for them (outside of selling DVC). Take it for what it's worth.

Sounds like a sales tactic to me. He saw that you were interested in something, and led you to believe it might be true. He never confirmed it, but he also never denied it. If that piece of information led to a sale for someone, they would be mad, but he would have never lied either.

 

[bdinger]

Sounds like a sales tactic to me. He saw that you were interested in something, and led you to believe it might be true. He never confirmed it, but he also never denied it. If that piece of information led to a sale for someone, they would be mad, but he would have never lied either.

It could be, but I didn't interpret it as that. I didn't express any interest in a GF DVC other than the curiosity of what's next after BLT is filled. The rep was selling us BLT. If anything, actually knowing 100% that a GF DVC was forthcoming could delay a purchase.

He was probably just as valid as the "bus driver said" rumors, so who knows... Just thought it was interesting to share.

 

[Buried20KLeague]

Maybe its just me but it feels like DVC is overtaking everything. And soon non DVC members will be edged out. Enough building DVCs with existing resorts. Y&BC never needed it, now its a crowded eyesore. I stayed there a few times before DVC arrived there. Now, that's one of the last places on property I'd book.

Contemporary used to be a really cool looking building and now with BLT, looks silly. Getting rid of the other garden wing is in effect stopping anyone from staying at the resort for which that was a more affordable option. Then there is no other accomodation except for the pricey tower. And I'm sure prices on that won't be lowered.

I shudder at the thought of DVC coming to Poly and overcrowding that area. Its nice as is. Making 20 more longhouses will just ruin it.

But if they want to build a new, non attached DVC, its no skin off my nose. I'd prefer it. I know many will disagree but just like everything else it will get oversaturated and people will realize its not worth it. Its basic economics. The less you have the more people want them. The more you build and the more overran it is, the less people want to spend their money on it. Its still new enough that people haven't tired of it yet.

I wish the money would just be spent on the parks. There are all of those empty Epcot pavillions that need fixing. There's a great deal that would probably bring more visitors in that way than DVC.

I think the point that you're missing, though, is that Disney has a HUGE pool of people to attempt to turn into DVC owners. Think about how many people visit WDW each year. Now think if they turn just .01% of those people into owners. That doesn't take into account people that buy in that don't buy during a trip to WDW, either.

They'll keep building as long as people buy. Which I'd bet is YEARS, still. Disney's ROI when they put up a new DVC building is nothing short of astonishing. Someone on another board had added up the total points available for purchase in the new BLT and calculated that Disney stood to receive $700,000,000 by the time the points were all sold. I have no idea what it cost to build that building, but it wasn't even CLOSE to that amount. Add to that the fact that the DVC owners then also pay to run the building for the next 50 years... Of COURSE Disney is going to keep building these things. Massive profit, plus zero cost operation of the facility for the next 50 years?!?!?!? Plus then the members are all very likely to spend money in tickets, merch, food, etc on a regular basis. On top of THAT... Most of these people finance the DVC purchase, which Disney does directly... Meaning Disney then also charges and gets interest from most members, too!!

I believe they'll add small DVC wings to each of the deluxes, because they'll go up quick, they'll sell quick (relatively), and they'll appease guests' desires for DVC's of certain types (like Poly and GF). In between these little add-on wings, they'll work on full DVC resorts at the same time. They'd be stupid if they didn't... That kind of income just will not be ignored. I'd also be surprised if they didn't start adding wings to moderates after deluxes are done, too. Maybe add a different tier or "class". This thing is just getting started, I'm certain.

Debate, if you like, how it might negatively impact WDW... That remains to be seen. Will crowds grow too large? Will they spend on the parks to compensate? Will it create a huge backlash? Will they change DVC perks negatively (as has been rumored) to compensate instead of spending on the parks?? Nobody knows.

One thing I DO know... If you buy in, you better hope and pray they don't change the rules and perks in such a way that would negatively impact the value of the VERY expensive timeshare you just bought.

 

[majortom1981]

ugh

I hate these lets complain about dvc posts.

First off any non dvc member can stay at a dvc resort.

Second the dvc resorts get all paid off when all rooms are sold. Unlike park additions. So there is no reason not to do it.

So this adds hotel capacity WHILE being a built in money raiser for the resort.

Also if the dvc addition is attached to an existing resort it will add capacity to that resort.

 

[lazyboy97o]

So this adds hotel capacity WHILE being a built in money raiser for the resort.

If revenue is contractually obligied to stay in the subsidiary that operates Disney's Vacation Club then it is not money for the Resort.

 

[DisneyJoe]

If revenue is contractually obligied to stay in the subsidiary that operates Disney's Vacation Club then it is not money for the Resort.

If the add-on DVC members are using the store and restaurants of the main resort, the main resort is gaining revenue from them, no?

 

[DVCOwner]

If revenue is contractually obligied to stay in the subsidiary that operates Disney's Vacation Club then it is not money for the Resort.

Also at the combined resorts, some of the cost of common areas of that resort are paid by DVC members. If not for DVC the resort would have to cover all of this cost.

DVC resorts do not take away money from the parks, they make money every year for Disney. This is money that Disney could spend on adding things to the parks if they wish. The problem is not DVC or adding more DVC to WDW; it is management not wanting to spend the money on the parks at this time.