Let's speculate about Polynesian some more!

[maui22]

Makes sense to you does not equal makes sense to Disney financially. I don’t think they’ll want people to snap up resale PVB points instead of buying direct Poly2 points.

Is resale much of a factor in their decision?
How many PVB resale points are sold each year?
Would the number of available resale points increase, decrease, or stay the same?
Would more add-on because they need more points to stay in larger accommodations?
Would some not sell because they can use their points for a duo studio?
Would those who sell PVB increase their asking price and only sell for more than it has been selling for?

Not arguing for or against association decision.

 

[MyDogTink]

This is where I am. The 1bed/2 bath POLY rooms are going to be tempting for my family. I wonder what the point chart will look like for them.

We can book 5 weeknights at BLT Lake view in August for 180 points. How much higher will these be? If I can get 4 weeknights for around 180 or less it might be doable for us.

Riviera would be 144 so I think POLY 2 would be more but maybe not 9 points a night more.

I think you own resale BLT like me. I don’t compare 1BR BLT to 1BR RIV because the 2 full bathroom vs 1, respectively, is like apples vs oranges to me.

We toured RIV the other day. The 2BR lockoff is small. I find the 1BR at BLT to be more spacious.

I am interested to see point comparison of 1BR at BLT vs Poly2. I think Poly 2 having 2 full bathrooms is the right comp; however sq footage may differ.

 

[Sandisw]

Is resale much of a factor in their decision?
How many PVB resale points are sold each year?
Would the number of available resale points increase, decrease, or stay the same?
Would more add-on because they need more points to stay in larger accommodations?
Would some not sell because they can use their points for a duo studio?
Would those who sell PVB increase their asking price and only sell for more than it has been selling for?

Not arguing for or against association decision.

It’s not just about what will sell but rather that all existing PVB contracts will get home resort advantage AND all resale contracts bought except for RIV and VDH will be eligible for booking at 7 months.

Given the change to having restrictions and making resale points less attractive, IMP it’s a big decision to walk away from that with this new project.

What I do wonder…if they decide they are going new…if if the info regarding FW came out first so that they can follow the restrictions model and then it will soften the blow with Poly tower having them.

Keeps all the new resorts actively selling..not counting AUL…with them.

I know there was talk years ago that a tower of this nature was going yo be part of the project but it was never offical. I can find nothing where DVD said it would be a SS ond phase but then backed off of it…like they did with VB which is why it has subsidized dues.

I get that people believe DVD wants the location to be balanced. I just think they care.

It’s going to come down to both short term and long term goals and what they feel is financially in their best interest.

 

[MyDogTink]

How many points of Poly are currently listed on the resale market?

People love Poly so I can see it selling well to hotel guests on sight who may not even know about resale. So, in that case, even if the same association, Poly may sell well as a direct purchase.

 

[tom1944]

I think you own resale BLT like me. I don’t compare 1BR BLT to 1BR RIV because the 2 full bathroom vs 1, respectively, is like apples vs oranges to me.

We toured RIV the other day. The 2BR lockoff is small. I find the 1BR at BLT to be more spacious.

I am interested to see point comparison of 1BR at BLT vs Poly2. I think Poly 2 having 2 full bathrooms is the right comp; however sq footage may differ.

I don’t own BLT yet. I tried to buy but could not make a deal in the timeframe I wanted to get my initial deal done.

I own at SSR but used my points at BLT.

I am following BLT contracts and deeds very closely because it is one of 4 possible purchases for the next contract.

 

[skier_pete]

I voted 80% same (OLD) association. My reasons are thus:

1) This is what they did/are doing at VGF (see below reasons)
2) The reason they did it and will again, by matching the 2066 UY end date, the contract will have only 42 years or less on it. Please won't care that buy, but that is technically a 16% reduction in value or 16% increase in "profit" for Disney vs a 50 year lease. It's not technically profit, but it's a financial advantage - and IMO the main reason they did it at VGF.
3) The Bungalows are a bit of a problem with breakage, and by combining the resorts they can spread out that issue. They could even use the points from the new resort to restructure and lower the bungalow points per night again. (They did this once already.) VGF didn't have the bungalow problem and they did this.
4) Lack of resale restrictions helps with sales. I suspect DVC is still a little leery about the negative impact on sales at Riviera, and using the same condo association delays them addressing that little problem.

 

[BamaGuy44]

The other big consideration will be -can I get the lower point 1 bedrooms without turning making a reservation a complex assignment.

I am interested in how many 1-bedroom units there will be, and how many will be standard points. The units facing Seven Seas Lagoon and Magic Kingdom will most likely be so many points it will be beyond what I am willing to spend.

I am maxing out at 200 points. That gives me a range of from $18,000 to over $40,000 as a purchase price.

I imagine all the rooms opposite the lake will be standard view, so to me it would be very surprising if there were any issue booking 1BR at 11 mos. I'm like you, if I don't feel like I'll be able to get whatever I want at 11 mos, I'll pass. I thought I would enjoy playing the 7 month game, but we've decided DVC is way too expensive to not be able to book exactly what we want.

 

[Genie+]

I think FW Cabins and Poly Tower will both be new associations with restrictions.

Look at VGF direct Sept sales! Over 180,000 points sold last month lol. Makes me think they wanted to put VGF as far in the rear view mirror as possible. Helps full restrictions become the norm next year. I figure Spring 2024 FWC go on sale and later in 2024 Poly2 goes on sale. The 3 active WDW resorts will have the same terms when it comes to restrictions so guides can spend alot less time talking about them. When asked, guides can simply say, “There are no restrictions for you. All 3 have restrictions for resale buyers.” They can simply move on to more pleasant topics.

 

[HyperspaceMountainPilot]

I think FW Cabins and Poly Tower will both be new associations with restrictions.

Look at VGF direct Sept sales! Over 180,000 points sold last month lol. Makes me think they wanted to put VGF as far in the rear view mirror as possible. Helps full restrictions become the norm next year. I figure Spring 2024 FWC go on sale and later in 2024 Poly2 goes on sale. The 3 active WDW resorts will have the same terms when it comes to restrictions so guides can spend alot less time talking about them. When asked, guides can simply say, “There are no restrictions for you. All 3 have restrictions for resale buyers.” They can simply move on to more pleasant topics.

I don’t want this to be true but it makes sense. I have 350 direct points, so I guess if I ever want to try the tower I can hunt for availability at 7m—not interested in buying at a restricted resort, or only a tower far from the bus and monorail stop.

 

[tom1944]

I don’t want this to be true but it makes sense. I have 350 direct points, so I guess if I ever want to try the tower I can hunt for availability at 7m—not interested in buying at a restricted resort, or only a tower far from the bus and monorail stop.

One of my concerns is that the issue of being far from bus and monorail stops might not be fully understood until after you can get the best initial price.

 

[intamin]

I voted 80% same (OLD) association. My reasons are thus:

1) This is what they did/are doing at VGF (see below reasons)
2) The reason they did it and will again, by matching the 2066 UY end date, the contract will have only 42 years or less on it. Please won't care that buy, but that is technically a 16% reduction in value or 16% increase in "profit" for Disney vs a 50 year lease. It's not technically profit, but it's a financial advantage - and IMO the main reason they did it at VGF.
3) The Bungalows are a bit of a problem with breakage, and by combining the resorts they can spread out that issue. They could even use the points from the new resort to restructure and lower the bungalow points per night again. (They did this once already.) VGF didn't have the bungalow problem and they did this.
4) Lack of resale restrictions helps with sales. I suspect DVC is still a little leery about the negative impact on sales at Riviera, and using the same condo association delays them addressing that little problem.

The only thing is if you're Disney, why would you put these restrictions in place and then not commit? If you go in halfway you really only discourage people from buying direct. The restrictions only work in the long term if you keep putting them on every new resort, otherwise, the resale market will continue to thrive.

 

[emchen]

I voted 80% same (OLD) association. My reasons are thus:

1) This is what they did/are doing at VGF (see below reasons)
2) The reason they did it and will again, by matching the 2066 UY end date, the contract will have only 42 years or less on it. Please won't care that buy, but that is technically a 16% reduction in value or 16% increase in "profit" for Disney vs a 50 year lease. It's not technically profit, but it's a financial advantage - and IMO the main reason they did it at VGF.
3) The Bungalows are a bit of a problem with breakage, and by combining the resorts they can spread out that issue. They could even use the points from the new resort to restructure and lower the bungalow points per night again. (They did this once already.) VGF didn't have the bungalow problem and they did this.
4) Lack of resale restrictions helps with sales. I suspect DVC is still a little leery about the negative impact on sales at Riviera, and using the same condo association delays them addressing that little problem.

Hi Pete! I dropped out a little after you did and became active again right before summer this year. So glad to see you back!

I think you brought up great points and although I am one of those who voted 100% NEW association, on the 0.001% chance that it is the OLD association, I think it would be for the reasons you enumerated.

One question for you and the group, in the event Poly2 is the SAME association: would it be "fair" in your eyes (given members pay for the construction cost of the villas through our initial buy-in), that half the owners of Poly2 would be free-riders when it comes to the construction costs of the new tower?

Well they did it at VGF, one might say. But there is a substantial difference in costs between renovating an existing building of uniform rooms and putting up an entire tower comprised of the full range of DVC villas (much more expensive). In other words, double or triple the cost, for half the new buyers.

 

[ehh]

3) The Bungalows are a bit of a problem with breakage, and by combining the resorts they can spread out that issue. They could even use the points from the new resort to restructure and lower the bungalow points per night again. (They did this once already.) VGF didn't have the bungalow problem and they did this.

Can you elaborate how breakage is a problem? I was under the impression that breakage is kind of desirable for DVC as it gives them more points to do with what they want.

Completely agree on the rest of your points!

 

[Nabas]

Can you elaborate how breakage is a problem? I was under the impression that breakage is kind of desirable for DVC as it gives them more points to do with what they want.

In order for breakage to be profitable for Disney, they need to have a room people want to rent.

On November 1 (a night I randomly tried), the PVB Bungalow is $3,982.50 per night with tax. At that kind of price, I suspect most vacationers expect a club level 2 or 3-bedroom suite.

Once you get past the popular DVC months (i.e. September to January), the PVB Bungalows are fully available for booking. When I stay at PVB, it's not uncommon to see a few of the bungalows empty.

If PVB and Poly Tower are in the same association, then it's possible that some of the new Poly Towers will want to book the Bungalows from time-to-time.

 

[CarolynFH]

Is resale much of a factor in their decision?
How many PVB resale points are sold each year?
Would the number of available resale points increase, decrease, or stay the same?
Would more add-on because they need more points to stay in larger accommodations?
Would some not sell because they can use their points for a duo studio?
Would those who sell PVB increase their asking price and only sell for more than it has been selling for?

Not arguing for or against association decision.

I think most of this is irrelevant. DVD needs to sell direct points to pay for construction of the building and to make a profit. If the new tower is part of PVB, people who want to stay there will be able to buy resale points and get full owner privileges. Short of a deep discount such as we saw with VGF this summer, sales of direct points will suffer by some amount. I don't think DVD wants to lose those potential direct sales (although yes, I recognize there will be some PVB owners who would have added on to their PVB ownership but won't buy into a new resort, and DVD will lose those sales) to the resale market.

 

[CarolynFH]

If PVB and Poly Tower are in the same association, then it's possible that some of the new Poly Towers will want to book the Bungalows from time-to-time.

What would prevent the new Poly Towers from booking the Bungalows at 7 months, if it's a new association? As you said, they're pretty much available. To me, they're sort of like AKV at 7 months - not so difficult to book that you need to own there to get one.

 

[Nabas]

What would prevent the new Poly Towers from booking the Bungalows at 7 months, if it's a new association? As you said, they're pretty much available. To me, they're sort of like AKV at 7 months - not so difficult to book that you need to own there to get one.

The idea is to use the Bungalows as part of the sales pitch. "Buy here and you can book the Bungalows at 11 months."

You and I are highly experienced DVC'ers - we know the ins and outs. But I suspect most first-time buyers don't even know what 7-vs-11 months means until their guide explains it to them. To them, being able to book a Bungalow at 11 months will sound like a good deal.

I have a cousin who now has 300 DVC points. He's been a DVC member for a few years yet still knows only a fraction of what I know.

 

[Sandisw]

I voted 80% same (OLD) association. My reasons are thus:

1) This is what they did/are doing at VGF (see below reasons)
2) The reason they did it and will again, by matching the 2066 UY end date, the contract will have only 42 years or less on it. Please won't care that buy, but that is technically a 16% reduction in value or 16% increase in "profit" for Disney vs a 50 year lease. It's not technically profit, but it's a financial advantage - and IMO the main reason they did it at VGF.
3) The Bungalows are a bit of a problem with breakage, and by combining the resorts they can spread out that issue. They could even use the points from the new resort to restructure and lower the bungalow points per night again. (They did this once already.) VGF didn't have the bungalow problem and they did this.
4) Lack of resale restrictions helps with sales. I suspect DVC is still a little leery about the negative impact on sales at Riviera, and using the same condo association delays them addressing that little problem.

They did add restrictions to VDH so it seems like they were not too worried about them.

And, I still believe price and a longer contract are a big plus in getting buyers to overlook them.

Since FW cabins appear to be on track to open first, they have to decide soon if they plan to continue that strategy.

 

[Sandisw]

Hi Pete! I dropped out a little after you did and became active again right before summer this year. So glad to see you back!

I think you brought up great points and although I am one of those who voted 100% NEW association, on the 0.001% chance that it is the OLD association, I think it would be for the reasons you enumerated.

One question for you and the group, in the event Poly2 is the SAME association: would it be "fair" in your eyes (given members pay for the construction cost of the villas through our initial buy-in), that half the owners of Poly2 would be free-riders when it comes to the construction costs of the new tower?

Well they did it at VGF, one might say. But there is a substantial difference in costs between renovating an existing building of uniform rooms and putting up an entire tower comprised of the full range of DVC villas (much more expensive). In other words, double or triple the cost, for half the new buyers.

Construction costs are paid by DVD and are recouped through sales.

So, not sure what you mean.

 

[Sandisw]

In order for breakage to be profitable for Disney, they need to have a room people want to rent.

On November 1 (a night I randomly tried), the PVB Bungalow is $3,982.50 per night with tax. At that kind of price, I suspect most vacationers expect a club level 2 or 3-bedroom suite.

Once you get past the popular DVC months (i.e. September to January), the PVB Bungalows are fully available for booking. When I stay at PVB, it's not uncommon to see a few of the bungalows empty.

If PVB and Poly Tower are in the same association, then it's possible that some of the new Poly Towers will want to book the Bungalows from time-to-time.

The thing about breakage is that they can anticipate some of it ahead of time so they can take other rooms.

In addition, they must be doing pretty good because owners at every resort get the full amount every single year.

I am not sure the bungalows are creating a problem because it’s not like DVD is forced to pay for rooms left or anything.

If they really want to, what would stop them from pulling ever other room still there at 60 days and offer those for cash and leave only bungalows left for owners?

In terms of marketing them? I just don’t see that as a big selling point to new buyer who don’t buy enough for more than one night. I think the pitch that yoy get to book those too at 7 months just like all the other resorts will be just as good to sway anyone being swayed by them.