The Poly2 Pricing Thread

[GoingSince1990]

I agree, I see a price difference small at first maybe $20 but in a month of two the difference will grow to maybe around$35-40ish

You think it’s worth paying an extra $35-$40 a point to add the ability to book at RIV and VDH (and CFW when it opens) and to get blue card privileges? I think there are some who may beg to differ.

 

[DonMacGregor]

I had seen/read in several forum and Facebook posts that they are still using vague and ambiguous language when referring to the new tower and the existing association. Language like "the plan" (I believe that was the direct quote from the presentation) is for it to be part of the existing association, and that the tower will be the newest addition to the "Polynesian Resort" (the resort in general, not specifically PVB), as in not specifically saying it is part of the Villas (basically the same CYA language they've been using all along). I had also read that people asking questions in breakouts after the meeting was over were also getting the same sort of noncommittal committal. In other words, they still haven't come out and directly and flatly said "the new tower will be joining the existing Polynesian Villas & Bungalows Disney Vacation Club association, and will not be a separate association".

"While the legal setup will not be fully confirmed until the condo association is amended to add the new tower, Chang stated that "our plans right now are for the new tower to be part of the existing Polynesian resort."

As always, it's Disney speaking Disney, and the rest of the world trying to decode it, but I did see the same concerned sentiment on several unrelated sites (not the usual same people posting to 3 or 4 different sites)

 

[tom1944]

Why should people be more eager to book 1br’s at Poly than at BwV, BLT or any other resort?

Except for the 1st year it will be just as available as everywhere else.

And it will open availability at BLT to some extent

 

[Cyberc1978]

And it will open availability at BLT to some extent

I don’t think it will. New owners might book 1br but I don’t think the majority will.
Some of those that currently own at Poly will book 1br but those that truly need or want a 1br have already bought elsewhere.

 

[Cyberc1978]

Yes but at this point, they hardly seem to care about adding any “future resorts” to that list. With poly tower allegedly going to the bookable with resale category, the “future resort” argument seems to carry very little value at this point.

I agree, that's why I think the restrictions go away eventually. It was an experiment to see if they could force more direct DVC sales which I think bit them in the butt a bit.

Have you considered the possibility that the restrictions is not going away and the new tower will have its own association?

There IS a reason why DVD didn’t include the Q/A in the recap. I don’t think DVD has made the decision yet about whether to include it or not.

 

[DougEMG]

It blew up. Well, with a whimper. And now we stand here. What do you suggest we do next?

Go buy resale POLY point

 

[maui22]

Yes but at this point, they hardly seem to care about adding any “future resorts” to that list. With poly tower allegedly going to the bookable with resale category, the “future resort” argument seems to carry very little value at this point.

Roughly 10 years ago, there was someone who posted a list of WDW DVC future plans.
His track record of being right is astonishing.
The last one I recall on his list is a true walk-in EPCOT resort (either YC or the front of EPCOT). If he is right, this resort will be the most desired resort in a long time.

 

[mr_booyah182]

Yes but at this point, they hardly seem to care about adding any “future resorts” to that list. With poly tower allegedly going to the bookable with resale category, the “future resort” argument seems to carry very little value at this point.

I really believe "future" resorts is meant as just that, DVC properties at new resorts. Not new buildings at existing resorts.

 

[Frugal Fairy Tales]

I really believe "future" resorts is meant as just that, DVC properties at new resorts. Not new buildings at existing resorts.

This is my understanding as well. (This doesn’t mean I like resale restrictions; quite the opposite)

 

[Royal Consort]

I really believe "future" resorts is meant as just that, DVC properties at new resorts. Not new buildings at existing resorts.

The Poly could have been a new resort, for the sake of DVC that equates to a new condo association. Just like CCV. Therein lies the issue.

 

[Frugal Fairy Tales]

The Poly could have been a new resort, for the sake of DVC that equates to a new condo association. Just like CCV. Therein lies the issue.

Yes, it could have been a new resort but apparently it’s not. So what is the big deal if it’s not a new resort? Does it negatively affect existing DVC owners if it’s not a new resort?

 

[Sykes]

The Poly could have been a new resort, for the sake of DVC that equates to a new condo association. Just like CCV. Therein lies the issue.

I think that their strong preference is to use existing associations when adding to an existing resort. If BRV's expiration had been 2064 or 2066 rather than 2042 I am relatively certain that CCV would have been integrated into the original association, but selling a brand new resort with a 26 year life span would have been a hard pill for many to swallow.

 

[Sandisw]

You think it’s worth paying an extra $35-$40 a point to add the ability to book at RIV and VDH (and CFW when it opens) and to get blue card privileges? I think there are some who may beg to differ.

I honestly don’t think anyone should assume CFW will have them.

 

[Sandisw]

I really believe "future" resorts is meant as just that, DVC properties at new resorts. Not new buildings at existing resorts.

Oh, it does. But, to do a brand new build at a current DVC location so you can make it a new phase without restrictions vs a new resort, just causes people to doubt them….

 

[Sandisw]

Yes, it could have been a new resort but apparently it’s not. So what is the big deal if it’s not a new resort? Does it negatively affect existing DVC owners if it’s not a new resort?

In a way, it could. Those who bought direct assuming the number of resale contracts who could book would diminish over time and not grow, are now faced with a different situation.

So, I don’t think it’s about Poly tower itself, but the fact that they have backtracked in practice and if they are going to do that, then just get rid of them

Personally, I own where I love and the decision and moves of DVD will be what they will be. But, I can’t say I will be recommending direct in the same way I have.

 

[Mikey15]

The Poly could have been a new resort, for the sake of DVC that equates to a new condo association. Just like CCV. Therein lies the issue.

New resort would mean a new association, but a new association doesn’t necessarily mean a new resort.

I’m sure they could have technically severed the Poly tower grounds from the existing resort (it was already part of those grounds as Spirit of Aloha), but why? Even if they did desire to create a new association, they wouldn’t have needed to create a separate resort.
Poly tower will, from what we can tell, share all transportation with the rest of the Polynesian. Hotel and DVC guests alike should have access to all pools. What reason would they have to create a new resort & have to cross-charge all these amenities, even if it were to be a separate association?

Contrast that with the fact that under FL law they could not sell CCV under the VWL association, because it would have not had the minimum 40 years remaining. They did not actually have a choice but to create a new association, despite being at the same resort. It’s the exception that proves the rule that in all other circumstances of units added later (treehouses, Kidani, bungalows, BPK conversion) they haven’t voluntarily created separate associations at the same resort.

 

[Frugal Fairy Tales]

In a way, it could. Those who bought direct assuming the number of resale contracts who could book would diminish over time and not grow, are now faced with a different situation.

So, I don’t think it’s about Poly tower itself, but the fact that they have backtracked in practice and if they are going to do that, then just get rid of them

Personally, I own where I love and the decision and moves of DVD will be what they will be. But, I can’t say I will be recommending direct in the same way I have.

I agree. They should get rid of resale restrictions. So, I think we should all be happy for any inventory that is introduced that does not have them. Also, if someone buys on assumptions, that is them taking a calculated risk. If you wait until there are facts to buy, that is another strategy. Or, if you buy direct, then there is nothing to figure out or miss out on, which is what Disney wants. It has been clear for awhile that DVC was not revealing whether or not Poly tower would be the same or separate association. Now that it appears it will be the same association ending in 2066, a lot of Poly owners and resale owners from all resorts are likely very happy. I don't see the bad news here, not even for Riviera and VDH direct owners. Adding restrictions to the Poly tower doesn't change the situation for Riviera and VDH. The solution to that is to remove the restrictions. Not adding restrictions to an addition to an existing association is better than adding restrictions to a new resort. Just my opinion. I think in this new DVC world, they have created FOMO due to the possibility of missing out and that has not changed. There are now different and developing ways to play the DVC game.

 

[Cfabar1]

I think the fact of the matter is, Disney is a company and it is their sandbox.

They're going to do whatever they can to boost profitability. Buy what you're happy with, and don't count on future decisions to play into it.

If anything, all the uncertainty makes me really disappointed I didn't buy more VGF when I could.... Deeded points at the flagship resort... That I could have well into retirement.... Alas.... For those of us DVC Millennials out there, the program has already been downgraded so much, there's not much hope for the future....

 

[Minniemoo15]

I agree. They should get rid of resale restrictions. So, I think we should all be happy for any inventory that is introduced that does not have them. Also, if someone buys on assumptions, that is them taking a calculated risk. If you wait until there are facts to buy, that is another strategy. Or, if you buy direct, then there is nothing to figure out or miss out on, which is what Disney wants. It has been clear for awhile that DVC was not revealing whether or not Poly tower would be the same or separate association. Now that it appears it will be the same association ending in 2066, a lot of Poly owners and resale owners from all resorts are likely very happy. I don't see the bad news here, not even for Riviera and VDH direct owners. Adding restrictions to the Poly tower doesn't change the situation for Riviera and VDH. The solution to that is to remove the restrictions. Not adding restrictions to an addition to an existing association is better than adding restrictions to a new resort. Just my opinion. I think in this new DVC world, they have created FOMO due to the possibility of missing out and that has not changed. There are now different and developing ways to play the DVC game.

Good point … when we were buying our first contract, my FOMO had me pushing direct so that we could stay at “any future resort”. My DH is much more level headed than I and said “let’s wait until there’s actually a restricted resort that we want to stay at, then we’ll add on direct then”. Neither of us cared about RIV so I was placing bets on these amazing future resorts that hadn’t even been built yet. We went PVB resale and couldn’t be happier.

 

[AnnaKristoff2013]

Does it negatively affect existing DVC owners if it’s not a new resort?

Only in the sense that us smelly resale owners can book in the shiny new building. There goes the neighborhood!