# What is the Future for DVC? Thoughts?



## littlestar

The last week of changes has made me ponder the future of Disney Vacation Club. Where do you think it's heading?  Do they continue to expand only at Disneyworld in Florida or do they branch out to other locations?  I would love to see a DVC resort in Gatlinburg, Williamsburg Virginia, Maui, etc., . . I guess I would like to see DVC with broad various locations like Wyndham has.

Cannot help but wonder what the future holds.


----------



## bnoble

I'm not sure what it would take to justify DVC's premium when there isn't a theme park next door. Aulani seems to have done it---at least in part---but I'm not sure the same can be said for HHI or VB.


----------



## littlestar

True about HHI and Vero. Disney's Vero is remote and Hilton Head is not on the ocean. Aulani definitely had a better location from the get go.


----------



## pedro47

littlestar said:


> The last week of changes has made me ponder the future of Disney Vacation Club. Where do you think it's heading?  Do they continue to expand only at Disneyworld in Florida or do they branch out to other locations?  I would love to see a DVC resort in Gatlinburg, Williamsburg Virginia, Maui, etc., . . I guess I would like to see DVC with broad various locations like Wyndham has.
> 
> Cannot help but wonder what the future holds.



Williamsburg, VA is out in my personal opinion because Busch Garden and Water Country USA has been in Williamsburg for over 25 years. Plus Great Wolf Lodge another water park is also located in the area.


----------



## elaine

Disney bought a large parcel of land about 10 years ago outside of DC @ National Harbor, where some hotels were being built. Even had a sign saying future home of Disney hotel. We all thought DVC. Disney sold the land a few years ago. The logical place would be Disney Paris, but not now with the low Euro.


----------



## pedro47

elaine said:


> Disney bought a large parcel of land about 10 years ago outside of DC @ National Harbor, where some hotels were being built. Even had a sign saying future home of Disney hotel. We all thought DVC. Disney sold the land a few years ago. The logical place would be Disney Paris, but not now with the low Euro.



Yes! You are correct the land purchase was part of a historical civil war battle sites and the local opposed DVC  building on the sites.


----------



## elaine

no. different place. That was near Manassas, VA and Disney proposed a theme park. This was in the National Harbor area, which has been developed with a Gayloard hotel, convention center, etc. Disney had enough land to build a hotel or a Disneyquest type of thing, but not enough for much more.


----------



## bnoble

elaine said:


> no. different place. That was near Manassas, VA and Disney proposed a theme park. This was in the National Harbor area, which has been developed with a Gayloard hotel, convention center, etc. Disney had enough land to build a hotel or a Disneyquest type of thing, but not enough for much more.



This is also the home of Wyndham National Harbor, one of two Wyndham TSes in the DC area.


----------



## ljmiii

littlestar said:


> The last week of changes has made me ponder the future of Disney Vacation Club. Where do you think it's heading?  Do they continue to expand only at Disneyworld in Florida...?


If I would hazard a guess I would say that their long term plan is to emphasize being part of the 'Disney Club' and deemphasize staying at DVC properties.  Yes, you have to buy a piece of the magic directly from us to be part of that club but what you'll really value and want to spend points on are the exclusive cruises we do, parties we throw, and special 'Disney Club only' events and access passes.

I've seen this in recent MVCI presentations where they are clearly trying to reposition themselves as a vacation club not a timeshare organization. That you want to buy DPs so you can sail on cruises, take package tours to Europe and adventure tours to exotic locations, and stay anywhere in the world using your DPs. And yes, we also have all these wonderful MVCI properties around the world you will own part of as well.

I think Disney would be even more successful because they can wrap any of these experiences in an extra layer of 'Disney Magic' to make them more exclusive, valuable, and (to be fair) enjoyable. There are only so may people who can or want to visit the parks and only so many the parks can hold. But if they can successfully sell the idea of a 'Disney Vacation' and/or the 'Disney Club experience' anywhere and everywhere in the world they have unlimited opportunity for growth.


----------



## dundey

littlestar said:


> True about HHI and Vero. Disney's Vero is remote and Hilton Head is not on the ocean. Aulani definitely had a better location from the get go.



Have to disagree about Vero being remote.  It is 8 miles from the restaurants and shops/ hotels of Vero beach.  No you can not walk to restaurants, but it is not remote IMO.

It is also a fantastic place to relax and spend a few days at.  For all who have not experienced Vero, you need to go!


----------



## stanleyu

I occasionally get Disney ""special offers" for Aulani membership. I don't know how well sales are going, but it obviously isn't sold out. Makes me have to wonder how eager they will be to open any more outside of Disney World.


----------



## jlf58

I can comment since I no longer work for them, Aulani sales are ok but sellout isn't until like another 7 years so if I had to guess, if given a choice, they would have not did that location. Jim Lewis told me they were looking at a 2nd Hawaii location but that's why he is gone. That would be a bad idea. They would love another CA location near Disney but that's hard to come by. Land is FREE in Orlando and that's there comfort zone so I don't see that model changing in the next decade. When I was there, we were pushing him for the Caribbean but not sure Disney can have the control they want out of the US. 




stanleyu said:


> I occasionally get Disney ""special offers" for Aulani membership. I don't know how well sales are going, but it obviously isn't sold out. Makes me have to wonder how eager they will be to open any more outside of Disney World.


----------



## ronparise

Not a Disney owner and I dont really get the whole Disney "experience" thing. But from what I can figure its the "experience" that gives all things Disney their value

This is not a comment on what Disney might develop in the future rather it's what I see for the existing owners as time goes on. 

What I see is that Disney is learning from Wyndham and doing whatever they can do to discourage sales on the secondary market. Some years ago Wyndham made it impossible to transfer certain benefits with secondary market sales (re sales) the intent was I'm sure  to force buyers into the Wyndham sales rooms for their purchases, What it did was instead was to depress secondary market prices to zero. I see Disney doing the same thing restricting the transfer of benefits

so let me be the first to welcome you all to the world of the dollar timeshare


----------



## bnoble

> so let me be the first to welcome you all to the world of the dollar timeshare


Disney has much more attractive system-wide rental prospects and a much more liquid resale market than is typical for timesahre, with several high-profile brokers in the market. That will help keep a floor under their resale prices unless travel demand collapses.


----------



## ronparise

bnoble said:


> Disney has much more attractive system-wide rental prospects and a much more liquid resale market than is typical for timesahre, with several high-profile brokers in the market. That will help keep a floor under their resale prices unless travel demand collapses.



I hope I'm wrong but I don't see how a broker, high profile or not, can set a floor. Just as beauty is in the eye of the beholder,  prices are only as high as buyers are willing to pay

My point is that there are two things that give any timeshare value. One is the real estate and the other is the package it's wrapped in and the vacation experience. And my question is: if the contents of the package and the vacation experience itself is diminished can the bricks and mortar (the real estate) hold its value.  I don't think so. But I've been wrong before


----------



## got4boys

Disney is very active on ROFR. 

They actually will buy back to make sure the pricing is not too low.


----------



## Jason245

ronparise said:


> I hope I'm wrong but I don't see how a broker, high profile or not, can set a floor. Just as beauty is in the eye of the beholder,  prices are only as high as buyers are willing to pay
> 
> My point is that there are two things that give any timeshare value. One is the real estate and the other is the package it's wrapped in and the vacation experience. And my question is: if the contents of the package and the vacation experience itself is diminished can the bricks and mortar (the real estate) hold its value.  I don't think so. But I've been wrong before


First of all dvc is rtu... so there is no real real estate. . Secondly. . Hundreds of thousands of people a year PAY to have dvc marketed to them (theme park visitors )...  Disney has the dvc properties as a means to get heads in the parks and spending cash... dvc is such a small part of the hotel business that they don't even bother to split it apart on their Financials. .. 

They are an entertainment company first and foremost. . Their hotel and timeshare biz is simply an ancellary cost to them... they could set any floor they want...they can without trying get more people to their presentations in a day then westgate can in a week offering people free stays. .

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk


----------



## ronparise

Jason245 said:


> First of all dvc is rtu... so there is no real real estate. . Secondly. . Hundreds of thousands of people a year PAY to have dvc marketed to them (theme park visitors )...  Disney has the dvc properties as a means to get heads in the parks and spending cash... dvc is such a small part of the hotel business that they don't even bother to split it apart on their Financials. ..
> 
> They are an entertainment company first and foremost. . Their hotel and timeshare biz is simply an ancellary cost to them... they could set any floor they want...they can without trying get more people to their presentations in a day then westgate can in a week offering people free stays. .
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk



Ok so no real estate it's the experience and only the experience that gives Disney value. And I don't doubt that Disney is very good at selling it but I'm not talking about the price Disney might put on that experience I'm talking about what that the timeshare might be worth without the full experience

didnt Disney just announce that certain of the developer benefits that come with a vacation ownership would not transfer upon sale? it just seems reasonable to assume that less benefit will mean a lower price


----------



## chalee94

ronparise said:


> Ok so no real estate it's the experience and only the experience that gives Disney value. And I don't doubt that Disney is very good at selling it but I'm not talking about the price Disney might put on that experience I'm talking about what that the timeshare might be worth without the full experience
> 
> didnt Disney just announce that certain of the developer benefits that come with a vacation ownership would not transfer upon sale? it just seems reasonable to assume that less benefit will mean a lower price



Lower, probably.  But not $1.

As long as you can rent for around double the annual dues,  DVC should continue to hold its value.


----------



## JimMIA

I don't see many opportunities for DVC expansion in the future -- other than expanding already existing resorts like they're doing at VWL.  Maybe when they run out of deluxe resorts, they'll build onto moderates...who knows?

To me, there is no unique benefit to staying in a Disney property without the draw of a Disney theme park.  Sure they can theme the resorts in the Disney style, but that's no reason to stay there, much less to BUY there.  And the point of building a timeshare resort is to SELL it.

Their history of remote resorts is not great, and even if they built great resorts, they can't begin to compete with other systems who have 50-100 resorts all over the country. 

Hilton Head is nice, but it's not on the beach and there are better places there.  

Aulani is in the least attractive location, on the least attractive island, in Hawaii -- plus you have the issue of maintenance costs and the costs of getting to Hawaii in the first place.  And, for Hawaiian vacations, other timeshare systems already have dozens of timeshare resorts throughout the islands, not just one in a bad place.

VB was not built out to anything like what they originally intended, and is now an albatross around their necks.  Sure it's a beautiful small resort, but there are hundreds of beautiful resorts on the Florida coasts -- almost all of them in better locations. VB is _definitely_ remote!  The town of Vero Beach itself is hard to get to, which is one of its charms, but also a reason why even Floridians don't go there.

National Harbor was not built -- I think in a flash of common sense when someone realized that there was nothing Disney-like about Washington, DC.  Weird and fantasy-filled, sure -- but not DISNEY-type wonder!


----------



## twinmommy19

ronparise said:


> Ok so no real estate it's the experience and only the experience that gives Disney value. And I don't doubt that Disney is very good at selling it but I'm not talking about the price Disney might put on that experience I'm talking about what that the timeshare might be worth without the full experience
> 
> didnt Disney just announce that certain of the developer benefits that come with a vacation ownership would not transfer upon sale? it just seems reasonable to assume that less benefit will mean a lower price



Disney and Wyndham are nothing alike.  Wyndham properties themselves, at face value, offer very little in the way of desirable differentiating factors compared to other top timeshare systems.  Offering those perks was critical to Wyndham's ownership value (and still ought to be).  

In the case of Disney, the resorts themselves are the primary differentiator of DVC ownership - and no other system can come close to offering what they do in the Orlando area.  Put aside the entire Disney magic experience factor and just think about the millions and millions of families who take young children to Disney every year.  Ever try traveling with two toddlers? I can assure you that proximity to the theme parks is a massive perk and it's something DVC cannot strip from re-sales. There are two DVC properties located right next door to Epcot.  Another one is right next to Animal Kingdom.  There are now 3 DVC properties located directly on the Monorail.
It's no coincidence that DVC built two more monorail properties and stopped depositing any of those properties (or the Epcot ones) into RCI - DVC knows their market VERY well.  They market their contracts as RTU purposely because they understand that a lifetime of Disney is a tougher sell.  They can, and probably should, strip away all the other goodies that come with ownership from re-sales for the simple reason that they can.  They have a complete monopoly with respect to the equivalent of "ski in / ski out" access to Disney World.


----------



## Lisa P

Twinmommy19, I agree with much of your post.  The markets for Disney vs. Wyndham are quite different.  DVC has beautiful resorts with theme park convenience but the rooms themselves are generally cramped compared with other timeshare company rooms.  DVC members don't care because they tend to be outside their rooms so much while there.  Wyndham owners are much less likely to stay at Disney year after year.  So as nice as Wyndham Bonnet Creek is, Wyndham buyers get sold on the huge range of properties where they can make internal reservations to travel around the country.  These are largely different markets.


----------



## JimMIA

ronparise said:


> didnt Disney just announce that certain of the developer benefits that come with a vacation ownership would not transfer upon sale? it just seems reasonable to assume that less benefit will mean a lower price


Yes...twice actually.  The first set of resale restrictions went into effect in April 2011 I believe, but they really were not of any consequence IMHO.  The most recent change was a few weeks ago and took away the annual pass benefit, which was a substantial benefit to many families.

All of those things restricted are "perks," not core elements of the timeshare ownership, and any knowledgeable timeshare owner fully understands that they can come and go with one swipe of the Mouse's pen.  I personally think it's foolish to base a direct purchase based on the fact that you _currently_ get some nice benefit like an AP discount.  But stranger things have happened in the timeshare world -- especially the Pixie Dust laden DVC world!


----------



## ronparise

Forget the Wyndham story except that there you have a recent real world example of what happens when a timeshare company stops supporting the secondary market

In my opinion Disney is stripping benefits so that they can easily distinguish buying retail from resale.  and "force" buyers into the salesroom for the Disney experience.  Without such a distinction what possible reason would a buyer have for choosing to buy from Disney 


If Disney doesnt open up a bigger gap between resale and retail they have failed to do what they are trying to do. Of course that gap could be enlarged by raising the retail prices.. maybe thats what will happen Given the power of the Disney marketing machine and the skill of their sales people thats entirely possible. but either way, increase the value of direct sales or lower the value of resales, thats what Disney is trying to do...and doesnt price follow value

Of course if the value is simply  due to the proximity to the Magic, than Disney will fail in what they are trying to do.. and as you know Disney doesnt take failure lightly


Thinking about this I am probably wrong. a simple distinction between retail and resale probably wont change a thing. because as chalee94 said "As long as you can rent for around double the annual dues, DVC should continue to hold its value"...  What Wyndham did was to attack the mega renters profit margins with their changes and thats when prices dropped.  So until Disney does something to restrict renting or remove benefits that renters currently enjoy, you guys are probably right  Disney will hold value on the secondary market>


----------



## paxsarah

twinmommy19 said:


> It's no coincidence that DVC built two more monorail properties and stopped depositing any of those properties (or the Epcot ones) into RCI



Not as often with the Epcot resorts, but I am looking forward to my RCI exchange into BWV next month. Epcot-area exchanges do still exist.



Lisa P said:


> Twinmommy19, I agree with much of your post.  The markets for Disney vs. Wyndham are quite different.  DVC has beautiful resorts with theme park convenience but the rooms themselves are generally cramped compared with other timeshare company rooms.  DVC members don't care because they tend to be outside their rooms so much while there.  Wyndham owners are much less likely to stay at Disney year after year.  So as nice as Wyndham Bonnet Creek is, Wyndham buyers get sold on the huge range of properties where they can make internal reservations to travel around the country.  These are largely different markets.



I agree. We originally looked into Wyndham and bought resale points because we knew Disney would be a repeat vacation destination with our then-preschool (now elementary) kids. But as it turns out, we've only stayed at WBC twice. We've exchanged into DVC three times (including next month) and Manhattan Club for next year, and used our points within the Wyndham system several times for Myrtle Beach, Williamsburg, and several other locations on the east coast. Our Disney trips are spacing out much more than when our kids were littler, because while we can still get accommodations at a value, the rest of the experience is costing more and more $$. Now that the kids are growing, they're starting to appreciate the experiences we can get at a wide range of locations.


----------



## JimMIA

ronparise said:


> Without such a distinction what possible reason would a buyer have for choosing to buy from Disney


Easy *F-I-N-A-N-C-I-N-G!*

A lot of people cite pixie dust, and feeling like part of a "club," but I think the _real_ reason in many cases is a different type of "Magic" -- financing.


----------



## JimMIA

paxsarah said:


> Not as often with the Epcot resorts, but I am looking forward to my RCI exchange into BWV next month. Epcot-area exchanges do still exist.


Yep, and I've seen BLT and AKV as well.  But I think the vast majority of DVC's deposits are for SSR.  

*IF* -- and I think it's a *big* if -- DVC does their deposits straight-up by depositing whatever the member puts into RCI, it stands to reason that most of the deposits would come from the bigger resorts.  SSR, OKW, AKV, and BLT are the largest resorts with the largest populations of owners who might make RCI deposits.

But I'm not at all convinced that DVC deposits straight-up!


----------



## SueDonJ

Fletch said:


> I can comment since I no longer work for them, Aulani sales are ok but sellout isn't until like another 7 years so if I had to guess, if given a choice, they would have not did that location. Jim Lewis told me they were looking at a 2nd Hawaii location but that's why he is gone. That would be a bad idea. They would love another CA location near Disney but that's hard to come by. Land is FREE in Orlando and that's there comfort zone so I don't see that model changing in the next decade. When I was there, we were pushing him for the Caribbean but not sure Disney can have the control they want out of the US.



Hey Fletch - good luck in whatever you're doing now!


----------



## ronparise

JimMIA said:


> Easy *F-I-N-A-N-C-I-N-G!*
> 
> A lot of people cite pixie dust, and feeling like part of a "club," but I think the _real_ reason in many cases is a different type of "Magic" -- financing.



Not terribly difficult to get a loan for a dollar, Heck Id loan you that

but I agree, Ive purchase timeshares that I never would have owned except for  the assumable loan


----------



## twinmommy19

paxsarah said:


> Not as often with the Epcot resorts, but I am looking forward to my RCI exchange into BWV next month. Epcot-area exchanges do still exist.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree. We originally looked into Wyndham and bought resale points because we knew Disney would be a repeat vacation destination with our then-preschool (now elementary) kids. But as it turns out, we've only stayed at WBC twice. We've exchanged into DVC three times (including next month) and Manhattan Club for next year, and used our points within the Wyndham system several times for Myrtle Beach, Williamsburg, and several other locations on the east coast. Our Disney trips are spacing out much more than when our kids were littler, because while we can still get accommodations at a value, the rest of the experience is costing more and more $$. Now that the kids are growing, they're starting to appreciate the experiences we can get at a wide range of locations.



You guys are missing my point.  There is an extremely large market of people  who buy DVC specifically because they consider it a huge commodity to be able to walk (or take the monorail) from their hotel into a Disney theme park.  The existence of this large market (and the willingness of that population to pay a premium for it) is the reason why DVC will never sell for a dollar like Wyndham points do.  Not only does DVC have a 100% monopoly over the timeshare market, but the Starwood Swan and Dolphin resorts are literally the only non-Disney lodging options that offer this access.

So again, I am not saying that there isn't a market of people out there who would prefer to own at one of the MANY gorgeous, spacious Orlando resorts over a DVC ownership. What I'm saying is that I don't think Wyndham Bonnet Creek offers enough relative to the 8+ Orlando resorts run by MVCI, HGVC, and Starwood alone to justify a high price sticker on Wyndham points in order to obtain access to it.  That comparative point applies to most Wyndham properties - which is the main reason why Wyndham points deeds don't have much resale value.


----------



## vacationhopeful

twinmommy19 said:


> ...<snip>... What I'm saying is that I don't think Wyndham Bonnet Creek offers enough relative to the 8+ Orlando resorts run by *MVCI, HGVC, and Starwood *alone to justify a high price sticker on Wyndham points in order to obtain access to it.  That comparative point applies to most Wyndham properties - which is the main reason why Wyndham points deeds don't have much resale value.



Wyndham never has had the level of finish as your stated list of resorts. And for years, the cost of _using _Wyndham was hundred of dollars LOWER in MFs and other costs than your list (MVCI, HGVC, and Starwood).

Not now. Wyndham's USAGE costs has CLIMB too high. The cost to buy into Wyndham is almost FREE on the secondary market ... it is the ONGOING costs that owners are fleeing from. And also the VALUE gotten for the dollars spent. And there are complex RULES to use the Wyndham timeshare product.


----------



## JimMIA

twinmommy19 said:


> So again, I am not saying that there isn't a market of people out there who would prefer to own at one of the MANY gorgeous, spacious Orlando resorts over a DVC ownership. What I'm saying is that I don't think Wyndham Bonnet Creek offers enough relative to the 8+ Orlando resorts run by MVCI, HGVC, and Starwood alone to justify a high price sticker on Wyndham points in order to obtain access to it.  That comparative point applies to most Wyndham properties - which is the main reason why Wyndham points deeds don't have much resale value.


I agree with you to a point, but I really doubt if very many people buy Wyndham (or Marriott, or Hilton, or Starwood, or Bluegreen, or...) *to vacation at WDW*.  

People buy timeshares for different reasons.  There's no question that DVC is great for WDW, but it is _extremely_ limited once you leave WDW.  People buy the larger systems to vacation *elsewhere*.  We were owners of DVC when we bought Wyndham; we bought Wyndham because we couldn't go anywhere we wanted to go, other than WDW, with DVC.

We found that Wyndham had great offerings in dozens of destinations where DVC has nothing.  Our stays last summer at Sedona and Flagstaff were way better than any of the zero DVC resorts in AZ.  We're going to Smuggler's Notch in a few weeks, and it's much nicer than any DVC's in New England.  And in October, Old Town Alexandria -- again, much better than the DVC offerings in the DC area.  Wyndham gives us more than 100 resort choices in 60 destinations in the US.  DVC has 13 resorts -- 9 of which are in ONE place and the other 4 are in places we don't want to go.

You like to walk and monorail to theme parks; we like to do other things.  There's no right or wrong here -- just different strokes for different folks.


----------



## paxsarah

twinmommy19 said:


> You guys are missing my point.  There is an extremely large market of people  who buy DVC specifically because they consider it a huge commodity to be able to walk (or take the monorail) from their hotel into a Disney theme park.  The existence of this large market (and the willingness of that population to pay a premium for it) is the reason why DVC will never sell for a dollar like Wyndham points do.  Not only does DVC have a 100% monopoly over the timeshare market, but the Starwood Swan and Dolphin resorts are literally the only non-Disney lodging options that offer this access.
> 
> So again, I am not saying that there isn't a market of people out there who would prefer to own at one of the MANY gorgeous, spacious Orlando resorts over a DVC ownership. What I'm saying is that I don't think Wyndham Bonnet Creek offers enough relative to the 8+ Orlando resorts run by MVCI, HGVC, and Starwood alone to justify a high price sticker on Wyndham points in order to obtain access to it.  That comparative point applies to most Wyndham properties - which is the main reason why Wyndham points deeds don't have much resale value.



I wasn't disagreeing with you (except on the statement that Epcot resorts aren't being deposited into RCI any longer, because they are, albeit sparingly). DVC offers something very exclusive that a certain population is willing to pay a premium for. On the flip side, what they offer is also very limited. What Wyndham (or many other systems) offer is less "special" but more flexible and with arguably broader appeal.

I also think that another reason that DVC points keep their value is that Disney has ROFR and does exercise it. I'm sure there would be more fluctuation if they didn't, though I don't think DVC would ever drop to a dollar, regardless.


----------



## twinmommy19

I think some you have misinterpreted what I'm trying to say.

To not "pick on Wyndham" - let's instead compare DVC ownership to a fixed week 9 deed for the Wyndham in New Orleans.  I'm sure that one retained it's value (like DVC will) because it's a niche market where demand will always (absent another destructive flood) exceed supply and maintenance fees will unlikely ever come close to the crazy prices that folks are willing to pay for a Mardi Gras rental.   

In comparison, Disney has a monopoly on a very specific niche market that isn't seasonal (week 9 in New Orleans is only one out of 52), and happens to be large enough to allow DVC ownerships to retain their resale value and also allow Disney to continue selling new deeds.  Outside of the Disney area, DVC hasn't made much of an attempt to compete with other TS systems in other regions.  They don't need to.  

Simple economics. 

Wyndham points system on the other hand, competes directly with every other system in the TS industry along with the ownerships people buy non-franchise to trade II and RCI.  On a relative basis, the value one gets from owning a Wyndham vs. ownership in these other (non-DVC) TS resales doesn't command a purchase price premium in the resale market (with all the Wyndham perks stripped out as Ron pointed out).


----------



## JimMIA

twinmommy19 said:


> I think some you have misinterpreted what I'm trying to say.
> 
> To not "pick on Wyndham" - let's instead compare DVC ownership to a fixed week 9 deed for the Wyndham in New Orleans.  I'm sure that one retained it's value (like DVC will) because it's a niche market where demand will always (absent another destructive flood) exceed supply and maintenance fees will unlikely ever come close to the crazy prices that folks are willing to pay for a Mardi Gras rental.


:hysterical:  You know Ron owns *ALL* of that week at BOTH of the NOLA Wyndhams...right?   



> Wyndham points system on the other hand, competes directly with every other system in the TS industry along with the ownerships people buy non-franchise to trade II and RCI.


Of course.  And they compete quite successfully, although there are certainly other systems that offer nicer accommodations.  Wyndham's differentiation factor is number and variety of locations.  They are an "anti-niche" option. 





> On a relative basis, the value one gets from owning a Wyndham vs. ownership in these other (non-DVC) TS resales doesn't command a purchase price premium in the resale market (with all the Wyndham perks stripped out as Ron pointed out).


I don't know what kind of assumptions you're making there, and frankly I don't know enough about other systems to evaluate that comparison.  

But I know two things about my own personal experiences with DVC and Wyndham:

When I sold my 310 point OKW contract after six years, I netted less than 70% of my purchase price.  I bought resale, and I paid cash.  If I had purchased direct, I would have lost more than 50%.
I purchased 500K Wyndham points at Great Smokys for just under $2000 *total*, including all closing and transfer fees.  When I exit, I will lose no more than $2000 -- and in the meantime, I have enjoyed the rough equivalent of 600-700 DVC points at an equivalent MF rate of well below $4 per DVC point.
Also...you know DVC just "stripped" most of the DVC perks from their resale owners too...right?   I'm just waiting for them to take two more pages from the Wyndham book:

a tiered VIP program that bases the perks you get on *how many* direct points you own
 a Wyndham-style different ownership model (like Wyndham's CWA) which gives you additional perks even large direct owners don't get.


----------



## bnoble

> I also think that another reason that DVC points keep their value is that Disney has ROFR and does exercise it


Except that we know ROFR follows the market rather than making it.  Prices dipped considerably during the recession, and demand was so low that Disney stopped exercising ROFR during that period. Presumably they were acquiring enough through foreclosure to satisfy any sales needs they had.


----------



## JimMIA

bnoble said:


> Except that we know ROFR follows the market rather than making it.  Prices dipped considerably during the recession, and demand was so low that Disney stopped exercising ROFR during that period. Presumably they were acquiring enough through foreclosure to satisfy any sales needs they had.


OR...they were taking such a bath with foreclosures and the general business downturn that they didn't have the *cash* to exercise ROFR.  Or a combination of factors.  

All we really know is that they not only stopped ROFR, they also virtually stopped financing for a period, and then re-instituted financing with greatly increased interest rates and much tighter down payment and credit standards.

I think it's likely that DVD took a real beating with their easy and cheap financing of SSR for people who couldn't really afford it.


----------



## twinmommy19

HTML:
	






JimMIA said:


> :hysterical:  You know Ron owns *ALL* of that week at BOTH of the NOLA Wyndhams...right?
> 
> Of course.  And they compete quite successfully, although there are certainly other systems that offer nicer accommodations.  Wyndham's differentiation factor is number and variety of locations.  They are an "anti-niche" option. I don't know what kind of assumptions you're making there, and frankly I don't know enough about other systems to evaluate that comparison.
> 
> But I know two things about my own personal experiences with DVC and Wyndham:
> 
> When I sold my 310 point OKW contract after six years, I netted less than 70% of my purchase price.  I bought resale, and I paid cash.  If I had purchased direct, I would have lost more than 50%.
> I purchased 500K Wyndham points at Great Smokys for just under $2000 *total*, including all closing and transfer fees.  When I exit, I will lose no more than $2000 -- and in the meantime, I have enjoyed the rough equivalent of 600-700 DVC points at an equivalent MF rate of well below $4 per DVC point.
> Also...you know DVC just "stripped" most of the DVC perks from their resale owners too...right?   I'm just waiting for them to take two more pages from the Wyndham book:
> 
> a tiered VIP program that bases the perks you get on *how many* direct points you own
> a Wyndham-style different ownership model (like Wyndham's CWA) which gives you additional perks even large direct owners don't get.



The point is that there is only so far the price for DVC resale a will ever drop so long as the demand and price point for their rentals remains significantly above maintenance fees.  That's all.  Enough folks want the Disney access the same way enough folks want stay in New Orleans for Mardi Gras relative to the number of properties there.  And enough folks want to stay mountainside at a top ski resort.  Geography is one of the safer bets in time sharing.  Every else can change...


----------



## SMHarman

At current point prices, and with the new restrictions, I can't see why I woukd ever but DVC over renting from a David or similar.


----------



## twinmommy19

SMHarman said:


> At current point prices, and with the new restrictions, I can't see why I woukd ever but DVC over renting from a David or similar.



I thought pretty much all of the restrictions were based on whether you own ANY DVC points purchased directly from the developer?  If that's the case - prices will probably dip a bit resale and folks who want to own DVC will just buy the minimum size contract required directly from DVC.  

I agree with you though.  I'm not going to go to Disney enough times in our lifetime to make ownership worth it for us.  Renting is more cost effective for us (or staying non-DVC via II/RCI trade) Was hoping to trade in via RCI but now they aren't depositing much at the DVC resorts where I'd want to stay over Marriott Lakeshore or some of the other options.


----------



## JimMIA

twinmommy19 said:


> I thought pretty much all of the restrictions were based on whether you own ANY DVC points purchased directly from the developer?  If that's the case - prices will probably dip a bit resale and folks who want to own DVC will just buy the minimum size contract required directly from DVC.


Yes, that is the case...for now.  But that could easily change, especially if enough people buy small contracts direct just to get member benefits.  The Mouse is neither blind nor stupid.  

It would be a simple matter for DVD to adjust the requirements for an AP discount, for example. _"Ok, starting today you have to own 100 developer points to get any AP discount, and if you want to buy the Gold AP, you have to own the normal minimum initial purchase of 150-160."_ 

Easy minor tweak, and there is nothing anyone could do about it but whine.


----------



## JimMIA

twinmommy19 said:


> HTML:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The point is that there is only so far the price for DVC resale a will ever drop so long as the demand and price point for their rentals remains significantly above maintenance fees.  That's all.


Eventually, I think DVC resale prices will drop to near zero as resorts approach the expiration of their RTU life and annual maintenance fees rise to a too-high level.  But that's a few years off at the earliest.  

Clearly DVC will retain value better than most timeshares -- at least for the WDW resorts, and probably also for VGC, for the convenient location reason you cited earlier.  I'm not sure the rental option is really that big a deal, because DVC could radically change that picture pretty easily.  They can't _eliminate_ renting, IMHO, but they can certainly make it more difficult and much less cost-effective.


----------



## elleny76

"People  who buy DVC specifically because they consider it a huge commodity to be able to walk (or take the monorail) from their hotel into a Disney theme park.  "  .[/QUOTE]


BINGO!   You are right. We own in Wyndham, HGVC, Starwood and DVC. Nothing is better than stay at SSR Who wants to drive in vacation? we dont We are walking distance to DS, boat, bus..etc  we love SSR.:whoopie:


----------



## stanleyu

As for resale prices dropping drastically: one can only hope! since we ALREADY own DVC we will get all the special offers based on our current ownings. And if prices do drop significantly I'll be buying more.


----------



## SMHarman

stanleyu said:


> As for resale prices dropping drastically: one can only hope! since we ALREADY own DVC we will get all the special offers based on our current ownings. And if prices do drop significantly I'll be buying more.


I'll message you when I want to go see the mouse.


----------



## moonlightgraham

I've owned DVC and Wyndham for years and bought both resale. I'll give Wyndham the advantage for number of locations but everything else DVC is head and shoulders better. From attention to detail, caliber of employees to service they win hands down. And you don't have to beg off a sales meeting to get a damn parking pass at every visit!

Good example, last year we spent a week at Aulani then a week at Kona Hawaiian Resort. Should have done it in reverse. After Aulani I could sense the family's disappointment. Now KHR is a nice property but it's no Aulani and I too felt some disappointment in the difference in everything I mentioned above. Bottom line: our DVC trips are special. Our Wyndham trips not so much. 

I use my DVC points for DVC lodging, the perks have little value to me. Like Stanleyu if resale prices drop I'll just get more points. 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## twinmommy19

stanleyu said:


> As for resale prices dropping drastically: one can only hope! since we ALREADY own DVC we will get all the special offers based on our current ownings. And if prices do drop significantly I'll be buying more.



Nah you don't want that to happen.  If it does, it means DVC has become the next Harborside (off the charts maintenance fees).    The only way the price of DVC ever falls to anywhere near a dollar is in that scenario.  Or obviously, since they are RTU, when the term of remaining only has a few years left (but that would be the case for any property).


----------



## stanleyu

SMHarman said:


> I'll message you when I want to go see the mouse.



good luck with that!


----------



## lprstn

I have to say, after visiting their Hawaii resort - I prefer the DisneyWorld resource by 10! Crowded and not the same feel you get at the Disneyworld location. I would forego visiting their other resorts if you want what you get at the main resort. Disney should save their money and invest in something else besides other properties.


----------



## twinmommy19

The points I made were never intended to imply there aren't plenty of folks out there who prefer Wyndham ownership over DVC.  

Wyndham points will continue to be worth nothing so long as plenty of non-franchise RCI lock-off properties can also be purchased for next to nothing with very low maintenance fees (say under $800) that can be deposited for +70 or more TPUs.  It would be hard to justify spending thousands to own Wyndham instead which is why Wyndham also goes for next to nothing.  Nothing great to differentiate from non-franchise.


----------



## Lisa P

Each developer that has had staying power in the timeshare industry has succeeding in their respective niche markets.  Hyatt, Marriott, Intrawest, and to some degree, Hilton, have developed high end resort properties with deluxe interiors in upscale destinations, including beachfront and ski resorts.  Disney has heavily themed resorts with the most success selling those within walking/boating/monorail distance of their theme parks.  Wyndham, Bluegreen, WorldMark, and a few others have created large internal exchange systems of nice resorts in diverse locations - relative consistency of resort experience with a great variety of travel locations, including access to prime season travel reservations without the added costs or hassle of exchange companies.  This flexibility is key for the points-based system market.

Every one of these developers offers something of real value to their respective niche markets which is *not* available with non-franchise timeshare ownership.  Over the last (nearly 20) years, we've thoroughly enjoyed having so many resorts within a day's drive for short stays, most of them with indoor swimming pools, minigolf, walk out to the ocean, even a few with mini-waterparks.  These features have been very high priority for us but if they weren't, the resorts could seem much less special to others.  Likewise, we enjoy availability of resort-to-park transportation and the lovely grounds of the DVC properties but it's often _not_ the highest priority for us when we vacation in Florida and we sometimes top out after seeing the Disney icons, hearing Disney music, and paying Disney prices for _everything_ onsite.  DVC also has its own niche market.



twinmommy19 said:


> DVC knows their market VERY well.  They market their contracts as RTU purposely because they understand that a lifetime of Disney is a tougher sell.


Actually, I think they market their contracts as RTU purposely because they've not wanted to sell the underlying deeds.  Why would they when they can (due to location and onsite transportation) make a profit by selling just the leaseholds?  The Members pay dues to further update and maintain DVC properties, then hand them back over to Disney.  Pretty sweet deal for Disney.



twinmommy19 said:


> Not only does DVC have a 100% monopoly over the timeshare market, but the Starwood Swan and Dolphin resorts are literally the only non-Disney lodging options that offer this access.


I would suspect that the only reason Disney does not pull this access from Starwood's hotels is because, realistically, they can't.  People would just walk next door and take the buses and boats.

To me, a big question is, now that Disney has developed (or is developing) timeshare space at all "deluxe" WDW properties (except Yacht Club), what next?  Whenever they add DVC villas to a deluxe hotel, most of the infrastructure and resort staff are already in place.  It just amounts to adding rooms, a quiet pool, and maybe a community hall.  Low investment, huge return.  Establishing free-standing resorts, both on WDW property and in their 3 coastal locations, has required a higher cost of development and a _MUCH_ longer, slower sales process to reach sell-out.

So what do you think they'll do next?  Convert part of Yacht Club?  Create something freestanding at Fort Wilderness or on undeveloped WDW land?  Select a non-theme-park location?  Try a DVC at a moderate resort?  Or lay low and cap off new DVC development for a while?


----------



## SMHarman

Lisa P said:


> Each developer that has had staying power in the timeshare industry has succeeding in their respective niche markets.  Hyatt, Marriott, Intrawest, and to some degree, Hilton, have developed high end resort properties with deluxe interiors in upscale destinations, including beachfront and ski resorts.  Disney has heavily themed resorts with the most success selling those within walking/boating/monorail distance of their theme parks.  Wyndham, Bluegreen, WorldMark, and a few others have created large internal exchange systems of nice resorts in diverse locations - relative consistency of resort experience with a great variety of travel locations, including access to prime season travel reservations without the added costs or hassle of exchange companies.  This flexibility is key for the points-based system market.
> 
> Every one of these developers offers something of real value to their respective niche markets which is *not* available with non-franchise timeshare ownership.  Over the last (nearly 20) years, we've thoroughly enjoyed having so many resorts within a day's drive for short stays, most of them with indoor swimming pools, minigolf, walk out to the ocean, even a few with mini-waterparks.  These features have been very high priority for us but if they weren't, the resorts could seem much less special to others.  Likewise, we enjoy availability of resort-to-park transportation and the lovely grounds of the DVC properties but it's often _not_ the highest priority for us when we vacation in Florida and we sometimes top out after seeing the Disney icons, hearing Disney music, and paying Disney prices for _everything_ onsite.  DVC also has its own niche market.
> 
> 
> Actually, I think they market their contracts as RTU purposely because they've not wanted to sell the underlying deeds.  Why would they when they can (due to location and onsite transportation) make a profit by selling just the leaseholds?  The Members pay dues to further update and maintain DVC properties, then hand them back over to Disney.  Pretty sweet deal for Disney.
> 
> 
> I would suspect that the only reason Disney does not pull this access from Starwood's hotels is because, realistically, they can't.  People would just walk next door and take the buses and boats.
> 
> To me, a big question is, now that Disney has developed (or is developing) timeshare space at all "deluxe" WDW properties (except Yacht Club), what next?  Whenever they add DVC villas to a deluxe hotel, most of the infrastructure and resort staff are already in place.  It just amounts to adding rooms, a quiet pool, and maybe a community hall.  Low investment, huge return.  Establishing free-standing resorts, both on WDW property and in their 3 coastal locations, has required a higher cost of development and a _MUCH_ longer, slower sales process to reach sell-out.
> 
> So what do you think they'll do next?  Convert part of Yacht Club?  Create something freestanding at Fort Wilderness or on undeveloped WDW land?  Select a non-theme-park location?  Try a DVC at a moderate resort?  Or lay low and cap off new DVC development for a while?


Find a Caribbean island for a pirates themed resort. 

Catch the East coasters like aluanu does for the west.


----------



## Lisa P

I agree that there are wonderful alternatives to a themed resort in Florida.  For most of the DVC niche market, membership is about association with the theme parks.  A much smaller subset also values the Disney cruise option.

A themed resort in the Caribbean has probably been under consideration by Disney numerous times.  Starwood has already captured part of this (themed resort in the Caribbean) market with Harbourside/Atlantis.  Wyndham/Margaritaville is developing in St. Thomas and San Juan/Rio Mar.  There are several gorgeous Caribbean resorts by other developers, upscale, though less themed.

Building a stand-alone resort on a hurricane-prone island with a foreign government requires an enormous investment and a tolerance for more risk in being unable to influence the future of the resort... two things Disney has not tackled to date.  Their RTU model means they are especially sensitive to considering the long term commitment to location.  The U.S. Virgin Islands offers some seriously pricey real estate to a developer.

Disney did develop a very nice, small, private island for their cruise line's day-use.  I'm guessing they've learned much first-hand about maintaining property in a hurricane-prone destination.    I suppose this could be interesting to consider what they could do with a "real" full scale Caribbean resort.  But have sales in Hawaii and their other offsite resorts been robust enough for them to seriously consider doing something like this?


----------



## Big Matt

I love going to Disney World in Orlando.  I used to be able to trade in to DVC via II, but not now that they are with RCI.  I have a lot of friends who own DVC and the ones who really love Disney double down and get an annual pass also.  They go three times a year and stay at DVC twice and a Marriott once.  So they spend around $6-7 thousand dollars a year on Disney.  That seems excessive to me, but they love it.  My question to them is "What are you going to do with all of your points when the kids go to college and grow up?"  

As for the future, I'd say it is limited.  Other than Orlando, none of the DVC properties is on par with the best competitors in the other locations.  Even in Orlando, the properties don't compare to Lakeshore Reserve for example.  More importantly to me is their inability to cross sell the brands owned by Disney the parent company.  They tried hard to cross brand with ABC and ESPN, but neither seems to fit with the Disney theme park audiences.


----------



## vacationhopeful

Big Matt said:


> ,,,.  They tried hard to cross brand with ABC and ESPN, but neither seems to fit with the Disney theme park audiences.



My younger sister just LOVES the ESPN bar near BWV. She follows sports like a bookie ... and most likely knows several. She would rather be at the ESPN bar than doing EMH at the parks ... but does the AM EMH as the ESPN is not yet open.

There is a Market for sports bars .. even at DVC.

PS I DID NOT disclose HOW to get to/from ESPN during our 2 almost week long stays at DVC ... AKV and VWL. She just followed me around the parks and on the buses.


----------



## elaine

we enjoy going to DVC and not even going into the parks. It is one of the few totally integrated places that we can vacation: great pools, lots of other fun things to do--bike riding, boat rentals, just walking around resorts, boat to DTD, decent foodie places, campfire, and being able to take a bus anywhere. We live in a congested area, and not having to drive is a huge + for me. DH and I went to AKV and stayed for 5 days and a getaway last Jan. We bought more DVC points b/c our younger teens like it and DH and I will use DVC in retirement for a few weeks as snow birds.


----------



## Southerngirl528

Big Matt said:


> My question to them is "What are you going to do with all of your points when the kids go to college and grow up?"
> 
> As for the future, I'd say it is limited.  Other than Orlando, none of the DVC properties is on par with the best competitors in the other locations.  Even in Orlando, the properties don't compare to Lakeshore Reserve for example.  More importantly to me is their inability to cross sell the brands owned by Disney the parent company.  They tried hard to cross brand with ABC and ESPN, but neither seems to fit with the Disney theme park audiences.



Can't speak for every member, but this DVC Member of well over 2 decades actually uses MORE points than when my big brood were still in school. I give each a wedding gift of a week somewhere. When we get together at least every other year, I need a GV for a week or more. I have a nice sized amount of points and I use 'em all!!

I have to respectfully disagree that, "none of the (non-Orlando) DVC properties  is on par w/the best competitors in other locations".   I assume you have not visited Disney's Aulani resort on Oahu. That is my very favorite Disney resort. Yes, I'm including EVERY Disney resort, not just DVC resorts. It is a very special resort. And though I have not stayed at the GCV, I have been there and all reports I get are that it is a great place. And yes, it is connected to a Disney theme park, but it's not in Orlando.

All that said I would definitely put the Marriott Maui Ocean Club Napili/Lahaina towers and that resorts' entire grounds and staff, up against any DVC resort. It's a fabulous location and a huge property.


----------



## Big Matt

I was at Ko Olina and explored Aulani, but only to wander around the perimeter.  Aulani seemed overcrowded, sits on a man made lagoon, and is on a part of the island that is out of the way.  Granted, it is still almost new so I'm sure the units are nice.  I don't like the Kapolei area so maybe that taints my view of Aulini also.  There are so many better choices in Hawaii that are in natural (not man made) settings.  

Like I said in my original post, I love Disney and the Disney experience.  The timeshares themselves don't stack up.  Take Hilton Head.  DVC is a neat fishing camp theme on a beautiful setting, but it isn't on the beach.  It doesn't compare the the ones that are because of the location.  I've stayed at Marriott, DVC (Old Key West, Saratoga, Bwalk Villas, BClub Villas, and Wilderness Lodge Villas), and a few other Wyndham and Diamond locations so I have a pretty large reference pool over the last 12 years.  DVC is a good brand, but the premium is due to the experience and not the timeshares on their own merit.  I also own Disney stock so my comments are constructive if anything.  



Southerngirl528 said:


> C
> I have to respectfully disagree that, "none of the (non-Orlando) DVC properties  is on par w/the best competitors in other locations".   I assume you have not visited Disney's Aulani resort on Oahu. That is my very favorite Disney resort. Yes, I'm including EVERY Disney resort, not just DVC resorts. It is a very special resort. And though I have not stayed at the GCV, I have been there and all reports I get are that it is a great place. And yes, it is connected to a Disney theme park, but it's not in Orlando.
> 
> All that said I would definitely put the Marriott Maui Ocean Club Napili/Lahaina towers and that resorts' entire grounds and staff, up against any DVC resort. It's a fabulous location and a huge property.


----------



## stanleyu

Big Matt said:


> I love going to Disney World in Orlando.  I used to be able to trade in to DVC via II, but not now that they are with RCI.  I have a lot of friends who own DVC and the ones who really love Disney double down and get an annual pass also.  They go three times a year and stay at DVC twice and a Marriott once.  So they spend around $6-7 thousand dollars a year on Disney.  That seems excessive to me, but they love it.  My question to them is "What are you going to do with all of your points when the kids go to college and grow up?"



I'd say you have no comprehension of how true Disney folks think and behave. I'm 71 now and it's been 25 years since we did Disney as a family. But my wife and I go there - by ourselves - as often as we can. And yes, we too buy annual passes. This is a great adult experience, not just a place to take the kids!


----------



## Southerngirl528

Big Matt said:


> I was at Ko Olina and explored Aulani, but only to wander around the perimeter.  Aulani seemed overcrowded, sits on a man made lagoon, and is on a part of the island that is out of the way.  Granted, it is still almost new so I'm sure the units are nice.  I don't like the Kapolei area so maybe that taints my view of Aulini also.  There are so many better choices in Hawaii that are in natural (not man made) settings.
> .



Big Matt, you quote the exact reasons I do not care for Waikiki/Honolulu. Way too much big city for my liking. For that reason Ko Olina is preferred for any time we choose to be on Oahu. And using my DVC points makes Ko Olina's relative quiet extra nice. Our favorite island is Maui. And we especially like staying on the east side almost every trip as well. Unspoiled and lovely. 

I always say it is a good thing not everyone likes the exact same thing because no one could ever get a rez! 

And Stanleyu, I entirely understand! DH and I have been on multiple Disney cruises with no kids. Just the two of us and we think DCL provides an outstanding experience for adults.


----------



## elaine

We actually prefer DVC HHI to oceanfront locations. We love the marsh, being in the oak trees with a nice breeze. I did a conference call on the balcony in July @ 2pm and was not too hot. We like taking the little shuttle over or riding bikes, and love the oceanfront beachhouse and pool with a quick serve restaurant. Maybe we have had too much kool-aid, but it's a really great family experience, with smores, sing a longs, and outdoor movies and games. It's more of the whole package vs. just the lodging, IMHO. We liked DVc enough to buy points (resale) and divest another beach timeshare.


----------



## Big Matt

Well, maybe you don't know me either.  I go to Disney all the time.  I'm getting ready to be an empty nester and my wife and I will go more often once she retires from teaching and we can go when we want to go.  I've even thought about retiring near Orlando and maybe even work at Disney World in some capacity.  My point was how much money is being spent.  I'm cheap so maybe that has something to do with it.  The annual passes are a good deal if you can use them, and frankly I'll buy them when I can go more often.  ....and I'm a Marriott junkie so I stay in the Marriott timeshares instead of DVC, but that's only because I can't trade into it anymore and don't find the price point appealing.  Again, maybe I'm too cheap.



stanleyu said:


> I'd say you have no comprehension of how true Disney folks think and behave. I'm 71 now and it's been 25 years since we did Disney as a family. But my wife and I go there - by ourselves - as often as we can. And yes, we too buy annual passes. This is a great adult experience, not just a place to take the kids!


----------



## elaine

Big Matt said:


> I've even thought about retiring near Orlando and maybe even work at Disney World in some capacity.


We have also thought about doing this, as well. We will easily use up all our DVC points and likely need more when we retire. I have heard that many OKW units are used by DVCers for 6+ weeks as snow bird units.


----------



## kanerf

I could see a DVC New Orleans or DVC Key West.  Both are somewhat pricey areas that could probably support a small DVC.


----------



## mj2vacation

Problem is that Disney demands that their divisions produce a net income of at least 60%.  It is very game of thronesish.   If DVC won't produce it, that's ok, just shift the funds to the "other" divisions who will. DVC then does not get money for new resorts, ala post Aulani. 

Disney will always go with the safe option, which limits them to WDW. 

Aulani was an homage to the ego of Jim Lewis and Al Weiss. Putting the keys to the kingdom in those hands eventually cost the two candidates for ceo their jobs.  

Hence, secession anxiety for when Iger finally decides to abdicate the Iron Throne.


----------



## stanleyu

I've often wondered why Disney hasn't made a little more use of existing facilities and space - maybe that's yet to come. For instance there is room for another resort between the Grand Floridian and MK. Also, they could put in some sort of light rail or monorail around Bay Lake and build a number of premium beach front resorts there. If they don't want to put in a new monorail they could use the existing line between MK and Epcot and put int a couple of switched sidings for resort use only. There is an existing lake along that line that could be dredged/improved, or they could put in a wilderness-themed resort as well.

Bottom line is that there is a ton of space still vacant at WDW - they already own it, they have development rights to it, and can get the best investment returns on it. Seems like a no-brainer to me!


----------



## Jason245

stanleyu said:


> I've often wondered why Disney hasn't made a little more use of existing facilities and space - maybe that's yet to come. For instance there is room for another resort between the Grand Floridian and MK. Also, they could put in some sort of light rail or monorail around Bay Lake and build a number of premium beach front resorts there. If they don't want to put in a new monorail they could use the existing line between MK and Epcot and put int a couple of switched sidings for resort use only. There is an existing lake along that line that could be dredged/improved, or they could put in a wilderness-themed resort as well.
> 
> Bottom line is that there is a ton of space still vacant at WDW - they already own it, they have development rights to it, and can get the best investment returns on it. Seems like a no-brainer to me!


They are taking it slow and steady. . You can't charge premium prices if you don't have full occupancy.  Also gators eating kids kinda makes beach front property a hard selling point. 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk


----------



## littlestar

Jason245 said:


> Also gators eating kids kinda makes beach front property a hard selling point.
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk



Yeah, no kidding. I have totally lost my desire to ever stay in a waterfront cabin with grandbabies on Bay Lake.


----------



## simon.fisher.2

I would really like to see international destinations. Disneyland Paris would be incredible. I would strongly consider an additional (resale) purchase if I could go to Paris etc on points.


----------



## mj2vacation

Big Matt said:


> I love going to Disney World in Orlando.  I used to be able to trade in to DVC via II, but not now that they are with RCI.  I have a lot of friends who own DVC and the ones who really love Disney double down and get an annual pass also.  They go three times a year and stay at DVC twice and a Marriott once.  So they spend around $6-7 thousand dollars a year on Disney.  That seems excessive to me, but they love it.  My question to them is "What are you going to do with all of your points when the kids go to college and grow up?"
> 
> As for the future, I'd say it is limited.  Other than Orlando, none of the DVC properties is on par with the best competitors in the other locations.  Even in Orlando, the properties don't compare to Lakeshore Reserve for example.  More importantly to me is their inability to cross sell the brands owned by Disney the parent company.  They tried hard to cross brand with ABC and ESPN, biut neither seems to fit with the Disney theme park audiences.



I own and love Lakeshore Reserve, but the Villas at the Grand Floridian are the NICEST TS rooms I have ever seen. Animal Kingdom is beyond unique. Been to Four Seasons, HGVC, most Marriott's and a few Westins.  

I own Ko'Olina, and Aulani is far more upscale. 

Hilton Head,  am with you. 

Vero is a nice place, just no one knows where it is. We still love going there.  The newly redone rooms are really nice. 

SSR and a few others are lackluster. Then again, I don't look at Grande Vista and Harbour Lake and think WOW....


----------



## Rsauer3473

simon.fisher.2 said:


> I would really like to see international destinations. Disneyland Paris would be incredible. I would strongly consider an additional (resale) purchase if I could go to Paris etc on points.



If you buy from Disney, you can use points at all Disney international resorts. Resale contracts since 2011 do not allow this.


----------



## simon.fisher.2

Rsauer3473 said:


> If you buy from Disney, you can use points at all Disney international resorts. Resale contracts since 2011 do not allow this.



True - It will be a very long time before I consider purchasing points directly from Disney however. Resale is the way to go for our family. 

It would be nice if they had a resort to add to the dedicated DVC resorts so it is easier to use points and it is a better value than converting to a hotel room.


----------

