Originally Posted By DVC_dad <<<This amazing Peter Dominick resort will now have people packing in from WalMart's SuperCenter with mac'n cheese and salisbury steak dinners to cook ... blech!>>> No. You are wrong 74. That crowd is at All-Star with no kitchen.
Originally Posted By DVC_dad <<<I would be pretty willing to bet that the average income of DVC owners exceeds that of the average income of people staying in the Deluxe resorts.>>> I am absolutely sure of this. Absolutely sure.
Originally Posted By DVC_dad <<<I really wish they would just build stand alone resorts and not add ons. >>> I totally agree with this!
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <I didn't make one comment about the income of people who are DVC members. I doubt that your statement about incomes is correct, but that's just an opinion< Why I think Trippy is right on the income issue is that most of the DVC owners I know from OKW were all former Deluxe visitors just as I was. And in today's economy, if you are going to plunk down $30,000 - $50,000 for a DVC share, you are not a typical Walmart shopper.
Originally Posted By ChiMike I think the Walmart comment is over-reaching, funny considering past conversations, but over-reaching. I have never had a problem with the add-ons, and as I said before, my only experience at the Wilderness Lodge was when I saw pretty sharp people over at the villas and trashy folks staying at the hotel. I don't think it's black & white. I would disagree with RoadTrip and VBDad over the income issue. Over the last 13 or so years it has been a lot harder to afford a week at the Polynesian or GF than it is to get the deal on DVC accomodations that DVC members are so sure to remind everyone about. This is further evidenced by what a bad deal it was to use points at the upper-end deluxe hotels. I would say that I welcome the increase in the cost of points and that the new resorts will have high point costs. Even with the influx of Boardwalk and Beach Club listings hitting the resale market (I think because of the enforcement of the transfer rule), even the resale price has stayed high. As someone who stays at a DVC resort from time to time, I much prefer the addons. The place I have a problem with is Saratoga Springs. I think one could be just as critical over it's massive scale, blandness, and it's overall effect on the DVC program. While I took Spirit's comment more as a witty jab than a truthful obeservation, I would say that I can see how the add-ons put a strain or additional burden on the hotel's resources.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Look at the impact at YABC and WL!>> I've never stayed in the Villas at the YABC, but I don't think there has been a negative impact on the Wilderness Lodge at all. There are only 136 DVC units at WL, so it’s not like they doubled the size of the hotel or anything. We've always stayed there during January so perhaps we don't notice the impact. But during January, even when the Villas were sold out, there was no overcrowding in either the pool or the restaurants. I guess I'd be curious to know what you think the impact is.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom <<There are only 136 DVC units at WL, so it’s not like they doubled the size of the hotel or anything.>> Or shut down the north wing of the WL or something. Come on guys lets get real. I can see someone talking about the "cheaping" of the DVC with the addition of SS but there is no way the DVCs have negatively impacted any of the Disney Resort properties.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<I would disagree with RoadTrip and VBDad over the income issue. Over the last 13 or so years it has been a lot harder to afford a week at the Polynesian or GF than it is to get the deal on DVC accomodations>> Right now I could book the Poly in January for $300 per night. What we currently pay for DVC (mortgage and maintenance) each year would buy 7 nights at $350 per night. We aren't taking business away from the All Stars.
Originally Posted By ChiMike >>Right now I could book the Poly in January for $300 per night. What we currently pay for DVC (mortgage and maintenance) each year would buy 7 nights at $350 per night. We aren't taking business away from the All Stars.<< Put it that way and DVC doesn't sound like much of a deal at all. Especially considering that in past conversations through your own accord you mentioned that you went from moderate accomodations to DVC. In your example, what kind of room, what kind of season? Numbers can be manipulated. For apples to apples, for my small amount of points I pay no where near that amount and can still get a studio for a week. I'm paying what would be a moderate room 90% rack rate for a studio at a DVC unit which is considered deluxe accomodations. In 2007 the Polynesian starts at $329 and the Grand Floridian starts at $375. If I were to book a room through Disney on 10/19/ - - 2006, for a garden view room at the Polynesian during off season would cost me $415.13. A room at the Contemporary for the offseason in the tower is $395 before an additional 12.5% tax. For November the rack rate goes up $50. This doesn't even start covering suites, conceirge or preferred views. And here I am paying $80 or $90 a night for a studio, larger room, at the Boardwalk. Somebody is filling those Monorail resort rooms. Somebody is filling the Yacht Club. They're paying those rates. People are dropping $400 a night at the Dolphin. So I don't buy it. I understand DVC members think they are many things but they aren't choosing to and/or capabale of having the buying power to get a room at GF's Tower for $585 a night in Februrary. If they choose to or where capable they wouldn't be DVC members. DVC is a deal, remember?
Originally Posted By FenwayGirl Hey DVC Dad...not only the WalMart crowd stay at the All Star resorts. Just because some of us are less fortunate does not make us less desirable than the well to do.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<In your example, what kind of room, what kind of season? Numbers can be manipulated.>> I didn't 'manipulate' anything. Standard Poly Room, Value Season. Rate was taken from mousesavers.com; no discount code necessary. Yes, DVC is a deal. When the mortgage is paid off I will have 32 years left on the contract and I will only be paying $900 per year maintenance. But in the meantime, the cash I lay out every year would buy a week at the Poly. Of course in DVC it buys a week in a one bedroom unit which is more than double the size of a standard Poly room, or two weeks in a Studio which is a bit larger than a Poly room. So I'm not saying that DVC isn't a deal. Just that for the cash I'm putting out I could stay at a Disney Deluxe for a week. In fact at the Wilderness Lodge (about $200 per night during value season) I could stay for 12 days.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo "I've never stayed in the Villas at the YABC, but I don't think there has been a negative impact on the Wilderness Lodge at all. There are only 136 DVC units at WL, so it’s not like they doubled the size of the hotel or anything. We've always stayed there during January so perhaps we don't notice the impact. But during January, even when the Villas were sold out, there was no overcrowding in either the pool or the restaurants. I guess I'd be curious to know what you think the impact is." FWIW, my view is these add ons put a strain on the overall infrastructure - facilities, dining, buses, parking - butit soulds like AKL will be trying to address these issues . Also, in the case of WL, while the Architecture is not bad, it is not as grand or fully match that of the WL IMHO.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom <<Also, in the case of WL, while the Architecture is not bad, it is not as grand or fully match that of the WL IMHO.>> In terms of the Villa's at the Wilderness Lodge the arcitecture is suppose to be different. The concept was that a railroad company came upon a site in the Wilderness while building a transcontenintal railroad. The story goes that they first built the Villa's for the railroad workers. Then found "the perfect site" and built the Wilderness Lodge. Which was intended to be a trans-contenintal railroad hotel. At least that is how the story is suppose to go.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Ok,a backstory to explain the difference. But the asthetics seem to speak for themselves. Though I would love to own some of those units all the same, I can't help but feel they have now detracted from the resort.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom I don't think the Villa's detract of tax the WL at all. Now sharing the same Disney transportation with Ft Wildreness is absoultely taxing and detracting the WL experience. And do you have any idea how many off resort guests crash the WL pool? Its gotten so bad at time that the WL CMs now check room keys for anyone swimming in the WL pool.
Originally Posted By ChiMike >>Yes, DVC is a deal. When the mortgage is paid off I will have 32 years left on the contract and I will only be paying $900 per year maintenance. But in the meantime, the cash I lay out every year would buy a week at the Poly.<< Not really though because you are paying more now for accommodations you will take in the future. A proper amortization would knock that amount down. It’s not apples to apples and I’ve always considered you RoadTrip to be smart enough to realize that. I think you’re better off with your prior positions of what a great deal DVC is. Here, let me help support your position. And again, most DVC members, even you I suspect, would not pay $350 a night for a standard room at the Polynesian in January. The original point up for debate is somehow, someway, there are those on here that think DVC members have a higher income level than those staying at the Deluxe hotels. I disagree with that premise and would say there is no correlation between membership and income level. I brought up opposite price examples to support that it is not clear-cut. People who are members who only choose to stay at moderates before their membership were not doing so simply because the Polynesian w/ monorail wasn't their taste prior to DVC. It was the value they placed on the cost. Many people who are not DVC members who stay at the Deluxe hotels do so because they own property that they also visit on one of Florida’s coastlines. I do and having DVC in addition to the coastal property and staying at Disney deluxe hotels is even too much for me. DVC will be the first to go, not staying at the Polynesian or AKL and certainly not the property we’ve had for the last few decades. It's one thing to say that DVC costs more than a Deluxe when speaking towards the Lodges. It's a whole other ballgame when comparing it to the Contemp's Tower MK view or the GF Lodge Tower. >>Of course in DVC it buys a week in a one bedroom unit which is more than double the size of a standard Poly room, or two weeks in a Studio which is a bit larger than a Poly room. << Again, not apples to apples. Ok, while value season is not the most common or frequent rate, let's compare a Boardwalk standard hotel room with a standard DVC Boardwalk Studio in value season. Forget 1-Bedroom, even the studio is bigger than the hotel room. Boardwalk Hotel w/tax: $352 Bigger room DVC studio BW: 9 points Now those 9 points cost me ~$4.50/pt maintenance fee and ~$65/pt / 43 years. That's $54.10 a night. So $54.10 a night compared to $352 a night? For still a bigger accommodation but with more of an apples to apples approach. Want to keep going down this road with me? It's not like I haven't done the math for the last 15 years. That’s why so many people are willing to rent their points at $10 a point. Have a cost of $54.10/night and turn around and rent for $90/night. The renter loves the price because it is still way better than the $352 and the member almost makes keystone (2x wholesale) on their points. I guess “large income†is relative, but to me it’s an issue of taking a loan or cash flow hit to prepay a vacation for a substantial savings. For me personally, I would say that the savings don’t warrant the hassles of staying within the DVC selection of resorts or the hassles of booking the accommodations. Most of my trips are over weekends and are within a few weeks notice. But I don’t deny the savings for those who can work around the parameters. If you ask me, it’s too much of a savings and I am glad to see Disney taking advantage of it with higher prices. I would venture to say that it could take a larger income to stomach the $352 * 7 rather than the $54 * 7. And since I still stay at the Polynesian frequently let me say that Disney knows they can't come close to getting away with the room conditions they get away with at BWV or BCV at the GF or the Polynesian. When you are spending cash at $400 or $500 a night and complain about a room, Disney jumps. When you get a crummy, nasty BW Villa there is little to no recourse as a member. You’re stuck as an owner unless you sell, otherwise you are not going to get very far with the board trying to get your complaint heard by the right people. That's why Disney loves DVC so much. You're commitment to Disney is more than their commitment back to you. I applaud that things have been turning around at the Boardwalk the new sofas are a good further step.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip ^^^ I wasn't talking about overall cost. I have stated many times that DVC is a great deal. I was talking current cash flow only. And for the cash I layout for DVC in 2006 I could buy a week at the Poly. Nothing more; nothing less.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>And in today's economy, if you are going to plunk down $30,000 - $50,000 for a DVC share, you are not a typical Walmart shopper.<< No kidding. We're low 6 figures and there is no way we would (or could) spend that kind of money.
Originally Posted By ChiMike Sure, but RT, you know that is an unrealistic way to look at it. You lay that cash out for the Polynesian and it's a one-time shot. I understand a membership can strain upfront cash flow, but the cost is cost, and point cost is much less than rack rate. It's like compairing rent for a NY penthouse vs. monthly payments on a 5 year balloon. It's almost pointless to try to compare the two.
