Riverea vs. L14 and 7 month booking

[CanadaDisney05]

This is fascinating. I wonder what people would pay for a ten year DVC ownership at Boardwalk or Beach Club. Is there even a market for that? At what price point?

I believe there is a pretty big market for something like this. Think about a young family that likes Disney, but doesn't absolutely love it. They want to travel to Disney a lot over the next 10 years while their kids are young, but don't forsee them continuing to travel after the kids get older and move out

 

[SG131]

I have been thinking about this for a while now and I agree. Once the contracts have been satisfied in 2042 for BWV/BCV and others, they will restart new contracts all over again but with new terms with BVT. You won't see any "extensions" like with OKW which was simple a money grab at the time IMO. I believe you will see a "reimagining" of the point charts with the new contracts. We will not have 9 pt a night for a studio standard view. I think the point chart at DRR is the glimpse into the future and where they are going. Reflections will confirm that theory. We talk about DVC 2.0...Think BWV 2.0...Since this will be a new contract, you will be allowed to change the amount of points you want just like if you are buying in for the first time. Current, DVC owners will have their FROR to the new contracts with incentives. This is the simplest process that could happen and makes the most sense to me.

I think that's the long term goal, but there's no way Disney would want to turn over all those contracts at once. I can't imagine them having BRV, BWV and BCV up for sale all at once, that's a lot of points to sell. As the contracts get closer to expiration, more young people will be hesitant to buy there because of the limited time. That will skew the average age of owners up. I'll be 56 when my boardwalk contract expires. I would be willing to commit to a shorter contract, but I definitely wouldn't commit to another 50 years at the resort knowing the resale market won't be as good. I'm not sure if they could get enough of the old owners on board with new terms to substantially reduce the number of points they would need to sell to fully sell out all 3 resorts again simultaneously. However, a lot depends on the economic situation come 2042. I'm sure that will have the biggest impact on their approach.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

I'm also going to note that, great, you "extend" (new association) BWV for 10 years.
That puts you 2052.

but wait

Saratoga expires 2054.
AKV and the rest of OKW in 2057.
That's the three biggest DVC right there all in a row and if you extend a 2042 10-15 years you're slapping right into that.

And your breathing room is limited with BLT (also pretty big!) fooping in 2060.

There is going to come a point in time where Disney is simply going to have to suck it up and deal with the contract turnover. How they do it is going to depend on the execs in power in the mid-30s, the economy, the outlook for luxury travel, cost of materials, etc.

If we deal in "maximum available rooms," between BCV and BWV we have 814. Saratoga along has more than 1300, and AKV another 700. So dealing with 800 for the Epcot resorts really isn't that big a deal in context. (Max available units is 591 for BCV+BWV, which compares to 888 at Saratoga and 458 at AKV. BRV is pretty small at 136 units/181 max rooms. So even tossing BRV in the mix with the two Epcot resorts still makes dealing with all 3 more of a labor issue than a total unit issue in context.)

(And yes, I am ignoring HHI and Vero. They're done and won't come back.)

 

[katandmouse]

This is fascinating. I wonder what people would pay for a ten year DVC ownership at Boardwalk or Beach Club. Is there even a market for that? At what price point?

I think we will find out in about 10 years! I can’t imagine it being as high as prices today, but I could see a group of buyers saying, hey I’ll try BCV/BWV for a few years, get my feet wet with DVC and see how it works.

I am starting to wonder about direct, just for the added booking options and a level playing field.

Can I ask what you mean about a level playing field? I’m just not sure what you mean.

As to 7 month availability, I mostly agree with @Bing Showei. A few months ago I was trying to figure out something similar about how much this resale restriction would affect everyone trying to book at 7 months, and looked at some data that was shared.
--Overall, direct sales have really been pretty steady over the years, including recently and it looks like this year. That means that there is a steady stream of new owners who add to the competition and demand for resorts at 7 months; except up until now, at least all owners could book the new resort and somewhat mitigate that demand.
--Overall resales have been slightly increasing each year. Now looking at some resorts specifically, it seemed to me like the % resales was more based on how long the resort has been open than popularity or size or anything. It was estimated OKW has about 20% resales, SSR about 14%, BLT about 11%, VGF about 5%. Overall through all of DVC it was reported to have about 10-12% resales; remember while the older resorts have more resales each year, DVC is selling more new points at the new resort to add into the system. It gets more complicated but that's the gist. In other words the older resorts would always have the most restricted resales and the newest resort would always be relatively easiest to book at 7 months.
--Of course, this only takes into account # resales, and not popularity or # points per resort or any of the other many factors that influence availability.
(Here’s a link to the numbers and my thought process for reference: https://www.disboards.com/threads/analysis-of-dvc-sales-resales-and-restrictions.3752766/ When I've had time I've been trying to verify the numbers but it is slow and complicated and I'm afraid I haven't gotten very far. I did track direct sales thanks to DVCNews.com financial reports, and those sales have been steady, not really decreasing like I originally thought.)

So my thinking is, if you want to book the newest DVC resort then buying direct makes sense. But buying direct will not necessarily help book an older resort. If you want to book an L14 resort, it doesn’t matter if you buy direct or resale because everyone faces that same increased competition at 7 months, and has the same opportunity to book. In that respect it’s still a level playing field for everyone; it just affects everyone negatively.

The other wrench is that eventually I could see Riviera/Reflections/etc becoming even harder to book than an L14 resort; at least all L14 resale owners have some kind of option to trade. RIV resale owners can only book there, leaving less available at 7 months for others. That sort of gets to the popularity issue Bing was mentioning too.

 

[Jenniebee]

Can I ask what you mean about a level playing field? I’m just not sure what you mean.

Sure, I mean resale being on a level playing field with direct. As new resorts are built, direct buyers will have 15, 16, 17 + options to book. Resale will only have 14. Those new direct buyers can book into my resort, but I cannot book into theirs.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

Sure, I mean resale being on a level playing field with direct. As new resorts are built, direct buyers will have 15, 16, 17 + options to book. Resale will only have 14. Those new direct buyers can book into my resort, but I cannot book into theirs.

But that's all at 7 months. At this point, buying DVC with dreams of sleeping around in studios is already a bit borderline.

 

[BWV Dreamin]

The whole 7 month model is changing. As DIsney continues to place any kind of restrictions on new and resale contracts, the 7 month booking gets altered. It is a slippery slope DVD is creating to effectively change the whole Disney Vacation Club model.

 

[Spark65]

I think as far as Disney is concerned having too many resorts with contracts ending simultaneously would be crippling to them. Reduced room revenue and crowds financially doesn't make sense. If they decide to do this they would have to use some of the resorts as rental units only while they renovate and re-market others. I strongly believe getting a big wad of cash from timeshare buyers is more financially sound, it's like getting paid upfront.

I see Disney knocking down Beach Club and Boardwalk in it's entirety myself and expanding Epcot in the future. That's why the shift in building the Riviera where it did but close to Epcot with a new transportation system. I also see building new resorts around the expanded Epcot as well but all being done at the same time. I did hear a rumor once that Disney was wanting to expand Epcot and I see this as the perfect way to do so. From a development potential this would be a homerun for them.

So buying at Riviera will be the best option if my scenario comes true.

 

[Brianstl]

So, maybe some longtime owners of OKW (aka "The Disney Vacation Club") can shed some light - back when booking was by phone, wasn't there a lottery system for high demand weeks like Christmas? That was a time when there was only 1 resort for all owners. Why wouldn't DVC2 be willing to move to a system like that? (Or keep the online 11mo how-fast-is-your-internet rush, and then work the waitlist?) Not commenting whether that would be a good or bad development; just wondering...

Disney doesn’t care if the person buying a new direct contract already owns points by resale. They can put any type of restrictions they want on the new contract. While these new contracts won’t technically be extensions they will function for all practical purposes like an extension to existing owners.

Disney is going to have to do something like that in the next ten years to protect themselves from the coming rapidly deceasing values of the 2042 contracts. They don’t want to have to take procession of a bunch of those contracts that would cost them maintenance fees and they can’t resell at a profit. Because if they don’t offer an extension, that is what is going to happen. We are quickly approaching a point that the lack remaining years on the 2042 contracts won’t justify a buyer to paying a premium.

With a new 15-20 year contract Disney could make that part of buying a direct existing

I think as far as Disney is concerned having too many resorts with contracts ending simultaneously would be crippling to them. Reduced room revenue and crowds financially doesn't make sense. If they decide to do this they would have to use some of the resorts as rental units only while they renovate and re-market others. I strongly believe getting a big wad of cash from timeshare buyers is more financially sound, it's like getting paid upfront.

I see Disney knocking down Beach Club and Boardwalk in it's entirety myself and expanding Epcot in the future. That's why the shift in building the Riviera where it did but close to Epcot with a new transportation system. I also see building new resorts around the expanded Epcot as well but all being done at the same time. I did hear a rumor once that Disney was wanting to expand Epcot and I see this as the perfect way to do so. From a development potential this would be a homerun for them.

So buying at Riviera will be the best option if my scenario comes true.

i don’t think there is anyway Disney tears down resorts to expand Epcot. The only time I think Disney will tear down a resort is too build a bigger one. But even that I think is a low possibility. Poly and Contemporary are going on 50 years. Disney just doesn’t tear down resorts.

 

[Bing Showei]

I see Disney knocking down Beach Club and Boardwalk in it's entirety myself and expanding Epcot in the future. That's why the shift in building the Riviera where it did but close to Epcot with a new transportation system. I also see building new resorts around the expanded Epcot as well but all being done at the same time. I did hear a rumor once that Disney was wanting to expand Epcot and I see this as the perfect way to do so. From a development potential this would be a homerun for them.

So buying at Riviera will be the best option if my scenario comes true.

Ignoring the plausibility of what you’re suggesting (that Disney will tear down consistently, reliably, hugely profitable, revenue generating resorts for CapEx with a much longer runway towards profit), a much more compelling and sensible reasons to buy Riviera is because it's a beautiful resort that best serves your family’s needs today.

If recent changes to Disney’s perspective on their timeshare product relative to the larger industry has taught us anything, it should be that buying a Disney timeshare today for what may come in the future is misplacing value in what you are paying for today.

When it comes to Disney timeshare ownership: Let Developers’ profits be your guide.

 

[ScubaCat]

When it comes to Disney timeshare ownership: Let Developers’ profits be your guide.

Sneak preview of Pinocchio 2 right there, folks.

 

[Sandisw]

As a BWV owner, if I was offered a chance to buy points at BWV for a discounted price in 2032 for say another 20 to 25 years, I probably would if it was a saving against the newer resorts. I also think that in 2043, any use of BWV, BCV, or BRV will be considered a new resort and come with its own upgraded points chart.

But, then again, in 10 years from now, I am hoping to own some more BLT or Poly points. If that happens, then I can't see us keeping BWV...especially at that point, I will be in my 80's and most likely many of the points will be be used by my children and their familes!

 

[ELMC]

I think as far as Disney is concerned having too many resorts with contracts ending simultaneously would be crippling to them. Reduced room revenue and crowds financially doesn't make sense. If they decide to do this they would have to use some of the resorts as rental units only while they renovate and re-market others. I strongly believe getting a big wad of cash from timeshare buyers is more financially sound, it's like getting paid upfront.

I see Disney knocking down Beach Club and Boardwalk in it's entirety myself and expanding Epcot in the future. That's why the shift in building the Riviera where it did but close to Epcot with a new transportation system. I also see building new resorts around the expanded Epcot as well but all being done at the same time. I did hear a rumor once that Disney was wanting to expand Epcot and I see this as the perfect way to do so. From a development potential this would be a homerun for them.

So buying at Riviera will be the best option if my scenario comes true.

Maybe I'm not understanding correctly, but there seems to be a bit of a disconnect between these two statements. If I'm understanding you correctly you're suggesting that Disney would be significantly hurt by BWV and BCV going offline, but then suggesting that they would knock them down to expand a theme park. That seems to be a bit self-contradicting.

That said, there are a number of reasons why Disney would not be "crippled" by BWV and BCV coming offline at the same time. First off, both of those resorts combined are still smaller than SSR. So that's not that large a pool of points to sell. Secondly, assuming they re-launch it as a new resort, they can sell the rooms through CRO for points that have been declared but not purchased. Additionally, the tremendous cash infusion from sales of a new DVC resort which will likely only take about a year to sell out more than makes up for the inconvenience of having to take rooms offline. Finally, there are still very large non-DVC components to both of those properties that will continue business as usual in 2042. There are others who have expressed your concern, but I am in disagreement and do not think it is an issue at all. Plus, 2042 comes with the bonus of jettisoning VB and HHI from the "Club", which I am fairly certain will be cause for celebration.

I do agree with your thought that they might be looking to expand Epcot sometime in the future, but given that it was not included in this major refurb it's not likely to be anytime soon. Plus, if you look at aerial maps of Epcot you will see that there is plenty of room for expansion that does not require knocking down two insanely popular and profitable resorts.

I will say this, I think buying Riviera in the hopes that at some point 20 years down the road it might possibly be the closest DVC resort to Epcot would be a grave mistake. Even if that were to happen, and I think that is a very small chance, as Bing said that would be a reason to buy Riviera 20 years from now, not today.

 

[Soap_1984]

Newer poster but long time dvc member. I have been thinking about buying another contract directly at riviera as we start going more often but I have to buy resale; it just makes no sense to buy at riviera. The resale restriction killed any financial rationalization for me; I have the benefit of being grandfathered in on my membership so can book riviera once it opens. I think people in my position will benefit the most as within ten or so years there should be a lot of turnover in terms of reselling all contracts and, assuming they don't lift the resale restrictions, that the new resorts just won't be busy on the dvc rooms since so few people can book them.

it is possible that the L14 are not any busier since the only reason you would buy riviera direct, considering the resale restrictions and high price, is if you really love riviera. Obviously if you bought riviera resale you reeaaaaaallly love riviera.

 

[ELMC]

Newer poster but long time dvc member. I have been thinking about buying another contract directly at riviera as we start going more often but I have to buy resale; it just makes no sense to buy at riviera. The resale restriction killed any financial rationalization for me; I have the benefit of being grandfathered in on my membership so can book riviera once it opens. I think people in my position will benefit the most as within ten or so years there should be a lot of turnover in terms of reselling all contracts and, assuming they don't lift the resale restrictions, that the new resorts just won't be busy on the dvc rooms since so few people can book them.

it is possible that the L14 are not any busier since the only reason you would buy riviera direct, considering the resale restrictions and high price, is if you really love riviera. Obviously if you bought riviera resale you reeaaaaaallly love riviera.

These are great points, but I see things similarly but slightly differently. To your first point, as more and more RIV contracts resell, those points will be confined to RIV. That means fewer RIV points will be trading out. Add to that direct RIV owners booking at 11 months as well as grandfathered resale buyers and other direct buyers competing at 7 months, and the demand will surely outpace supply. The locking in of RIV resale buyers into RIV is what is ultimately going to put the most stress on the system. That said, your point is an excellent one. As the number of post-January 2019 resale buyers continues to grow, the number of resale owners vying for RIV rooms will decline. I agree. However, I think that the starting point is so high that it will take decades for us to see any real benefits, IMO.

As for your second point, I think like this as well. Sadly, however, a significant percentage of people buying RIV are doing so because it's the resort being actively marketed. Most are unaware that they have a choice as to where they buy, and thanks to the insane price hikes at BCV, BWV, VGF, etc. etc. $188 per point for Riviera looks like a bargain by comparison.

To your point about RIV resale buyers really loving RIV, I agree completely. And they'd better, because they can't stay anywhere else.

 

[Matty B13]

I think if you look at the point chart disparity between Riviera and BWV & BCV, you will get a very clear idea of why DVC would not want to extend this resorts past 2042. BWV & BCV have some of the best value point charts in the DVC system. DVC can't wait to end the contracts on these resorts, and then do a quick remodel and jack up the point charts up to the levels of RIV, VGF, BLT, or Poly for this resorts in such a prime location. They will probably double the point totals for these resorts easily, and sell the resort out in less than 2 years, just to people who want to go to Food & Wine. I bet on Janaury 1st, 2043 (or when ever DVC officially takes over the resort completly) they will have all the permits in place and contractor line up to flip these resorts, and start selling points by 2044.

 

[JasonDDN]

I think if you look at the point chart disparity between Riviera and BWV & BCV, you will get a very clear idea of why DVC would not want to extend this resorts past 2042. BWV & BCV have some of the best value point charts in the DVC system. DVC can't to end the contracts on these resorts, and then do a quick remodel and jack up the point charts up to the levels of RIV, VGF, BLT, or Poly for this resorts in such a prime location. They will probably double the point totals for these resorts easily, and sell the resort out in less than 2 years, just to people who want to go to Food & Wine. I bet on Janaury 1st, 2043 (or when ever DVC officially takes over the resort completly) they will have all the permits in place and contractor line up to flip these resorts, and start selling points by 2044.

I completely agree with this scenario as I stated with my previous post. These reimagined resorts will look similar to what we see with RIV today in regards to points, resales restrictions, maint fees, etc. everything we dislike about RIV is coming to a resort near you in 2042. I hope I’m wrong...but we will see when reflections starts selling.

 

[Spark65]

Maybe I'm not understanding correctly, but there seems to be a bit of a disconnect between these two statements. If I'm understanding you correctly you're suggesting that Disney would be significantly hurt by BWV and BCV going offline, but then suggesting that they would knock them down to expand a theme park. That seems to be a bit self-contradicting.

Sorry I only deleted most of your quote to reduce space.

I see no disconnect in anything I said. What you are completely missing is the land value in relation to what it holds. BC and BWV are undersized resorts on a valued asset and that asset is land and location.
Disney can expand Epcot and build larger resorts with better accommodations and amenities and resell at a higher price point. A larger park can hold more people which translates to more money and charge more for points for a timeshare with unbelievable access and amenities to an even larger park with a huge draw.

Given all the latest resorts sizes and amenities built BC and BWV have no place in the long term holdings. Once Reflections is on line and the time line before shutting down BC and BWV more resorts could be built rendering those two resorts useless maybe even archaic. Remember it has everything to do with money not your emotional views.

My money is on Disney to develop and build for profit not pennies to squeak by on.

 

[Bing Showei]

My money is on Disney to develop and build for profit not pennies to squeak by on.

Are the hotel side rooms, conventions, and cash converted villas what you are referring to as “pennies” that Disney is squeaking by on?

If so, I understand more now your perspective on the need to support the poor folks in their timeshare division with your direct purchase; balancing out the DISers nickel and diming their vacation dollars on resale.

 

[Spark65]

Are the hotel side rooms, conventions, and cash converted villas what you are referring to as “pennies” that Disney is squeaking by on?

If so, I understand more now your perspective on the need to support the poor folks in their timeshare division with your direct purchase; balancing out the DISers nickel and diming their vacation dollars on resale.

You really don't see the big picture do you. Development doesn't always include the redevelopment of existing buildings it can be more costly to do so. They will knock them down to pave the way for bigger and better and more profitability. As far as you nickle and diming your way through a vacation that's your choice I like to live a little. Cheers my friend