The SAB poll

[BostonDisneyKid]

I have thoroughly enjoyed reading the threads on the party mom and SAB and the all the strong opinions and so forth on this subject. So I figured I'd create a poll to see where people stand on this issue. If you have comments please feel free to post them as well.

 

[3DisneyKids]

Waiting for the poll....

 

[Mamiamjo]

I voted to keep it private to YC/BC/BCV guests only. It's hard enough to find a lounge chair as it is without inviting other guests in.

 

[dianeschlicht]

I voted to keep it to just YC/BC/BCV folks. No guests, and no pool hopping.

 

[DisDaydreamer]

Voted YC/BC guests only. I can't imagine what it would be like (crowd wise) if it were hoppable.

 

[Luckymommyx2]

Voted YC/BC guests only. I can't imagine what it would be like (crowd wise) if it were hoppable.

Ditto!

 

[the who #3]

i would vote for use to be restricted to bc,yc,bcv and bw,bwv. keep it on the lake.
it would not be as nice if it were crowded all the time, and it would be more difficult to keep it clean. (that must be a difficult pool to keep clean).

 

[bwvBound]

Voted YC/BC guests only. I can't imagine what it would be like (crowd wise) if it were hoppable.

Excerpts from the existing pool-hopping perk:
Source of quoted sections:
http://dvc.disney.go.com/dvc/member...d=WDWPerksRecreationWaterActivitiesDetailPage

• Pool-hopping restriction based on Occupancy: "...if they are not at capacity. "
• Pool-hopping restriction based on Dates: "Due to expected high occupancy, Disney Vacation Club Members may not "pool hop" during the following dates*:" ...
• Additional Date/Capacity restriction: "Other restricted dates may be added based on projected pool capacity."
• Guideline for use: "Please check with a Host/Hostess at the Front Desk of the Resort hotel you wish to visit to find out about pool-access availability."
• Restrictions for specific pools: "Pool hopping is not available at Uzima Pool at Disney's Animal Kingdom Lodge and Stormalong Bay at Disney's Yacht & Beach Club Resorts or at the leisure pools of these two Resort hotels. "

If, for the sake of conversation, the last restriction were dropped and the guideline above truly observed -- wouldn't that be sufficient? We might assume that SAB is generally unavailable (date/capacity restrictions) ... but how delightful the occasional window of opportunity. What a thrill it might be to call BC/BCV front desk for permission and for that request to be granted.

Note: I'm all about following the guideline of asking first!

 

[Laurabearz]

Excerpts from the existing pool-hopping perk:
Source of quoted sections:
http://dvc.disney.go.com/dvc/member...d=WDWPerksRecreationWaterActivitiesDetailPage

• Pool-hopping restriction based on Occupancy: "...if they are not at capacity. "
• Pool-hopping restriction based on Dates: "Due to expected high occupancy, Disney Vacation Club Members may not "pool hop" during the following dates*:" ...
• Additional Date/Capacity restriction: "Other restricted dates may be added based on projected pool capacity."
• Guideline for use: "Please check with a Host/Hostess at the Front Desk of the Resort hotel you wish to visit to find out about pool-access availability."
• Restrictions for specific pools: "Pool hopping is not available at Uzima Pool at Disney's Animal Kingdom Lodge and Stormalong Bay at Disney's Yacht & Beach Club Resorts or at the leisure pools of these two Resort hotels. "

If, for the sake of conversation, the last restriction were dropped and the guideline above truly observed -- wouldn't that be sufficient? We might assume that SAB is generally unavailable (date/capacity restrictions) ... but how delightful the occasional window of opportunity. What a thrill it might be to call BC/BCV front desk for permission and for that request to be granted.

Note: I'm all about following the guideline of asking first!

The trouble with that (for me), is that there would be a greater chance of the pool being at capacity. I mean before long word would get out that if you head over to SAB early enough (before it reaches max. capacity) you can stay all day.... So when I try and take my family down at say 2 or 3 in the afternoon, there is a far greater chance of us being turned away, even if we are staying AT BCV.
Not sure I would like that much.

 

[bobbiwoz]

We don't own at BCV and so, going there is a treat. When we stay there, the attraction is SAB (and walking home from Illuminations)! I voted for the exclusive use of guests staying at YC/BC/BCV.

Bobbi

 

[bwvBound]

The trouble with that (for me), is that there would be a greater chance of the pool being at capacity. I mean before long word would get out that if you head over to SAB early enough (before it reaches max. capacity) you can stay all day.... So when I try and take my family down at say 2 or 3 in the afternoon, there is a far greater chance of us being turned away, even if we are staying AT BCV.
Not sure I would like that much.

Excellent point!

Permit me one more quote from the same perk information:
"If the pool you are visiting reaches capacity, you may be asked to leave in order to accommodate Guests of that Resort hotel."

So ... if pool-hoppers were easily identified on arrival (brighly colored wristband) and asked to leave as guests reached capacity .... ? Ok, nevermind. There would be, admittedly, far too much work in carrying out a less-restrictive policy.

I'm convinced ... keep as is. I'm grateful (hugely) for my one shot this past January to enjoy SAB's lazy river while staying at BWV. I clutched my letter of permission as a much cherished treasure. It was 12 years in coming ... and it will likely be another 12 years before I get a second chance.

 

[keishashadow]

While I voted for option #2, and think it's a great poolscape; doubt much if we'll ever have the energy level to trek over after a long day in the parks ; far easier to just enjoy where-ever we stay.

 

[Starr W.]

I voted to keep it for BC/YC/BCV only use. Pool hopping doesn't appeal to me. I'll try SAB one of these days by booking at BCV, other than that I'll be happy enough with the pools at the DVC I'm staying at.

 

[jarestel]

If I were simply voting on the basis of how much it actually matters to me, I'd say it's just a pool and do with it what you wish. But from the viewpoint of the actual YC/BC/BCV guests who are paying decent money to stay there, I'd have to agree with the majority of the group... keep it as it is for the exclusive use of paying customers.

Keep the SAB restrictions in place!

 

[murcor]

I voted to keep it for BC/YC/BCV only use. Pool hopping doesn't appeal to me. I'll try SAB one of these days by booking at BCV, other than that I'll be happy enough with the pools at the DVC I'm staying at.

Same here

 

[dgaston]

In the minority -- voted to have it for DVC members, no guests. For me I think pool hopping is enough of a pain for most people that few would do it. I agree with bwvBound that current DVC rules should be enforced.

 

[BroganMc]

Well for BCV owners, I'd say the exclusivity of SAB is the reason to own (and pay such high resale prices). But for the rest of the world, it's just a pool. It's kinda funny seeing all the brou ha ha stirred when one threatens to use it.

 

[dsneygirl]

I voted BC/YC/BCV guests only. I love BCV and SAB, we're staying there in 24 days! Last trip we were lucky the place was deserted. By noon there weren't even checking room cards. But if it was busy and I couldn't find a spot I would be annoyed.

 

[dannyh23]

BC/YC/BCV only.... It can get crowded enough as it is...

Besides, we gotta keep those BCV resale values high!!!

 

[Boardwalker]

I voted that it should just be for Yacht and Beach Club guests..... even though back when I became a DVC member at the BW, one of the selling points was the use of SAB. (This was before there was a BCV.)
Whereas I think it stinks to lose perks, that is what they are. And we stayed at the Beach Club before we became DVC and couldn't find a chair at SAB then, so I feel taking away that perk was warranted for the enjoyment of the guests of that resort.
If they don't want the Beach Club to lose its cache, they had better protect SAB's exclusivity.