Copper Creek Selling March 8

[Dean Marino]

Dear wife is brilliant.....

"IKEA - I just saw a room by IKEA....." (West Side Story - in this case, East side story...).

"How do you sell a dump that's all IKEA? How do you make it look like Motel 6?" (Credit to Julie Andrews).

All personal opinion - I'm not necessarily right, no one else is necessarily wrong.

 

[FireflyTrance]

We lined up the UY with our existing contract (December) - I imagine they're selling the full range. We will get points for 2016, so that's as you'd expect.

Dec is the UY I would purchase as well if I bought here. So if you purchase 50 you get 50 points immediately and then another 50 in Dec 2017?

 

[Disn3yVision]

Well, I wouldn't be buying Poly to trade out anywhere as you're still putting more up front on the table than needed vs resale and you still would have to buy the extra points for stays at PVB compared to buying to stay at most of the other resorts that require fewer points. For the occasional stay elsewhere it's no big deal of course. So IMO if talking about PVB it compares similarly to CCV - buy to use it there or else go resale for something more economical.

So I hear this argument on the boards a lot and it drives me bonkers because it I think it is faulty logic. You should buy where you want to stay the MAJORITY of the time, not every time. Or where you want to have the option to stay the most. Lets say you make 40 DVC trips in your lifetime. NOBODY is going to stay the same place 40 times in a row, especially with so many other amazing resorts to choose from that have so many unique experiences. Why cheat yourself like that? If you know you want to stay at PVB 20 out of those 40 times, then you should buy at PVB. Doubly so if those 20 trips will be in a lake view during food and wine. Shoot, if you want to stay at PVB 15 times during Food & Wine in a lake view and want to visit all the other resorts the rest of the other 25 trips I think you should buy at PVB. No way you are going to be able to do that by purchasing elsewhere. To me it is analogous to going to a nice restaurant and they serve you way to much food. If you chose to stuff your face and force yourself to eat it all as not to waste anything, all that is going to do is give you a stomach ache, make you feel guilty and sick, and have a miserable rest of your day. Instead, just eat until you are satisfied... so be it if you leave a little food on the plate.

Also, since Poly is only studios, if you take a trip with extended family and want a 2 bedroom you can stretch your points by getting a 2 bedroom at SSR or OKW, using less points per night. You shouldn't force yourself to stay in a 2 bedroom at VGF (or get 2 studios at Poly) and use up all of your points banking and borrowing because you paid more upfront for your points and VGF is "on par" with Poly in terms of reputation and initial buy in costs. My point is you shouldn't paint yourself into a corner and make your decision based on the fact you had a higher buy in 5, 15, 25, or whatever years ago. You should do what is best for that specific situation, regardless of where you bought and for how much. Maybe you want to take two trips in one year so you stay at SSR twice instead of PVB once. I think that is a perfectly legitimate use of your points and you shouldn't take it off the table because you didn't buy resale and paid retail for Poly.

I'm not convinced that PVB won't be seeing a jump up in MF's though. The buildings used there were over 30 years old and the siding and roofs were not replaced with the new build. And the Bungalows are in some of the toughest maintenance conditions - over water. Only time will tell on MF's.

I agree with you that the PVB dues will probably rise as a result of the bungalows, but as you say who knows. My point is if that is the case, they were smart to start with lower dues at PVB and then raise them after it is sold out. I just can't understand why they would not use this same logic for CCV... start out low and raise them later. Most educated DVC buyers know that the dues are the most expensive part of the purchase so to start them of so high knowing they are guaranteed to rise will scare off a lot of buyers.

In my original post I wasn't trying too compare PVB to CCV so much, but rather to compare burying the higher costs of the resort in the MF verses the price per point or points per night. Of the 3 it seems having higher MF's is the worst option for the consumer. I only used PVB as an example because the Bungalows seemed comparable to the cabins and the price per point is the same.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

So I hear this argument on the boards a lot and it drives me bonkers because it I think it is faulty logic. You should buy where you want to stay the MAJORITY of the time, not every time. Or where you want to have the option to stay the most. Lets say you make 40 DVC trips in your lifetime. NOBODY is going to stay the same place 40 times in a row, especially with so many other amazing resorts to choose from that have so many unique experiences. Why cheat yourself like that? If you know you want to stay at PVB 20 out of those 40 times, then you should buy at PVB. Doubly so if those 20 trips will be in a lake view during food and wine. Shoot, if you want to stay at PVB 15 times during Food & Wine in a lake view and want to visit all the other resorts the rest of the other 25 trips I think you should buy at PVB. No way you are going to be able to do that by purchasing elsewhere. To me it is analogous to going to a nice restaurant and they serve you way to much food. If you chose to stuff your face and force yourself to eat it all as not to waste anything, all that is going to do is give you a stomach ache, make you feel guilty and sick, and have a miserable rest of your day. Instead, just eat until you are satisfied... so be it if you leave a little food on the plate.

Also, since Poly is only studios, if you take a trip with extended family and want a 2 bedroom you can stretch your points by getting a 2 bedroom at SSR or OKW, using less points per night. You shouldn't force yourself to stay in a 2 bedroom at VGF (or get 2 studios at Poly) and use up all of your points banking and borrowing because you paid more upfront for your points and VGF is "on par" with Poly in terms of reputation and initial buy in costs. My point is you shouldn't paint yourself into a corner and make your decision based on the fact you had a higher buy in 5, 15, 25, or whatever years ago. You should do what is best for that specific situation, regardless of where you bought and for how much. Maybe you want to take two trips in one year so you stay at SSR twice instead of PVB once. I think that is a perfectly legitimate use of your points and you shouldn't take it off the table because you didn't buy resale and paid retail for Poly.



I agree with you that the PVB dues will probably rise as a result of the bungalows, but as you say who knows. My point is if that is the case, they were smart to start with lower dues at PVB and then raise them after it is sold out. I just can't understand why they would not use this same logic for CCV... start out low and raise them later. Most educated DVC buyers know that the dues are the most expensive part of the purchase so to start them of so high knowing they are guaranteed to rise will scare off a lot of buyers.

In my original post I wasn't trying too compare PVB to CCV so much, but rather to compare burying the higher costs of the resort in the MF verses the price per point or points per night. Of the 3 it seems having higher MF's is the worst option for the consumer. I only used PVB as an example because the Bungalows seemed comparable to the cabins and the price per point is the same.

I think you may have missed this sentence of mine: "For the occasional stay elsewhere it's no big deal of course." Essentially the reverse of buying where you want to stay the Majority of the time as if you did that you would only stay elsewhere occasionally.

DVC used to subsidize the MF's of new resorts and from what I recall would report what that subsidy was although it tended to be cents. I don't know if they do that anymore or not. With dues at CCV what they are I'd guess not - or rather hope not or that won't be good. I believe the thought that estimated property taxes may be high is very likely but FL also seems to be going for the throat with increasing taxes too.

 

[LAX]

In 2019 You'll be sorely disappointed to be paying $185 a point for Caribbean Beach...

Honestly, I am not that disappointed on the price per point at CCV since DVD was trying to sell me VGF points at $160 (IIRC). However, the MF is a really big turn off for me. Not the mention 1 bedrooms that only accommodate 4 persons.

LAX

 

[Humphrey_Bear]

Dear wife is brilliant.....

"IKEA - I just saw a room by IKEA....." (West Side Story - in this case, East side story...).

"How do you sell a dump that's all IKEA? How do you make it look like Motel 6?" (Credit to Julie Andrews).

All personal opinion - I'm not necessarily right, no one else is necessarily wrong.

I couldn't agree more. Where is the Wilderness in the decor?? The villas are all so bland, with only a few rustic touches here an there. One of things that Disney was known for was the wonderful themeing in their hotels, now everything seems so generic. To clarify, I'm not talking about the resort grounds, just the villas and rooms.
The cabins look good, and I love the fireplace, but everything is so modern. Isn't that the Contemporary's themeing?? Its the Wilderness Lodge, not the Ikea Lodge!!!

 

[skier_pete]

I couldn't agree more. Where is the Wilderness in the decor?? The villas are all so bland, with only a few rustic touches here an there. One of things that Disney was known for was the wonderful themeing in their hotels, now everything seems so generic. To clarify. I'm not talking about the resort grounds, just the villas and rooms.
The cabins look good, and I love the fireplace, but everything is so modern. Isn't that the Contemporary's themeing?? Its the Wilderness Lodge, not the Ikea Lodge!!!

I do think in many of the rooms they've gone to a much more neurtal look. The new Beach Club and Boardwalk refurbs are very bland, and even the Animal Kingdom refurb toned down the Animal theme quite a bit. (Though I think those still go well.) However, Wilderness Lodge without a "rustic" feel to it seems like poor choices. Maybe that's why the MF are so high - they're already planning a furniture upgrade.

One big thing to look at when purchasing at a property is where are the resale values going to go...I know it's a hard thing to predict, but I feel like that this property is not going to retain its value like VGF and even the Poly are holding pretty well. With BRV going for $90-100 a point, even though the contract links are shorter the MF being so much lower, I can easily see resale values once the place is sold out dropping to near similar levels. Those high MF are going to be a real turnoff.

 

[Disn3yVision]

I'm sure part of the modern feel was a knee jerk reaction to owners complaining that other resorts, such as AKV and even PVB, were too "dark", and of course saving money, but maybe part of it is DVD just trying appeal to a new group of buyers and differentiate it from the other woodsy feeling resorts, namely AKV, BRV, THV and VGC... which all have a similar "feel". Either way me no likey.

 

[disneynutz]

New designs and colors may be the result of the new current DVC management.

Bill

 

[hakepb]

I do think in many of the rooms they've gone to a much more neurtal look. The new Beach Club and Boardwalk refurbs are very bland, and even the Animal Kingdom refurb toned down the Animal theme quite a bit. (Though I think those still go well.) However, Wilderness Lodge without a "rustic" feel to it seems like poor choices. Maybe that's why the MF are so high - they're already planning a furniture upgrade.

One big thing to look at when purchasing at a property is where are the resale values going to go...I know it's a hard thing to predict, but I feel like that this property is not going to retain its value like VGF and even the Poly are holding pretty well. With BRV going for $90-100 a point, even though the contract links are shorter the MF being so much lower, I can easily see resale values once the place is sold out dropping to near similar levels. Those high MF are going to be a real turnoff.

It's possible that Poly maintains the highest resale value of any DVC...rental demand at the Poly is super high.
CCV, on the other hand, is competing with great cash discounts on WL rooms.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

I'm sure part of the modern feel was a knee jerk reaction to owners complaining that other resorts, such as AKV and even PVB, were too "dark", and of course saving money, but maybe part of it is DVD just trying appeal to a new group of buyers and differentiate it from the other woodsy feeling resorts, namely AKV, BRV, THV and VGC... which all have a similar "feel". Either way me no likey.

I believe it was Iger that announced at an annual meeting that they were updating resorts to be more in the industry norm. Boy are they ever.

I stay enough at the industry norm and do not want this bland look from Disney. Tasteful themed updates would be nice and of more interest for me. Without it one of the enjoyments of onsite is lost and that may be neutral at best and perhaps a negative because I know what they could do and used to try to do. I won't pretend they always succeeded but several of the resorts were very well done.

I will add though that a year or two ago I was talking with a furniture store owner who stated that the younger generations idea of rustic differed greatly from what hers and mine were. This is an example of that.

 

[sndral]

Looking at the pix and the video the livingroom space associated w/ the 1 and 2 bdrms. seems so narrow, it looks very much like what I assume it is - a redone hotel room. Perhaps it is just the photos & the space won't 'feel' that way in real life.
Is that little square off the hall the closet in the studio? Seems very small to me.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

It's possible that Poly maintains the highest resale value of any DVC...rental demand at the Poly is super high.
CCV, on the other hand, is competing with great cash discounts on WL rooms.

The decrease of hotel rooms may very likely mean less discounts at WL.

 

[Friendlyadvice2]

The decrease of hotel rooms may very likely mean less discounts at WL.

Agreed Kathy. That's all part of the plan here, and going forward.

 

[hakepb]

The decrease of hotel rooms may very likely mean less discounts at WL.

The DVC wing has been out of commission for a while. It might just be the construction scaring off some regulars right now. It seems there has been a lot of threads in the other Resort board from people with moderate reservations getting WL and AK deals for a very minimal upgrade price.

 

[CarolynFH]

The decrease of hotel rooms may very likely mean less discounts at WL.

I agree! Fewer hotel rooms = easier to fill = less need to offer discounts. That's been the supposition from the time it became known that the Poly DVC would be composed primarily of renovated hotel rooms - DVC rooms stay full essentially 100% of the time, and the members foot the bills! If the new tower at CBR indeed becomes a DVC resort, how many CBR rooms will it replace?

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

The DVC wing has been out of commission for a while. It might just be the construction scaring off some regulars right now. It seems there has been a lot of threads in the other Resort board from people with moderate reservations getting WL and AK deals for a very minimal upgrade price.

I remember quite a few threads of people switching away from WL due to the construction. I'd think it did have an effect on the occupancy.

 

[skier_pete]

I agree! Fewer hotel rooms = easier to fill = less need to offer discounts. That's been the supposition from the time it became known that the Poly DVC would be composed primarily of renovated hotel rooms - DVC rooms stay full essentially 100% of the time, and the members foot the bills! If the new tower at CBR indeed becomes a DVC resort, how many CBR rooms will it replace?

They are taking out 9 buildings. Each building has 64 rooms - so they are taking out 576 rooms from CBR.

Wilderness Lodge was one of the lowest occupied resorts at WDW - something like 75% occupancy on average. Many of the Deluxe resorts have relatively low occupancy (at or below 80%), which is why they are converting so many rooms to DVC. As you say - DVC members pay all maintenance expenses. Plus Disney takes the profit up front. Not that Disney thinks about these things, but come 2042 when they can re-sell all these existing resorts again will be a massive cash windfall.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

It's possible that Poly maintains the highest resale value of any DVC...rental demand at the Poly is super high.
CCV, on the other hand, is competing with great cash discounts on WL rooms.

One of the things that occurred at Poly is they reduced discounting when they took those 3 longhouses out of "normal" inventory. Cutting the Lodge in half, I expect to see fewer great cash discounts at WL.

 

[skier_pete]

It's possible that Poly maintains the highest resale value of any DVC...rental demand at the Poly is super high.
CCV, on the other hand, is competing with great cash discounts on WL rooms.

I think it's unlikely it will stay ahead of VGF, but I do agree that it will stay higher than most. I bet 5 years from CCV will be less than Poly or maybe even BLT.