IF this ends up being a DVC expansion... why is it so difficult to believe that Disney could build, market, and sell an actual moderate DVC, with moderate sized rooms and moderate amenities?
I've seen three general arguments against this. The most concrete is the idea that lowering point values means fewer points to sell, and that the cost to build the facility is the same regardless of whether they build a moderate or deluxe, thus lower profit. But this is only partially true. Smaller rooms means you can fit more rooms into the same space, offsetting the impact of the lower point allocations. And while there is probably some fixed overhead cost in putting up the building, I'm sure there are choices that they can make to reduce finishing costs, or leave out more expensive elements (like a fancy pool) to reduce overall cost. That might all still add up to a somewhat reduced profit margin, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the project is not viable or worthwhile; if it did, there would be no value resorts.
The second argument, less directly stated than assumed, seems to be that DVC == Deluxe, and that a moderate DVC operating within the existing system is simply antithetical. The assumption is that including a moderate resort would hurt the brand, thus devaluing the whole system. And it's true that DVC is frequently marketed as a means of "staying in a deluxe accommodation at the price of a moderate". But in the case of a moderate DVC, couldn't that simply be reframed as "staying in a moderate accommodation at the price of a value resort"? There is a huge segment of Disney-going families who simply can't afford DVC as it currently exists. If you reduce the cost (by reducing the number of points required to stay, not the upfront cost of those points), you open up a whole new demographic of potential buyers. To some extent I think that DVD must realize that they're pricing out a huge portion of the market. A moderate option would give them a way to address this, without necessarily impacting the "deluxe" side of the business. Those who want and can afford deluxe need not buy or stay at CBR - they can still buy at Poly or the new Wilderness Lodge or whatever comes after that.
Which brings me to the third argument: that a moderate option would throw the system out of balance. This one is tough to assess. It *could* introduce imbalance, but it's anyone's guess whether the stampede would be away from CBR to the deluxe resorts, or *toward* the cheaper rooms at CBR from deluxe owners. My own guess would be that the latter is more likely. The fact that the cheaper room categories (studio, standard view) and cheaper seasons (early December!) are so popular shows that there is a strong demand by existing owners for lower-cost options. Sure, all those moderate owners would no doubt also look to book at near-park resorts occasionally, or even regularly, but their 50 point contracts won't go far at VGF or Poly. The resorts most likely to lose here remain SSR and OKW, as value-seekers flock to the lower-cost moderate, and those trading up will be wanting park proximity.
Anyway, I'm not arguing that a truly moderate DVC is in the works at CBR, only that I don't think the idea is wholly implausible.
