Let's speculate about Polynesian some more!

[AnnaKristoff2013]

To be fair, if that was really DVDs thinking they would not have kept it quiet for almost two years.

Regardless of what the end result has become, DVD definitely wanted people to think that it might become a new resort and potentially have restrictions.

It benefited them to have people debating this.

It’s also possible that both sides of us in this debate are ascribing all kinds of advanced tactics to DVD when, in fact, it’s just a monkey throwing poo at the wall. LIke, maybe DVD purposely kept this quiet for years while they quietly calculated the maximum value they could extract from this impactful decision. On the other hand, is it possible that it’s literally like the old ROFR lady joke where someone threw a dart at the wall, and didn’t realize or care that they had a bunch of us on pins and needles for two years?

 

[StevieB81]

To be fair, if that was really DVDs thinking they would not have kept it quiet for almost two years.

Regardless of what the end result has become, DVD definitely wanted people to think that it might become a new resort and potentially have restrictions.

It benefited them to have people debating this.

Maybe. I just really kind of think that they announced an expansion at Poly, and to them that was it. Nothing to talk about except a new tower. Also, we're creating the 17th DVC resort at Fort Wilderness. Poly isn't the 17th because it already exists. We talked ourselves into thinking it was more. Probably why it didn't come up at the meeting until it was asked. The answer was "that's the plan", because why wouldn't it be. Just my take.

 

[ziravan]

Maybe. I just really kind of think that they announced an expansion at Poly, and to them that was it. Nothing to talk about except a new tower. Also, we're creating the 17th DVC resort at Fort Wilderness. Poly isn't the 17th because it already exists. We talked ourselves into thinking it was more. Probably why it didn't come up at the meeting until it was asked. The answer was "that's the plan", because why wouldn't it be. Just my take.

Meh. Even if that were originally the case we know they watch these boards and so they were very well aware of the speculation (and how it ties in with the RIV restrictions) when they made their announcement this week.

Even if we talked ourselves into more, they were well aware of that and were STILL content to let that conversation ride out for a long time.

(If it weren’t for the RIV restrictions, the speculation on Poly2 would likely have been far different. DVC not giving up on restrictions for the Poly Tower was prob the biggest elephant in the room here.)

I personally think that they ARE vested in the current restrictions but not so much as to alter their original plans with Poly (to add balance later).

And so: I expect the restrictions will stay at RIV and also be included in the CFW.

 

[StevieB81]

Meh. Even if that were originally the case we know they watch these boards and so they were very well aware of the speculation (and how it ties in with the RIV restrictions) when they made their announcement this week.

Even if we talked ourselves into more, they were well aware of that and were STILL content to let that conversation ride out for a long time.

(If it weren’t for the RIV restrictions, the speculation on Poly2 would likely have been far different. DVC not giving up on restrictions for the Poly Tower was prob the biggest elephant in the room here.)

I personally think that they ARE vested in the current restrictions but not so much as to alter their original plans with Poly (to add balance later).

And so: I expect the restrictions will stay at RIV and also be included in the CFW.

Yes, I can imagine them being like "what the h--- are they talking about? We said we were going to do this a long time ago. Let's see how far they'll go with this. This should be fun." I agree about restrictions. Anything "new" will have them.

 

[BamaGuy44]

"Speculate" is in the title of this thread. And speculate we did. People made very good arguments as to why their thoughts were correct and convinced themselves they were right. Weeks. Months. Years? These boards do this ALL THE TIME. And now some people, who convinced themselves of something with zero input from an actual decision maker, are a little peeved. Why did Disney not communicate better? Why this, why that? Meanwhile, I can imagine DVC thinking "why would it NOT be the same resort? It's literally at the same resort. All we did was finish it." We got ourselves all worked up for a decision that, in the end, was really no decision at all IMO. It was fun though.

Kind of like when they converted some more rooms at WL to DVC when Boulder Ridge was already there. It was literally at the same resort, they didn't even build anything new really. so it wouldnt be a new association or anything. Obviously.

 

[Sykes]

Kind of like when they converted some more rooms at WL to DVC when Boulder Ridge was already there. It was literally at the same resort, they didn't even build anything new really. so it wouldnt be a new association or anything. Obviously.

It probably wouldn’t have been a new association if Florida timeshare law (and the practicalities of a relatively short time remaining on the existing lease) didn’t make it difficult for DVC to sell the new expansion under the existing association. It’s still the sole exception to the practice of DVC adding expansions to the existing associations.

 

[BamaGuy44]

It probably wouldn’t have been a new association if Florida timeshare law (and the practicalities of a relatively short time remaining on the existing lease) didn’t make it difficult for DVC to sell the new expansion under the existing association. It’s still the sole exception to the practice of DVC adding expansions to the existing associations.

I don't know about any of that, but we're getting a lot of smug "duh it was obviously not going to be a new association, it's at the same resort, lol" When they've already done that exact thing.

Easy to act like it was obvious now.

 

[ziravan]

On a slightly different path of the implications of same association, I wonder if they’ll take this opportunity to create a new category for the longhouses: garbage view.

The best views are their own category, LV. The worst (parking lot) aren’t. It’s been argued before that there should have been LV, Pool/Garden and standard (parking lot) from the start.

Redoing the point chart for the Tower could allow them to fix that.

 

[AnnaKristoff2013]

On a slightly different path of the implications of same association, I wonder if they’ll take this opportunity to create a new category for the longhouses: garbage view.

The best views are their own category, LV. The worst (parking lot) aren’t. It’s been argued before that there should have been LV, Pool/Garden and standard (parking lot) from the start.

Redoing the point chart for the Tower could allow them to fix that.

I really hope not. The more “views” they make, the worse availability gets, because you start getting chunks of dates available in all the different views without the ability to string them together into one reservation.

 

[intamin]

I don't know about any of that, but we're getting a lot of smug "duh it was obviously not going to be a new association, it's at the same resort, lol" When they've already done that exact thing.

Easy to act like it was obvious now.

Hindsight’s 20/20. Just like the 10 people who voted 100% same association after the news came out, people just like to pretend they’re right.

 

[Sandisw]

Maybe. I just really kind of think that they announced an expansion at Poly, and to them that was it. Nothing to talk about except a new tower. Also, we're creating the 17th DVC resort at Fort Wilderness. Poly isn't the 17th because it already exists. We talked ourselves into thinking it was more. Probably why it didn't come up at the meeting until it was asked. The answer was "that's the plan", because why wouldn't it be. Just my take.

With the exception that when people asked, they were told many many times that no one knew.

I asked and inquired several times from many different guides and all said the same thing. “We haven’t been told anything and are not allowed to speculate”

So, the directive from DVC was not to say one way or the other. Thst means they wanted it to be kept vague.

I even read a report that the reason was that announcing it from the start of BPK at VGF lost them sales and didn’t want to make that mistake

We all knew that one side of the discussion would be correct but there is no way to say that the writing was on the wall from the start . DVD purposefully keep it quiet in order for the debate to continue and refused to let DVC guides confirm it.

Mine could not even confirm on the recorded line the next day that Chang said what she did. We now know they have finally been allowed to confirm, since we have reports of that.

Asking happened a lot so it wasn’t “gee, no one ever asked so yes, it’s our plan right now”

With this new trust thing floating about, I now wonder if we are in for a few more surprises and it very well could still include the tower.

 

[wiihoo888]

With the exception that when people asked, they were told many many times that no one knew.

I asked and inquired several times from many different guides and all said the same thing. “We haven’t been told anything and are not allowed to speculate”

So, the directive from DVC was not to say one way or the other. Thst means they wanted it to be kept vague.

I even read a report that the reason was that announcing it from the start of BPK at VGF lost them sales and didn’t want to make that mistake

We all knew that one side of the discussion would be correct but there is no way to say that the writing was on the wall from the star. DVD purposefully keep it quiet in order for the debate to continue.

And, with this new trust thing floating about, I now wonder if we are in for a few more surprises and it very well could still include the tower.

Expect the unexpected….

 

[AnnaKristoff2013]

With this new trust thing floating about, I now wonder if we are in for a few more surprises and it very well could still include the tower.

I am starting to feel a little badly for Riviera owners with regards to the Trust. If they launch the trust and don’t remove resale restrictions from Riviera, I don’t see how Rivera resale doesn’t plummet. It won’t go to zero i suppose because there exists a price where people would still snap it up just to stay in Riviera, but if resale trust points can get you into Riv, who would want to buy Riv resale?

Disney wouldn’t have a direct financial incentive to remove the resale restrictions either, because they wouldn’t need to sell Riviera direct anymore, they could just throw the remaining Riviera into the trust and sell trust points. As a result, at least in the beginning, people who own trust points (direct or resale) could have a better ability to book at Riviera than people who own direct at other non-riviera resorts. Finally, if Disney starts selling an upgrade/wash option to convert your deed to trust points, they’d have a real incentive to keep the resale restrictions, to try to incentivize current Riviera owners into “upgrading” their membership. That would be what other timeshare developers would do, I guess it’ll be a test to see if Disney is like everyone else.

 

[wiihoo888]

I am starting to feel a little badly for Riviera owners with regards to the Trust. If they launch the trust and don’t remove resale restrictions from Riviera, I don’t see how Rivera resale doesn’t plummet. It won’t go to zero i suppose because there exists a price where people would still snap it up just to stay in Riviera, but if resale trust points can get you into Riv, who would want to buy Riv resale?

Yup. That’s what has me considering cancelling the third contract we just got. I was wise enough to purchase all small point contracts, but this is still murky at best. I think I see the writing and the wall and not sure what I think about it. Still have a few days to decide….and I still do love Riviera

Thinking more about the trust…I’m seeing it as being more attractive to those needing larger accommodations. Regular resort rooms have been going for low nightly rates, and I’m not sure that I see how smaller accommodation needs would make a trust program as desirable. Joining it to try to score that small studio room would seem….odd. If the points do make it to the resale market, then that changes things a bit

 

[Sandisw]

I am starting to feel a little badly for Riviera owners with regards to the Trust. If they launch the trust and don’t remove resale restrictions from Riviera, I don’t see how Rivera resale doesn’t plummet. It won’t go to zero i suppose because there exists a price where people would still snap it up just to stay in Riviera, but if resale trust points can get you into Riv, who would want to buy Riv resale?

Disney wouldn’t have a direct financial incentive to remove the resale restrictions either, because they wouldn’t need to sell Riviera direct anymore, they could just throw the remaining Riviera into the trust and sell trust points. As a result, at least in the beginning, people who own trust points (direct or resale) could have a better ability to book at Riviera than people who own direct at other non-riviera resorts. Finally, if Disney starts selling an upgrade/wash option to convert your deed to trust points, they’d have a real incentive to keep the resale restrictions, to try to incentivize current Riviera owners into “upgrading” their membership. That would be what other timeshare developers would do, I guess it’ll be a test to see if Disney is like everyone else.

I am going to speculate even further though. I think any membership into the trust when sold will have severe restrictions on it that will make selling those difficult as well. The trust rules could be set up any way they want for people who don’t purchase directly from DVD…just like now.

I have always said and still will, don’t ever buy expecting or assuming any resale value.

Where we may differ is I don’t think they will try to combine the two systems from existing resorts with deeded ownerships and declared units.

I think they are more likely to start a parallel non specific system with all the new properties, potentially including some of the Poly tower, and the undeclared units at the current active resorts.

However, I also think if they move this way, then I would be surprised if they don’t adjust the restrictions on RIV and VDH. They would have no need to keep them because they would then be limited like the O14…kept out of the new properties in the trust.

 

[AnnaKristoff2013]

am going to speculate even further though. I think any membership into the trust when sold will have severe restrictions on it that will make selling those difficult as well. The trust rules could be set up any way they want for people who don’t purchase directly from DVD…just like now.

I don’t see how this would be legally possible though. I’m unaware of any timeshare system with a trust-based points system where the resale trust points can be somehow “restricted” to make it so you can’t use them to book. They couldn’t use regular resale restrictions, because the trust system isn’t tied to one resort that they could restrict to.

Edit: Disney has never invented a novel product with regards to timeshares. They’ve always copied aspects of existing systems. What you are describing would be completely novel as far as I know.

 

[tom1944]

What is the trust and how is going to work?

 

[wiihoo888]

I am going to speculate even further though. I think any membership into the trust when sold will have severe restrictions on it that will make selling those difficult as well. The trust rules could be set up any way they want for people who don’t purchase directly from DVD…just like now.

I have always said and still will, don’t ever buy expecting or assuming any resale value.

Where we may differ is I don’t think they will try to combine the two systems from existing resorts with deeded ownerships and declared units.

I think they are more likely to start a parallel non specific system with all the new properties, potentially including some of the Poly tower, and the undeclared units at the current active resorts.

However, I also think if they move this way, then I would be surprised if they don’t adjust the restrictions on RIV and VDH. They would have no need to keep them because they would then be limited like the O14…kept out of the new properties in the trust.

I honestly can’t see them starting the trust with just the new properties though. A guarantee at maybe the tower, Riviera, or a cabin isn’t that terribly attractive. I would think it would be at least a bit broader than that

 

[Sandisw]

I honestly can’t see them starting the trust with just the new properties though. A guarantee at maybe the tower, Riviera, or a cabin isn’t that terribly attractive. I would think it would be at least a bit broader than that

You go from having to choose one home resort at 11 months to 5…RIV, VDH, AUL, CFW and Poly tower.

Right now..it’s pick one. Even I could see how it might be a better purchase along with my deeded ownership over resale.

At 7 months you access the rest, which is no different.

Plus, every other new project done would automatically be included in the trust so over time, you get more and more properties until eventually, it’s all like that.

 

[Sandisw]

I don’t see how this would be legally possible though. I’m unaware of any timeshare system with a trust-based points system where the resale trust points can be somehow “restricted” to make it so you can’t use them to book. They couldn’t use regular resale restrictions, because the trust system isn’t tied to one resort that they could restrict to.

Edit: Disney has never invented a novel product with regards to timeshares. They’ve always copied aspects of existing systems. What you are describing would be completely novel as far as I know.

Except you don’t own at the resort. You are buying a membership. And I see nothing that would preclude DVD from setting up the POS of the trust to put restrictions on selling your membership interest in the trust.

Who knew they’d ever go the restrictions route.

So, yes, I can definitely see them finding a way to do it.