While my analysis puts AKV somewhere in the mid-pack for Year 1, Year 5, and Year 10 costs, the "+" part of SAP+ can skew things heavily as personal resort rankings are personal, as is the weighting of them.
For example, RIV Direct is a clearly worse value than most resale resorts, but
personally I'd still take it as SAP+ over a good chunk of the resale market because of the "+" part (and to avoid resale restrictions impacting usability of
my purchase).
I appreciate you linking to this analysis, but this probably demonstrates why I ought to post a fuller post/explanation (and a more legible chart, it's so bad lol).
In short for VGF: the uncertainty of the future is pretty high, and VGF is particularly sus since dues increases have always been unusually low in its history.
I'm of two minds about the VGF dues growth:
- When someone/something shows you what they are, you should listen.
- For example, I wouldn't discount that certain resorts have had higher rate of dues increases the last 10 years than others and just say they'll average out in the future. They've demonstrated a sustained pattern of dues increases, arbitrarily predicting that'll go away is naïve.
- In this light, VGF's low dues growth should be believed to be durable.
- If something's too good to be true, it probably is.
- VGF's dues growth has been very low in its history. But it's not that old yet, so its dues history is shorter and a regression to the mean is more likely than a 'bad dues growth' resort regressing to the mean.
- It's likely that my overall dues analysis is no better than guessing past somewhere between 10-20 years, and it's ridiculously likely that there are some things that will be wrong sooner than that...if I had to choose 'least probable', I'd pick VGF.
If I were to manually bias any of the numbers in my analysis, I'd probably skew VGF's future dues growth rate closer to WDW's average growth rate.
(n.b., I guess I did manually bias CCV and RIV by declaring they had too little data to use their dues data)
But to demonstrate my point, VGF's
highest 5yr CAGR in its existence is 3.64%. In the last 5 years of 5yr CAGRs (which would be inclusive of dues 9 years ago, at most), only the following resort-years have had lower 5yr CAGRs across all of
DVC-older-than-VGF:
- BCV 2020 - 3.40%
- BRV 2024 - 3.46%
- BLT 2024 - 3.47%
And of those three, VGF's 5yr CAGR in the same year was no more than 0.01% higher than the lowest resort that year (3.47% in 2024).
So said another way, VGF has essentially always had the slowest 5yr rate of dues growth in its entire existence, when compared to resorts older than VGF. This feels anomalous.
Anyway, not trying to pick on you
@AstroBlasters. Just feel compelled to point out the flaws in my own analysis!
