Let's speculate about Polynesian some more!

[GoingSince1990]

Considering it’s not going on sale for many more months, I would be surprised if they had an initial price already decided and announced to guides.

We could be in a deep recession when sales start, or the economy could be roaring. There is no way they know today what the price will be.

 

[Sandisw]

Just to be clear, I'm not excusing Disney if they truly broke any promises that they intended to make (verbal or otherwise). Even a guide using imprecise language that accidentally creates a broader commitment than Disney intended is a legitimate beef (albeit a bit smaller scale). But I do take issue with accusing Disney of lying or breaking promises when it's really a matter of Disney interpreting "new resort" (and similar language) differently than some posters would choose to interpret it.

For reference, when I bought RIV and signed the document regarding restrictions, it said that all future resorts whose points were bought resale would be restricted.

When the tower was announced in 2022, the language regarding it was purposely vague so that left us guessing if it would be a future resort or part of PVB.

So, DVD did make the decision to keep the classification of the project secret until this week.

That is why I think some are upset because by not tying it to PVB for this long, they knew that some buyers might just assume it would follow RIV and thus not risk it and go direct.

So, again, it’s not about tthe actual language , it’s about DVD implying one thing and turning around and using semenatics to get around the strategy they have been pushing for almost 5 years.

 

[intamin]

I wrote a really long response but honestly I just feel like I’m smacking my head on a wall over and over again. It’s not your fault- just feel like I’m constantly explaining myself and being told you asked for it so shut up. But I hope everyone who’s telling RIV owners they’re promised nothing and can’t complain, they’re doing the same thing to those who are complaining about the retheming at any of the resorts cause that certainly isn’t promised to them, it was just marketed to them like that when they originally bought in and why they chose that location.

But yeah you’re right here I acknowledge what you’re saying. Think myself and many others have mentioned a few times in the threads - we get it. We completely understood then, too. We are promised nothing but a room to sleep in at 11mo (and even that has become a bit iffy at times) I just assumed most had made a collective decision to purchase for a few other impermanent perks, as well. Wrong to assume and as good a time as any to stop harping about this. Has anyone actually purchased RIV because of restrictions? That would certainly be an interesting take.

Yep, if that’s the case I don’t want to hear a peep from any owners complaining about the de-theming of their resorts. It says nothing about the light fixtures or chairs in a resort changing. People are per usual taking this as an easy way to mock RIV owners who bought direct and are like you bought direct for nothing. Which in reality still is the only way to stay at RIV unless you own RIV resale or had a grandfathered resale contract so I still fail to see the logic. This actually gives me more options. Maybe the move now is to do 200-250 resale Poly points and then 150 direct at CFW. Decisions.. decisions..

 

[emchen]

Amy from DVCFan wrote this in response to a similar comment in their Facebook group.

Thank you that’s what I was looking for. Corroboration.

 

[KimMcGowan]

I would add that an argument could be made that Disney said that the original build at Poly was just the first of two parts. (This is what I have heard repeatedly - but I can't verify it.) This is just them fulfilling their promised expansion.

 

[Sandisw]

I am going to add that I will not be surprised if we see DVC the tower into a split project where some of it is added to PVB to sell as deeded ownership interests and the other units are added to the newly formed trust, along with CFW and priority for those rooms will be given only to trust people.

 

[Sandisw]

I would add that an argument could be made that Disney said that the original build at Poly was just the first of two parts. (This is what I have heard repeatedly - but I can't verify it.) This is just them fulfilling their promised expansion.

Of course they can. And if they had said that from the start I bet people might be less frustrated.

But people can’t ignore that DVD didn’t do that. They wanted people to assume something that I bet they knew from the start.

Nothing I can find in the POS or timeshare law that tied their hands that they couldn’t say if the plan was going to be an additional phase of PVB or new.

The announced right away it would be a DVC project. It’s association could have been declared then.

 

[BamaGuy44]

Just to be clear, I'm not excusing Disney if they truly broke any promises that they intended to make (verbal or otherwise). Even a guide using imprecise language that accidentally creates a broader commitment than Disney intended is a legitimate beef (albeit a bit smaller scale). But I do take issue with accusing Disney of lying or breaking promises when it's really a matter of Disney interpreting "new resort" (and similar language) differently than some posters would choose to interpret it.

No they’re not technically lying but that’s part of being upfront and operating in good faith. Why should we need to interpret what “new resort” means? Why should we have to parse the meaning of the answer to a direct question asked in a meeting with the purpose of disseminating information?

Language in contracts should be clear with terms well defined. Communication from the executives should be unambiguous. Using vague language all the time and contradicting yourself to make it easier to weasel out of things later is customer-hostile practice and disappointing to me from Disney.

This comes off as angry but I’m not, I don’t even own RIV or Poly.

 

[Genie+]

At $230 or $250pp I’m not sure incentives could get it down much under $200pp.

Any guesses to best price on 150pts in the first 2 years?

$195pp seems high but still reasonable around $4pp/py. Keeping it under $30k complete could help sales.

 

[Cfabar1]

all depends on the economy and how quickly they want to move sales.

none of us imagined 161 pp....

I wouldn't be surprised if it was priced high to begin with.

Depends on their goals.

 

[Sykes]

When the tower was announced in 2022, the language regarding it was purposely vague so that left us guessing if it would be a future resort or part of PVB.

So, DVD did make the decision to keep the classification of the project secret until this week.

It seems like a lot of the anger is about things that they didn't say rather than things they did say, and then people are twisting that beyond recognition to make it sound intentionally deceptive. It could be malice, or (among other possibilities) they could have wanted to hedge their bets because the economy (and specifically Disney leadership) has been in turmoil and they understood that their business priorities could shift 3 years down the line so they didn't want to make any affirmative statements that they might eventually backtrack on. I've still yet to see a promise or commitment (verbal or otherwise) that they've failed to meet, only one where people read more into the definition of "new resort" than Disney (likely) ever intended.

Even so, ~63% of the respondents in the (weirdly worded) poll on this thread acknowledged that they believed that there was at least a 20% chance that it would be the existing association, and about 1/3 of people thought it was more likely than not to be the existing association. In the poll taken a year ago in this thread it was 64% of respondents that believed it would be the existing association. No one should have been blindsided by this.

I don't blame anyone for personally being disappointed if they interpreted things differently, but that doesn't mean Disney was deceptive. I also won't defend Disney's communication--they've always been remarkably terrible at communicating with their customers about details (regarding DVC and other topics). But, given all the things that can change over the course of a big project like this one, I'm not sure that I would have handled it any differently if I was managing communication (except maybe not saying anything at all about the association until it's finalized).

 

[Mikey15]

No they’re not technically lying but that’s part of being upfront and operating in good faith. Why should we need to interpret what “new resort” means? Why should we have to parse the meaning of the answer to a direct question asked in a meeting with the purpose of disseminating information?

Language in contracts should be clear with terms well defined. Communication from the executives should be unambiguous. Using vague language all the time and contradicting yourself to make it easier to weasel out of things later is customer-hostile practice and disappointing to me from Disney.

This comes off as angry but I’m not, I don’t even own RIV or Poly.

I don’t have a horse in this either, but we’re not exactly talking about some arcane legalese interpretation of what “new resort” means. They built a new building, where an old building used to be, at the Polynesian resort, without even so much as room for its own bus stop. That’s not a new “resort,” just by the plain language of it.

Could they have built a new resort at the location? Maybe. But we’ve known at least for a while that it’s part of Poly (even if we didn’t know the association decision, nor when that was decided).

 

[GrumpyInPhilly]

I am going to add that I will not be surprised if we see DVC the tower into a split project where some of it is added to PVB to sell as deeded ownership interests and the other units are added to the newly formed trust, along with CFW and priority for those rooms will be given only to trust people.

I haven't heard of this trust. Could you elaborate?

 

[intamin]

I haven't heard of this trust. Could you elaborate?

Refer to this thread

https://www.disboards.com/threads/dvc-club-level-and-home-resort-survey.3935147/page-7#post-65191559

Apparently a bunch of DVC execs are part of this new FL business called the Palmetto Trust Association.

 

[MerlinandtheMouse]

You were promised that you would have access to all future resorts that will join DVC. And you still have that.
Complaining that other people have the same is just mean. You want to feel good about having something that others don't? OK, but you were not promised that.

Man I really wanted to stop talking about this, but you’re putting words in my mouth now. I own PVB resale and most of my points are resale I get more from this decision than not. I love how we say we want no restrictions because that’s what’s actually fair here, a thing I assume we all agree on??? And we’re specifically talking to DVD’s decisions and how they’re the bad guy for their lack of clarity and integrity and never about if some should benefit and others shouldn’t, literally I have yet to read a comment where someone says anything even close to what you’re implying. Yes, I’m the mean one, please keep ganging up on the minority of RIV owners that continue to get alienated by DVD decisions, even if you don’t think they are, we clearly do.

You’re right that nothing changes on literal paper. That’s fair. But if people are just going to keep pretending like this doesn’t affect the overall value and appeal of a super expensive purchase and everything is as it was before that’s not being fair, honest and, frankly, is being intentionally obtuse.

If nothing really changes then RIV would be sold out by now and the resale prices would be much higher than they are now and many of you all here would have purchased direct or resale points in some capacity. Idc what anyone says - most buy with the hope that if they had to resell one day it would do ok on the market, we have endless threads about this exact topic here. That’s ultimately what makes DVC different from other timeshares. We believed that if restrictions were going to become a common occurrence going forward, our purchase would be no different from anyone else’s. That’s how it was sold to us. We’re sitting here asking that DVD remove them altogether and y’all are like idc that much because it doesn’t effect me and RIV owners signed up for this and they’re a bunch of suckers anyway (I don’t actually think you think that but it’s not nice when someone puts words in your mouth, is it?)

Let me say it for the people in the back: this decision is great news for resale owners, myself included. I hope this is a turning point for DVD and they continue to not add restrictions on any additions to the DVC portfolio. In the end, I accept whatever restrictions they add or take away because I love staying at RIV but I really, really hope they remove them on existing resorts, too, because it does devalue them. It would be a nice gesture from DVD but I won’t hold my breath.

I’m going to attempt to hold my tongue from now on because I don’t want to argue with anyone and the back and forth is a bit exhausting. You’re not the one making decisions so I really don’t have any issue with you at all. You’re fully entitled to your opinions on all this, and I really do respect that. And I even agree with what most are saying! I just wish people could see this from the other side. I’ve tried but I’m clearly not the person to do that succinctly enough to make it make any sense to anyone.

These boards are a great place to be a sound board for thoughts, opinions and yes, complaints but most of that is towards a massive entity that ultimately doesn’t care about my opinion or yours. My take away from all this is to take everything DVD says with a heavy dose of speculation and try not to be bogged down by the rest of it. We clearly all love this product and want the best from it, we’re on the same side.

 

[Sandisw]

It seems like a lot of the anger is about things that they didn't say rather than things they did say, and then people are twisting that beyond recognition to make it sound intentionally deceptive. It could be malice, or (among other possibilities) they could have wanted to hedge their bets because the economy (and specifically Disney leadership) has been in turmoil and they understood that their business priorities could shift 3 years down the line so they didn't want to make any affirmative statements that they might eventually backtrack on. I've still yet to see a promise or commitment (verbal or otherwise) that they've failed to meet, only one where people read more into the definition of "new resort" than Disney (likely) ever intended.

Even so, ~63% of the respondents in the (weirdly worded) poll on this thread acknowledged that they believed that there was at least a 20% chance that it would be the existing association, and about 1/3 of people thought it was more likely than not to be the existing association. In the poll taken a year ago in this thread it was 64% of respondents that believed it would be the existing association. No one should have been blindsided by this.

I don't blame anyone for personally being disappointed if they interpreted things differently, but that doesn't mean Disney was deceptive. I also won't defend Disney's communication--they've always been remarkably terrible at communicating with their customers about details (regarding DVC and other topics). But, given all the things that can change over the course of a big project like this one, I'm not sure that I would have handled it any differently if I was managing communication (except maybe not saying anything at all about the association until it's finalized).

They knew what they were doing and they decided to keep it quiet. Why do you think the threads are as long as they are….because the information out there could be interpreted both ways.

Guides and sales people had different answers, Some, like mine, said they could not speculate and did not have the answer, Some told people the same….some said different..and DVD themselves made sure that anything they put out was vague enough to be interpreted .

I think you may be missing the point some are discussing. It’s about the messaging and what this type of decision does to how people view the direct vs resale benefits moving forward…its not about this decision in a vacuum. Its not about RIV owners not knowing what they bought or that they were promised more…

However, by not saying one way or the other, when at the same time, promoting that the only way to get access to future resorts is to buy direct, and people can see and hear about the new Poly tower, they left peoplewith the impression, even without directly saying it, that maybe that shiny new tower could be off limits as it might be a new resort.

So, if this is the way they will go in the future, will they lose some buyers who no longer believe that restrictions for resale are a strategy? This decision proves that it’s not as set in stone as many thought because they choose to make this part of PVB…

Even here, I bet you have a lot of posters who will no longer have the same opinion when the question is asked…I certainly won’t.

And, if you look at the original poll against the most recent one, people’s opinions changed. Went went from most saying same, to most saying new. Why would that be? Something cause people to change their minds.

I agree that the word deceptive is too strong, but no question, they let people infer things that my guess is they knew from the beginning was not true.

 

[Sandisw]

I haven't heard of this trust. Could you elaborate?

Here!

Thread 'DVC Club Level and Home Resort Survey'
https://www.disboards.com/threads/dvc-club-level-and-home-resort-survey.3935147/

Post #127 has the link to the newly created documents that are pretty interesting to read!

 

[GrumpyInPhilly]

Refer to this thread

https://www.disboards.com/threads/dvc-club-level-and-home-resort-survey.3935147/page-7#post-65191559

Apparently a bunch of DVC execs are part of this new FL business called the Palmetto Trust Association.

Wow! Very interesting!

So much on the boards the last few days about PVB and this just flew under my radar. It's almost a full-time job trying to keep up with DVC happenings. Thanks.

 

[maui22]

I think CFW will have to be in its own category given its original nature. It will be a new association because although it’s part of an existing resort it’s not part of an existing DVC resort. But putting restrictions on CFW feels like an insane move for DVD given that the future resale value would likely plummet, or at the very least, be incredibly unstable, making potential buyers very reluctant to go direct there when they can go direct at another active selling resort and swap at 7mo for the cabins.

I am in minority, I expect them to be restricted. In 5 years or so them build the Reflections concept. However, they have it part of the same FW association (also restricted).

 

[MerlinandtheMouse]

I am in minority, I expect them to be restricted. In 5 years or so them build the Reflections concept. However, they have it part of the same FW association (also restricted).

I actually think they’ll be restricted as well, I just think it’s an insane decision from DVD to do so lol maybe they’ll restrict them in a different way we haven’t been introduced to yet