Poly Expansion Watch

[tjkraz]

That's not what I said at all... I'm saying that the way they have chosen to expand DVC post-Riviera (Scrapping Reflections, Grand Flo hotel conversion, Poly expansion) leads me to believe they are not happy with the way the Riviera roll out has gone and prefer to do it a different way for now. Read into that what you will.

I'm confused as to how canceling one project (in the early months of a 2-year pandemic), converting hotel rooms at another and new construction at a third collectively point to dissatisfaction with a fourth project.

DVC has a new VP in charge, so it's no great surprise to see subtle changes to the playbook. More often than not, DVC has offered buyers more than one resort at WDW. There was a time when BLT, AKV and SSR were all selling concurrently.Plans for new villa construction similar to this were on the table 10 years ago and ultimately shelved. They're taking advantage of an opportunity to sell 42 years of ownership in a known resort for the full going rate.

A "late 2024" opening means this Poly expansion is almost 3 years away. They will probably have about a year between VGF points being sold out (barring some massive price increase) and Poly2 offering. Other projects could have filled that gap more efficiently if Riviera was such a concern, including Reflections.

I don't see where this has any relation to "the way Riviera's roll out has gone." Riviera spent a full year out-selling the likes of Copper Creek and Poly before that pesky pandemic set in. If anything, this move points to a lack of confidence in Reflections which was less than 2 years away from completion when it was shelved.

 

[Katie & Glen]

Quick takes:

1. This is a homerun - There is absolutely no doubt in mind whatsoever that this will perform amazingly well and is a perfect addition to the Poly!
2. I can't help but think they flipped the Reflections idea a bit and moved it here.
3. Derek DeBoer hopefully has some new lamps to steal!
4. We will be checking out the new VGF Villas on Thursday and will post a video of this proposed area for size and scope.
5. Using my very scientific measuring method (counting in the picture)... I'm estimating around 400 new villas with Studio, 1 Bedroom, 2 Bedroom, and Grand Villas. I also wouldn't rule out some Tower Studio villas (look in the corner of the concept art).
6. Condo Association? Based on size my initial gut reaction is separate... Think Boulder Ridge/Copper Creek.
7. Pricing? Expect it to open aggressively with incentives. I would expect by the time the resort opens in 2024 we will be in the range of $225-$230pp.
8. Fireworks views Fireworks views Fireworks views!!! Poly is the best place on the loop to watch fireworks so this is going to be amazing!!
9. I'm hoping for a signature dining experience at the top and/or a bar or lounge like TOTWL. Artist rendering also looks like a new swimming pool will be included.
10. I'm sold... This is going to be an amazing addition to the Polynesian!

Some have pointed out that the top level could be grand villas, not a restaurant or lounge li,e at BLT.

Apparently, the exterior looks like similar to the layout of a grand villa like those at BLT, Kidani, and Saratoga.

Hoping we get some layouts "soon" that tell us they are adding 1, 2, and 3 Bedroom units (and lock offs).

 

[DisneyOutsider]

I'm confused as to how canceling one project (in the early months of a 2-year pandemic), converting hotel rooms at another and new construction at a third collectively point to dissatisfaction with a fourth project.

It's fine if you disagree. Reasonable minds can disagree here... but you're being intentionally dense at this point by leaving out all of the pertinent details of my argument in an attempt to act like it's not a valid point. The fact is that since Riviera rolled out with their restrictions, they seem to be going out of their way to avoid declaring a new association. I think Riviera is that reason. So I'll just say this:

I'm convinced that DVC isn't happy with the way Riviera is selling, pandemic or no pandemic. If you think that the Riviera restrictions haven't been a major PITA for DVC, then we have nothing to talk about really. Agree to disagree. I'm not interested in arguing any further about whether DVC views Riviera as a success or not.

 

[Frugal Fairy Tales]

Riviera restrictions are a major PITA for all. LOL. But, they prevented me from purchasing RIV, which now I am thrilled about because I can go for new Poly instead!

 

[DisneyOutsider]

I was right there with ya. Right up until here. Ummm... have ya met BLT and TOTWL?

I agree with Paul on this. The view from Poly gives the best perspective of the castle-centric shows in my opinion.

The TOTWL view is great, but it really warps the perspective of the show in relation to the castle.

 

[tjkraz]

Condo Association? Based on size my initial gut reaction is separate... Think Boulder Ridge/Copper Creek.

Disagree here.

Copper Creek happened because rolling them into the existing condo association would have given buyers only 25 years of ownership. Early returns on VGF2 suggest there's zero pushback on the 42 years remaining, and Poly would be the same. (Heck, some buyers are willingly paying up to $265 each for 20 years of BCV ownership.)

Same association means Disney gets the rooms back 8 years sooner, and then can better market all pieces of PVB when they re-sell in 2066. Make them separate entities and they're effectively separate forever. Assuming the new expansion is well received, it would be difficult to re-sell 4 million points worth of studios + bungalows in '66.

Also, linking the two would give more owners access to the bungalows which appear to be something of an albatross. Maybe even give themselves some wiggle room to reallocate points across the whole and lower bungalow costs.

The only reason I can think of to keep them separate would be to impose resale restrictions. Doing so would be validating the usefulness of a rule which many owners seem convinced has backfired. (I'm not convinced that resale restrictions have backfired, but also skeptical that they provide enough reason to separate the two. It didn't in the case of VGF.)

 

[Frugal Fairy Tales]

Biggest question, new association or under the current…

When did they halt VGF direct sales in relation to the announcement of the Big Pine flip? Maybe the status of Poly direct points being available for sale, or not, will give us a clue. Thoughts?

 

[HIRyeDVC]

What's with all this addition around MK?

Assuming the new expansion is well received, it would be difficult to re-sell 4 million points worth of studios + bungalows in '66.

What if this new expansion included a mix of room types to include 1,2,3 BRs? I don't think they'd have a hard time selling 4 million points then.

 

[bdphill22]

If they are stealing plans from Reflections then can the please steal the lazy river if they have the room? It is has one we probably won't stay anywhere else.

Though it must have 1BR and 2BR for us to buy in. We haven't bought the current poly because we do 1BR and 2BR. Which is why I almost hope it's a different association so the contract is longer. Though that may increase the buy in and also an even higher point chart.

 

[tjkraz]

The fact is that since Riviera rolled out with their restrictions, they seem to be going out of their way to avoid declaring a new association. I think Riviera is that reason.

The takeaway I'm getting from your comments is that there's NO other good reason for selling additional points at two of the most cherished resorts in all of Walt Disney World, other than to avoid resale restrictions. If that's the case, yes I disagree.

I say again, for the first year Riviera didn't just equal past resorts but exceeded their sales pace. Not merely for a couple months, but for an entire year. They sold 181,000 Riviera points in January 2020, one of the 5 best months over a 10-year span. If you believe that buyers suddenly woke up to the resale restrictions in late 2020 and no other factors conspired to slow Riviera sales over the last 18 months, then we are definitely on different pages.

No owners would be harmed if those restrictions were removed. Disney could wipe that out in a heartbeat if they determined it wasn't serving their best interest.

 

[tjkraz]

What if this new expansion included a mix of room types to include 1,2,3 BRs? I don't think they'd have a hard time selling 4 million points then.

I'm quite sure the new expansion will have those room types. My point was that if you put this new building in a separate condo Assocation with a 2074 ending date, the original association (with just Studios + Bungalows) will be very difficult to market on its own come 2066.

 

[HIRyeDVC]

I'm quite sure the new expansion will have those room types. My point was that if you put this new building in a separate condo Assocation with a 2074 ending date, the original association (with just Studios + Bungalows) will be very difficult to market on its own come 2066.

But the original poly is already sold out. Why would Disney need to market it more?

 

[DisneyOutsider]

The takeaway I'm getting from your comments is that there's NO other good reason for selling additional points at two of the most cherished resorts in all of Walt Disney World, other than to avoid resale restrictions.

Nope... and please don't try again. This sentence is beyond silly.

 

[BoatDriver]

I'm quite sure the new expansion will have those room types. My point was that if you put this new building in a separate condo Assocation with a 2074 ending date, the original association (with just Studios + Bungalows) will be very difficult to market on its own come 2066.

I've been thinking about this as well. I can argue both sides in my head, but I think I can make a more reasoned argument for keeping it in the same Association.

1. It greatly simplifies the legal process
2. It doesn't depress current points.
3. It opens up the new building for new contract sales 10 years earlier, and in line with the rest of the property.
4. It ameliorates the current problem with the bungalow point disparity.

 

[tjkraz]

But the original poly is already sold out. Why would Disney need to market it more?

In 2066. When current ownership ends and the points revert back to Disney.

 

[tjkraz]

I've been thinking about this as well. I can argue both sides in my head, but I think I can make a more reasoned argument for keeping it in the same Association.

1. It greatly simplifies the legal process
2. It doesn't depress current points.
3. It opens up the new building for new contract sales 10 years earlier, and in line with the rest of the property.
4. It ameliorates the current problem with the bungalow point disparity.

https://www.disboards.com/threads/poly-expansion-watch.3875840/page-3#post-63850101

 

[BamaGuy44]

If they are stealing plans from Reflections then can the please steal the lazy river if they have the room? It is has one we probably won't stay anywhere else.

Though it must have 1BR and 2BR for us to buy in. We haven't bought the current poly because we do 1BR and 2BR. Which is why I almost hope it's a different association so the contract is longer. Though that may increase the buy in and also an even higher point chart.

Disney pay attention to this person. They are wise.

 

[BoatDriver]

Disagree here.

Copper Creek happened because rolling them into the existing condo association would have given buyers only 25 years of ownership. Early returns on VGF2 suggest there's zero pushback on the 42 years remaining, and Poly would be the same. (Heck, some buyers are willingly paying up to $265 each for 20 years of BCV ownership.)

Same association means Disney gets the rooms back 8 years sooner, and then can better market all pieces of PVB when they re-sell in 2066. Make them separate entities and they're effectively separate forever. Assuming the new expansion is well received, it would be difficult to re-sell 4 million points worth of studios + bungalows in '66.

Also, linking the two would give more owners access to the bungalows which appear to be something of an albatross. Maybe even give themselves some wiggle room to reallocate points across the whole and lower bungalow costs.

The only reason I can think of to keep them separate would be to impose resale restrictions. Doing so would be validating the usefulness of a rule which many owners seem convinced has backfired. (I'm not convinced that resale restrictions have backfired, but also skeptical that they provide enough reason to separate the two. It didn't in the case of VGF.)

Bingo

 

[kungaloosh22]

Yep, I think we all called this ...

Yes!

I've been thinking this is what will happen [in response to comment that luau would probably be replaced with DVC], too, and I hope it does (so maybe it's just wishful thinking). I'm also hoping for signature dining, perhaps on the top floor of a new DVC building with a nice fireworks view. Is there room for another pool, too, or is that a bridge too far?

I'm giddy! This is all I ever really wanted for DVC. I'll be sad, though, if it's a new association instead of part of the original.

ETA: To clarify my last comment, although Poly has always been our favorite resort, I definitely do love all the DVC resorts. I was so disappointed that Poly had only studios. I love their studios, just wanted more options. And also, the Poly deserves signature dining. So I'm hopeful!

 

[HIRyeDVC]

In 2066. When current ownership ends and the points revert back to Disney.

I understand that but I honestly don't think Disney is thinking that far ahead. 44 years is an eternity in DVC years