We will just have to agree to disagree. Your idea would net them hundreds of millions of dollars, where as my idea nets billions.Except I don’t think tear down gets them more money. I think a good renovation will allow them to sell just as high and have less upfront costs.
I don’t think it’s about thinking big or small. I just see that it achieves the same goal and Disney will spend the least it can to maximize profits.
If renovating gets them the same return, they will go that route. If they need to tear down and start from scratch, they will. I just don’t think they will need to do it.
If this level of VGF is a success, I bet we see more of it.
Although I don’t see the big slash screen and video I still see the smaller gfv coming soon tile with a deeper overview of gfv further down the home page
if dvc was getting cold feet that tile would be gone too
Is it really fully restored? I don’t think they can push a new roof on owners in 2041.This means that Disney gets a fully restored BWV and 4.8 million points for free in 2042.
We are responsible for maintenance until 2042. If BWV needs a new roof in 2041, it’s going to get a new roof in 2041.Is it really fully restored? I don’t think they can push a new roof on owners in 2041.
This issue is complicated at OKW as some owners are arguing that maintenance for big items that are scheduled to happen after 2042 should only be paid by 2057 owners.
It's because they're headed over to BRV (we can still fantasize).As no renovations have apparently started on Big Pine there remains the possibility of DVC getting cold feet yet again. I'm not saying they have but it could happen. Even if they started renovations there isn't a thing I can see that is being done that wouldn't lend itself to just being a room renovations for GF hotel rooms. Or perhaps it's just delayed for any number of reasons such as material shortage, worker shortage etc and so they are pulling back the marketing to wait until dates can be revised.
It's because they're headed over to BRV (we can still fantasize).
We are responsible for maintenance until 2042. If BWV needs a new roof in 2041, it’s going to get a new roof in 2041.
Yes, Disney uses the straight line method to depreciate the value of assets. From their 10K’s, physical assets (such as hotels and attractions) typically are deprecated over 25 to 40 years. No roof will last 25 years, so presumably that deprecates faster.My understanding is that costs such roof are amortized over "useful life" so if a roof is determined to last 20 years, owners would only be responsible for 1/20th of the roof cost in 2041. Spread over the amount of points at the resort, that cost increase would be minimal.
We are responsible for returning BWV to Disney in good condition. Legally, we owners cannot stop paying for maintenance just because we know Disney gets the asset back in 2042.That would be a very difficult thing to justify in the lawsuits that would undoubtably follow.
Yes, Disney uses the straight line method to depreciate the value of assets. From their 10K’s, physical assets (such as hotels and attractions) typically are deprecated over 25 to 40 years. No roof will last 25 years, so pres
But that’s not what we’re talking about here. Rather, we DVC members in effect pay for the roof every year. If, using your number, Disney estimates that the roof will last 20 years, then we theoretically are paying one-twentieth of that cost every year.
If BWV needs a new roof in 2041, then that cost will come out of funds that Disney has set aside every year (from our annual Maintenance Fees) to pay for maintenance such as a new roof.
We are responsible for returning BWV to Disney in good condition. Legally, we owners cannot stop paying for maintenance just because we know Disney gets the asset back in 2042.
Quite the opposite. Disney can sue us if we fail to maintain BWV in good condition.
If the roof truly needs to be replaced in 2041, then we are legally responsible for replacing it.
Now if Disney finds an unscrupulous contractor who says the roof needs to be replaced when it doesn’t, then we can sue.
I’m simply saying that if the roof legitimately needs to be replaced in 2041, then we are responsible. We continue to be responsible until ownership transfers back to Disney.
We are responsible for returning BWV to Disney in good condition. Legally, we owners cannot stop paying for maintenance just because we know Disney gets the asset back in 2042.
Quite the opposite. Disney can sue us if we fail to maintain BWV in good condition.
If the roof truly needs to be replaced in 2041, then we are legally responsible for replacing it.
Now if Disney finds an unscrupulous contractor who says the roof needs to be replaced when it doesn’t, then we can sue.
I’m simply saying that if the roof legitimately needs to be replaced in 2041, then we are responsible. We continue to be responsible until ownership transfers back to Disney.
Keep in mind that the Polynesian and Contemporary are now more than 50 years old. The Poly just went through a major renovation but there’s no talk of tearing them down.I think the thing people are missing with the tear down versus renovation is the building itself. If they do a renovation only with another 50 year deed they are asking the major structural components to be structurally sound for over 100 years. Early to mid 90s construction may not last that long and by relying on that is a big risk to them. Also, a tear down would allow them to make the building itself a lot more energy efficient. They could take the risk of the renovation to flip it quicker in any case.