People interested in Poly2: are you hoping for new association or same?

[Sandisw]

The only reports so far are that it will be the same and I'd believe that makes the most sense. I'd also be in favor of it being the same. I wasn't in favor of the addition to VGF of the resort studios they designed. I believe it is unfairly going to put a crunch on the original villas. PVB has the studios and bungalows but would benefit from an addition other villa options as it should have had from the start.

However at this point it also would have been fine to leave Poly as is. I'm not a fan of the architecture nor the location impact of the proposed building.

My guide has reported that they have not been given any info regarding if it will be the same or different.

So, at least one report that there has been no decision given to anyone in the DVC area.

 

[zavandor]

The only reports so far are that it will be the same and I'd believe that makes the most sense. I'd also be in favor of it being the same. I wasn't in favor of the addition to VGF of the resort studios they designed. I believe it is unfairly going to put a crunch on the original villas. PVB has the studios and bungalows but would benefit from an addition other villa options as it should have had from the start.

However at this point it also would have been fine to leave Poly as is. I'm not a fan of the architecture nor the location impact of the proposed building.

It is very difficult to predict the effect on 1BR at VGF. Currently studios are hard to get. VGF was the first resort to sleep 5 in the studios, I remember many people justifying buying even given the high cost and point charts comparing to 1BR elsewhere. It is not unlikely that many people who would prefer a studio are forced to upgrade to a 1BR because of the lack of availability. Also, I bet most lock offs are booked as studios and 1BR. Also, two connecting resort studios will sleep 10 and cost way less than a 2BR.
Now studios will be more readily available and that could free up some 1BR and 2BR at VGF1. Is it enough to compensate for the number of people who buy VGF2 and want 1BR and 2BR? I have no idea, but I don't think it'll be as dramatic as many think.

For PVB2, if it's a separate association, I would recommend NOT to buy for people interested in studios. Given the likely proportion of rooms, they'll be difficult to book. Better to buy PVB1 resale. And that's why I think it'll be the same association. DVC don't want to lose those sales and the sales of addons.

 

[BamaGuy44]

My guide has reported that they have not been given any info regarding if it will be the same or different.

So, at least one report that there has been no decision given to anyone in the DVC area.

I firmly believe they haven't decided yet, which explains the deliberately vague wording of the release. They might want to gague reaction, see how VGF2 does in the next year or so, or who knows what. I can see pros and cons for them either way so who knows. Personally I predict separate association with Rivera type restrictions, but I suck at predicting what they'll do.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

My guide has reported that they have not been given any info regarding if it will be the same or different.

So, at least one report that there has been no decision given to anyone in the DVC area.

Not actually referencing the guide reports but the one or two that seemed like the more internal knowledge that often sneaks out.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

It is very difficult to predict the effect on 1BR at VGF. Currently studios are hard to get. VGF was the first resort to sleep 5 in the studios, I remember many people justifying buying even given the high cost and point charts comparing to 1BR elsewhere. It is not unlikely that many people who would prefer a studio are forced to upgrade to a 1BR because of the lack of availability. Also, I bet most lock offs are booked as studios and 1BR. Also, two connecting resort studios will sleep 10 and cost way less than a 2BR.
Now studios will be more readily available and that could free up some 1BR and 2BR at VGF1. Is it enough to compensate for the number of people who buy VGF2 and want 1BR and 2BR? I have no idea, but I don't think it'll be as dramatic as many think.

For PVB2, if it's a separate association, I would recommend NOT to buy for people interested in studios. Given the likely proportion of rooms, they'll be difficult to book. Better to buy PVB1 resale. And that's why I think it'll be the same association. DVC don't want to lose those sales and the sales of addons.

Yes, just a wait and see for VGF. I am leaning toward the thought that the additional points in the association will now make the larger villas book faster than the resort studios. We'll see!

 

[Paul Stupin]

The only reports so far are that it will be the same and I'd believe that makes the most sense. I'd also be in favor of it being the same. I wasn't in favor of the addition to VGF of the resort studios they designed. I believe it is unfairly going to put a crunch on the original villas. PVB has the studios and bungalows but would benefit from an addition other villa options as it should have had from the start.

However at this point it also would have been fine to leave Poly as is. I'm not a fan of the architecture nor the location impact of the proposed building.

The thing is, I’m not a fan of the architecture (old and dated) and location (too long a walk to Magic Kingdom) of the original resort! So for those exact reasons I’d like it to be a new association. And I wouldn’t want to compete with Poly1 owners for the new building when that’s the only place where I want to stay.
Re the possible VGF2 crunch on the original building, I’m a little concerned as well, since we love the lake view one bedrooms. But the point chart for them is so high that I don’t think, for the times of year we travel, that one hour into the 11 month window they’ll all be gone. For all we know the 7 month window might be impossible, but that’s why we own there.

 

[CarolMN]

But the point chart for them is so high that I don’t think, for the times of year we travel, that one hour into the 11 month window they’ll all be gone. For all we know the 7 month window might be impossible, but that’s why we own there.

This is why I don't think VGF1 owners will see much (if any) negative change if they book their 1 & 2 bedroom villas at 11 months. I strongly suspect the same for PVB owners when the new tower comes online.

 

[Anthony Vito]

As much vitriol as there is towards the resale restrictions, we don't actually know what Disney thinks of them. If there happens to be any internal debate (and there may not be), the other thing with keeping it the same association, is that it lets them push out any decisions on how to handle that. If they make it a new association, then we see whether they're all in on the restrictions or if they've come up with other ways to push people towards direct purchases.

 

[Sandisw]

As much vitriol as there is towards the resale restrictions, we don't actually know what Disney thinks of them. If there happens to be any internal debate (and there may not be), the other thing with keeping it the same association, is that it lets them push out any decisions on how to handle that. If they make it a new association, then we see whether they're all in on the restrictions or if they've come up with other ways to push people towards direct purchases.

Which could support they were not forthcoming in the announcement. With VGF, made sure everyone knew it was the same association. With CCV, they came out with the new names right away so everyone knew they would be two different resorts.

Now, vague language that allows the reader to decide it could be both. Depending on what you think, the same sentence can be used to "support" same or new association!!!

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

The thing is, I’m not a fan of the architecture (old and dated) and location (too long a walk to Magic Kingdom) of the original resort! So for those exact reasons I’d like it to be a new association. And I wouldn’t want to compete with Poly1 owners for the new building when that’s the only place where I want to stay.
Re the possible VGF2 crunch on the original building, I’m a little concerned as well, since we love the lake view one bedrooms. But the point chart for them is so high that I don’t think, for the times of year we travel, that one hour into the 11 month window they’ll all be gone. For all we know the 7 month window might be impossible, but that’s why we own there.

The same should apply to Poly then as VGF. If you own there and book at 11 months it should be no issue getting into the new building.

 

[bdphill22]

2 questions:

1. Which would be more likely to cause the point chart for 1/2 Bedrooms be lower? We want it to stay in 1 and 2 Bedrooms, but since they don't have them already I can't get a good idea of what those point costs would be.

2. Which would be more likely to make booking 1/2 Bedrooms more available (at both 11 and 7 months)?

 

[smmora]

2 questions:

1. Which would be more likely to cause the point chart for 1/2 Bedrooms be lower? We want it to stay in 1 and 2 Bedrooms, but since they don't have them already I can't get a good idea of what those point costs would be.

2. Which would be more likely to make booking 1/2 Bedrooms more available (at both 11 and 7 months)?

#2 - definitely new association would be better at 11 months, if its the same you are competing against everyone at both resorts
at 7 months its open to everybody (or maybe just owners and direct buyers and grandfathered resale)

 

[Sandisw]

2 questions:

1. Which would be more likely to cause the point chart for 1/2 Bedrooms be lower? We want it to stay in 1 and 2 Bedrooms, but since they don't have them already I can't get a good idea of what those point costs would be.

2. Which would be more likely to make booking 1/2 Bedrooms more available (at both 11 and 7 months)?

Since they have no 1 or 2 bedrooms they can make them whatever they want, whether it’S a new or the same association.

They can only sell points deeded to those new rooms so the point chart will reflect that.

They already have point charts for studios so that will play a role in what they do there. For VGF they kept it simple and make the SV and LV resort and deluxe the same, with TPV more.

New association reduces the owners with 11 month advantage for those rooms.

 

[achinforsomebacon]

Since they have no 1 or 2 bedrooms they can make them whatever they want, whether it’S a new or the same association.

They can only sell points deeded to those new rooms so the point chart will reflect that.

Is there any reason they wouldn't make the new 1+ bedrooms the highest points across all resorts? This would allow them to sell more overall and people would need to buy more to be able to stay there.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

Is there any reason they wouldn't make the new 1+ bedrooms the highest points across all resorts? This would allow them to sell more overall and people would need to buy more to be able to stay there.

Originally PVB studio points were the same as VGF I believe. I'd look to the VGF charts to get an idea of what to expect.

 

[Paul Stupin]

The same should apply to Poly then as VGF. If you own there and book at 11 months it should be no issue getting into the new building.

Good point. I guess my issue with Poly2 being in the same association is that I’m not really a fan of Poly1, with (again just my opinion) it’s dated architecture and accommodations. So I’d rather just be in a separate resort with a more modern take
on the theme, and have my dues just go to that. And I think there might be way more Poly owners interested in trying out the new tower than VGF2 owners, who bought with the intention of staying at the new studios, lining up for the VGF one bedrooms.

 

[DVCSunDevil]

There is also a very real danger -- if they aren't the same association, the new resort guests may not have access to the Volcano pool. The Volcano pool is already too small for all the existing Poly guests. Adding hundreds more guests per night to Poly property could overwhelm the Volcano pool.

I 100% agree. I have made the same comment on other threads. If PVB2 is the same association at PVB1, that main Poly pool (Volcano) won't be able to handle it. We were there in February and we got loungers at 10:15am (it opens at 10:00am), and by 10:45am all the loungers were taken. While we were there, we ran into someone we know from back home who was staying there the entire week. She said they were doing parks every morning and wanted to go to the pool in the afternoon, but getting loungers was impossible. Lucky for her, we were getting up for an ADR so she got out loungers.

I don't know what Disney will decide regarding the Poly2 association status, but IMO they absolutely need to make Poly2 a new association. There needs to be some sort of buffer between the two resorts. Also, the restaurant(s) at the new Poly2 better be good. The ADRs at Poly are already tough to get, so dropping another resort right next to current Poly will make those restaurants even more packed.

 

[DVCSunDevil]

Honestly, I don't think the association, whether the same or not, will restrict people to any of the current resort amenities.

I think that could be why they are proposing the new pool for the tower to give people a 3rd option. Now, they could restrict cash guests from using the new pool, but not the other way around.

Just curious why you think that. If both Poly and Poly2 are their own association, the key to get into the pool can restrict them from "pool hopping", right? I mean, I can't walk over to BCV and go into their pool if I am staying at BWV. I am not sure why they wouldn't do the same if Poly2 is it's own association. Restaurants are different, because anyone can make an ADR at any restaurant. But the amenities, IMO, should be restricted to guests of that resort.

They way I look at it, the reason for putting a pool at Poly2 if it was it's own association is because they would have to have a pool there. You can't have a resort with no pool. On the flip side, they would also have to have a pool there if it was the same association as Poly in order to spread out demand. So who knows, lol...the reasoning for having a pool at Poly2 works both ways.

 

[Marionnette]

I 100% agree. I have made the same comment on other threads. If PVB2 is the same association at PVB1, that main Poly pool (Volcano) won't be able to handle it. We were there in February and we got loungers at 10:15am (it opens at 10:00am), and by 10:45am all the loungers were taken. While we were there, we ran into someone we know from back home who was staying there the entire week. She said they were doing parks every morning and wanted to go to the pool in the afternoon, but getting loungers was impossible. Lucky for her, we were getting up for an ADR so she got out loungers.

I don't know what Disney will decide regarding the Poly2 association status, but IMO they absolutely need to make Poly2 a new association. There needs to be some sort of buffer between the two resorts. Also, the restaurant(s) at the new Poly2 better be good. The ADRs at Poly are already tough to get, so dropping another resort right next to current Poly will make those restaurants even more packed.

If Polyflections is part of the Polynesian Village Resort, then guests of the new tower will be able to use the Volcano pool. It won't matter whether there is one association (like AKV) or two (like BRV/CCV).

 

[DVCSunDevil]

If Polyflections is part of the Polynesian Village Resort, then guests of the new tower will be able to use the Volcano pool. It won't matter whether there is one association (like AKV) or two (like BRV/CCV).

If that is true, then on pool days people better plan on being in line at 9:50am at the latest. There was literally a line of 25ish people at 9:45am before it opened when we were there in February. I was shocked. If an entirely new resort has access to that pool, it will be crazy-town trying to get a lounger.