home News forums Reviews Trade links

Go Back   The DVC Boards at MouseOwners.com - the place to talk DVC and Walt Disney World > VACATION CLUB RESOURCES > Latest DVC News and Rumors
 Register FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

Old 09-14-2018, 02:54 PM   #61
The.disney.couple
One Bedroom
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Southern California
Posts: 250
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by carolina_yankee View Post
Yeah, you all got snowed on the hotel renovation for sure!

I would own at VGC if I knew we would get out DL at least once every 3 years, but we're generally once every 4-5 years so it makes more sense to put up with renting points or paying for off-site. Occasionally I'll have a ton of WDW points left over so I'll use them for a DL Hotel stay. But it takes planning!

Dirk
Yeah, that makes total sense with how often you go.

When we bought our Poly points that was our worst case scenario when making the choice to buy. If we were to have extra, couldn't use them, rent them, bank them, had to cancel a ressie, etc. then we'll just use them at the DL hotel if we had to. It's just a quick drive down for us so we have that option. But for some strange reason I've never had any extra points, I'm always short
__________________
Home Resorts: VGC, PVB

Check out my disney photography
https://www.instagram.com/the.disney.couple/?hl=en
The.disney.couple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2018, 03:20 PM   #62
The.disney.couple
One Bedroom
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Southern California
Posts: 250
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FCivish3 View Post
The way the tax thing was set up to work, Disney would build the hotel, and get a tax credit of $300 million or whatever it was, and then when they collected room taxes they would keep most of that tax as their subsidy until they reached the $300 million total.

So in essence Disney was paying for it but then was getting reimbursed to a certain degree from the standard room taxes. This would allow them to build a bigger and better hotel. Without the subsidy they would perhaps spend $300 million less and have a smaller, perhaps not as extravagant hotel. So the city of Anaheim would have lost THAT tax revenue, from the rooms not built, forever. But by helping Disney to build a bigger better hotel, at some point in the future The city of Anaheim would be getting even more revenue back.
and not to mention the 30% (or so) that the city would still be getting every year until the subsidy was over and then start collecting the full 100% in perpetuity. The city had even already budgeted for that 30% that they would be getting every year until they got the full amount. And let's not forget that the subsidy was offered to ANYONE in Anaheim, not just Disney. Others also took advantage of this subsidy. Before this subsidy was offered, The Grand Californian and The Disneyland Hotel were (are) the only hotels in the city of Anaheim to hold that coveted luxury rating.

I think it was a great idea for the city and the members at the time who approved it. The city needed more revenue and they were willing to play ball to get that revenue, they were grateful. The parks were doing ok, but things were a little "stagnant" and the last big update to the parks was Cars Land (Which in my opinion is one of the greatest, immersive lands I've been to). But the parks needed/ need more. So Disney agreed to dump 1.5 billion into the parks in Anaheim and build this new luxury hotel. Now, the economy is strong, prices have skyrocketed at the parks and attendance is still doing well. So, now the city sees how well Disney is doing and instead of still playing ball, they now want to play hardball because the city "deserves" more. They were looking for any excuse to cut that hotel subsidy.
__________________
Home Resorts: VGC, PVB

Check out my disney photography
https://www.instagram.com/the.disney.couple/?hl=en
The.disney.couple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2018, 03:28 PM   #63
Leftcoaster
Founding Member
 
Leftcoaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Aliso Viejo, Ca.
Posts: 2,696
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OttawaWendy View Post
I'm sorry but I think it's a bit the pot calling the kettle black when the crux of this is Disney wanting special treatment in the form of not paying the same taxes as other corporations.
Except Disney never asked,nor lobbied for this tax break. City of Anaheim created the tax incentive because they desperately need 4 star hotels in Anaheim. Anaheim has one of the largest convention centers on the west coast but, they get mostly second tier conventions because they donít have the quality hotel rooms that higher end conventioners want to stay in. Currently, two 4 star hotels exist in Anaheim. Grand Californian and Disneyland Hotel.
__________________
www.twitter.com/morerumlesscoke

"Being a princess means so much more than wearing a tiara and a pretty dress" - Cinderellabration
Leftcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2018, 12:11 PM   #64
carolina_yankee
Administrator
 
carolina_yankee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 27,101
Default

It doesn't sound like "special treatment" or "corporate welfare" to me, but a way for the city to encourage the kind of development the city discovered it needed.

It's not "special treatment" if every developer has the same opportunity and the opportunity is designed to foster the kind of development Anaheim wanted.

I think living wage and housing costs are critical issues that are going to have ramifications all over the country, but I see that as separate from the need to develop Anaheim and finding a way to encourage it to happen. Tax rebates are the kinds of levers governments can push to foster (or deter) development.

It will be interesting to see if Disney builds the hotels without the rebates. Anaheim may well be in a position of having to cut their budget because Disney canceled a project. You can't force a corporation to build.

Then again, if circumstances have changed and Disney builds the hotels without the rebates, then Anaheim is actually better off.

But will canceling the rebates discourage other developers from building luxury hotels? A convention needs hotels connected to the Convention Center (by purpose, not physical), not to a Theme Park. I know the parks a huge draw for convention business as well, but I would hope Disney hotels are primarily for Disney guests, not Convention guests.

Most likely, I suspect, the termination of the subsidies is a "reset" that will allow negotiations to develop a new partnership between Disney and Anaheim that will be the same thing but with different packaging, and may have built in protections about "unintended consequences" for both sides.

Dirk
__________________
carolina_yankee is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2018, 03:41 PM   #65
rowrbazzle
Grand Villa
 
rowrbazzle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: TX
Posts: 1,256
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FCivish3 View Post
The way the tax thing was set up to work, Disney would build the hotel, and get a tax credit of $300 million or whatever it was, and then when they collected room taxes they would keep most of that tax as their subsidy until they reached the $300 million total.

So in essence Disney was paying for it but then was getting reimbursed to a certain degree from the standard room taxes. This would allow them to build a bigger and better hotel. Without the subsidy they would perhaps spend $300 million less and have a smaller, perhaps not as extravagant hotel. So the city of Anaheim would have lost THAT tax revenue, from the rooms not built, forever. But by helping Disney to build a bigger better hotel, at some point in the future The city of Anaheim would be getting even more revenue back.
I dunno. Seems like it'd take a long time to be giving money away. At 15% tax rate, it would take $2 billion in room charges before exhausting $300 million. Even if Disney could charge $1,000/night, that's still 2 million days. For 700 rooms, assuming full capacity, that would take 2,857 days or almost 8 years to reach. At 86% occupancy (the # I found for Disney hotels overall), that's a little over 9 years. I'm assuming $1,000 isn't realistic (the average Disneyland rate is like $530, apparently) so any number less than that just extends the time. Even at $750/night, for instance, it's 10.5 years at full capacity and over 12 years at 86%.

And if the idea is that the subsidy is the difference between a nice and a super nice hotel, then it's really a matter of comparing the difference in rates. That's a much smaller number. If they're getting a portion in the short-term, that's better, but it's still a lot of money going to the builder. Either way it seems like a long time to wait for tax revenue from a big fancy hotel.
__________________
rowrbazzle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2018, 04:05 PM   #66
FCivish3
Studio
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Lost in Disney
Posts: 89
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rowrbazzle View Post
I dunno. Seems like it'd take a long time to be giving money away. At 15% tax rate, it would take $2 billion in room charges before exhausting $300 million. Even if Disney could charge $1,000/night, that's still 2 million days. For 700 rooms, assuming full capacity, that would take 2,857 days or almost 8 years to reach. At 86% occupancy (the # I found for Disney hotels overall), that's a little over 9 years. I'm assuming $1,000 isn't realistic (the average Disneyland rate is like $530, apparently) so any number less than that just extends the time. Even at $750/night, for instance, it's 10.5 years at full capacity and over 12 years at 86%.

And if the idea is that the subsidy is the difference between a nice and a super nice hotel, then it's really a matter of comparing the difference in rates. That's a much smaller number. If they're getting a portion in the short-term, that's better, but it's still a lot of money going to the builder. Either way it seems like a long time to wait for tax revenue from a big fancy hotel.
Yes, it would have taken a long time to pay back. About 15 to 20 years. But Anaheim would still have received 1/3 of the taxes during that time. And 100% later. A VERY significant source of income for them, even at the reduced rate. And now, if it doesn’t get built, it is the City of Anaheim that loses its income.

Meanwhile, yes, the city wanted the difference between a Nice and a Super nice hotel. The reason for the subsidy was to make them go Super nice, and build another 5 star hotel. The city wants and NEEDS 5 star hotels, but, until this, the only ones in the city were at Disney hotels. The Disneyland Hotel and the Grand Californian. The city, in its greed, is slashing its own throat.

I hate it when people say “corporate welfare” when actually, it is CITY welfare.
__________________
-=- Fred

Poly, AKL, BLT
FCivish3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2018, 10:17 AM   #67
carolina_yankee
Administrator
 
carolina_yankee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 27,101
Default

I just deleted a shit load of posts that went very quickly into a "politics thread" kind of direction. Next time that happens, the thread is locked and posters can deal with Administrator.

Topic is specifically confined to the Anaheim subsidy and the Disneyland Resort.

Even there, don't get into Anaheim politics unless it is non-partisan factual information that illustrates the topic and not tirades against "greedy politicians," "evil unions," or "that party hates corporations (workers)" etc.

Dirk
__________________
carolina_yankee is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2018, 04:54 PM   #68
Ludwig von Chuck
Grand Villa
 
Ludwig von Chuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Chanhassen, MN
Posts: 1,036
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by carolina_yankee View Post
I just deleted a shit load of posts that went very quickly into a "politics thread" kind of direction. Dirk
Don't forget your contribution to the Swear Jar.
__________________
" . . . when it comes to brain surgery then I can only do swell . ."

BRV owners since 2009

First trip: Nov 76 at PVR for my 8th birthday
Last trip: Oct 17 at PVB to take my granddaughter to MNSSHP
Next trip: Jul 19 at AKV with all my grandchildren (4 girls)

Moonlight Magic: AK x2, MK, Epcot x2, and TL
Ludwig von Chuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2018, 05:51 PM   #69
carolina_yankee
Administrator
 
carolina_yankee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 27,101
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludwig von Chuck View Post
Don't forget your contribution to the Swear Jar.
Administrator broke that jar many, many, many moons ago. Besides, it was an accurate reflection of my mood as I saw where the thread was going!

Dirk
__________________
carolina_yankee is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:51 PM.

© MouseOwners. "MouseOwners" is a registered servicemark. This is an unofficial fan site and is not affiliated in any way with The Walt Disney Company, the Disney Vacation Club, Disney Vacation Development, or any of their affiliates or subsidiaries. All Disney images © The Walt Disney Company.
Powered by Forum Software