Disney Riviera Resort

[MickeyMinnieMom]

I have not once said that my proposition was likely. In fact, I started out staying how ridiculous I thought it was, but the more we discussed it, the more we figured that the resort will need some kind of "hook". When we look at what the offerings for DVC have been, we're seeing a lot of "exclusivity" and that's kinda how this all played out.

If you haven't been to Yachtsman, I think you're missing out. I'm sorry, but steak is not just steak. However, I am a red meat lover, so you'd have a hard time to convince me otherwise.

My hubby and I made the mistake of eating there on our first night on our recent trip in May. We compared every other restaurant to it and none of them stood up, even the beloved Cali Grill (which we DIDN'T love, btw).

Yacht Club isn't exactly convenient and I don't think DRR would be either. None of the resort restaurants off the monorail are exactly convenient, but yet, people find their way there.

If you had a restaurant that had 40 tables and was exclusive to DVC members and DRR guests, that had a fireworks view, I bet it's full every night.

You keep arguing that it can't sustain itself. How big do you think it has to be? How big is CRT? Not very big at all. They build it to create the demand. Done.

I get what you're saying. As lockedout said they probably could keep something very small booked up. But why would they limit this way?

How would they "create demand"?

• V&A draws because it's in a separate class. Don't see them doing that.
• CRT draws because it's IN the iconic castle -- unique.
• Maybe rare characters? Maybe that + view would do it. Not for me, but for some, certainly. For enough people? Dunno.

If the food is 1) extraordinary and 2) unique, and 3) the place is small enough I absolutely could see it staying booked.

I just don't see why they would limit themselves this way rather than having a regular-sized restaurant open to all -- like all of their other restaurants are, and like all restaurants in hotels around the world are. There may well be exceptions I'm not aware of, obviously.

Btw: I never said "steak is just steak". I said I can get that many places. We live in and visit other places that have great steakhouses. Jiko is unique, though -- so that we travel to AKL for.

ETA: Just to illustrate, 4 of the top 29 steakhouses in the U.S. listed here are near us. Yachtsman isn't on here. It's not a draw to us, personally. https://www.google.com/amp/amp.travelandleisure.com/slideshows/best-steakhouses-in-the-us?source=dam

6 of these top 50 near us -- Yachtsman not there. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thedailymeal.com/america-s-best-steakhouses?amp

 

[preemiemama]

I get what you're saying. As lockedout said they probably could keep something very small booked up. But why would they limit this way?

How would they "create demand"?

Exclusive DVC fireworks view.

 

[Madonna3]

I get what you're saying. As lockedout said they probably could keep something very small booked up. But why would they limit this way?

How would they "create demand"?

• V&A draws because it's in a separate class. Don't see them doing that.
• CRT draws because it's IN the iconic castle -- unique.
• Maybe rare characters? Maybe that + view would do it. Not for me, but for some, certainly. For enough people? Dunno.

If the food is 1) extraordinary and 2) unique, and 3) the place is small enough I absolutely could see it staying booked.

I just don't see why they would limit themselves this way rather than having a regular-sized restaurant open to all -- like all of their other restaurants are, and like all restaurants in hotels around the world are. There may well be exceptions I'm not aware of, obviously.

Btw: I never said "steak is just steak". I said I can get that many places. We live in and visit other places that have great steakhouses. Jiko is unique, though -- so that we travel to AKL for.

Just for clarification, you'll never catch an argument from me about the AKL restaurants. They are SOOOO good. All of them. Yum. Don't make me get in the car!! Cause I will!

Let's look at Trattoria al Forno. It was a great hidden gem for breakfast. Then Disney went "we want more" and they threw a few characters at it. BOOM! Booked!

Just admit it's not a completely crazy, wild idea. But you're right, 1, 2, and 3 would need to apply.

I don't see them making a new V&A either. I don't think it would fit the atmosphere. You can't plop a V&A next to POP!

And again, exception to "all restaurants are open to everyone" are: a. Club 33. Anyone can be a member, but you have to be a member to attend. b. Private clubs ie. golf clubs. Anyone can be a member, but you have to be a member to attend. And there are some resorts (not Disney) that do not have public restaurants. Again, anyone can dine there if you pay to stay. It's not a foreign concept, not even to Disney.

And why would they do this? Because as I have stated, exclusivity sells.

At this point, I enjoyed the debate. We agree this idea is unlikely. I've made my point and so have you. I think I'm done beating the horse.

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

Exclusive DVC fireworks view.

I included that in my list above of possible draws.

Not enough to make me buy -- for sure, though -- all other things held equal.

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

Just for clarification, you'll never catch an argument from me about the AKL restaurants. They are SOOOO good. All of them. Yum. Don't make me get in the car!! Cause I will!

Let's look at Trattoria al Forno. It was a great hidden gem for breakfast. Then Disney went "we want more" and they threw a few characters at it. BOOM! Booked!

Just admit it's not a completely crazy, wild idea. But you're right, 1, 2, and 3 would need to apply.

I don't see them making a new V&A either. I don't think it would fit the atmosphere. You can't plop a V&A next to POP!

And again, exception to "all restaurants are open to everyone" are: a. Club 33. Anyone can be a member, but you have to be a member to attend. b. Private clubs ie. golf clubs. Anyone can be a member, but you have to be a member to attend. And there are some resorts (not Disney) that do not have public restaurants. Again, anyone can dine there if you pay to stay. It's not a foreign concept, not even to Disney.

And why would they do this? Because as I have stated, exclusivity sells.

At this point, I enjoyed the debate. We agree this idea is unlikely. I've made my point and so have you. I think I'm done beating the horse.

Same here on that last paragraph!

And we AGREE on the awesome AKL restaurants -- yumm!!

And we AGREE that it's unlikely! You'd say "but possible"... I'd say "probably not entirely impossible" -- close enough!!

ALL of this said... as I mentioned yesterday, Disney has certainly done other stuff that I just didn't get -- this could be the next!

And if it had 1) great food, 2) nice view, 3) something unique about the food, I'd definitely try it. I just wouldn't be even a smidge more likely to try it if it was DVC/DRR exclusive. And even all of that wouldn't make me more likely to BUY. But enough people may disagree.

Good debate, and now we stay tuned, I guess!!

 

[preemiemama]

I included that in my list above of possible draws.

I'm not sure it would need the characters- exclusive and fireworks would work for many. However, I agree with @Madonna3 that we've pretty much gotten all we can out of this. We all agree that they need to do SOMETHING at DRR- let's hope it is more than "just another DVC resort".

As a side note, we ate at Trattoria a few weeks ago. It had been one of our favorite breakfast spots in the past, and the character aspect (especially Flynn Rider) was appealing. However, the kitchen is unable to keep up with the demand. We (and many others) waited 45 minutes for entrees to come out- after we waited 15 minutes to get the fruit and pastries. Our server said that happens daily with the 3rd seating. It is a disaster- servers yelling at chefs in the open kitchen and many disgruntled diners. Everyone working there seemed overwhelmed. So, whatever DRR does, it will only work if they can actually handle the demand they create...

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

We all agree that they need to do SOMETHING at DRR- let's hope it is more than "just another DVC resort".

100%!

Given its location, I think they need to do more than current DVCs that are attached to deluxes -- move those deluxe amenities in house on this sucker. I'm not convinced that they will, though... and if they don't, I have no idea what they could sell it for $$$...

 

[preemiemama]

100%!

Given its location, I think they need to do more than current DVCs that are attached to deluxes -- move those deluxe amenities in house on this sucker. I'm not convinced that they will, though... and if they don't, I have no idea what they could sell it for $$$...

Not convinced they will either, unfortunately. And I believe they will sell it for the same or more than Copper Creek. That has me concerned for sure.

 

[tjkraz]

Cash guests wouldn't need a membership card, they'll have a magic band. Membership cards would only be needed for members without a current resort reservation. If if you're a DVC member, you can't pool hop to BC. What if DRR built a nice pool that you could use since you're DVC.

So Disney should build an extra large pool at Riviera, with operations and upkeep funded by owners of the resort, yet it would essentially be a DVC country club which 500K owners could use at their leisure even if not staying on property? Guests at the resort will compete with non-guests for use of the facilities and only DRR owners are paying for it. Who is happy with that scenario?

What if there was a store that sold DVC merch, like the Dooney and Bourke bags, that only DVC members could buy at a store only for DVC members?

That seems a bit more reasonable, but Disney would have to change the way it manages merchandise. There really isn't much member merchandise--resorts like BoardWalk and BLT essentially do have specific locations for their DVC stuff but it only takes up a couple racks. In recent years Disney merchandising has gravitated more toward mail order than expanding on-property offerings. Those handbags don't even make it into the resort stores currently.

Merchandise is undoubtedly a challenge and it's difficult for me to even comment on that. Yes, they've had at least 4 offerings for the D&B bags now and all have sold out. Meanwhile, they offered some Vera Bradley bags a few years back and those eventually went on clearance to move the last of the stock. The Alex & Ani 25th anniversary bracelets are still available...7 months into DVC's 26th year. The high-end Tommy Bahama shirts were clearanced out. For every D&B sellout example, there appears to be 2-3 other situations where Disney mis-judged demand and will pay for that error.

Don't tell me DVC doesn't like exclusivity because it's already being done. It's not far fetched to believe it could be done on a resort level and that it would appeal to buyers.

The exclusivity needs to have some tangible value and serve a purpose, though. The theme park evenings (free admission, free snacks, short waits for rides) have a purpose. There's tangible value to exclusive park access for nearly every person who visits Walt Disney World. I don't see how that carries over to an "exclusive restaurant." No matter where I choose to dine, I expect short wait times, good food and good service. Hanging a shingle that says "DVC Members Only" doesn't enhance my dining experience. And given varying tastes in food, the menu will render the "perk" useless to thousands of owners who simply have no interest.

 

[tjkraz]

We dislike Poly because of the enormous amount of people using the bar/restaurants that are not staying there.

I don't know how to judge guests from non-guests. But even if non-guests are somehow banned from using resort amenities, wouldn't resort guest be turning out in greater numbers? I'm not really seeing how it's a net positive change.

Imagine Ohana is currently serving 250 parties on a given evening for dinner. If Disney were to add some exclusivity, the expectation would remain that they serve 250 parties per evening. Such a move would not dramatically change the number of people using the amenity.

IMO, the situation at Poly is somewhat unique and more attributable to the design of the resort. Kona Cafe and Ohana, in particular, are open to the lobby and don't offer any of the seclusion of other dining spots. The waiting area of Ohana spills out into the second floor of the resort. Guests attending the luau dinner shows--up to 3x per night--add to traffic throughout the lobby.

Does anyone feel put-off by the lack of exclusivity offered at Olivia's? How about The Turf Club or Sanaa?

 

[Madonna3]

I don't know how to judge guests from non-guests. But even if non-guests are somehow banned from using resort amenities, wouldn't resort guest be turning out in greater numbers? I'm not really seeing how it's a net positive change.

Imagine Ohana is currently serving 250 parties on a given evening for dinner. If Disney were to add some exclusivity, the expectation would remain that they serve 250 parties per evening. Such a move would not dramatically change the number of people using the amenity.

IMO, the situation at Poly is somewhat unique and more attributable to the design of the resort. Kona Cafe and Ohana, in particular, are open to the lobby and don't offer any of the seclusion of other dining spots. The waiting area of Ohana spills out into the second floor of the resort. Guests attending the luau dinner shows--up to 3x per night--add to traffic throughout the lobby.

Does anyone feel put-off by the lack of exclusivity offered at Olivia's? How about The Turf Club or Sanaa?

All good points.

 

[beer dave]

We've done Beaches N Cream when we stayed at Boardwalk. It's in a far more crowded / easily accessible (e.g. On foot) area and is cheaper than a place like Yachtsman, right? -- easier to keep at capacity, I'd imagine.

We like proximity, generally. At DHS, we eat dinner there (e.g. Brown Derby for dinner), or at Cal Grill later in the evening when we get back to BLT. In Epcot, we eat somewhere there.

No reason to go to DRR if we're in Epcot or DHS unless the restaurant there is unique in some way. If food is excellent and the view is said to be nice, maybe we'll try it once and see. But I wouldn't see going there routinely unless I was staying there. That's just us. Plenty of options closer to where we are at any point in time.

AKL is worth driving to because it's unique and top notch, so we do.

Ok-- but this is a list of reasons you personally wouldn't go-- you pretty much always stay at BLT?....cool. I love BLT... I was referring to the idea presented that the restaurant would have trouble because it is far away... and I can't figure out how it is any further away from epcot or DHS than any of the crescent lake restaurants--- and actually, I think with the gondola transport, it is closer (in travel time) (yet to be determined) than anything at BC /YC from either park.... especially DHS...... I agree it with all the things you guys are covering-- so no need for my comment there.... it would be redundant....

Hopefully they have something in the bag of tricks........

 

[Andrew015]

I hope you're referring to off-property guests as it relates to resort exclusivity. (Even that would be a terrible move in my opinion). The moment they restrict on-property guests is about 3 seconds before my DVC interest hits the market. In recent years, they haven't given us much reason to visit the parks. I've found myself spending less and less time in the parks and more time bouncing around the resorts. Obviously, they're trying to change that dynamic, but restricting resort amenities to only guests staying at that resort will mark the end of my travels to MCO.

Personally, I don't think it will ever happen because it's a buffer against a bad economy. And if they can sell an $80 Nautilus at Trader Sams, they're not going to discriminate based on where you stay.

I don't know how to judge guests from non-guests. But even if non-guests are somehow banned from using resort amenities, wouldn't resort guest be turning out in greater numbers? I'm not really seeing how it's a net positive change.

Imagine Ohana is currently serving 250 parties on a given evening for dinner. If Disney were to add some exclusivity, the expectation would remain that they serve 250 parties per evening. Such a move would not dramatically change the number of people using the amenity.

IMO, the situation at Poly is somewhat unique and more attributable to the design of the resort. Kona Cafe and Ohana, in particular, are open to the lobby and don't offer any of the seclusion of other dining spots. The waiting area of Ohana spills out into the second floor of the resort. Guests attending the luau dinner shows--up to 3x per night--add to traffic throughout the lobby.

Does anyone feel put-off by the lack of exclusivity offered at Olivia's? How about The Turf Club or Sanaa?

 

[_auroraborealis_]

Exclusive DVC fireworks view.

TOTW has that and demand is not huge. You can eaisly walk up 10 minutes before fireworks 300+ nights per year.

 

[tjkraz]

I hope you're referring to off-property guests as it relates to resort exclusivity.

All of my comments were hypotheticals, questioning the value of any sort of guest exclusivity. Personally I don't think making resort amenities exclusive to any group (DVC owners, resort guests, on-site guests, etc.) holds any real value.

And as your comments illustrate, "exclusivity" can also backfire if Disney starts attacking the wrong group(s).

 

[beer dave]

TOTW has that and demand is not huge. You can eaisly walk up 10 minutes before fireworks 300+ nights per year.

You can walk up--- and stand with a large crowd on the balcony to watch --sure-- but try to get a seat and get served at the lounge at ten till....not going to happen. In my experience, the lounge stays quite busy most of the time--- no?

 

[_auroraborealis_]

You can walk up--- and stand with a large crowd on the balcony to watch --sure-- but try to get a seat and get served at the lounge at ten till....not going to happen. In my experience, the lounge stays quite busy most of the time--- no?

My point is more that to have "DVC exclusive fireworks views" is not a compelling value proposition or unique, and the data from TOTW says that it "packs them in" for roughly half an hour a night.

 

[beer dave]

My point is more that to have "DVC exclusive fireworks views" is not a compelling value proposition or unique, and the data from TOTW says that it "packs them in" for roughly half an hour a night.

Ok-- true for the fireworks part. I had an L on the end of TOTW.... thinking more of the restaurant aspect for DRR....

I like that DVC only uses the TOWL--- I would love a similar thing at DRR-- but I still wouldn't buy in. As long as they have one bedroom units, there will always be 7 month availability.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

Cali Grill is a much more revenue-dense use of space than TOTW.

 

[preemiemama]

Ok-- true for the fireworks part. I had an L on the end of TOTW.... thinking more of the restaurant aspect for DRR....

I like that DVC only uses the TOWL--- I would love a similar thing at DRR-- but I still wouldn't buy in. As long as they have one bedroom units, there will always be 7 month availability.

I agree. I was replying about what would make the restaurant a selling point- and I think the fireworks view + DVC exclusive might work as one for the restaurant as a whole. I have also said that I don't realistically think this is something they will do. We were having fun spitballing what it would take and is feasible at DRR. I've said repeatedly that I think they will simply do the minimum and rely on the gondolas to sell the resort- even though I personally think it will take more than that given its location.

The one bedroom units made me think of another possible "hook". What if the resort was built as all studios? There is definitely some market research available that would show studio rooms near DHS/EPCOT would be popular...