RESALE POLICY CHANGE!

[LAMickey14]

When buying resale it should only include the resort you buy into and I believe it is moving that way. Because direct cost more and should include more benefits than resale.

 

[miTnosnhoJ]

The first rule of Internet Forums: Don't feed the trolls.

I was always under the impression that the dining discounts, merchandise discounts, and AP discounts were merchandising decisions. Here is this population of your best, most frequent customers. They come multiple times per year. They get to know the parks very well. They have alternatives, such as cooking in the villa, or hanging at the pool for a relaxing day away from the park. The discounts seemed to me a way to keep this group (including me) engaged. How many mouse ears can one family buy? What these new restrictions show is that Disney is doing fine without marketing to its most frequent customers. This might even be a way to cut the number of people in the parks. If the frequent users can be encouraged to stay away from the parks, by buying day tickets rather than AP's, there is more room for those customers who only come once every few years.

In my opinion, Disney would not score well in Marketing 101, but this is usually a symptom of a corporate culture where different silos are rewarded for things other than the customer experience. It's funny though. You can attend lectures at Disney talking about their customer experience processes. Go figure.

When I bought from Disney, I had to sign papers saying that the perks could go away. I even had to sign a statement that the Spa at VGF could close, even though the name of the resort is Grand Floridian Resort and Spa. So I can't say I wasn't warned, and as a direct purchaser (actually a blend of Direct and Resale) I will be fine for now.

 

[DisDadDVC]

When buying resale it should only include the resort you buy into and I believe it is moving that way. Because direct cost more and should include more benefits than resale.

This will not happen.

 

[sunshinehighway]

It seems like it's just a crappy thing to do. The membership extras that they are taking away really aren't so great they make paying direct prices worth it. Yeah losing the AP discount price sucks but when was the last time there was a really great DVC AP discount? If you but an AP, you'll get a discount on merchandise and dining anyways so that's a wash. I've never been to the TOTW lounge. I heard it's often not busy at all so I doubt I'm the only one. The new Epcot lounge isn't worth the price of buying direct. Random member mixers and special events? I doubt that's a huge deal for most people either.
It almost seems petty.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

that's with a prime property like the Poly.

I think the structural decisions they made about Poly made it less "prime" than the point cost they assigned would need it to be.

All studios + stupid expensive bungalows is a really limiting room option set. While studios have always been first to book at most resorts, that doesn't necessarily mean that there's a market for a resort that is basically all studios.

I think what offends me about this maneuver by Disney, grandfathered or not, planning to sell at some point or not, is it is really restrictive in terms of a lot of use cases. If you need 2BR units regularly and want to stay at WDW, Aulani and Poly are terrible properties. The new VWL2 is not going to be a large association (cabins aside, and if they follow a Poly points model...). It actually shows quite a bit of how Disney operates in silos -- DVC cares only about the sale of new DVC contracts direct, and not about incremental revenues (park tickets, dining, etc.) because their comp structure and bonuses within the corporate machine are solely about DVC, and not about contributory revenue elsewhere. The entire Disney beast is doing a lot of this right now, and not just at DVC.

 

[southerngirl528]

The issue isn't whether it impacts us. It might, but that's not the point.

The point is what this says about how DVC sees us.

I understand that business is business. But. It's also good business to treat your customers like you value them. That's especially true with Disney, a brand associated with treating its customers magically. I suppose that's just legacy now.

I surely hear what you're saying, ziravan. And I recall how I was very unhappy when they did away with free valet parking at DVC resorts so it's not been 100% hearts & flowers for me either. But I DO see DVC as valuing their members, though perhaps not in the same way it was in the beginning. But to be fair, there was nowhere near a quarter million members either. I can't help but wonder if a partial reason for the changes is the reason we see so often in our current society: it's the few that abuse privilege that cause the majority to suffer loss of those privileges. I have even read a variety of comments on disboards and other forums on how to "beat the system", like how not to pay for parking, etc.,, etc.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

It is becoming almost amusing that there's so much gnashing of teeth here when virtually everyone howling is NOT impacted by the new rules for resales going forward. If you already own, you are NOT impacted by the new stuff.

My concerns aren't just if I'm affected but what it demonstrates about the thoughts of those in control of something I own. There have been lots of posts about "well, you should have seen it coming" or "the documents always said it could change". When changes start the good assumption is that eventually something might change that actually affects you too. And, this one actually could affect anyone posting here because one never knows when you might want or need to sell.

It impacts in terms of the resale value of the contracts. I wouldn't buy a contract with the plan of selling it, but I literally had a contract sent for ROFR today. So now in addition to wondering if the value of the points just dropped 20%, I have to wonder if 10 years from now all we need are studios, will I be able to sell one of our contracts for a decent amount of money, or will I have to rent most of the points to get my money back, or will that be restricted more? I'd like to believe owning DVC isn't a risky investment---and while we've all been aware DVD could eliminate a lot of benefits, I guess I hadn't expected them to eliminate the DVC benefit category entirely, and I don't know what that means yet.

Bruce

If you had bought direct the drop in value definitely would have been 20% and might have been as high as 50%. If resale does drop and only time will tell but I'm skeptical it will change much, then at least you're only having a 20% change on a much lower number. 20% drop on $168/pt vs 20% drop on $100/pt also adds up.

 

[DisDadDVC]

Unless the changes are retroactive, I think this will be the only substantive change for a while. Keeping so many different classes of owners is a headache for Disney. To grandfather in for 2011, and now for 4/4/16, they aren't going to want to do it again for 8/1/16 etc.

 

[DisDadDVC]

The point is what this says about how DVC sees us.

It's really the same way they saw us the day after we signed on the dotted line.

 

[robinb]

This is DVD and Disney's huge mistake here: resale buyers aren't competition, they're new customers.

1. As new DVC members, resale buyers are probably far more enthusiastic about coming and spending money than the person they bought from.

2. They're far less likely to rent out their points than the former owners, and that means less competition in that market.

3. Many owners end up buying add on points, and many do that direct. I did.

I bought BCV resale. I would not have justified buying direct. But. After being a member and using and enjoying the product, I DID buy direct, a fixed week at Poly. I almost certainly wouldn't have bought resale with these restrictions in place.

So, had these restrictions applied to me, they would have cost Disney/DVC years of APs and TIW, 8 trips and counting to WDW, a 168 point direct contract, dozens of meals and other expenses, etc etc.

I wasn't their competition when I bought resale. As a direct result, I've been their customer to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars. That's just me.

Disney/DVC has this backwards, and it's a damned shame. It's a shame for us. It's a shame for future DVC members. It's a shame on Disney/DVC.

No, resale buyers are not new customers. They are replacement customers. New customers buy retail.

This is yet another example of Disney valuing new and once-in-a-lifetime customers over loyal, on-going customers.

 

[DisDadDVC]

No, resale buyers are not new customers. They are replacement customers. New customers buy retail.

This is yet another example of Disney valuing new and once-in-a-lifetime customers over loyal, on-going customers.

The profit margins on loyal customers are much lower. We have figure out a few ways to "beat" the system (while still spending thousands...)

 

[LAMickey14]

This will not happen.

We shall see, stranger things have happen.

 

[DisDadDVC]

We shall see, stranger things have happen.

Let me rephrase. Based on what I understand about DVC, it can't legally happen.

 

[AKVHutch]

As I was in 2011, I am once again concerned about the resale value, which was a major selling point my Guide brought forth during the discussions of purchasing. I really did not see that big of an impact from 2011 and personally think this is really not a huge deal to most involved. I seldom use a discount from DVC that I don't get from having an AP. Most of the rest of it seems pointless. I will personally sit & wait to see how it impacts the after market and go from there.

As to how Disney views me, I have no illusion other than I am a source of income to their purse. The way things have been going recently nothing that Disney does winds up hitting them in the purse or in their park and room occupancy statistics.

 

[DisDadDVC]

As I was in 2011, I am once again concerned about the resale value, which was a major selling point my Guide brought forth during the discussions of purchasing. I really did not see that big of an impact from 2011 and personally think this is really not a huge deal to most involved. I seldom use a discount from DVC that I don't get from having an AP. Most of the rest of it seems pointless. I will personally sit & wait to see how it impacts the after market and go from there.

As to how Disney views me, I have no illusion other than I am a source of income to their purse. The way things have been going recently nothing that Disney does winds up hitting them in the purse or in their park and room occupancy statistics.

The only real important change from this is the lack of AP discount. And that is a BIG deal to me. This is worse than 2011 IMO.

 

[ScubaCat]

Let me rephrase. Based on what I understand about DVC, it can't legally happen.

Yes, exactly. Booking at any DVC resort is part of the ownership interest, not a member benefit (now known as a "membership extra".) Any changes would apply to ALL members, not just direct purchases. People will continue to bring up the idea of different DVC resort booking rules for resale purchases, but it's just one of those myths that will never die.

 

[jerseyduke]

I love how they try to spin it!

"we want to make sure we can continue to deliver the Membership Extras that add value to your overall experience – offerings that are provided as a premium advantage to our Members who purchase directly from Disney Vacation Club."

EVERY contract on the resale market was, at some point, purchased Directly from Disney.

So, I guess if the resale maker were to somehow disappear altogether, they would no longer be able to continue to deliver these extras?

The AP one is the one that hurts. That alone, IMHO, is worse than all 2011 ones combined.

 

[skier_pete]

Another comment - if you part of your reasoning for buying DVC is the value that you get when you sell it, I don't think you are doing it right.

Especially with all the 2042 properties - those properties are going to start hitting a wall in the next 10 years. Think about it: in 2026 you can buy resale into BCV, but it's only good for another 16 years, whereas somewhere like BLT will have something like 34 years. You can't tell me that resale on that BCV property will be able to hold up in the same price neighborhood. Another 10 years after that you won't be able to give away a BCV property with 6 years on it.

In other words -> all DVC resale values are going to trend to zero eventually.

 

[ScubaCat]

The only real important change from this is the lack of AP discount. And that is a BIG deal to me. This is worse than 2011 IMO.

This new policy, removing all "membership extras", is FAR worse IMHO than the previous restriction from 2011. That one basically prevents you from using your points in the worst way possible. The new rules remove perks that actually make a difference in the experience of visiting WDW in the first place. Sure, none of them are imperative, but aside from the gold AP, some of the dining discounts are pretty nice too. And not being able to attend the member events is a bummer. Who knows what ticket offers may arise in the future, too.

 

[DisDadDVC]

I know DVD is an expert in the timeshare biz, but I wonder if they might be more careful with how they pitch buying into DVC. There is a big difference between your real estate ownership and the "magic" that they market it with. You see people complaining that their resale dues are paying for these member benefits and they aren't. The ONLY thing you are buying with DVC is the real estate interest. Everything else is a sales tactic.