2025 Dues

[WinterSolider]

When dues outpace CPI, owners are not on the winning side...

Dues outpacing CPI is 100% irrelevant.

Dues outpacing cash rack rates is what you should be looking at.

If dues go up 5% and CPI goes up 3% but rack rates at the Disney hotels go up 8%, you're still coming out ahead because the thing you're going to use the points for is to stay at Disney resorts. You're not using your dues to buy eggs.

 

[jshadd]

Here's a detailed analysis of this year's dues compared to past years.
https://www.dvcfieldguide.com/2025-annual-dues-details

 

[DanCali]

Dues outpacing CPI is 100% irrelevant.

Dues outpacing cash rack rates is what you should be looking at.

If dues go up 5% and CPI goes up 3% but rack rates at the Disney hotels go up 8%, you're still coming out ahead because the thing you're going to use the points for is to stay at Disney resorts. You're not using your dues to buy eggs.

That argument doesn't work when rack rates fall though.... Did your dues go down when hotel rates plummeted during downturns like in 2009 and 2020?

Rack rates are irrelevant to me. If I was buying a condo/hotel (where you own a hotel room you can use, and it can also go in a rental pool from which you split the revenue with management) I might care about that. But a timeshare is more like a fractional condo and the HOA dues are related to the costs of running/maintaining the resort, which should be more correlated to CPI than rack rates.

If anything, I might care about point rental rates because I can rationalize it that if dues go up 7% but so do point rental rates, and then I am still better off owning. Unfortunately, when dues go up, more owners rent points (more supply) and rental rates may not go up at all or might go down. As others pointed out, a contract is generally worthless if/when point rental rates are lower than dues (and "rack rates" are not part of that statement).

 

[davidhr]

I’m glad I’m the type of person who doesn’t check these things after I make the purchase. If can’t remember the last time I checked rack rates. I don’t care. If I enjoy my ownership and can afford the dues with no issues, I don’t care. The day the dues become a problem for me, I’ll sell. And as I’m considering $0 back for my contracts when I make the purchase, unless I have to pay someone to take my contract, I’m fine.

 

[maui22]

Made some charts with 5YR CAGR.

Sorted by 2025 dues:

Sorted by 5YR CAGR:

Fun to look at DVCNews historical dues chart.
https://dvcnews.com/dvc-program-menu/financial/annual-dues-by-resort

Seems the last several fully new resorts have seen high dues starting out.

• 2017 CCV opened with dues of $7.33. Only VB was higher at $8.11
• 2019 RIV opened with dues of $8.31. Only VB and HHI were higher.
• 2023 VDH opened with dues of $9.06. Only VB, HHI, OKW, and AUL (unsubsidized) were higher. However, wasn't there some tax when staying there. That would distort the actual dues when staying there).
• 2024 CFW opened with $12.16. Only VB was higher.

Now, compared that with the expansion.

• VGF2 started near the lowest dues.
• PVB2 started low and 15 days after opening, 2025 dues put it as the lowest non-subsidized.

Might there be a pattern to Disney deciding expansions vs entirely new 50+ year resorts?

 

[SPLzero]

That argument doesn't work when rack rates fall though.... Did your dues go down when hotel rates plummeted during downturns like in 2009 and 2020?

Rack rates are irrelevant to me. If I was buying a condo/hotel (where you own a hotel room you can use, and it can also go in a rental pool from which you split the revenue with management) I might care about that. But a timeshare is more like a fractional condo and the HOA dues are related to the costs of running/maintaining the resort, which should be more correlated to CPI than rack rates.

If anything, I might care about point rental rates because I can rationalize it that if dues go up 7% but so do point rental rates, and then I am still better off owning. Unfortunately, when dues go up, more owners rent points (more supply) and rental rates may not go up at all or might go down. As others pointed out, a contract is generally worthless if/when point rental rates are lower than dues (and "rack rates" are not part of that statement).

if CPI data was actually realistic.

doesn't rental rates also rely on cash rates? supply and demand plays a roll in rental rates yes but as long as cash rates continue to increase so should rental rates.

 

[Brian Noble]

Seems the last several fully new resorts have seen high dues starting out.

I wonder how much of that was a hangover from Aulani's dues fiasco. If you are an executive setting these numbers, setting them too high makes it a little harder to make your quota. Setting them too low gets you and everyone you know fired. Unceremoniously.

 

[E2ME2]

I sold a couple small contracts this year, and the net result is my 2025 MFs are $70 higher in 2025.
Across my current 900 Points, my weighted average MF$ per point is $9.0872, right in the middle of the range.

 

[eticketplease]

2023 VDH opened with dues of $9.06. Only VB, HHI, OKW, and AUL (unsubsidized) were higher. However, wasn't there some tax when staying there. That would distort the actual dues when staying there).

The transient taxes are paid by the person using the points at VDH and AUL not necessarily the owner.
The transient taxes are baked into the dues at VGC so those who there always pay those taxes whether they stay there or not.

I wouldn't say that the AUL & VDH Dues are distorted as all have to pay the taxes. One could use their points and stay elsewhere and thus not having to pay the taxes.

AUL has been long talked about as SAP so then when visiting DL or DW they wouldn't be paying those taxes.

Might there be a pattern to Disney deciding expansions vs entirely new 50+ year resorts?

Possibly as the people that bought SSR for the treehouses, VGF for the BPK and PVB for PIT received 8 years less of a deed and were paying the current prices.
On the other hand this hurts them in turn of "restricted resort availability" for non direct points if they are doing with the original 14 resorts.
If they do it with the cabins then it wouldn't matter too much as that is already a "restricted resort" in terms of no resale points except CFW.

 

[maui22]

I wonder how much of that was a hangover from Aulani's dues fiasco. If you are an executive setting these numbers, setting them too high makes it a little harder to make your quota. Setting them too low gets you and everyone you know fired. Unceremoniously.

Very good point.

 

[CastAStone]

This. I have been saying that my gut feeling is that Disney is looking to get out of the hotel industry side of the business. They see a ceiling coming.

The ceiling is at WDW. They can’t build more rooms and they can’t take much more price.

Disneyland has neither problem but has logistical challenges.

They need a 3rd US resort to actually continue to grow apace.

Surely someone there has realized that.

 

[DanCali]

if CPI data was actually realistic.

doesn't rental rates also rely on cash rates? supply and demand plays a roll in rental rates yes but as long as cash rates continue to increase so should rental rates.

I think it depends on how other things change.

If only cash rates go up (but dues don't), then rental rates should go up.
If only dues go up (but cash rates don't) then I think rental rates will likely go down because more owners will try to rent out points.
If both go up, then it's less clear what will happen with rental rates - maybe stay flat-ish?

 

[Brian Noble]

They need a 3rd US resort to actually continue to grow apace.

Where do those guests come from without cannibalizing the existing two?

 

[GrumpyInPhilly]

Made some charts with 5YR CAGR.

Sorted by 2025 dues:

Sorted by 5YR CAGR:

Outside of OKW, my home resorts are the two highest at WDW.

 

[tom1944]

Where do those guests come from without cannibalizing the existing two?

Would the proposed location in Virginia have provided a third location and based on the population within easy driving distance had a large enough market without cannibalizing the 2 other locations.

 

[Brian Noble]

Maybe? Not sure where the sweet spot is. The farther North you go, the more you can distinguish markets, but the less likely you will find a location that can operate year-round.

It's also the case that building a new theme park resort just to sell some more hotel rooms is a large capital investment. There may be better ROIs elsewhere---and so far, that's exactly how the company has behaved, by adding Shanghai, expanding the capacities of the other existing resorts, and building (or buying) new cruise ships. Lots and lots of cruise ships.

 

[MICKIMINI]

Would the proposed location in Virginia have provided a third location and based on the population within easy driving distance had a large enough market without cannibalizing the 2 other locations.

Does Disney still own the land in VA?

 

[CastAStone]

Where do those guests come from without cannibalizing the existing two?

1. Some amount of cannibalization is good because Disney has far, far more demand than profitable supply. If they cut the ticket, hotel, and AP prices back to 2019 levels again tomorrow they’d be overrun with guests. They’re using price to manage the equilibrium point on the supply and demand curves, but they would make more profit dollars by shifting the supply curve and reducing prices.
2. A new park would inevitably bring incremental demand from locals, Disney die hards, families who can afford a 1-2 park trip but not a 4 park trip, and, if located intelligently, people who don’t like the weather in Orlando during summer break.
3. A really creative idea, like using Arrendelle as the backdrop and putting the park near Milwaukee or Syracuse or whatever, cold-proofing 95% of the experience, and leaning into the snowy winters (and perfect summers) would induce even more demand for its uniqueness.

I have absolutely no doubt that building a 3rd park would drive huge returns. The question is just are they too chicken to do it.

 

[Brian Noble]

They’re using price to manage the equilibrium point on the supply and demand curves, but they would make more profit dollars by shifting the supply curve and reducing prices.

On an incremental basis, sure. But there is a LOT of capital that has to be deployed to get there. Expanding the existing platforms (which they have been doing) might be a way to do that without busting the capex budget for the Construction Years.

 

[maui22]

I wonder how much of that was a hangover from Aulani's dues fiasco. If you are an executive setting these numbers, setting them too high makes it a little harder to make your quota. Setting them too low gets you and everyone you know fired. Unceremoniously.

Been driving me crazy trying to remember his name. Finally did...Jim Lewis.