All SAP vs Multiple Home Resorts

[RuntheMouse]

I think I need to go back and consider some numbers. If you have multiple home resorts, how many points are you typically keeping at each one?

We usually are in studios, certain times a 1 bed.
175 @ SSR
100 @ AKV
150 @ BRV
200 @ RIV

 

[TinkAgainU]

Yeah and your OKWe points are a very different case since your points are ALL direct. They will not be as affected by the 2042 and on resort closings/re-openings. When the resorts start to do close you wont be restricted from 14 down to 10 down to 5 choices, etc and you should always have the choice of all currently open resorts at 7 months

Although, just be aware, Direct does NOT guarantee you will have access to Any future resorts, the documents are clear on that. Direct purchase adds 3 resorts and rather random Membership Extras which are also specifically stated as essentially "at Disney's sole discretion" with a specific warning Not to purchase based on any Future resorts or Extras. Add ons are very "Current Buyers Only" focused as Sales tools. A good example is if you currently purchase less than 150 points in a contract, you don't get Membership Extras. A real sad situation for any Direct contracts under minimums. Something to consider before buying multiple small contracts Direct. I would need to re-read the Exact wording, but I think they even state inherited contracts lose Direct status (sold contracts definitely do) but I found the inherited/successor terminology concerning. (The point here is to READ whatever Direct contract they send you, realizing you may have up to 10 days to cancel a purchase - although I know that is only 7 days if you live in California as an example of why you need to read EVERY page.)

 

[r6175rpm]

Although, just be aware, Direct does NOT guarantee you will have access to Any future resorts, the documents are clear on that. Direct purchase adds 3 resorts and rather random Membership Extras which are also specifically stated as essentially "at Disney's sole discretion" with a specific warning Not to purchase based on any Future resorts or Extras. Add ons seem very "Current Buyers Only" based as Sales tools.

I can’t see the value in buying direct at this point.

 

[Tatebeck]

Although, just be aware, Direct does NOT guarantee you will have access to Any future resorts, the documents are clear on that. Direct purchase adds 3 resorts and rather random Membership Extras which are also specifically stated as essentially "at Disney's sole discretion" with a specific warning Not to purchase based on any Future resorts or Extras. Add ons are very "Current Buyers Only" focused as Sales tools. A good example is if you have less than 150 points you don't get Membership Extras. A real sad situation for any Direct contracts under minimums. Something to consider before buying multiple small contracts Direct. I would need to re-read the Exact wording, but I think they even state inherited contracts lose Direct status (sold contracts definately do) but I found the inherited/successor terminology concerning.

As long as each future resort is added into the BVTC when they are opened they will be available for 7 month bookings with direct points. They could stop adding them to the BVTC at some point but there would be a major uproar as they have said since conception that you can book at any resort with direct points, just with a shorter window. And there could likely be lawsuits, etc from direct buyers. We have talked about it in other threads and most think it is very unlikely to happen. That is arguably their main selling point over resale contracts once a member has enough points for direct benefits. They wouldn't want to lose that sales edge. That being said that was one small reason I didn't want to load up on direct OKWe points like DonkeyHoTay did. Also I already had a bunch of resale points on the books. I may have chosen differently too if I was just starting with few or 0 points to my name.

 

[ak517]

I get the whole buy where you want to stay thing, but we own at AKV and VGF and I treat both as SAP depending on season and activities. We’ve been able to stay at BCV (4 night trip at 7 month mark) and BWV (2 nights with several weeks notice) without issue, as well as at VGF and AKV with as little to a few months in advance. When looking at contracts, I was focused on what was a dollar per lifetime point I was happy with that still fell within our up-front budget. Note I do include current annual dues in the calculation for $/pt. I also knew I mostly wanted to O14 resorts so we were comfortable buying resale, but we jumped on the VGF direct sale last year because it felt like a bargain in the long run (and my DH is a VGF snob LOL). You’ve gotten a lot of great advice. Happy shopping!

 

[dvc lover 1970]

I would add on SSR points and book the one bedroom.

 

[crvetter]

I would need to re-read the Exact wording, but I think they even state inherited contracts lose Direct status (sold contracts definately do) but I found the inherited/successor terminology concerning.

Inherited contracts don’t lose direct status since that falls under a gratuitous transfer of points. Only if there is an exchange of value do the points lose direct status (a sale)

 

[CarolynFH]

Inherited contracts don’t lose direct status since that falls under a gratuitous transfer of points. Only if there is an exchange of value do the points lose direct status (a sale)

I concur.

 

[TinkAgainU]

As long as each future resort is added into the BVTC when they are opened they will be available for 7 month bookings with direct points. They could stop adding them to the BVTC at some point but there would be a major uproar as they have said since conception that you can book at any resort with direct points, just with a shorter window. And there could likely be lawsuits, etc from direct buyers. ...

Threats of lawsuits aside, their purchase documents are clear you should not buy with the expectation of access to any Future resorts, and there is certainly no guarantee future resorts would be a part of the existing timeshare setup. There is "chat" around about a major change of their timeshare model already. Not trying to be overly negative (I may add some Direct Points again soon) but I'm a realist. Disney's very sneaky cautious legal team wrote and reviewed every single paragraph of the purchase agreement and related documents required to buy Direct. While I'm trashing those documents, I'll mention the part where (unless you notify them in writing prior to Closing) you authorize Disney to do a Background Check (not just credit, specifically states includes a public records check) on you and share that information with DVD's affiliate companies. I have nothing to hide, but that much sharing of my personal information made me go ... ummm, maybe I should read ALL the fine print lol.

 

[TinkAgainU]

Inherited contracts don’t lose direct status since that falls under a gratuitous transfer of points. Only if there is an exchange of value do the points lose direct status (a sale)

Sorry, while Direct would still have access to resorts in place at the time of the purchase (until they expire or are otherwise access limited), what I meant to point out was per Membership Extras (page 8 of the Purchase Agreement I signed) stated,,,

... Membership Extras may not be hypothecated, bought, sold, exchanged, rented or otherwise transferred and are solely for PURCHASER's use and not the benefit of any assigns or successors-in-interest. If PURCHASER sells or otherwise transfers PURCHASER's Ownership Interest, Membership Extras do not automatically transfer to the new owner. Do not purchase an Ownership Interest in reliance on the ability to transfer Membership Extras if there is a subsequent transfer of the Ownership Interest. PURCHASE should refer to ....

BOLD fonts above are added by me. Unless I'm missing a legal interpretation - a successor-in-interest could be a family member who inherits at your death, not just someone you sold your interest to ... so that means Membership Extras would NOT legally pass to your kids for example. I hope my interpretation is wrong

 

[intamin]

Sorry, while Direct would still have access to resorts in place at the time of the purchase (until they expire or are otherwise access limited), what I meant to point out was per Membership Extras (page 8 of the Purchase Agreement I signed) stated,,,

... Membership Extras may not be hypothecated, bought, sold, exchanged, rented or otherwise transferred and are solely for PURCHASER's use and not the benefit of any assigns or successors-in-interest. If PURCHASER sells or otherwise transfers PURCHASER's Ownership Interest, Membership Extras do not automatically transfer to the new owner. Do not purchase an Ownership Interest in reliance on the ability to transfer Membership Extras if there is a subsequent transfer of the Ownership Interest. PURCHASE should refer to ....

BOLD fonts above are added by me. Unless I'm missing a legal interpretation - a successor-in-interest could be a family member who inherits at your death, not just someone you sold your interest to ... so that means Membership Extras would NOT legally pass to your kids for example. I hope my interpretation is wrong

I don't think I've ever heard of kids losing the benefits after a gratuitous transfer from their parents or other family member

 

[crvetter]

Sorry, while Direct would still have access to resorts in place at the time of the purchase (until they expire or are otherwise access limited), what I meant to point out was per Membership Extras (page 8 of the Purchase Agreement I signed) stated,,,

... Membership Extras may not be hypothecated, bought, sold, exchanged, rented or otherwise transferred and are solely for PURCHASER's use and not the benefit of any assigns or successors-in-interest. If PURCHASER sells or otherwise transfers PURCHASER's Ownership Interest, Membership Extras do not automatically transfer to the new owner. Do not purchase an Ownership Interest in reliance on the ability to transfer Membership Extras if there is a subsequent transfer of the Ownership Interest. PURCHASE should refer to ....

BOLD fonts above are added by me. Unless I'm missing a legal interpretation - a successor-in-interest could be a family member who inherits at your death, not just someone you sold your interest to ... so that means Membership Extras would NOT legally pass to your kids for example. I hope my interpretation is wrong

I think that is more a catchall saying that a transfer of the ownership interest (transfers can be sales here) will not necessarily keep membership extras. However, gratuitous transfers it works. It be really easy to get around if they intended inheritance not to be exempt, which they do. Just establish a Living Trust for DVC and name subsequent Trustees (could be a separate one per contract) then there is never a transfer of ownership upon death.

But again the forms from Member Administration, and all contact with them, do state that gratuitous transfers the benefits carry over.

But no one should buy anyone for the Membership Extras, they are plus that Disney can take away at any moment.

 

[2010dvcfan]

Grand Floridian at Christmas is magical, you'll have a hard time getting in without home resort advantage. If money wasn't the only value you were using to make your decision what would you decide?

Is there much financial difference in buying more SSR points to book 1 bedrooms at 7 month window then to purchase smaller contract and get the studio you want at 11 month window after factoring in the annual dues being paid on more "cheap points" for 1 bedrooms?

I purchased BLT direct in 2010 for $110 a point then proceeded to use it at SSR repeatedly to make my points stretch so I could go more often. A lot of people spoke up about how I had made a bad choice to buy more expensive points then use them at SSR. I placed value on the location and home resort booking window more then I placed valued on my current financial situation which I suspected both would change as the years progressed.

Turns out I was correct on both, the 7 month availability inventory is not near as generous as it was when I first bought into DVC and $110 a point at BLT is not considered expensive anymore either.

Personally I don't see availability improving any at 7 month window especially at the monorail resorts, basing that off of my experience with DVC since 2010. You have to decide if your ok with every trip you take for the rest of your membership being at SSR that would be rare but it is something to consider.

I'd take that 200 points and grab two more home resorts with 100 points each open up your options.

My experience with DVC is all points bought today will be considered "cheap points" in 3-5 years.

Congrats on adding on!

 

[Instagramhusband]

So this is my first post and I have done a bit of reading on this topic but haven't really found the response that has resonated with me as a good answer. For a little background I currently have 2 contracts at SSR. 158 direct and 100 resale for 258 total points. I am looking to add around 200 more from resale. I have stayed at SSR once and it was fine but we generally like to stay other places. I've had the mindset that "more cheap points is better than less points at specific resorts". We typically plan one big trip and the rest are small 1,2, and 3 nights. We love GF and if I were to buy at another home resort, this is where it would be. I just struggle with wrapping my head around the price per point at GF being twice as much or 75% more than SSR points. I can almost always book what I want at SSR, even weeks before hand and if I am flexible, haven't had issues with 1 night stays at GF in studios. My other consideration is that 1br seem to stay available a lot longer and with more points, I don't need more than 7 months typically to get what I want in a 1br. I feel like having GF as a home resort would give me the chance to book more studios but is that really worth the upcharge in points, when for the same money(contract costs), I'm booking 1br's, just with more of my cheap points. Am I missing something big here?

I went through this process as well. I bought two SSR contracts for a total of 255 points. I wanted to add between 100-150 at a Monorail resort and Poly and GF were my top two choices. In reading your travel choices, you very much mirror mine and my wife's. I do think if you still feel like you need more points and you want a different experience than SSR as a home resort you should hold out for the best timing on price. I came to that conclusion when I couldn't talk her into paying 70 percent more than SSR.

After holding out for a few months one day I got lucky, a resale Poly hit on my lunch and I bid on it at 139 and got it through ROFR. It was 100 points but a different use year but I had to take it.

 

[Sandisw]

Threats of lawsuits aside, their purchase documents are clear you should not buy with the expectation of access to any Future resorts, and there is certainly no guarantee future resorts would be a part of the existing timeshare setup. There is "chat" around about a major change of their timeshare model already. Not trying to be overly negative (I may add some Direct Points again soon) but I'm a realist. Disney's very sneaky cautious legal team wrote and reviewed every single paragraph of the purchase agreement and related documents required to buy Direct. While I'm trashing those documents, I'll mention the part where (unless you notify them in writing prior to Closing) you authorize Disney to do a Background Check (not just credit, specifically states includes a public records check) on you and share that information with DVD's affiliate companies. I have nothing to hide, but that much sharing of my personal information made me go ... ummm, maybe I should read ALL the fine print lol.

The contract language surrounding future resorts is not a direct vs. resale clause. It is about not being guaranteed that any future resorts will be added as DVC so do not buy expecting to have access to more than what exists today in the system.

Trading is a function of the DVC resort agreement between owners and BVTC. So, when one purchases, what is already in there is all one is guaranteed to have access to at 7 months. Resorts can be removed, but once added, that can only happen under certain terms.

If DVD is going to add future resorts to BVTC, they would only be doing so to give their direct purchases continued rights to trade into those other resorts. And, if those resorts can trade in with direct points, other resort owners will be given the right to trade into them as well with their direct points.

Resale points can be excluded because each DVC resort agreement that has them set it up that way. Owners of RIV resale are barred from other resorts because those other resorts resale points are barred from them (unless grandfathered).

Having said all of that, I agree that no one should buy expecting anything more than what you are legally entitled to and that is access at your home resort, since if BVTC ceased to exist and the current assocation of your home resort choose not to enter into a different trading agreement with other DVC resorts, it would be a one resort only contract.