Benefits not the same if purchase a resale...is this true?

[disneynutz]

Why can't the names of the guides/sales people that give the wrong information on purpose (that's a nice way of saying "lied") be posted on here?

I am new to DVC and I don't know who my guide is. What if it's one of the same who is providing the bad information? Wouldn't that be beneficial for myself and others who are in the same position as me, to know? Also, isn't that what these boards are all about; helping each other out?

If I can post specific names from specific resale companies that I bought DVC from, why can't we post guide names?

Without posting any names, nothing will change...the guides/sales people will keep doing what their doing. But, if we get their names out, then maybe their sales will take a hit and/or Disney will notice, and things will change.

Evan

If putting out wrong info increases sales do you really think that Disney is going to tell them to stop?

Bill

 

[Chuck S]

It is against the DIS/DVC Board policies to permit complaint containing the names of specific CMs or guides. We would only be getting one side of the story, based on what an anonymous poster on an internet discussion board decided to post. These allegations could have real life consequences for a CM, and it simply would not be fair. Can you imagine if a few dozen DISers called to complain about a specific CM, based solely on a situatin they had read about here?

Remember how many DISers were were condemning a DVC owner a couple of weeks ago, based on a post from a renter that said the reservation had been canceled? When in reality, the renter wait list had come through, and the reservation number had changed just a couple of days prior.

It simply is not appropriate.

 

[JimMIA]

If putting out wrong info increases sales do you really think that Disney is going to tell them to stop?

Bill

Yes, I think DVC would tell them to stop...provided you get the information to the people with a vested interest in running a quality operation. But if one takes the lazy way out and calls the sales office to complain, I think you'll just generate a good laugh.

I think many DVC timeshare sales personnel are honest and reputable. I don't trust my guide any further than I could throw Cinderella's Castle, but there are a number of good ones...as we've seen on this thread.

 

[Dean]

If putting out wrong info increases sales do you really think that Disney is going to tell them to stop?

Bill

If they are giving out specific and incorrect info, not only do I think DVC will ensure they stop, if they don't, they won't be working with CHP for very long. That would be a for cause termination with a lot less HR requirements than most situations.

 

[JimMIA]

Without posting any names, nothing will change...the guides/sales people will keep doing what their doing. But, if we get their names out, then maybe their sales will take a hit and/or Disney will notice, and things will change.

Chuck has already answered your question -- posting Disney employee names is not permitted. Even when those names are posted in a positive manner, as has happened on the current DCL thread, they are removed.

The far better way to handle deceptive sales practices is to either a) complain directly to Disney (not the DVC sales office) or b) complain to the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation Timeshare Division. Personally, I think a complaint LETTER to Disney corporate offices would be more fruitful because their public perception objectives are higher than the strict legal requirements regulated by Florida DPR.

Also, the best protection against deceptive sales practices is educated consumers who take personal responsibility for doing their own research and making themselves well-informed before making major financial decisions. Those who rely on the Fairy Godmother are setting themselves up for disappointment. There is no Fairy Godmother.

 

[otterpop]

Thanks for all the replies and while I now do agree with what everyone has posted regarding posting guide names, there is still one thing I don't understand...I am not posting this to create an argument, but for my own personal understanding (and sorry for now really getting off topic)...

If I post the following on the internet, how are they different (and let's assume I am stating the honest facts):

"I was on the phone with my guide, Mr. Xxxx Xxxxxxxx, and he said the following "the points to stay at all DVC resorts will be doubling starting next Monday"."

and

"I was at the Magic Kingdom today and Space Mt, Splash Mt, Thunder Mt, were not running, I stepped in gum 15 times, and my cheeseburger had a long hair in it."

Are they different because one is regarding a person and the other not (i.e Mr. Xxxx Xxxxxx versus Magic Kingdom)? I looked up the def of slander and that didn't help me much either, but I'm guessing this has something to do with that...

Thanks...

Evan

 

[JimMIA]

Are they different because one is regarding a person and the other not

Yes.

And, bottom line, we have to remember that the DIS is a private website - provided at no cost - and they have a right to set whatever posting policies they see fit.

 

[cseca]

otterpop,
I think if I understand it correctly it's "hearing 1 side of the story" issue.
In your first statement Mr. xxxxx can't post a rebuttal statement here.

In your second statement nobody needs to dispute it.
Although that sounded yucky...
But if you are to say "cast member xxxxx put a hair in my burger" that would be not good as well.

 

[tjkraz]

Think about the implications. You're putting people's livelihood at risk by posting names, which is particularly dangerous when talking about a commissioned salesperson whose success depends upon their reputation.

What is to keep someone from a competing timeshare developer from posting something like "Joe Smith from DVC just told me that resale buyers can only book 5 months out."?

Jealous co-workers, former co-workers or even a customer with a grudge could EASILY ruin a career. All they need to do is pop onto a discussion board and start spreading lies about the individual.

As Dean said a few posts ago, I have little doubt that many of these instances of "Guides lying to people" have some element of either the client misunderstanding a response, reading too much into the answer or not asking clear enough questions in the first place. And obviously the Guide is not present to defend him/herself.

If there's a problem, the best thing to do is contact DVC / Disney / Florida Timeshare Bureau--whomever one thinks is most appropriate given the circumstances. Then allow the system to do its job.

Disney doesn't want an unethical salesperson on their staff any more than we do. But we need to let THEM resolve the situation rather than resorting to Internet vigilante justice. DVC can determine if the underlying problem is a training issue that can be addressed (ignorance on the Guide's part) or if there is a pattern of negative behavior.

DVC doesn't use the sales tactics of other timeshare developers--lock you in a room until you agree to buy, create barriers to canceling--so Guides who do not behave in an ethical manner will not be successful with DVC.

 

[GrumpyPOTFH]

Yes.

And, bottom line, we have to remember that the DIS is a private website - provided at no cost - and they have a right to set whatever posting policies they see fit.

Lets not forget the whole reason this private website is here for them to make money by making sales of timeshares, no different then any other company including Disney.

 

[JimMIA]

Lets not forget the whole reason this private website is here for them to make money by making sales of timeshares, no different then any other company including Disney.

That's not true.

I assume you are talking about The Timeshare Store. They are one of the longtime sponsors of the DVC boards, but they do not OWN the website nor to they make any of the rules here.

 

[GrumpyPOTFH]

I did not say they own the website. I said that the website is here to make money off the sale of timeshares. They go to their accounts buying adds and say they have a select type of person on this site, and charge them to advertise on the site. They might even get more if linked from this site. If it was not for the sale of timeshares or other related items this site would not be around. It is here to make someone money. And there is nothing wrong with that. It is called capitalism, some people do not like it but I do.

So what I said is TRUE. They do prifit off the sale of Timeshares.

 

[otterpop]

Thanks again for all the responses.

I guess the things that really bugs me is this is Disney!!!! They can take all the money they want from me (willingly though!) in an honest fashion and according to good old fashion family values!

I didn't want to hijack this thread, so maybe we should start a new one to make sure this one stays on topic???

Thanks again!

Evan

 

[LisaS]

If I post the following on the internet, how are they different (and let's assume I am stating the honest facts):

"I was on the phone with my guide, Mr. Xxxx Xxxxxxxx, and he said the following "the points to stay at all DVC resorts will be doubling starting next Monday"."

and

"I was at the Magic Kingdom today and Space Mt, Splash Mt, Thunder Mt, were not running, I stepped in gum 15 times, and my cheeseburger had a long hair in it."

In the second example you are reporting your experience. We have no way of knowing if it is true or you are making it up but in either case it's only your own reputation for fair reporting on the line.

In the first example, you are reporting your interpretation of information provided to you by a specific individual. You may be 100% accurate or you may have misheard/misinterpreted that information or you may be deliberately misquoting him. That person's employer does not allow him to post here so he does not have the opportunity to give his side of the story even though his professional reputation is on the line.

 

[pilferk]

I just spoke with our guide (we're currently discussing adding some points to cover some of the reallocation shortages) about this.

He said (and I'll quote):
"That's baloney."

He has not heard of any changes to the "benefits" policy in regards to resale vs buying through Disney. There has not been any company wide notification that the policy is changing. He has not heard, personally, rumors that there are any changes in the pipeline.

He said that doesn't mean there aren't changes coming, or that there won't be changes at some point in the future. He pointed out that according to the POS, all the benefits are pretty much subject to change at any time. But nothing official has come down, and he hasn't even heard anything unofficial.

And he said all that knowing full well that I'm contemplating a small add on purchase to our contract, and that the information could, possibly, cost him a sale.

Take that for what you will.

 

[princessbride6205]

Resale has zero value to the company, except (indirectly) as a story to tell the prospective purchaser who doesn't want to own for the duration of the contract for some reason. That's pretty marginal.

I disagree. A resale purchase can benefit DVC because many people (would love to know the statistic!) who buy in also add on points later. Add ons direct thru DVC can be more attractive than resale for getting the right UY and pricing is a wash btw DVC and resale on small add ons. A resale purchase benefits the Disney company as a whole because it means years of me committing to spend my money there - tickets, food, more visits because our room is prepaid, etc.
Just a personal anecdote, but the only reason we could afford DVC at all is because we bought a small resale contract. Without those great resale prices, we would not have purchased at all. We may have purchased after several more years of saving, or maybe not.

Ok, I also have to voice this pet peeve. Ignore the reality, legal and otherwise. Its just a peeve I have. Rant follows: These contracts ARE retail. I mean, how else did they come into existence? Why is it, they feel they must sell the same item over and over, them and only them? Can you see Walmart pitching a fit and trying to shut down all yard sales? "No, No! You have no right to resell those clothes, we own them, you MUST bring them back to the store so we can resell them".

Ok, I know, its not the same, but still. They did sell it, they did get their high dollar fee. Just let it go and move on already, jeesh. What a bunch of whiny babies

And if this is all about overloading the cruise system, why not ARP (advance reservation priority) for direct points? It could work like home resort advantage for non DVC options. Inside the DVC system your advance booking window is based on home resort, as always. Outside the DVC system, the advance booking window is based on purchase point. Let resale have the same options, just a few months later. I could live with that. But then, I only ever saw non-DVC options as a fall-back option anyway.

Your Walmart/yard sale analogy made me smile. As you say, it doesn't directly relate, but it's an interesting angle.
I also like your idea about the booking window priority. I don't personally plan to use points to cruise or exchange, but would not like the option taken away completely. I don't want to be the peasant class of DVC.

I also liked the PP who suggested that direct purchasers get a free but very valuable benefit like a few fast passes for each trip. That could be a huge selling point to a family that just waited in line at Toy Story Mania for 90 minutes.

 

[pilferk]

I also liked the PP who suggested that direct purchasers get a free but very valuable benefit like a few fast passes for each trip. That could be a huge selling point to a family that just waited in line at Toy Story Mania for 90 minutes.

I think that's a great point. There are other, VERY tangible, benefits that Disney could offer to direct sales buyers that would cost them almost nothing. Fast passes, priority room assignment, priority access to dining reservations...a whole HOST of them....which would work better. They'd have a more tangible benefit for MOST users and they woudln't create a negative customer experience for those buying resale.

And they would have far less operational effects on the existing administration of the program.

I also agree with Jim on this. If they were going to change the benefits, THESE would seem like the least likely ones to change.

 

[JimMIA]

I think that's a great point. There are other, VERY tangible, benefits that Disney could offer to direct sales buyers that would cost them almost nothing. Fast passes, priority room assignment, priority access to dining reservations...a whole HOST of them....which would work better. They'd have a more tangible benefit for MOST users and they woudln't create a negative customer experience for those buying resale.

And they would have far less operational effects on the existing administration of the program.

I also agree with Jim on this. If they were going to change the benefits, THESE would seem like the least likely ones to change.

However...as someone pointed out a few pages back (not sure if it was Dean or Brian), we have to be careful what we wish for. DVC could offer direct purchase incentives that would cost them nothing...but they could also dilute our current benefits to provide direct purchase incentives. I don't want to give any examples, but just use your imagination and you'll see lots of examples of perks that could be lessened or eliminated to provide more perks for direct purchasers.

Would those really justify the extra price of buying direct? Probably not for anyone who did the math, but most DVC buyers don't do the math anyway. They just go, "Ooooo, looky here! Look what I got for 'free'!!!"

 

[pilferk]

However...as someone pointed out a few pages back (not sure if it was Dean or Brian), we have to be careful what we wish for. DVC could offer direct purchase incentives that would cost them nothing...but they could also dilute our current benefits to provide direct purchase incentives. I don't want to give any examples, but just use your imagination and you'll see lots of examples of perks that could be lessened or eliminated to provide more perks for direct purchasers.

Would those really justify the extra price of buying direct? Probably not for anyone who did the math, but most DVC buyers don't do the math anyway. They just go, "Ooooo, looky here! Look what I got for 'free'!!!"

I agree, probably not.

To be clear, I'm not saying they SHOULD offer incentives to direct buyers. Only that, if they were going to, there's probably better ways, with better options, to go about it than the one the errant guide suggested to the OP. Disney holds some things that would be very tangible to visitors, but cost almost nothing, in their hands.

 

[tjkraz]

Your Walmart/yard sale analogy made me smile. As you say, it doesn't directly relate, but it's an interesting angle.

I'll give you "interesting" but it's not a terribly valid analogy.

With a yard sale, you're getting second-hand goods and it shows. Clothing has been washed and worn by someone else dozens of times, used, abused, etc. It's not brand new off the shelf.

Timeshare resales may as well be brand new off the shelf. There is absolutely no distinction between an AKV contract purchase from DVC and one purchased resale. Same owner's rights...same ending date...same annual dues amounts, etc.

When you buy something from a yard sale, you really aren't getting the same product as a "new" item. With DVC contracts, used and new are identical.

I think that's a great point. There are other, VERY tangible, benefits that Disney could offer to direct sales buyers that would cost them almost nothing. Fast passes, priority room assignment, priority access to dining reservations...a whole HOST of them....which would work better. They'd have a more tangible benefit for MOST users and they woudln't create a negative customer experience for those buying resale.

I don't think Parks and Resorts agrees with the "cost them almost nothing" aspect, which is why we haven't received such benefits.

DVC marketing must compensate P&R for every one of the instant fastpass cards given out at sales presentations.

Counting lockoffs separately, there are over 4000 DVC villa rooms at WDW now. Given the occupancy of those rooms, conservatively we're talking 20,000+ members/friends/family/renters on any given day. Spread over the parks--even with the assumption of some guests not going to the parks--and it's a pretty big population.

Consider the impact on attractions like Soarin, Toy Story Mania and Expedition Everest if you have 2000+ DVC members heading straight for the FastPass machines throughout the morning to redeem their instant FastPasses.

With regard to dining reservations, consider how other guests would be impacted if those 20,000 DVC members were given a head start on booking popular restaurants like LeCellier, Chef Mickey's or Crystal Palace. During particularly busy days (holidays, days when special events are scheduled), members could take the bulk of the dining reservations before others were even permitted to book.

In other words, the theme park operations staff isn't going to allow DVC members to access any special perks which put other guests at a serious disadvantage. They would effectively be telling Passholders, FL residents and even people paying $600 per night for the Poly that they are second-class citizens. That philosophy would clearly show through longer standby times / later FastPass return times at the parks, and reduced ADR availability at the restaurants.

EDIT: I'll add that I also got confirmation yesterday that this resale/perks rumor is false. That said, in theory it made some sense to me because it's something that DVC itself can control rather than relying on complicity from other branches of the company. You could certainly argue that FastPasses and earlier ADR windows are of greater value to members, but those aren't benefits that Parks & Resorts will freely surrender. P&R isn't interested in deifying DVC members above-and-beyond all of their other classes of guests.

If DVC does ever create some distinction between resale and direct, it will either be something that they can completely control (different booking windows, Member Services booking fees for resale buyers, separate cruise inventory, etc.) or it's something that DVC will ultimately have to pay for from their sales budgets. And in the latter case, added sales will be necessary to justify the expense of the perk.