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

[BeccaG]

Subscribing because I was thinking of adding on through Resale and now...well now I'm a bit turned off.

 

[hmillerbarilla]

We own both resale and direct. I'm really curious to hear how this is going to turn out!

 

[godalejunior]

We own both resale and direct. I'm really curious to hear how this is going to turn out!

Me too....

 

[disneynutz]

Subscribing because I was thinking of adding on through Resale and now...well now I'm a bit turned off.

Disney re-allocated the points twice last year and DISers were posting that they were purchasing small add ons to make up for their shortages. Shortly after that Disney started transferring points for a fee.

Now the Guides are telling people that Disney will be treating resale buyers differently than direct buyers so people are buying direct instead of resale just in case.

Seems that Disney will do anything they can to increase profit.

Bill

 

[Lil' Grumpy]

just my opinions based on what i learn from reading here.


not too surprise. many have dropped direct then talked resales
up.

i 've many threads talking about how poor it was to used points
for dcl. then other threads talking about how some are buying resales
points to used for dcl. [ it was shocking to me read some only
brought dvc for cruising. odd to me, because we only considered dvc
for dvc resorts, mostly @ wdw.]

i expect what the owners paid for. so many seem to get caught up
in the final dollar amounts instead of meeting their needs. for that,
they are willing to "roll the dice". [ since security is important to me,
i didn't mind @ all paying more to get what best met our current
& future expectations.] resales like buying used cars, choices are
limited to what the previous owner has, & we would not have gotten
what we were after.

in general, i thought it was interesting, some asked for the professionals
to state their case. [ most were hoping they can repute this as a rumor? ]
however, if the truths been know, & i am guessing, [ willing to bet],
they also knew this was coming, & trying to get as many sales before the
"bell" rung. [ based on offering matter of fact info, a good indicator many
are close friends with the guides & leaking info to them seem likely,
in~deeds.]. are guides posting on the cm threads? my guess, they are.



but more than anything else, with so many dvc members , my guess
dvc have finally saw the need to separate the groupings....& if
dvc thinks- like the disney company, then they are going to set their
"response" system by using a very dependable measurement
-the old/mighty dollar value. "betcha" it's disney #1 motivator.

secondly, with 2 new ships, i don't think disney "would not" be thinking
ahead & setting aside some dvc ownerships to one of the ships. so
what order should rooms be made available to the alternative
owners, that can also return the highest value to disney ? would that
be something for guides could use to entice new owners to the resorts
versus resales? i think a distinct possiblity.


currently , based on our personal goals, i see this as progress. [ we
are blt owners, & we spent over 4 hrs., going over our expectations
before we signed.] and this was a major change in switching back
to the wdw over cruising. i think the dvc perks are nice, but they
are not the reasons/factors in deciding us going with dvc. we
didn't buy points to rent or with any thought of putting our
shares up to sale. [ only major health or family losses would make
us & we know we would lose.]


so why are we so excited to spend our hard-earned monies @ disney?
it goes back to the reasons it was founded. to me, it is the last
of the "dick & jane" era. while i am no saint, nor do i claim any
special knowledge or talents....my current career has given me
many insights on how important the disney experience can be.* if
one recognizes it's value system. [ it only requires participation &
a little consideration & respect to make the magic work]. dvc provides
us a safe haven & a place to pass "go". as for the memories, that depends
on us. [ so far , [past 25 years] we like it that way.]

ps. i remember when they took away the dick & jane readers.
you can't imagine how many young people in their mid-20's that
don't have a clue what they should be doing with life. we are very
busy @ work with teaching things that should been presented @
the first grade level.

anyhoo, since this seem dcl related, has me thinking it has to
do with the new ships & a new kind of ownerships & what order to
process the many, many requests. i could be wrong, except
one thing...whatever comes up, it will be an expensive one,
that's for sure. [ well mickey has the taste for the richest cheese,
from my observations & experiences. ].

for the record, i am very new to this game. we have had major problems
& haven't used dvc yet. just what i needed..a new set of the jitters,
....., i should have gotten my wife a new ring.

 

[The B Team]

I am currently considering an add-on via resale, but I'm putting the brakes on that until these muddy waters are cleared. It may be worth it for me to still buy resale but I think I wait to see how this change affects pricing.

 

[gkrykewy]

On top of that, for folks like me who have no interest or intention of cruising, trading out or ABD, who would even consider buying from Disney direct if the bottom falls out of resale prices? Disney would have to heavily push the cruising option and ABD to convince people to buy direct.

I agree with this. A reasonably healthy resale value is critical for DVC's direct sales; I don't see them permitting the "bottom to fall out" as others have suggested. On the other hand, I'm not sure how much of an impact this change would have on resale prices. A resale buyer is generally an informed and value-seeking buyer; informed enough to know that ABD or cruising are very poor points values (and cruising seems likely to be even less of a points value in 2012). Perhaps the biggest negative impact on resale prices would be the specter it would raise of further changes down the line.

These are interesting times though; I wonder what else happened last Friday!

 

[JWG]

Not at all, they can choose to offer or not any non contractual items to any group they want at any point they want. None of the items in question are contractual, they could stop them all yesterday if they wanted. They could also set up a tiered VIP system where some members get more benefits in this group than others.

Here's an issue I have and why I think they can't do this, at least not retroactively. You have the right to gift/will your ownership to family members as long as you don't charge a fee. This past July my parents did this, they added us to their membership for estate planning.

Disney treated it as a resale, even though it wasn't. Matter of fact, my parents names are still on the deeds, they just added us.

However, all of us got 2010 Vacation Planning Guides (even my parents), new membership cards, etc. We were all treated as though we were new members and the code on the box the planning guide came in was something like "resale-bwv".

You can't code fee free ownerwhip changes within the family as a resale and then take away benefits. I guess you can, but if that's the case the value of membership has deteriorated entirely as no one buys a 50 year timeshare interest expecting to use it themselves (or most don't) that entire time.

That's another reason I still call shenanigans.

 

[CMOORE185]

What is worrisome is that TSS has yet to chime in. If this was untrue they would be the first to jump on an correct this. Where are you TSS?

 

[MasonDuo]

CMOORE - I thought the exact same thing while I kept reading all of the posts. I'm sure they have seen this post grow quickly so if it really was phoey wouldn't the try to put us at ease?

Hopefully they can share some insight.

 

[pilferk]

No RCI either? That would seriously put a dent in my plans if I didn't buy direct! Even still, if this turns out to be true, I can see this really affecting resale values! Also, if they are going to do something like this that de-values the points then they should atleast be willing to buy the points back at FMV (or 90-95% of what they plan to charge for addons or new sales of said points).... Just my 2c

And, taking that speculation further, if it effects resale values through other entities...Disney will then have greater opportunity to exercise it's ROFR option, garnering more points for them to sell at much higher prices...and limiting the impact of the competition.

I don't know if any of this is true...but you can see the bean counter logic buried in their, if you look. It's a cruddy customer satisfaction decision, though. And, quite frankly, the "negative experience" they say their trying to avoid is going to be compounded greatly by the "negative experience" THEY create by limiting the benefits of people who buy resale. ESPECIALLY if they make this decision retroactive.

 

[tammymacb]

I just called MS.

I knew I'd get nowhere with DCL so I inquired about ABD instead.

I have 420 points. Only 120 direct from Disney the other 300 are resale points.
I called inquiring making a 2011 Alaska ABD reservation. Gave MS my account # and she pulled up my available # of points. I could have made the reservation today which, of course would have used ALL my points. Resale and direct.

So, in my experience, whoever you spoke to was not telling you the truth. OR DVC execs haven't shared new details from a "secret meeting" with MS staff yet. Which is just as believable.

Regarding mixed contracts, I posted this yesterday.

Now, we've got a couple different posters, one who was told by two guides that the changes "took effect" on Friday. One poster was told that this "is coming". I believe the posters. The question is, which guide was correct. If any.

Well obviously, the first two guides who said the policy was in effect were wrong. I could have booked ABD yesterday. Which ( unless Disney is treating mixed contracts differently ) would be against the new policy.

I think Disney will do whatever they can to make a little extra money. However, they've lost my trust completely and along with that, any potential they had to sell me anything else.

 

[pilferk]

Now, why is it VGC has robes in the room, resort specific pens and other accessories? I don't see any cut corners at VGC. The quality of furniture and even hinges on the cabinets scream quality. Lewis and Iger still in charge there...
But than again, DLR seems to be more immune to cutbacks for whatever reason.

MG

My wholly unfounded and completely speculative theory?

It's because there is a stronger creative force (Lasseter, specifically) who pretty much resides at DL. He doesn't really pay that much attention to WDW, which is unfortunate.

But his presence, alone, seems to have influence out there. He won't allow corners to be cut. And while he may not have had direct oversight of VCG, you know that, all things considered, they wanted to make sure he was onboard with the design.

 

[Inkmahm]

I wouldn't even call that a "rumor". That's more like idle speculation based upon last week's events.

If DVC is limiting trade-outs to just direct buyers, that may have the desired effect to curb DCL bookings. There is always demand for SOME number of DVC villas through CRO. The problem is in controlling that number of points.

Just to throw numbers at it, CRO may be able to absorb 500,000 points worth of DVC villas per year. Some will go unbooked but that percentage can be accounted for. But if that number of points grows to 1,000,000, many more villas will go unbooked than originally projected. DVC would then have to charge more points for a cruise. Lower CRO rental success means they need to charge more points to recoup the cost of the cruise.

So they could bring the economics of trades back into line in two ways:

1. Limiting the number of cruises available for points bookings.
2. Raising the number of points charged per cruise.

It sounds like they are leaning more toward #1 and those policy change--if true--would result in some owners being completely unable to access the cruise inventory. Good news for those who own direct purchases but certainly not good for resale prices.

One question this raises in my mind is how a member will be treated if they own both a direct AND a resale contract. DVC could differentiate between the two. Or this (rumored) policy change could simply be an attempt to get first-time buyers to go direct. After that, owners may be able to add resale contracts with no penalty.

As always, the devil is in the details...

We purchased our first 150 points through resale at BWV. Our DVC membership card has the original date of membership of when those BWV points were sold even though we weren't members until years later. We have added on direct through DVC to get to 655 points. All are under the same membership number with the same earlier membership date. I can't imagine DVC trying to differentiate between our first points and the rest of the points, all under the same membership.

 

[JimMIA]

I doubt if this "some time soon" rumor is true, but I would not be surprised to see DVC create some kind of an advantage for purchasing directly from them. They're really going to have to do something to differientiate their product because the spread between direct and resale is really huge. The fact that DVC now sells minimum contracts of 50 points to new customers tells you they are having a desperate time making sales.

In the past, DVC's two big advantages for buying direct were the fact that you were buying from a trusted company, and the financing. The trust factor is still huge for them, but not worth $30 per point or more. Financing is not the advantage it once was because of the high rates they have to charge since the secondary market collapsed and they have to carry the mortgages themselves. And they have been getting slaughtered with foreclosures and take-backs.

However, if DVC wanted to create a distinct marketing advantage, restricting DCL, ABD, and RCI doesn't seem like a very good approach.

Restricting DCL and ABD reduces those Disney companies' target markets, and provides little if any real benefit to the direct purchaser -- especially ABD, which is ridiculously expensive.

Restricting RCI is doubly stupid. First of all, they aren't restricting much, because DVC only offers a tiny fraction of RCI to begin with. What do we have access to -- a couple hundred of the 6,000+ RCI resorts? If someone really wanted to exchange through RCI, they'd be way ahead purchasing an inexpensive timeshare resale for that purpose.

Secondly, RCI transactions are exchanges. If fewer members offer their DVC points for exchanges, fewer RCI stays are available. So restricting the number of members who can offer DVC points would greatly reduce availability for those who purchase direct. Yeah, I know there would also be fewer DVC members competing for RCI exchanges, but the fact is that a pretty high percentage of RCI deposits never actually get exchanges...especially those made because someone missed the banking deadline. So the points going in far outweighs the number of competitors

DVC can create additional RCI availability by releasing more of their points inventory to RCI, but that's a double-edged sword. If they make it too easy to exchange in, why would someone not just buy an inexpensive timeshare and exchange into DVC? (That, incidentally, is exactly what some of our real timeshare experts do -- some of them don't even own DVC at all, and others only have token ownership to get the perks like AP discounts.)

To me, the more beneficial changes DVC could make to bolster the value of their direct sales would be some kind of VIP program that would offer enhanced booking advantages, better banking/borrowing options, better AP and cash stay discounts, etc.

Also, I think IF they did make distinctions between direct and resale, they would grandfather current owners...if for no other reason, to avoid controversy, regulatory difficulties, and lawsuits.

 

[gkrykewy]

Regarding mixed contracts, I posted this yesterday.

Now, we've got a couple different posters, one who was told by two guides that the changes "took effect" on Friday. One poster was told that this "is coming". I believe the posters. The question is, which guide was correct. If any.

Well obviously, the first two guides who said the policy was in effect were wrong. I could have booked ABD yesterday. Which ( unless Disney is treating mixed contracts differently ) would be against the new policy.

I think Disney will do whatever they can to make a little extra money. However, they've lost my trust completely and along with that, any potential they had to sell me anything else.

The other possibility is that it's not retroactive, and so wouldn't have affected your availability check.

 

[tjkraz]

I think Disney will do whatever they can to make a little extra money. However, they've lost my trust completely and along with that, any potential they had to sell me anything else.

Not saying whether it's right or wrong but I do think Disney is in a bit of a catch-22.

Sales have certainly been impacted by the volume of contracts hitting the resale market. When 10% of US workers are unemployed and looking for ways just to make the mortgage payments, DVC couldn't naturally sustain high ROFR levels. Low resale prices lead to more people going that route.

I know it's hard to feel sorry for a company that still earns hundreds-of-millions in profits. But when one business unit invests $800 million to build a new resort, it's expected to earn a certain return on that project. If it can't, that's when the cuts begin. That's when they decide to get cheaper comforters or eliminate bathrobes or cut back on the landscaping budget.

Current members do have a vested interest in strong DVC direct sales. All members have access to new resorts added to the system. Most people like the Annual Pass discount and access to the Top of the World Lounge--both perks which are funded by marketing. People like getting their DVC goodie bags on cruises and they like going to the BLT preview sessions to get free FastPasses.

If they can't meet expectations cuts will happen somewhere. On a daily basis here many folks argue that DVC (and Disney as a whole) should keep the quality of the product high and business will follow. If this rumor is true, it sounds like an attempt to kick-start sales so that cuts aren't required.

It sounds kinda ugly to say "DVC will do anything to make a sale." While I won't support lies or deceptive marketing practices, yeah, they really WILL do anything to make a sale. You can't be in the timeshare business if you don't sell the product. And if Disney gets out of the timeshare business, wait and see what happens to resale values with no ROFR.

Limiting the number of members who have access to booking cruises would certainly improve reservation success for those who can book. That feature is very important to many members as the DCL discussion thread has shown over the last week.

 

[cseca]

The days of DVC maintaining the best timeshare resale value is numbered...

It would be funny (sad funny, not haha funny) if they send out member updates with this information prefaced by:
" To increase member satisfaction... "
or
" Based on member survey/request... "

 

[nolanboys]

What is worrisome is that TSS has yet to chime in. If this was untrue they would be the first to jump on an correct this. Where are you TSS?

My thoughts exactly. We bought our contract this past spring through resale. Our membership card says 2004 though. We bought our points to use at WDW, but I still don't want to have those other options taken away. I'm watching this thread closely.

 

[mouseaider]

JimMia...... your last post makes the most sense to me out of all of this. You must be a business owner like me.

I am just closing on my resale.... yesterday or today.... and if I had heard a rumor like this before I made my mind up, I wouldn't be on this board today.

We purchased a resale contract through TSS for BWV. I tried to by a BCV directly from my DVC guide and was told they did not have any available. She tried to sell me BLT and OKW at a much higher price so we went the resale route.

I hope I don't regret buying into DVC because of something like this rumor coming true, but if I do, I will take the loss, sell out of DVC and quit going to WDW altogether. I will not support a company that turns its back on their members.