Blackout days for DVC Resales???

[Sammie]

I don't think it is a case of DVC not caring, but you have to realize that with 200,000 memberships what one member wants and what another wants as a DVC priority is very different.

The DIS DVCers are a very small percentage of that total membership and most of them are pleased with what they bought and how they are treated. Even some DISers are, I know I am.

But also with those numbers compared to resort and park guests, we have to all remember we are just a small subset of the total situation.

We are not special, we are just a very small fish in a really big ocean. Some DVC members forget that.

 

[Dean]

The balance isn't quite that bad. If my family of 4 spends 2 weeks per year at a DVC resort, that's about 56 park admissions (14 days x 4 people). But it's only one DVC ownership.

A single DVC contract translates to dozens of park visits by owners, friends and family each year.

Still, I agree that WDW and DL aren't going to bend their policies to appease DVC owners. And DVC doesn't have the clout necessary to dictate policy.



A strong resale market is a useful tool for those Guide sales pitches, but it's certainly not a "need."

6 years ago resale prices were running about 85% of direct. Today it varies more by property, but the range is around 50-70%. The lower percent doesn't appear to be hurting sales at all.

Most other timeshares are worth about ten cents on the dollar after a direct purchase. Those salespeople avoid the resale issue altogether and those who end up buying apparently gave it no consideration whatsoever.

At the end of the day, timeshares are bought because of the benefits they deliver. People want to own DVC for the yearly visits to the Grand Floridian or Contemporary. Most people give little-to-no consideration to all of the "what ifs".

And those other timeshares have a higher tour to sale ratio it appears than does DVC from the limited info I've seen.

 

[Dean]

The question was why you think there "needs to be REAL DIFFERENCES" between resale and direct?

Personally I do think there needs to a real difference enough to put pressure on potential buyers. However, that is simply looking at it from a DVD business perspective.

 

[Lil' Grumpy]

well i'll be , keeping it real?!

if i may , i like to add my observations to the fire.

the reference about reality wasn't a joke per say, just
i took many comments being valid because there are "differences"
between dvc owners & those differences can also shaped their
opinions. i think more then most would ever confess to.

for the record, we're direct and we don't own any other.
we do have friends that own other time shares. though
we have never sought a re-sale , we have an "active"
interest in buying one- if we find one that we can use with
our current ones. some times , in the past, i have stated specific
comments with the purpose to learn what would be right for us.

don't get why others worry or care how fellow owners feel
about their investments-location, price, or backgrounds.
however, one factor that catches my attention-- is how
certain trends by certain groups changes upon us personal.
so you can take any position you desire-but over
& over , there are specific type of actions being taken by
resales & renters that are negative-- "causes & effects."
that's factual as they continue to grow bigger & larger,
covering many topics.

this suggestion~black out days ~ i think is very bad on many
levels. one being , there are so many others that are better.
i can't see why dvc would ever benefit from taking a "side".
especially with so many other options available. surely those
in charge of dvc can sit down & lay down the improvements
that is needed --to met the promises they used to sell
direct members. ( left resales out simply because they did
not go thru disney, not because they are any less important.)

it is very evident to me that dvc is not typical of the other
time sales & as they expanded , the old system is failing
to meet the demands on many levels. however, i don't think
dvc "growing pangs" made the whole program bad. especially
if the current dvc leadership seek problem solving &
corrective measures. i think the new majority realize that
current owners are hurt by the rci trading because it
does not match the promises they are trying to sell.
either fixed it or shut it down.

the fact is...there are real differences between direct vs resales.
those differences can be measures in dollars. but it isn't
the only factor.
renting has risen the last few years effecting both groups.
i like to know how come dvc is ignoring so many professional
ones?

again the trading out needs overhaul to reflect the real value
for dvc owners or get rid of it. look how many are always
trying to get in vs trying to trade out. & those are part
of a sub group. we are like most direct buyers, that our
primary reasoning for dvc, are for stays @ wdw & our
home resort. we may not be the majority, but we
would always be happy to stay @ our home resort
& not the others. and i think many more feel the same.
one of our problem is getting blocked out from our
home resort because so many brought cheap resales
@ ssr though they never want to stay there. therefore,
there need some tweaking in that area especially
adding different times certain groups can trade out.
then all rci trades in should be way after that, &
not within any 4mos period so members would have
the right to make changes. i don't see any black
out days accomplishing any of this.

i can't ever see having a black out day but rci could
still trade in. i don't think room requests be for renters
or rci traders. to be fair, room requests should only
apply to the owners.

as for the number of different types that makes up the
club. i see the rationalizations to manipulate &
general comments that has no meaning to me. instead
i follow the trends being posted by the groups ,&
i care about the potential problems that effected
what we paid for. i could care less for all the
projections and/or excuses....we are "entitled" to
what we paid for & the co. does not have the right
to give it away to those bending the rules.

i was kind shock that dvc made a "big deal" about
the 20 years without giving those originally members
still with company with a few reward perks. it is
lil' things like this make me wonder why new leadership
isn't being sought.

 

[Chuck S]

...one of our problem is getting blocked out from our
home resort because so many brought cheap resales
@ ssr though they never want to stay there.

Then you should book during your home resort priority window. People at other resorts can not book your home resort, and have no impact upon availability in your home resort priority window. There may by some RCI trade activity, however if they limit that, they would also have to limit the ability of a DVC owner to trade out. And an RCI trade, in theory, is a DVC owner booking a room at their home resort and them trading it to another location. Which is certainly not prohibited under the DVC rules.

I agree that blackout days are not a particularly good idea, IMO. And I really don't see DVC implementing such a scheme, except perhaps as described in my prior post

 

[Missyrose]

the fact is...there are real differences between direct vs resales.
those differences can be measures in dollars. but it isn't
the only factor.
renting has risen the last few years effecting both groups.
i like to know how come dvc is ignoring so many professional
ones?

I guess the thing I never seem to understand about your posts is why you always equate resale buyers with renters, as if owning via resale means you have not invested in the system. Resale buyers pay the same MFs as direct buyers, whereas renters come an go without any tether to the system. I just don't understand why you equate the two so often.

 

[Apps]

I guess the thing I never seem to understand about your posts is why you always equate resale buyers with renters, as if owning via resale means you have not invested in the system. Resale buyers pay the same MFs as direct buyers, whereas renters come an go without any tether to the system. I just don't understand why you equate the two so often.

So true. There is no difference to anybody but Disney between a resale owner vs a direct owner (except the direct owners usually paid way more money and have more flexibility). Points are points and its not if resale owners magically increase the point count and take potential bookings away. There is really no class distinction between the two.

 

[Breyean]

I guess the thing I never seem to understand about your posts is why you always equate resale buyers with renters, as if owning via resale means you have not invested in the system. Resale buyers pay the same MFs as direct buyers, whereas renters come an go without any tether to the system. I just don't understand why you equate the two so often.

It ALWAYS comes down to the evil renters according to his posts.

It's sort of funny. Just about any topic - he brings up the perils caused by renters.

 

[Sammie]

the fact is...there are real differences between direct vs resales.
those differences can be measures in dollars. but it isn't
the only factor.
renting has risen the last few years effecting both groups.
i like to know how come dvc is ignoring so many professional
ones?

What makes you think DVC ignores professional renters?

 

[Lil' Grumpy]

wow--that sure was a judgmental expression, esp. from a
person i have never met. i know what the insult
you are trying to make but it isn't worth anything to me.

however, i am curious about the real source---what do you own
to back up your intrusive input? direct,resales , rci ... & /or combo
you own? and do you rent often? those are the de~tails that i think
shaped your intentions & the objective of the motivation.

as for the other questions , i will add more later to define
the trends that i think worth watching.

in general, i see our dvc as a tool. i don't think the personal
info. of the owners is important, comparing owners' traits ,to
the ways dvc is currently managing vs the lack of managing---
especially, what they could/should be doing.

 

[jerseyduke]

Personally, I could live at The World in eternal Bliss, so I may not have the best opinion here. I have enough points for about 8 nights at VGF right now, so I need points for the other 357 nights.

I am looking at other resorts for add ons. They are mostly 2042 resorts. I understand the current resale restrictions, and I am ok with them for additional contracts, so resale it is!

IF they were to put a restriction as to when I could use those points, I would drop the resale thought, as that would be a restriction most likely too great. So I would turn to direct.

Now the 2042 resorts are selling at 4.50 per point per year. VGF is selling at 3.00 per point per year!!! (even RESALE BCV points are going at about 3$ per point per year!!!)

If I bought direct, that would push me toward VGF points, and I would just take my gambles at staying someplace else at 7 months.



Also, remember that DVD, DVC, Parks, etc, all have different P&Ls, but they all have the exact same shareholders.

The 7 month problem caused by "low demand" resorts has a simple solution....
Expand the monorail to all of them

 

[dianeschlicht]

It ALWAYS comes down to the evil renters according to his posts.

It's sort of funny. Just about any topic - he brings up the perils caused by renters.

I don't rent out my points, and I don't understand why some here find that to be such an issue. I have owned DVC for 16 years, and I've never had a problem getting a reservation at my home resorts when I wanted them.
AND...I don't always book at the 11 month window, because I don't always know when I want to travel. That being said, I DO book the popular DVC times at the 11 month booking window, and then I change at the 7 month window if I can. I suspect Lil' Grumpy hasn't figured out how to do that just yet. There are certainly a lot of people outside of the DIS who own DVC and have no clue how most of it works. Those of us on the DIS have a definite advantage.

 

[Chuck S]

Also, remember that DVD, DVC, Parks, etc, all have different P&Ls, but they all have the exact same shareholders.

The 7 month problem caused by "low demand" resorts has a simple solution....
Expand the monorail to all of them

Yeah, but Disney and DVC, once the resorts are initially sold, could really care less about demand at one resort over another. It really isn't anything that will affect them at all. The dues and maintenance are paid for, so in essence they have very little to gain by increasing demand at a particular resort.

And though I think you posted about the monorail in jest, I think we'd be more likely to see monorail extensions to POP Century and All Stars before we see them at SSR or OKW, except for the virtue of having a monorail line to DtD. Bus is still the cheapest way, and then the next step would be a cheaper mass transport system like light rail or on demand POD system (like Heathrow's ULTra) over a full fledged monorail.

 

[jerseyduke]

Yeah, but Disney and DVC, once the resorts are initially sold, could really care less about demand at one resort over another. It really isn't anything that will affect them at all. The dues and maintenance are paid for, so in essence they have very little to gain by increasing demand at a particular resort.

And though I think you posted about the monorail in jest, I think we'd be more likely to see monorail extensions to POP Century and All Stars before we see them at SSR or OKW, except for the virtue of having a monorail line to DtD. Bus is still the cheapest way, and then the next step would be a cheaper mass transport system like light rail or on demand POD system (like Heathrow's ULTra) over a full fledged monorail.

Yes, I am sure the demand problem is of no concern, and of no business benefit.

I do wonder how much the monorail costs per mile to build. I doubt there is business benefit to expanding the system, it is just such iconic DW. I am glad when they built EPCOT they added it, I do wish it hit all the parks.

 

[DenLo]

Yes, I am sure the demand problem is of no concern, and of no business benefit.

I do wonder how much the monorail costs per mile to build. I doubt there is business benefit to expanding the system, it is just such iconic DW. I am glad when they built EPCOT they added it, I do wish it hit all the parks.

I saw this in an article *********************************/2012/weekly-rumor-round-up-disney-world-universal-orlando-october-19/ recently:

Most people accept that it cost Disney about $1,000,000 a mile in todays dollars when they originally built the monorail system that we know and love. The problem is, it would probably cost closer to $100,000,000 a mile to build new track today. And because Disney doesnt charge for riding the monorail, the only money it would be saving is having to run less busses. For a company where even the most diehard Disney Fan must agree that they count pennies at every opportunity, expanding the monorail makes zero sense financially

I've seen several articles about this including one comparing the cost at expanding at WDW to what it cost to build the monorail in Las Vegas.

I would mind if they just upgraded the system they currently have. It's really having lots of downtime.

Sorry the system dropped part the link to the article I was quoting.

 

[lilpooh108]

I don't feel like quoting anybody because this is not targeted to anyone, but why any current owner would WANT resale restrictions is puzzling.

The less restrictions, the easier your exit strategy from this timeshare is in case you need to sell. The less restrictions, the more resale purchases.

I would much rather new owners come in through resale to pay their responsibility for MFs than people holding on to contracts, burdened by resale restrictions, who can't pay MFs and the rest of us suffer when DVC takes it out of reserves.

Who cares about renters? Resale owners and retail owners both rent. We should be glad that it's an option for us.

 

[Apps]

I don't feel like quoting anybody because this is not targeted to anyone, but why any current owner would WANT resale restrictions is puzzling.

The less restrictions, the easier your exit strategy from this timeshare is in case you need to sell. The less restrictions, the more resale purchases.

I would much rather new owners come in through resale to pay their responsibility for MFs than people holding on to contracts, burdened by resale restrictions, who can't pay MFs and the rest of us suffer when DVC takes it out of reserves.

Who cares about renters? Resale owners and retail owners both rent. We should be glad that it's an option for us.

I said this EXACT same thing in another post. Having a decent exit option is a WIN for everyone.

 

[lilpooh108]

I said this EXACT same thing in another post. Having a decent exit option is a WIN for everyone.

Thanks. I think some people take the "Club" part to heart. We are just timeshare owners. It's a superior product, yes. Sometimes there is pixie dust, sometimes there is magic. But every year we have annual dues, and every year your life changes.

Why anyone would want to make the "Club" more exclusive by limiting resales is crazy = shooting yourself in the foot.

A person's financial condition today is not indicative of his financial condition tomorrow.

 

[Apps]

Thanks. I think some people take the "Club" part to heart. We are just timeshare owners. It's a superior product, yes. Sometimes there is pixie dust, sometimes there is magic. But every year we have annual dues, and every year your life changes.

Why anyone would want to make the "Club" more exclusive by limiting resales is crazy = shooting yourself in the foot.

A person's financial condition today is not indicative of his financial condition tomorrow.

I absolutely agree and i'm in my mid thirtys with young kids. 10 or 15 years from now, I or my kids, may just not want to go to Disney anymore. Would like to be able to sell my resale at a decent price

 

[Dean]

I don't feel like quoting anybody because this is not targeted to anyone, but why any current owner would WANT resale restrictions is puzzling.

The less restrictions, the easier your exit strategy from this timeshare is in case you need to sell. The less restrictions, the more resale purchases.

I would much rather new owners come in through resale to pay their responsibility for MFs than people holding on to contracts, burdened by resale restrictions, who can't pay MFs and the rest of us suffer when DVC takes it out of reserves.

Who cares about renters? Resale owners and retail owners both rent. We should be glad that it's an option for us.

There are many facets. On the surface it's what's best for current owners, new owners and DVD; they are not the same answers. Effective resale restrictions help DVD, hurt current owners, hurt future retail buyers and are neutral to negative to new resale buyers depending on how effective they are. Current restrictions help current resale buyers because they can buy more cheaply than had this not all gone down. All current qualified owners lose is potential resale value. However, it helps all of us for DVD/DVC to remain strong, viable and expanding going forward. IMO strong resale restrictions are an industry standard currently, DVC is a lightweight in that area.