Direct Owners Care

[808blessing]

I have direct points. Whatever arbitrary number the eligibility number is at the moment, doesn't change the fact that I am in the direct club.

(This is not to be confused with minimum buy-in or resales. That's a different topic.)

I'm wondering how I can be a DVC direct member and still not see DVD representing the amount I contributed to the pot because it is just "not enough".

I say it matters. What says you?

 

[Marionnette]

I have direct points. Whatever arbitrary number the eligibility number is at the moment, doesn't change the fact that I am in the direct club.

(This is not to be confused with minimum buy-in or resales. That's a different topic.)

I'm wondering how I can be a DVC direct member and still not see DVD representing the amount I contributed to the pot because it is just "not enough".

I say it matters. What says you?

I don't own a single direct point but in 2012, we purchased a 25-point resale contract that makes me a blue card member. I love the fact that we're grandfathered in. But if I were a direct purchaser without enough points to qualify for a blue card, I would be upset to know that members like me exist.

 

[Sandisw]

Participation for membership requires you to meet a certain criteria. Yes, all are part of the club, even resale owners. But not the special program for perks.

It’s really no different than Costco. If you want some cash back, you pay for a different level of membership.

DVD sets the rules so I dont see it as a problem. It’s not just having direct points, it’s having the right number.

 

[sethschroeder]

What about the people paid a lot more in to the bucket then? Do they get extra perks you do not?

There is a limit simply to drive sales and because over time the number of resale members will rise that don't have access to benefits. They take all that profit they got from the direct purchase, stash most of it, and put a little back in to the fund for paying for perks.

 

[thanxfornoticin]

I don't own a single direct point but in 2012, we purchased a 25-point resale contract that makes me a blue card member. I love the fact that we're grandfathered in. But if I were a direct purchaser without enough points to qualify for a blue card, I would be upset to know that members like me exist.

But wouldn't you know what the threshold was at the time you bought? If so, you'd have a choice to buy the required number of direct points at the time to qualify, or buy less and not worry about the perks. It's not like people are buying direct, qualifying for perks, and then having that pulled from them later. It's a decision people make at the time based on the criteria at the time. It sounds like a choice people make upon purchase, unless I'm missing something in this argument.

 

[Marionnette]

But wouldn't you know what the threshold was at the time you bought? If so, you'd have a choice to buy the required number of direct points at the time to qualify, or buy less and not worry about the perks. It's not like people are buying direct, qualifying for perks, and then having that pulled from them later. It's a decision people make at the time based on the criteria at the time. It sounds like a choice people make upon purchase, unless I'm missing something in this argument.

So if you were a direct owner of 100 points, who bought knowing that you would not get a blue card, you would be okie dokie with a resale owner with the very smallest contract possible qualifying for membership extras because they bought in a few years earlier? That's what I'm getting at. I'm completely fine with it because I'm that resale owner with a grandfathered 25-point contract. But I also understand why it would be upsetting for the 100-point direct owner.

 

[Sandisw]

So if you were a direct owner of 100 points, who bought knowing that you would not get a blue card, you would be okie dokie with a resale owner with the very smallest contract possible qualifying for membership extras because they bought in a few years earlier? That's what I'm getting at. I'm completely fine with it because I'm that resale owner with a grandfathered 25-point contract. But I also understand why it would be upsetting for the 100-point direct owner.

And I guess I don’t know why? You bought when the criteria was 25 direct and someone else bought 100 direct when they needed more.

Owning resale doesn’t really have anything to do with it. You either do or do not have what you need.

 

[808blessing]

Yes, not to bring in the subject of resale but just looking at direct.

I am a direct owner. I am a constituent of Direct county. Where is my representation from DVD? I am inivisible until the yeary points are deemed "enough". It was apparently pre-determined at birth of contract. And yet dvd money goes out to pay for future perks of all of my direct brothers and sisters who are older than me.

I love this intellectual discussion because I think it has merit. Just never thought to stand up for very few of us who may fall into this category. We contributed to DVD too, no matter what amount of points.

 

[808blessing]

I propose Y/ND designation could have stood for Yes =direct. ND=Not direct.

It hasn't been rolled out that way of course. DVD sold me and others a direct add-on of a small amount, so I ask we be treated as direct members*, fundamentally a "DVD" beneficiary of something else ?!? regardless of year & amount of purchase. Can't wait to see what they dream up! Either that or consider giving all DVD owners (which we are) eligibility.

 

[Marionnette]

And I guess I don’t know why? You bought when the criteria was 25 direct and someone else bought 100 direct when they needed more.

Owning resale doesn’t really have anything to do with it. You either do or do not have what you need.

Again. I don't own a single direct point. Those 25 points are resale points. I don't know how many direct points @808blessing owns but if it’s even 1 direct point, it's more than I have. Yet, by virtue of the ever-changing metrics by which DVC defines eligibility for Membership Extras, I qualify for them while 808blessing does not. And DVD never received a dime from me!

I'm not complaining because I benefit from having purchased at a time when those were the rules. But I can understand 808blessing's point.

 

[kes601]

So, if I bought a lifetime membership for a platinum level for some club in 1985 for $300 and now that same platinum level lifetime membership would cost $3000. But you bought in in 2010 for $1000 at a gold level. Are you saying it's unfair because you spent more for your gold membership than I did for my platinum membership in 1985? That's not how things work. You knew the "perks" when you bought in. What the terms were for those perks before or after are irrelevant.

 

[clm10308]

I don’t understand what you are trying to say.

 

[OKW Lover]

I'm wondering how I can be a DVC direct member and still not see DVD representing the amount I contributed to the pot because it is just "not enough".

I guess I just don't understand what you are asking. Please elaborate.

 

[Marionnette]

I don’t understand what you are trying to say.

I guess I just don't understand what you are asking. Please elaborate.

I think the point goes back to how Membership Extras are paid for by the developer (DVD), not by members' dues. It was a question posed in another thread. There was an assertion that DVD's money to pay for Membership Extras such as Moonlight Magic has to come from somewhere given. DVD's revenue stream comes from direct sales, so the money must therefore come from the sale of direct contracts.

The OP is saying that even though they did not purchase enough points to qualify for Membership Extras, they did buy direct points and therefore contributed to DVD's revenue stream. They feel that there should be some level of benefits that acknowledges this.

Of course, following along that line of logic, Members who own more direct points should get greater perks or other considerations based on their greater support of DVD. Which then leads us into a discussion of the Double Platinum level of ownership vs Platinum vs Gold vs the rhodium level when DVC clearly cannot handle two simple levels of Y vs ND.

 

[chicagodisneyguy]

The OP's posts kinda remind me of when I wake up on Sunday morning and re-read texts I sent from 3am the night before...after going to a noon Cubs game Not a whole lot of coherent thoughts.

Considering the OPs home resorts are Aulani, BWV, and VGC I assumed they are Blue cards...but if not are you saying you want Blue card benefits? I mean, I bought 200 points direct in 2009 during a global recession....but didn't complain I didn't get 10 years of free annual passes like OKW people did in 1996. Why? Because that wasn't the promotion or in the contract when I bought. If people want the benefits the Blue card offers people need to pay for them.

I think Disney does an amazing job making members feel special once on property...either being blue or white card. But expecting to be given the same discounts as other members who hit a certain monetary threshold (resulting in a desired profitability) seems a bit entitled.

 

[Sandisw]

I propose Y/ND designation could have stood for Yes =direct. ND=Not direct.

It hasn't been rolled out that way of course. DVD sold me and others a direct add-on of a small amount, so I ask we be treated as direct members*, fundamentally a "DVD" beneficiary of something else ?!? regardless of year & amount of purchase. Can't wait to see what they dream up! Either that or consider giving all DVD owners (which we are) eligibility.

You did buy direct, but you did not buy what was needed to qualify for the extras…like I said,i it’s like Costco. If you don’t buy the higher level of membership, you don’t get the 2% back. Or when Disney offered the free dining plan and those in the values got a different plan than those in deluxe. However, in each case, you have contributed to them as a business.

Sure, it was nice when owning DVC no matter how purchased, made you eligible for the perks, but DVD changed the program.

 

[808blessing]

Yes! Dreaming up dreams for the future of DVD. Not lamenting on the past.

Thanks to Marionette for helping me express some thoughts I had with people who are confused by them!

 

[heynowirv]

Again. I don't own a single direct point. Those 25 points are resale points. I don't know how many direct points @808blessing owns but if it’s even 1 direct point, it's more than I have. Yet, by virtue of the ever-changing metrics by which DVC defines eligibility for Membership Extras, I qualify for them while 808blessing does not. And DVD never received a dime from me!

I'm not complaining because I benefit from having purchased at a time when those were the rules. But I can understand 808blessing's point.

You pay them MF's every year so you can't say they don't get a dime from you.

 

[Sandisw]

You pay them MF's every year so you can't say they don't get a dime from you.

But MFs do not fund DVD.

 

[Marionnette]

You pay them MF's every year so you can't say they don't get a dime from you.

I pay dues to DVC. I have never paid money to the developer (DVD).