Do I even care about membership perks?

[BuzzLightyearDad]

Hi,

We’ve got a contract at BCV that we bought resale that is a couple years old so it doesn’t include perks. We used to own a BLT contract that was purchased direct but were forced to sell it to create some short term cash. In the back of my mind, I’ve been thinking we would get a direct 75 point contract at some point to get the perks back. But as I think about it, I’m just not sure restaurant discounts are worth paying such a premium for points. We don’t have APs but do have a Disney VISA which has a few discounts. Is anyone passionate that you need the membership perks?

Thanks in advance for the thoughts.

 

[omniscientmommy]

Depends on how often you go to Disney. If it's once a year probably not. We go a few times a year and still wouldn't buy DVC but have APs. So each person is different.

 

[CarolMN]

IMO, the only perk that has enough $$ value to possibly justify a direct purchase is the annual pass. If you go often enough that the annual pass is the best pass for you, then "do the math" - especially if you have to buy tickets for a family.

Otherwise the perks are nice, and I'm glad to have them, but I wouldn't pay today's direct prices to get them.

 

[Madame]

Hi,

We’ve got a contract at BCV that we bought resale that is a couple years old so it doesn’t include perks. We used to own a BLT contract that was purchased direct but were forced to sell it to create some short term cash. In the back of my mind, I’ve been thinking we would get a direct 75 point contract at some point to get the perks back. But as I think about it, I’m just not sure restaurant discounts are worth paying such a premium for points. We don’t have APs but do have a Disney VISA which has a few discounts. Is anyone passionate that you need the membership perks?

Thanks in advance for the thoughts.

I think the consensus is that at 25 points to qualify for perks it was worth it, at 75 not so much. The best perk is the Gold AP & it doesn’t sound like you’ll use that.

All of that said, I’m sitting here on a grandfathered contract I’d never sell simply because it is grandfathered. Only you can decide how much that feeling of inclusion in the club is worth to you.

 

[Dtw002]

Was lucky and bought 25 points before the new rule, so we have the perks. I will say they are pretty awesome; discount on APs, access to lounges, took art class at reunion station, get the magazines. With the perks you do feel like more of being in a club vs just a timeshare. Now is that worth thousands of $$$$ probably not. I will say though, people always are downer on the perks - but for us they are pretty cool.

 

[McCrae]

One perk that should be considered is the ability to stay at non home resorts. This is a perk that can be changed. Already some restrictions are in place. I would imagine this will continue with any further developments and could be applied in theory to all non direct contracts.

 

[jodifla]

For me, the perks are very important. I use many of them frequently.

 

[CarolMN]

One perk that should be considered is the ability to stay at non home resorts. This is a perk that can be changed. Already some restrictions are in place. I would imagine this will continue with any further developments and could be applied in theory to all non direct contracts.

Agree. However, lack of availability at 7 months is making that ability less and less valuable, especially if one wants a studio and travels mostly September - early January.

 

[ELMC]

IMO, the only perk that has enough $$ value to possibly justify a direct purchase is the annual pass. If you go often enough that the annual pass is the best pass for you, then "do the math" - especially if you have to buy tickets for a family.

Otherwise the perks are nice, and I'm glad to have them, but I wouldn't pay today's direct prices to get them.

I agree. To add, there is a lot of overlap between DVC perks and AP perks. So if you decide not to buy qualifying points then you lose the discount on the AP. But once you have the AP you will get the dining discounts, eligibility to buy TiW, merchandise discounts, etc. Add to that the fact that Disney demonstrated that it differentiates between the AP levels with its Galaxy's Edge preview. If that kind of behavior continues then a whole other analysis will need to take place as to whether or not it is worth it to pay for the higher level AP.

It's enough to make one's head spin, which leads me to the conclusion that maybe it's best to own at the resort you want to stay at in the most economical way possible and not worry about anything else.

 

[Noah_t]

One perk that should be considered is the ability to stay at non home resorts. This is a perk that can be changed. Already some restrictions are in place. I would imagine this will continue with any further developments and could be applied in theory to all non direct contracts.

I thought this was a right, not a perk, that could not be taken away unless specifically written in the contracts like they did for Riviera.

 

[Jdella27229]

I guess the short answer is, no. However, and this may sound totally stupid, I just feel a little bit better knowing that I own through DVC and not resale. With that being said, my wife and I have 150 at CC and do plan on buying resale to add 100 more points in the near future.

 

[McCrae]

I thought this was a right, not a perk, that could not be taken away unless specifically written in the contracts like they did for Riviera.

If you look at your deeds the option to remove the right to stay at other DVC properties is included.

 

[CarolMN]

I thought this was a right, not a perk, that could not be taken away unless specifically written in the contracts like they did for Riviera.

I interpreted this to refer to the fact that any resale going forward will not be able to book the new resorts, beginning with the Riviera. As time passes and the contracts for legacy resorts expire and the number of "no-book" resort options increase, this could turn out to be a big deal for some Members.

 

[Cyberc1978]

I thought this was a right, not a perk, that could not be taken away unless specifically written in the contracts like they did for Riviera.

Thing is IF Disney removed this option/perk/benefit then all resale owners would have to stay at their own resort. That would effectively mean that those resorts would book up pretty fast leaving no other option for direct buyers when the 7 month window opens up. Removing the option for resale buyers would therefore also remove the option for direct buyers.

 

[Sandisw]

I agree that the big benefit is the AP and if you don’t see that as a need, I would not spend the extra money simply for that, especially given that perks can be changed for anyone. They are not guaranteed.

 

[jarestel]

In the earlier days of DVC (not the really early free park tickets days) when the "perks" consisted of a few discounts and the ability to use points for cruises and Disney hotels, there was really nothing special or useful about them. And as a result, DVC allowed everyone, resale or direct, to partake of perks. In today's DVC however, I think the perks are a nice addition to membership and certainly of some benefit.

Having said that, should someone buy direct just for perks? Absolutely not, since just as quickly as they gave them to us they could take them away. And then all of the folks who purchased the 25/75 extra points just to become direct members for perks would become irritated. On the bright side though, one would still have the points to use and who doesn't need more points?

I would buy direct for a few reasons but solely for the acquisition of perks wouldn't be one of them. Good luck!

 

[zavandor]

I would be very cautious of buying for any perk that is not an AP discount (and even that...). I am not sure perks like the Moonlight Magic free events will continue much longer: the resort hopping restrictions may be strong enough to differentiate direct from resale purchasers. Like we saw with the July 4th debacle, the Star Wars Epcot failure and Topolino's Terrace NYE event, members are more and more seen as cash cows, why give them anything for free?
The AP discount might be different because it might push owners to actually go more often or go the the parks more often instead of resorts only days, so it makes money to Disney. MM? Please buy a DAH event ticket.

 

[katandmouse]

One perk that should be considered is the ability to stay at non home resorts. This is a perk that can be changed. Already some restrictions are in place. I would imagine this will continue with any further developments and could be applied in theory to all non direct contracts.

I thought this was a right, not a perk, that could not be taken away unless specifically written in the contracts like they did for Riviera.

If you look at your deeds the option to remove the right to stay at other DVC properties is included.

The thing that worries me about calling the ability to stay at non-home resorts a “perk” is that it sounds like an “incidental benefit,” like the discounts and exchanging points into Disney Collection, cruises, etc. But the difference between reserving non-home DVC resorts and those perks is that booking non-home resorts is appurtenant to your deed, whereas the incidental benefits are not included in the deed. When you purchase your Ownership Interest as represented by points, you are also purchasing access to the Home Resort reservations and DVC Reservation Component (non-home resorts).

So while Disney can change the terms and conditions for booking your home and non-home resorts, I believe there are more legal implications with it. And if they outright remove the ability to book non-home resorts, I’d be more concerned about whether a DVC timeshare is worthwhile in general than the incidental perks. I hope I’m making sense. What I’m trying to say is that if DVC removes the right to stay at other DVC properties for the L14 resorts, that’s when it becomes a timeshare scam for me. (Even the Riviera/future resorts restriction is approaching that to me, but I understand how they got around that...)

In the meantime, I have learned that I do care about those membership perks and miss being a “full” member. Even though the perks are not financially worth it at all, I am still working up to buy 75 points direct from Disney. I guess while I do that I’ll keep an eye on what other changes they make...

 

[DSLRuser]

The "perks" for me have added up to about a $2,500 cash savings to me over the course of a year.

We saved $550 x 4 being able to get the gold pass instead of a Platinum Annual pass.

Then numerous 10% discounts for food an merch over the course of 3 trips this last year. So yes. you do care.

 

[McCrae]

The thing that worries me about calling the ability to stay at non-home resorts a “perk” is that it sounds like an “incidental benefit,” like the discounts and exchanging points into Disney Collection, cruises, etc. But the difference between reserving non-home DVC resorts and those perks is that booking non-home resorts is appurtenant to your deed, whereas the incidental benefits are not included in the deed. When you purchase your Ownership Interest as represented by points, you are also purchasing access to the Home Resort reservations and DVC Reservation Component (non-home resorts).

So while Disney can change the terms and conditions for booking your home and non-home resorts, I believe there are more legal implications with it. And if they outright remove the ability to book non-home resorts, I’d be more concerned about whether a DVC timeshare is worthwhile in general than the incidental perks. I hope I’m making sense. What I’m trying to say is that if DVC removes the right to stay at other DVC properties for the L14 resorts, that’s when it becomes a timeshare scam for me. (Even the Riviera/future resorts restriction is approaching that to me, but I understand how they got around that...)

In the meantime, I have learned that I do care about those membership perks and miss being a “full” member. Even though the perks are not financially worth it at all, I am still working up to buy 75 points direct from Disney. I guess while I do that I’ll keep an eye on what other changes they make...

I agree with the sentiment of your post.