Does anyone know

[duckfan78]

if DVC is going to or thinking of letting members purchase less than 25pts at a time? I just thought it would be a good idea if we could buy less.

It would be nice to maybe buy 10-15pts for my fiancee for the holidays or birthdays. It would just be nice to not have to have a minimum to purchase.

If anyone knows..fill me in..thanks!

 

[NJOYURLIFE]

I cannot speak for DVC at all, but honestly I can see them eliminating the 25 point contracts and making the add on amount higher rather than ever allowing less than 25 points.

 

[Chuck S]

Considering that people that buy resales, even the 25 point contracts are entitled to DVC discounts and benefits, I agree with NJOYURLIFE, I'd expect the minimum to increase. Can you imagine someone buying a 5 or 10 point contract resale, being full DVC members, and member accounting having to do that paperwork?

 

[mbhoxsie]

Considering that people that buy resales, even the 25 point contracts are entitled to DVC discounts and benefits, I agree with NJOYURLIFE, I'd expect the minimum to increase. Can you imagine someone buying a 5 or 10 point contract resale, being full DVC members, and member accounting having to do that paperwork?

Exactly... With all of the overhead needed to process the paperwork, process dues, financing, etc, I don't see them going below 25 pts..

 

[MinnieGirl33]

My thoughts exactly.

Too much overhead for not enough return on small contracts.

 

[Caskbill]

Considering that people that buy resales, even the 25 point contracts are entitled to DVC discounts and benefits, I agree with NJOYURLIFE, I'd expect the minimum to increase. Can you imagine someone buying a 5 or 10 point contract resale, being full DVC members, and member accounting having to do that paperwork?

The dues on a 5 point contract wouldn't even cover the costs of printing and sending out the Vacation Magic publication 4 times a year.

And if DVC continued to pay closing costs on add-on's, how many years of dues would it take on 5-points to just recoup the closing costs? Using today's closing costs, and annual dues, I calculate it at 13.6 years.

IMO, DVC should make it so that anyone with less than 150 points does not receive the DVC perks, Vacation Magic, etc. People could still purchase smaller contracts, and when they reached 150 points or more, they become eligible.

 

[jdg345]

The dues on a 5 point contract wouldn't even cover the costs of printing and sending out the Vacation Magic publication 4 times a year.

And if DVC continued to pay closing costs on add-on's, how many years of dues would it take on 5-points to just recoup the closing costs? Using today's closing costs, and annual dues, I calculate it at 13.6 years.

IMO, DVC should make it so that anyone with less than 150 points does not receive the DVC perks, Vacation Magic, etc. People could still purchase smaller contracts, and when they reached 150 points or more, they become eligible.

Exactly, and they wouldn't wait 13.6 years ... so we'd all get to chip in helping them to recoup ...

 

[spiceycat]

hey be happy they lower it to 25 - the first couple of years it was 50 points....

you need 60 points for a studio at BWV, BCV or VWL for 5 nights.

BWV standard view you need 50 points (really 45 - but for thankgiving 49).

Okw you need 40 points for 5 nights.

SSR you need 55 points for 5 nights

so I would go with at least 40 points.

 

[duckfan78]

The dues on a 5 point contract wouldn't even cover the costs of printing and sending out the Vacation Magic publication 4 times a year.

And if DVC continued to pay closing costs on add-on's, how many years of dues would it take on 5-points to just recoup the closing costs? Using today's closing costs, and annual dues, I calculate it at 13.6 years.

IMO, DVC should make it so that anyone with less than 150 points does not receive the DVC perks, Vacation Magic, etc. People could still purchase smaller contracts, and when they reached 150 points or more, they become eligible.

Why anyone who has only 150 would get less perks is beyond me. not everony can afford more than that. Lets remember, DVC isn't supposed to be some elite club of rich people. its for disney lovers everywhere.

And for over a $100/pt, I am sure if you are already a member, the overhead won't be that costly. i have points and they already send me vacation magic, and other paperwork etc.

 

[missymouse]

For what it's worth a couple weeks ago I asked MS why the magic number was 150 points. He said basically that they have determined that 150 points was the magic number for buying in through Disney due to costs to maintain the account, ease of booking, etc. This is also the approx. number of points needed for at least yearly trips to WDW which in all honesty is the goal of Disney to assure you will take your yearly vacation there. He also said basically in a very polite and politically correct way that is is one way to assure that only those who can afford the initial investment and maintainence fees become new members. I asked about resales of less than 150 and he said they are the right way to go for some people but that they really like all members get to that 150 point. I told him that we had determined that 100 points was the ideal number for our family and he said that seemed like a correct assessment when I explained our rationale. I think that they had to set the bar somewhere and when they crunched all the numbers it was easier to have say 1000 accounts at a with 150 points rather than 6000 accounts with 25 points or 3000 with 50 points. As I recall he also said 25 was the minimum add on because of administrative costs associated with that and that is was a nice number that most people are comfortable with increments of 25.

As I recall this is the general jist of his explanation, so I don't guarantee 100% accuracy.

 

[tink_n_pooh]

I think the OP was referring to adding on less than 25 points at a time. I can understand why DVC can't do individual contracts for less than 150 points but I do feel that those of us who are already members (with 150+ point contracts) should be able to add on in smaller increments than 25 points.

We are already members and we would not receive any additional benefits, no additional vacation magics to print or send and no additional members to take advantage of other member perks, we would just have more points to use each year = more time at WDW.

If the closing costs are that significant DVC could simply not include the closing costs in add on's of less than 25 points. The member could be responsible for these costs on smaller contracts.

As far as resales, I don't understand why DVC allows resales of less than 150 points to those persons who are not already members. Not everything can be controlled I am sure but I am honestly surprised that DVC lets these contracts go through since it wouldn't have been allowed if it were an initial contract purchased directly through DVC.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Chuck S]

I think the OP was referring to adding on less than 25 points at a time. I can understand why DVC can't do individual contracts for less than 150 points but I do feel that those of us who are already members (with 150+ point contracts) should be able to add on in smaller increments than 25 points.

We are already members and we would not receive any additional benefits, no additional vacation magics to print or send and no additional members to take advantage of other member perks, we would just have more points to use each year = more time at WDW.

If the closing costs are that significant DVC could simply not include the closing costs in add on's of less than 25 points. The member could be responsible for these costs on smaller contracts.

As far as resales, I don't understand why DVC allows resales of less than 150 points to those persons who are not already members. Not everything can be controlled I am sure but I am honestly surprised that DVC lets these contracts go through since it wouldn't have been allowed if it were an initial contract purchased directly through DVC.

Just my 2 cents.

Because each add-on IS , legally, a seperate contract, and is filed and recorded seperately, with the county clerk, or recorder, or whatever they call it in Orange County.

 

[LisaS]

I think the OP was referring to adding on less than 25 points at a time. I can understand why DVC can't do individual contracts for less than 150 points but I do feel that those of us who are already members (with 150+ point contracts) should be able to add on in smaller increments than 25 points.

We are already members and we would not receive any additional benefits, no additional vacation magics to print or send and no additional members to take advantage of other member perks, we would just have more points to use each year = more time at WDW.

If Disney allowed this, they could end up with DVC members who own fewer than 25 points if owners added on just a few points and then sold their main contracts. With perks like the current annual pass discount, the value of the perks the owner could take advantage of would greatly exceed the owner's annual dues. Imagine owning only 10 points -- you would pay about $45/year in dues and can purchase annual passes at a discount for your whole family! You could rent distressed points for $7.50 each and have them transferred in to your account to get enough points to make a reservation, or just rent out your 10 points every year and stay at a non-DVC resort with an AP rate.

If the closing costs are that significant DVC could simply not include the closing costs in add on's of less than 25 points. The member could be responsible for these costs on smaller contracts.

If someone wanted to buy DVC points a little at a time, but had to pay $250 in closing costs each time, it wouldn't be very cost effective for the owner. Purchasing 10 points at BWV @$95/point plus an additional $25/point in closing costs brings the cost to $120 per point. It would end up being an expensive way to buy more points.

As far as resales, I don't understand why DVC allows resales of less than 150 points to those persons who are not already members. Not everything can be controlled I am sure but I am honestly surprised that DVC lets these contracts go through since it wouldn't have been allowed if it were an initial contract purchased directly through DVC.

Just my 2 cents.

Lately they have been aggressively ROFR'ing small contracts (50 points or less). But if they prevented non-members from buying resale contracts with fewer than 150 points, it would end up hurting current owners who need to sell off an add-on of less than 150 points and could only sell it to another member.

I think Caskbill's idea makes a lot of sense -- let people buy the smaller contracts to get their foot in the door, but have a tiered benefit scheme where someone needs to own 150 points to be full-fledged member and receive all of the membership perks.

 

[Pootle]

Why anyone who has only 150 would get less perks is beyond me. not everony can afford more than that. Lets remember, DVC isn't supposed to be some elite club of rich people. its for disney lovers everywhere. .......

Using that argument, Disney would let people into the parks who could only afford to pay $5 admission ...... Disney lovers, but can't afford the full price Sorry, but it's a business with most things done with an eye on profit.

 

[7onbuzz]

I agree with Caskbill & LisaS. If DVC allows smaller & smaller contracts, their costs go up and profit goes down. Then quality goes down. The DW and I have never worried about the above average cost of Disney because of the overall quality. Not only is DVC a sound investment if you take annual (or more frequent) trips to WDW, but it is a way to insure the quality that we've all come to expect from Disney.
Someone made the comment that DVC is not an elite club for rich people. You're absolutely right, but neither is it a welfare program.

 

[castleri]

IMO, DVC should make it so that anyone with less than 150 points does not receive the DVC perks, Vacation Magic, etc. People could still purchase smaller contracts, and when they reached 150 points or more, they become eligible.

Was very glad to see this post as I had been thinking along the lines of exactly the same thing but thought maybe I was just being a grinch and should not be thinking this way.. Ultimately the cost of administering the small stand alone contracts is passed along to everyone not just those who have those contracts and all the perks that go along with them.

 

[duckfan78]

Using that argument, Disney would let people into the parks who could only afford to pay $5 admission ...... Disney lovers, but can't afford the full price Sorry, but it's a business with most things done with an eye on profit.

im sorry, but 150pts=close to $15,000. A family of 4 to visit disney with just park tickets is not going to cost you more than $750 for 4-5 days.

 

[Chuck S]

im sorry, but 150pts=close to $15,000. A family of 4 to visit disney with just park tickets is not going to cost you more than $750 for 4-5 days.

A family of 4 for $750 for 4 nights, including tickets, maybe in a highly discounted room at a value resort. Value resorts are averaging nearly $100 per night with taxes. In fact, I paid a little over $100 with tax at POP last month for one night, room only, as no AP discount was available. Add park hoppers for 4, and you're over that $750 amount. DVC resorts are not VALUE resorts. DVC makes sense if you stay in moderate or deluxe onsite resorts, normally. And the savings must be considered long term, over the course of the contract. For instance, take your buy in price of $101 per point/47 years remaining at SSR, add $4 per point dues and you're looking currently at a yearly cost of $6.15, at that rate, a dream season studio is $73.80 per night during the week and $159.90 on weekends, or $688.80 for a full seven night vacation. Whereas cash price for that same studio can be over $2100. And deluxe accomodations at a regular Disney resort even higher. Even at a Disney value resort, it is over $700.

 

[mrs.explorer1977]

We've just bought a resale for 50 points at HH and have immediately added on an additional 50 points, through Disney, at SSR. We'll probably continue to add on through Disney as our family grows and our needs change.

Why we shouldn't be entitled to all the same perks as someone who bought a 150 point contract directly from Disney at the beginning is beyond me. We're still DVC members, and just because we couldn't do the initial outlay for 150 points doesn't mean we're less "worthy" of the perks.

I think that way of thinking is somewhat "elitist". Yes, we didn't do it the traditional way, but we ARE still members. And as such, I think we shouldn't be subjected to a "tiered benefit program".

 

[duckfan78]

We've just bought a resale for 50 points at HH and have immediately added on an additional 50 points, through Disney, at SSR. We'll probably continue to add on through Disney as our family grows and our needs change.

Why we shouldn't be entitled to all the same perks as someone who bought a 150 point contract directly from Disney at the beginning is beyond me. We're still DVC members, and just because we couldn't do the initial outlay for 150 points doesn't mean we're less "worthy" of the perks.

I think that way of thinking is somewhat "elitist". Yes, we didn't do it the traditional way, but we ARE still members. And as such, I think we shouldn't be subjected to a "tiered benefit program".

you are totally correct! i agree with you. i did it the traditional way of 160pts originally. but if you own a part of DVC you are still a member. It should not be some elitist group.