DUES Info! - All resorts dues have been released

[VGCgroupie]

They can only raise it to 5 nights minimum but that’s also way too much.

That’s the thing if owners accept a minimum of 2 and it saves them money they most certainly will raise the minimum to 3, and so on.

 

[walt34]

DVC can implement a minimum night stay, but never more than 5 nights.

But, I think many owners value the flexibility of DVC to go for short trips and such.

So, those additional cleanings are still going to a new guest.

I'm very much opposed to a minimum night stay. But if I'm staying for a week, I get one actual cleaning. If the same room is used for 7 individual stays, it will get 7 full cleanings. That's quite expensive. And that second room costs the exact same number of points and dues as my seven day stay. So I'm subsidizing the shorter stays. That's why I feel it would be better, if the cleaning were removed from the dues (=significantly reduced dues) and you get billed one cleaning per stay separately. So everyone can still book one night, but the cleaning charge paid for that room for one night would be the same I pay for seven night stay (as everyone gets one cleaning). Probably not possible but from my perspective the fairest solution: everyone pays what they consume.

 

[VGCgroupie]

I never felt I was treated any different than what I could or should expect. In other words they treated me the same as everyone else.

I’ve seen many stories of the opposite. Problems don’t always arise with every stay it’s when they do you might see how DVC could be treated differently.

 

[VGCgroupie]

I really suspect minimums of three or four days would help with availability and dues.

It would quite possibly tank the resale market as well. But DVC doesn’t care about that. But owners should care about it.

 

[Cyberc1978]

They need to eliminate commercial renting period. That will fix this problem as well.

As long as owners or anyone else staying then eliminating commercial renting won’t make any difference.
If DVC number crunchers can make a business case saying that renters often only stay 1-2 nights and that is a big part of the bigger increase in dues then I’m all in for making a change saying if others than owners are staying they need to stay 3 nights minimum.

 

[Brian Noble]

I have found the level of service Disney gives cash customers far exceeds what they give DVC owners.

And that costs money, which would be reflected in Dues. For example if DVC provided more frequent housekeeping, that increases what is already the largest component of Dues.

It is pretty typical for a timeshare to offer slightly lower service levels than a co-branded hotel, in part because the owners pay for it directly and consciously. This is a balancing act across the ownership’s collective desires.

Overall service is lacking for DVC. They don’t tend to be treated as a paying customer, they tend to be treated as an owner.

Other than housekeeping frequency I have no idea what you mean here. I’ve been a cash guest, an exchange guest, and an owner. The experience other than housekeeping was indistinguishable to me.

That’s the thing if owners accept a minimum of 2 and it saves them money they most certainly will raise the minimum to 3, and so on.

But they wouldn’t doing it to save themselves money. It would be to balance the cost that owners bear. And there are plenty of counter-examples to your claim. Wyndham for example has a minimum of three nights during peak season dates, and two otherwise.

 

[VGCgroupie]

As long as owners or anyone else staying then eliminating commercial renting won’t make any difference.
If DVC number crunchers can make a business case saying that renters often only stay 1-2 nights and that is a big part of the bigger increase in dues then I’m all in for making a change saying if others than owners are staying they need to stay 3 nights minimum.

Renters tend to stay less nights that is a fact. Rentals are typically 1-3 nights.

If commercial renting is gone owners may not have to resort to split stays to which requires more cleaning to take place.

 

[airjay75]

I wonder how much savings you'd even get if you went to a 2 or 3 day minimum stay. Wouldn't be surprised if you had to go up to 5+ days to get any real savings in dues. I doubt it would impact me much personally, but I really don't like the idea of limiting the use of our points - I think I'd worry about it being a slippery slope too.

I do like the idea of being able to pay during your stay for cleanings if you wanted them. Get rid of all in-stay cleanings (other than trash service), but actually offer it consistently as a paid add-on, and I'd be very happy. If implemented correctly, I don't see why it couldn't also be a money maker.

 

[Brian Noble]

I’ve seen many stories of the opposite.

Partly that’s because owners complain more; in general they are more entitled than the average guest because ownership carries extra emotional weight.

I do like the idea of being able to pay during your stay for cleanings if you wanted them. Get rid of all in-stay cleanings

Back in the day this was offered. I’m not sure when or why it stopped.

 

[Cyberc1978]

I'm very much opposed to a minimum night stay. But if I'm staying for a week, I get one actual cleaning. If the same room is used for 7 individual stays, it will get 7 full cleanings. That's quite expensive. And that second room costs the exact same number of points and dues as my seven day stay. So I'm subsidizing the shorter stays. That's why I feel it would be better, if the cleaning were removed from the dues (=significantly reduced dues) and you get billed one cleaning per stay separately. So everyone can still book one night, but the cleaning charge paid for that room for one night would be the same I pay for seven night stay (as everyone gets one cleaning). Probably not possible but from my perspective the fairest solution: everyone pays what they consume.

I like that idea.

Another option would be if you book 3 nights or less you pay ie $85 for cleaning. More than 3 nights would not have a cleaning fee.

 

[VGCgroupie]

And that costs money, which would be reflected in Dues. For example if DVC provided more frequent housekeeping, that increases what is already the largest component of Dues.

It is pretty typical for a timeshare to offer slightly lower service levels than a co-branded hotel, in part because the owners pay for it directly and consciously. This is a balancing act across the ownership’s collective desires.


Other than housekeeping frequency I have no idea what you mean here. I’ve been a cash guest, an exchange guest, and an owner. The experience other than housekeeping was indistinguishable to me.

I was more meaning the level of customer service not level of tangible items.

But they wouldn’t doing it to save themselves money. It would be to balance the cost that owners bear. And there are plenty of counter-examples to your claim. Wyndham for example has a minimum of three nights during peak season dates, and two otherwise.

Wyndham isn’t a desirable time share to myself or many others. DVC is highly desirable partly due to the fact that isnt run like your typical timeshare such as Wyndham

 

[Brian Noble]

I like that idea.

Another option would be if you book 3 nights or less you pay ie $85 for cleaning. More than 3 nights would not have a cleaning fee.

Many other systems award “housekeeping tokens” in proportion to the points owned, and each stay requires a token. If you are a “typical” owner, that’s plenty. If you book many short stays, you have to pay for extra tokens.

 

[Cyberc1978]

I wonder how much savings you'd even get if you went to a 2 or 3 day minimum stay. Wouldn't be surprised if you had to go up to 5+ days to get any real savings in dues. I doubt it would impact me much personally, but I really don't like the idea of limiting the use of our points - I think I'd worry about it being a slippery slope too.

I do like the idea of being able to pay during your stay for cleanings if you wanted them. Get rid of all in-stay cleanings (other than trash service), but actually offer it consistently as a paid add-on, and I'd be very happy. If implemented correctly, I don't see why it couldn't also be a money maker.

Instead of a minimum stay introduce a new fee, if you book 3 nights or less you pay ie $85 for cleaning. More than 3 nights would not carry a cleaning fee.

 

[airjay75]

I like that idea.

Another option would be if you book 3 nights or less you pay ie $85 for cleaning. More than 3 nights would not have a cleaning fee.

I was trying to think of something like this too. Like, find a way to reward owners who stay longer and cause less costs for the membership as a whole. I see Brian just mentioned a token system - that's interesting. If there was a way to structure it so it felt like more of a "carrot" than a "stick" approach, I think that would be ideal and an easier sell.

 

[VGCgroupie]

Instead of a minimum stay introduce a new fee, if you book 3 nights or less you pay ie $85 for cleaning. More than 3 nights would not carry a cleaning fee.

I like this. It actually also would impact the rental market in a negative way imo. Win win

 

[VGCgroupie]

Many other systems award “housekeeping tokens” in proportion to the points owned, and each stay requires a token. If you are a “typical” owner, that’s plenty. If you book many short stays, you have to pay for extra tokens.

I could see them adding extra cleaning tokens when you buy MMB!

 

[Cyberc1978]

I like this. It actually also would impact the rental market in a negative way imo. Win win

We rarely if ever stay less than 3 nights.

 

[Brian Noble]

I was more meaning the level of customer service not level of tangible items.

I still have no idea what you mean here. The number of smiles checking in? Vibes? Responsiveness of bell services?

I can’t distinguish my cash stays from those on points. That’s not to say the service level is great. It’s not. Disney is a very mid-tier hotelier, generally a notch below a better business brand e.g. Westin. They are not good at solving problems whether you are on cash or points but at least they are consistent.

Wyndham isn’t a desirable time share to myself or many others.

The point wasn’t “minimums are good, actually.” It was “having minimums does not lead to an upward creep on minimum nights.” The minimums have been 3/2 for the entire time I’ve owned them. There was a brief time wh you could book single orphaned nights but I think that’s no longer true.