DVC Direct Price Increase Coming February 2026

[muppets3d]

I guess I just fundamentally disagree that DVC cares at all about the resale stability of the product.

If they cared why would they make it so Riviera and later resort points can only be used at those resorts once resold? A huge benefit of DVC - the ability to exchange into the wide range of resorts on Disney property - gone. They are adding fees to the resale process. I'm not sure how much further they could go to make DVC resale less appealing. But I am also sure they're working on ways to do just that.

Those Aulani and Riviera contracts they bought could have very well been ROFRed simply to keep them out of the hands of a known commercial renter for all we know.

It sounds good and makes us feel good to think that DVC cares that our points can be sold on the resale market, but honestly I really don't think they care. They are in the business of selling direct points, and other timeshare systems have no problem selling direct contracts even though they have no resale market at all. In fact in many cases, owners that no longer want the timeshare have to either give the contract back to the developer or just stop paying dues and eventually the developer gets the hint and takes it back.

A main hint that DVC pays no attention to resale is you will not find that word anywhere on DVC's website or in any marketing materials for the program.

 

[Girlstar30]

Jellyrolls was a cash machine. Cover charge to pay for pianists--and also contribute to profit. Nearly everyone buying multiple drinks at $15-$20 a pop. I don't think I was ever there when it wasn't packed by 10pm. I totally understand why ESPN and Great River closed down the way. But this one was a head scratcher--unless problems with people over-indulging (which was pretty common) was creating issues elsewhere on property.

People were def drunk at Atlantic Hall, thats why I was surprised Disney had something like that. I didnt think it was an actual nightclub and was surprised when we wandered in. But im glad there's more adult options because we had a lot of fun Made me like boardwalk even more I hope they dont get rid of it.

 

[jcolvin5]

I guess I just fundamentally disagree that DVC cares at all about the resale stability of the product.

I don’t think DVC cares about resale out of goodwill, but I do think they care insofar as resale stability directly supports direct sales.

Resale pricing anchors perceived value. When resale collapses, it becomes harder to justify premium direct pricing without adding friction, incentives, or deeper discounts. DVC has repeatedly acted, through ROFR, restrictions, and selective enforcement, to keep resale from becoming too disconnected from direct, even if they don’t try to maximize it.

Personally, I think they should lean into ROFR more often. Used selectively, it’s a clean, low-risk tool to stabilize pricing, protect optics, and support the direct value proposition without needing heavy-handed policy changes.

So I’m not arguing they want resale to thrive. Just that they don’t want it to break. And I think that’s a meaningful distinction.

 

[airjay75]

I guess I just fundamentally disagree that DVC cares at all about the resale stability of the product.

I don’t think DVC cares about resale out of goodwill, but I do think they care insofar as resale stability directly supports direct sales.

This is an interesting conversation. When we look at other timeshares, clearly, resale value isn't much of a thing. People buy those timeshares realizing any resale value will be slim to nonexistent. With DVC, that has not been the case. There has been a robust resale market, and, even with resale restrictions, there still appears to be a resale market where you can extract some value from your contract.

It almost makes me think that we don't really know how much DVC cares about the resale market and even DVC themselves may not know how much they care about the resale market. RIV/VDH/CFW restrictions were clearly put in place to make direct more attractive. And, by all accounts, I actually think that is succeeding. But, does DVC truly not care about resale value at all? Or, would they worry about whether direct sales would suffer if resale value plummeted to zero or close to it? And, would direct sales actually be harmed if that happened? I don't think we know the answers to these questions because a robust resale market still exists, even for resorts like RIV (albeit, with lower resale prices).

At the end of the day, DVC exists to make money. They don't make money off of resale (setting aside this new $500 resale "admin" fee). I think they care about resale to the extent it affects direct sales. The restrictions to date don't seem to have affected direct sales. But, is there a point at which resale value could affect direct sales and cause DVC to second guess making any further devaluation of resale? Maybe. How conscious is DVC of this? Hard to tell.

 

[Sandisw]

I don’t think DVC cares about resale out of goodwill, but I do think they care insofar as resale stability directly supports direct sales.

Resale pricing anchors perceived value. When resale collapses, it becomes harder to justify premium direct pricing without adding friction, incentives, or deeper discounts. DVC has repeatedly acted, through ROFR, restrictions, and selective enforcement, to keep resale from becoming too disconnected from direct, even if they don’t try to maximize it.

Personally, I think they should lean into ROFR more often. Used selectively, it’s a clean, low-risk tool to stabilize pricing, protect optics, and support the direct value proposition without needing heavy-handed policy changes.

So I’m not arguing they want resale to thrive. Just that they don’t want it to break. And I think that’s a meaningful distinction.

I definitely am not of the belief they care. They ROFR because they have a reason to take those points back.

The enjoy the benefits of a decent resale market because anyone who knows about it when buying sees it as a plus,,

But the majority of direct buyers have no idea it exists and I’d bet a not that most don’t even think about it.

DVC holds resale IMO more because of the parks. As long as those exist, you have buyers for the product.

Even when resale is restricted to only one resort, it will still offer onsite accommodations that will should provide savings over cash.

DVC has worked pretty hard to make resale inferior to direct so they don’t want it seems as the same product.

If they really cared about it, they’d have continued the aggressive ROFR of 2022 that shot prices up.

I mentioned they took my SSR I was selling at $125. Now that resort is getting though in the 90s and even high 80s…

 

[Girlstar30]

I definitely am not of the belief they care. They ROFR because they have a reason to take those points back.

The enjoy the benefits of a decent resale market because anyone who knows about it when buying sees it as a plus,,

But the majority of direct buyers have no idea it exists and I’d bet a not that most don’t even think about it.

DVC holds resale IMO more because of the parks. As long as those exist, you have buyers for the product.

Even when resale is restricted to only one resort, it will still offer onsite accommodations that will should provide savings over cash.

DVC has worked pretty hard to make resale inferior to direct so they don’t want it seems as the same product.

If they really cared about it, they’d have continued the aggressive ROFR of 2022 that shot prices up.

I mentioned they took my SSR I was selling at $125. Now that resort is getting though in the 90s and even high 80s…

I agree that they dont care. If resale was worthless myself, and im sure a lot of people would still buy a direct for blue card benefits and more resale.

Because we're not buying to resell, we're buying to go to Disney and be able to stay at these resorts. The alternative for many would be not going at all and we dont *think* were going to sell. Sure it would be nice to sell down the line and make a profit but with the way things are going I dont expect that. I dont trust the product any less if it wasnt worth more. They're already devaluing year after year.

Look at how many people are buying 2042s and they dont care that it will be worth way less sooner than other contracts and zero in 16 years

 

[airjay75]

I tend to agree with the perspective that Disney does not care about resale value or the resale market. But, the question that enters my mind is this. Let's say tomorrow, the resale vale of all DVC contracts basically plummeted to zero or close to it, regardless of resale restrictions, and similar to other timeshares. Would that hurt direct DVC sales? I honestly don't know, and I suspect Disney is not completely confident in the answer to that question either. And, I think that is precisely the reason why we will continue to see incremental changes to further devalue resale over direct. Better to pluck a chicken one feather at a time than all at once.

 

[DisneyFanSea]

Let's say tomorrow, the resale vale of all DVC contracts basically plummeted to zero or close to it, regardless of resale restrictions, and similar to other timeshares. Would that hurt direct DVC sales?

It would be interesting to know what percentage of direct buyers were even aware of a resale market when they first bought.

Although it must be enough for Disney to put restrictions on resale contracts.

 

[Cfabar1]

I tend to agree with the perspective that Disney does not care about resale value or the resale market. But, the question that enters my mind is this. Let's say tomorrow, the resale vale of all DVC contracts basically plummeted to zero or close to it, regardless of resale restrictions, and similar to other timeshares. Would that hurt direct DVC sales?

I think it would, but likely not as much as we would think...

Better to pluck a chicken one feather at a time than all at once.

I agree... they are playing the long game...

I think a big reason why they are adopting this approach is that resale is so much more visible now than say in 1999...