Effective 2/25/2018, you need at least 75 direct points to qualify for Membership Extras

[ScubaCat]

But not everyone has an in-n-out! They are still regional, kwim?

But it's just a few miles from DL club 33. So if club 33 isn't so great, I was just suggesting a better nearby alternative than McDs.

 

[drjackal31]

Our resale contract closed today, deed not yet listed. I had thought we would possibly do the 25 point add on someday. I talked to my husband and he couldn't care less. I on the other hand am one of the people who is anxious about "missing out". But I think sticking with our resale only will be best.. (need some home repairs too!)

 

[bwvBound]

But it's just a few miles from DL club 33. So if club 33 isn't so great, I was just suggesting a better nearby alternative than McDs.

Ohhhhh, gotcha. Right. Thanks!

 

[kboo]

Our resale contract closed today, deed not yet listed. I had thought we would possibly do the 25 point add on someday. I talked to my husband and he couldn't care less. I on the other hand am one of the people who is anxious about "missing out". But I think sticking with our resale only will be best.. (need some home repairs too!)

This change really only affects people who were in the process of closing, had bought fewer points resale with the plan always of adding on 25 direct, who now may not close in time to add on 25. For the people who planned their resale purchase to buy an additional 25 to get to the points they needed, this change really sucks.

Anyone who bought and closed and had accounts open before they announced the new prices on direct points "should have" been going through this same analysis before prices went up before Jan 17. And really, if you didn't rush to buy then, then that means that the perks weren't worth $3750-$5500. If so, then why even consider buying in with more points for the same perks at an even higher price point? Almost all of the people who bought DVC resale after doing their research on the DIS are really informed buyers. The perks just aren't worth that much if you're a post 4/4/16 owner like me. In some ways Disney is changing the incentives associated with buying direct for the informed buyers; it's not going to affect uninformed buyers who wanted to buy direct "to avoid the hassle" or because they didn't want to own "used points."

I think the silver lining here is that Disney has pretty much all but said that they are not interested in reselling older properties. Which should be good news for anyone in ROFR or hoping to buy resale. They may ROFR the occasional ridiculous contract, but I don't think they will be nearly as active as they may have been in the past. Unless they get someone on a cruise who absolutely wants to buy a huge contract at an old, sold out resort and someone happens to have the bad luck to have the perfect match in ROFR right then.

 

[Irishtripletsmomma]

For what’s it worth, when I called to get 50 as a new customer they told me that the minimum for CCV and AUL was 100. So not sure if they bumped both new and add-ons up or if it was just another misinformed person on the phone. This wasn’t a guide though.

We met with a guide 2 weeks ago and he told us the minimum when buying direct for new members is 100 points as well

 

[Bbguy5]

Got put on a waiting list yesterday for 25 points, OKW Feb UY. Guide called tonight and I paid for them. He did say they were working overtime due to all of the sales.

 

[Irishtripletsmomma]

We will be closing on a resale contract tomorrow or Thursday according to our title company. Does anyone know about membership incentives for someone in California? I know they do one moonlight magic event a year at either Disneyland or California Adventure (not both) and the guide we met with said we would save around $20 on Disneyland annual passes which seems insane. I get that $20 discount when I “renew” each year (I have one of the less expensive California AP). From what I’ve been reading it seems like the discounts on annual passes seems to be much greater in Florida

 

[ScubaCat]

$20 on a new pass is the best they offer for DL. I guess it's better than being kicked in the head...

https://disneyvacationclub.disney.go.com/discounts-perks-offers/ticket-tour/disneyland-pass/

 

[LilyJC]

I get that $20 discount when I “renew” each year (I have one of the less expensive California AP).

Unfortunately they’ve taken away the renewal discount at DLR with the changes implemented this past week. That $20 discount is looking better than nothing... We absolutely loved the Moonlight Magic, but other than that there really aren’t any other DLR incentives.

 

[cmarsh31]

This change really only affects people who were in the process of closing, had bought fewer points resale with the plan always of adding on 25 direct, who now may not close in time to add on 25. For the people who planned their resale purchase to buy an additional 25 to get to the points they needed, this change really sucks.

Anyone who bought and closed and had accounts open before they announced the new prices on direct points "should have" been going through this same analysis before prices went up before Jan 17. And really, if you didn't rush to buy then, then that means that the perks weren't worth $3750-$5500. If so, then why even consider buying in with more points for the same perks at an even higher price point? Almost all of the people who bought DVC resale after doing their research on the DIS are really informed buyers. The perks just aren't worth that much if you're a post 4/4/16 owner like me. In some ways Disney is changing the incentives associated with buying direct for the informed buyers; it's not going to affect uninformed buyers who wanted to buy direct "to avoid the hassle" or because they didn't want to own "used points."

I think the silver lining here is that Disney has pretty much all but said that they are not interested in reselling older properties. Which should be good news for anyone in ROFR or hoping to buy resale. They may ROFR the occasional ridiculous contract, but I don't think they will be nearly as active as they may have been in the past. Unless they get someone on a cruise who absolutely wants to buy a huge contract at an old, sold out resort and someone happens to have the bad luck to have the perfect match in ROFR right then.

We closed before the Jan price increase but decided that the extra $125 wasn't enough to rush into a direct contract and we'd just wait the year we had planned. The change from 25 to 75 was MUCH bigger in terms of $, so we rushed this time. Yes we paid an extra $125 but we also had an extra month to think more rationally about it.

 

[zavandor]

So I am reading this long thread. what is the concensus for us resale people who bought after 11 but before 16? We get the needed discounts and perks I feel. i don't need my points for cruises or to stay in another property hotel. Do I need to start worrinign they might pull everything out from under us and should buy a 25 pt add on? I plan on adding at least 100-120 pts down the road and would like that to be another property to have another 11 mths window for a week stay.

I bought in not long after the first round of restrictions in 2011 and the only real DVC incentive was the annual pass discount, which was useless for me because I was planning to stay once every three years (then, you know, addonitis...).
I'm very happy I've been grandfathered in 2016 and about all the perks I currently can use: food and merchandise discount, platinum plus pass this year, my first moonlight event this September, the Epcot lounge.
But I bought because DVC allows me to stay in deluxe hotels at a reasonable price. Those perks are like the icing on the cake, I would eat the cake even without the icing!
If they'll stop grandfathering me in the future, I'll be sad, but I'll be back to square one, where I was when I bought in.

 

[ziravan]

I bought in after the 2011 restrictions. It was widely understood that those restrictions didn’t really disenfranchise resale buyers because they were poor uses of points anyway.

The 2011 restrictions were a way to create space between resale and direct but at the end of the day, they were little more than talking points.

In fact, I added on Poly direct in 2015, so I have a pool of direct points that I can use for pre-2011 benefits and I stlll never have and probably never will.

I never felt like I wasn’t part of ‘the club’ by buying in after 2011 because I understood the restrictions to be more or less technical and not meant to have a real bite.

 

[ziravan]

The 2016 restrictions were a real bite. I referred to them in the 3rd post here about them as spiteful, and I still feel the same way. (I also outlined buying resale and adding on 25 points in that same post).

I believe that the 2016 restrictions broke the ‘club’. Yes, DVC is a timeshare, but I bought in eyes open knowing it was a timeshare, but also being sold on how “DVC changes how you ‘do Disney’”.

For the first time, DVC created 2nd class citizens in its ownership pool. The Membership addendum went so far as to refer to direct buyers as ‘owners’ and resale buyers as ‘purchasers’.

Spiteful. In my opinion, it’s spiteful precisely because it’s unnecessary. DVC ignores more foot traffic than most timeshares ever see. One of the big advantages I see in DVC is that it set itself apart as more than ‘just another timeshare’. Hell, it’s a club.

‘All timeshares do it’ has never been a convincing argument to me for restrictions. If DVC wants to be like other timeshares, I would prefer they do so by being slightly more aggressive sellers than by destroying the ‘club’ feel to the program. It’s not like they don’t have the foot traffic to do so. Put a sign up at all those booths that say, “Ask me how to get extra fast passes” (attend a presentation). Put an invitation for a free meal/presentation into hotel registration packages or in the literature in the room. Hell, make a better DVC video than the one that’s been looping in the rooms for the last 3 years. DVC had lots of room to be more aggressive with marketing without being ‘in your face’.

As I said in my very public letter to DVC in 2016, “Some of the pixie dust is gone, not because I didn’t believe; because you didn’t. And that makes me sad.”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.la...s-buys-execs-name-web-domain-open-letter/amp/

 

[ziravan]

I view these 2018 restrictions as little more than closing a loophole from 2016.

We’ve been advocating the 25 point add on here from the very beginning.

Many of us, including me, have suggested that it was a loophole that would be closed, probably sooner than later, and there was some urgency to adding on as soon as eligible.

I don’t view the 75 point restriction as a bad deal, in context. It’s just that the 25 point loophole was a very good deal.

DVC has committed itself to using perks to distinguish between resale and direct. I don’t think that they’re going away. In fact, the more they raise prices, the more they’ll have to depend on perks to reel people in.

I expect more and better perks. The perfect perk is one people will want without costing more money. APs is an example. Yes. The discount costs more but is made up by more trips to the parks to spend money. FL residents get a similar discount, for the same reason: encourage potential frequent flyers to fly frequently.

I think another round of restrictions are coming. Whether it’s a tier or not, I think the next round will bring extra FP benefits into play. WDW is now actively playing with FP benefits, and something will have to justify $200/point. FPs are powerful tools (and while there is a limit to quantity, the only real cost to WDW is opportunity cost.)

 

[GlamMistress]

I view these 2018 restrictions as little more than closing a loophole from 2016.

We’ve been advocating the 25 point add on here from the very beginning.

Many of us, including me, have suggested that it was a loophole that would be closed, probably sooner than later, and there was some urgency to adding on as soon as eligible.

DVC has committed itself to using perks to distinguish between resale and direct. I don’t think that they’re going away. In fact, the more they raise prices, the more they’ll have to depend on perks to reel people in.

I expect more and better perks. The perfect perk is one people will want without costing more money. APs is an example. Yes. The discount costs more but is made up by more trips to the parks to spend money. FL residents get a similar discount, for the same reason: encourage potential frequent flyers to fly frequently.

I think another round of restrictions are coming. Whether it’s a tier or not, I think the next round will bring extra FP benefits into play. WDW is now actively playing with FP benefits, and something will have to justify $200/point. FPs are powerful tools (and while there is a limit to quantity, the only real cost to WDW is opportunity cost.)

The "extra restrictions" possibly coming are what really worries me about this. I keep swinging back and forth between direct and resale. The last 3 days, I've driven my husband nuts. He doesn't care one way or the other - he told me to buy what I want. That just made me spiral more. At the end of the day, DVC is about getting rooms cheaper than rack. I'm a frugal person. Buying resale means getting an even better deal on rooms. I refuse to pay $700 rack to stay at Poly for example. To me, that is Four Seasons in Hawaii pricing. So while all the perks sound nice, I just can't make the numbers close on direct. And I sure have been trying to make them close on CCV for the past 72 hours. It's a very hard decision, but we all have to protect our own pocketbooks first, right? The mouse already has tons of my money. Sigh. So many decisions.

 

[SuzGM84]

Got put on a waiting list yesterday for 25 points, OKW Feb UY. Guide called tonight and I paid for them. He did say they were working overtime due to all of the sales.

Congrats! We were put on a WL on Sunday for 25 pts, SSR or BLT Dec UY. Haven't heard a peep from our guide since then....

 

[MrInfinity]

Regarding the "club feel"... Think of it this way. Someone buys into the club by purchasing their points from Disney. The intent of the timeshare concept is that this person is committing to a lifetime of ownership... not use of a timeshare for a few years. So great! They're in the club. Benefits, perks. But, after 5 years this family gets tired of going to Disney World. This is where the timeshare concept should kick in... "but you bought for life!". So go. Find a way. Give the points to your friends, let them enjoy the club for a week. You're in the club, end of story. But no, tired traveler just sells after 5 years.

New family. Buys that, and now with *no new money given to Disney* this new family is now in the club?? They paid half as much, and they are suddenly clubbers for life? They'll use it for 5 years, and sell, to a new family and that family now gets to be in the club? See where I'm going with this? No money is ever reaching Disney on all these after-market exchanges, yet family after family are getting into the club for dirt cheap.

I guess I think that's appropriate that club should be for people who buy from Disney. The whole point of the timeshare concept is that there is a heavy disincentive to sell. Disney wants the family (the one family) to which they sold the points to have to go year after year... not spread the love over 10 families who will all get to use the one purchase. See the difference? 10 families buy from Disney -- 10 families get the club. 1 family buys from Disney but 10 families get the club is not a good timeshare model.

I'm okay with that. It really seems how timeshares should work. If you want to be in the club, just buy from Disney. It's not like you can't. And you don't even have to buy them all. Just buy 75. You're only second class if you don't want to join the club. The changes in 2016 occurred because the internet was spreading resale-fever. Owning a timeshare for life was becoming more like "buy it, and if you don't want it after 5 or 10 years you can sell and recoup most of your spend". The changes were to fix what was original intent (long-term ownership) but the internet was causing an easy path to circumvent.

I guess I'm just a realist about it. That's how timeshares work. You're supposed to own forever, not look at it like a quick in/out discount on rooms with perks.

 

[ziravan]

Regarding the "club feel"... Think of it this way. Someone buys into the club by purchasing their points from Disney. The intent of the timeshare concept is that this person is committing to a lifetime of ownership... not use of a timeshare for a few years. So great! They're in the club. Benefits, perks. But, after 5 years this family gets tired of going to Disney World. This is where the timeshare concept should kick in... "but you bought for life!". So go. Find a way. Give the points to your friends, let them enjoy the club for a week. You're in the club, end of story. But no, tired traveler just sells after 5 years.

New family. Buys that, and now with *no new money given to Disney* this new family is now in the club?? They paid half as much, and they are suddenly clubbers for life? They'll use it for 5 years, and sell, to a new family and that family now gets to be in the club? See where I'm going with this? No money is ever reaching Disney on all these after-market exchanges, yet family after family are getting into the club for dirt cheap.

I guess I think that's appropriate that club should be for people who buy from Disney. The whole point of the timeshare concept is that there is a heavy disincentive to sell. Disney wants the family (the one family) to which they sold the points to have to go year after year... not spread the love over 10 families who will all get to use the one purchase. See the difference? 10 families buy from Disney -- 10 families get the club. 1 family buys from Disney but 10 families get the club is not a good timeshare model.

I'm okay with that. It really seems how timeshares should work. If you want to be in the club, just buy from Disney. It's not like you can't. And you don't even have to buy them all. Just buy 75. You're only second class if you don't want to join the club. The changes in 2016 occurred because the internet was spreading resale-fever. Owning a timeshare for life was becoming more like "buy it, and if you don't want it after 5 or 10 years you can sell and recoup most of your spend". The changes were to fix what was original intent (long-term ownership) but the internet was causing an easy path to circumvent.

If I’m a developer that builds a subdivision, it needs perks like a playground, pool, and clubhouse to sell well.

It shouldn’t matter to the developer how often the homes are sold and resold. That’s true even if he has other subdivisions to sell.

The developer got all the money he should reasonably expect from the first sale (and believe me, as manager of the program, DVC continues to make a ton of money from current owners, whether they’re the original owners or not).

Now, as it applies to Disney. Every family tired of WDW that sells to a family invigorated to go recharges the spending potential of that member across the WDW spectrum. If DVC is too silo’d to realize that, then that’s its own problem.

Take me, for example. DVC didn’t make any money from my 2014 BCV resale. But WDW darn should did. And then. Then. Based on my experience with DVC - me, as a dirty resale buyer - I bought a 168 point Poly direct contract. Imagine that?!

 

[Matty B13]

Regarding the "club feel"... Think of it this way. Someone buys into the club by purchasing their points from Disney. The intent of the timeshare concept is that this person is committing to a lifetime of ownership... not use of a timeshare for a few years. So great! They're in the club. Benefits, perks. But, after 5 years this family gets tired of going to Disney World. This is where the timeshare concept should kick in... "but you bought for life!". So go. Find a way. Give the points to your friends, let them enjoy the club for a week. You're in the club, end of story. But no, tired traveler just sells after 5 years.

New family. Buys that, and now with *no new money given to Disney* this new family is now in the club?? They paid half as much, and they are suddenly clubbers for life? They'll use it for 5 years, and sell, to a new family and that family now gets to be in the club? See where I'm going with this? No money is ever reaching Disney on all these after-market exchanges, yet family after family are getting into the club for dirt cheap.

I guess I think that's appropriate that club should be for people who buy from Disney. The whole point of the timeshare concept is that there is a heavy disincentive to sell. Disney wants the family (the one family) to which they sold the points to have to go year after year... not spread the love over 10 families who will all get to use the one purchase. See the difference? 10 families buy from Disney -- 10 families get the club. 1 family buys from Disney but 10 families get the club is not a good timeshare model.

I'm okay with that. It really seems how timeshares should work. If you want to be in the club, just buy from Disney. It's not like you can't. And you don't even have to buy them all. Just buy 75. You're only second class if you don't want to join the club. The changes in 2016 occurred because the internet was spreading resale-fever. Owning a timeshare for life was becoming more like "buy it, and if you don't want it after 5 or 10 years you can sell and recoup most of your spend". The changes were to fix what was original intent (long-term ownership) but the internet was causing an easy path to circumvent.

The problem with this is, if the "one" family decides not to pay their MF and then partially pays them and drags this on for a few years, the club is penalized by having to cover their MF's on the "one" family. With resale the MF's are always covered by "new" owners. So I would think that DVD would want a healthy resale market compared to the "other" timeshares out their that are pennys on the dollars on the resale markets. Also, this allows DVD to drive the price up of direct points, because "hey, you can always sell it resale" and get some of your money back.

Changing "perks" every year will start to wear thin on prospective buyers both resale and direct.

 

[Bing Showei]

I guess I think that's appropriate that club should be for people who buy from Disney. The whole point of the timeshare concept is that there is a heavy disincentive to sell. Disney wants the family (the one family) to which they sold the points to have to go year after year... not spread the love over 10 families who will all get to use the one purchase. See the difference? 10 families buy from Disney -- 10 families get the club. 1 family buys from Disney but 10 families get the club is not a good timeshare model.

You make it sound like 10 families are enjoying the same "club" benefits for 50 years. The membership is for 18,250 days worth of "club benefits" whether those benefits are spread between one or 18,250 families shouldn't matter at all to DVD.

You also make it sound like those resale families are freeloaders. Each of those families pays the same exact MFs that the original pay. In fact, if you bought in at the start of DVC, inflation not withstanding, resale purchasers of your points are probably paying more to be "members" of the club than you ever did. DVD just doesn't see that money.

So if your argument is on behalf of DVD, and how DVD should be allowed to see more of that money, then you are arguing against the very fundamental value that every direct owner should expect when buying into a system with a strong resale component.