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

[MrInfinity]

@ziravan ... Difference is the builder walks away from the property. Timeshares are different.
I don't agree with the notion that "they should want a healthy resale market". "They" don't. Buyers do. Sellers do. But a timeshare developer wants the one family to have to go to Disney long after the Disney-fever that made them buy in wears off. That's what "they" want. They do not want a liquid resale market. It exists with Disney because unlike most other timeshares which I couldn't care less about getting like a hotel on some beach I don't care about... Disney timeshares are Disney. Thus they develop their own resale market because there is demand for it. There is no demand for other timeshares so their value falls to 0.

@Matty B13 ... It is not a good selling tactic to say "hey you can always sell". That is an internet thing and prevails out here. The goal of a timeshare is that it's so awesome you'll love the ownership and want to go for life. You're not simply hedging a couple near-term trips at a discount on the anticipation that you'll be able to sell in 5 years when it's assumed you won't want it any more.

@Bing Showei ... You're looking at it like you've bought 50 years of club and that's sellable. Only the property interest is sellable. The Membership Benefits were offered to you and only you as a perk for buying. That didn't need enforcing before the internet made easy paths to buy and sell, thus we're seeing the amendments which are really just being done to enforce standard timeshare intent.

Didn't say they're freeloaders. I'm saying that Disney offered one family some perks as an incentive to buy their timeshare. They're not offering that perk to some other guy who's buying your points from you. Come buy the points here! At Disney. We'll offer you the same perks. That's the whole point. Incentivize direct sales.

Really... a liquid timeshare is not a goal of a developer. Many people above said DVC... Is... a... Timeshare... And that should be taken to heart. You don't own the perks, you can't sell the perks. If you want the direct sales incentive perks, then buy direct points.

 

[Mia Kylie and Co]

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'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.

Dirt Cheap?

 

[MrInfinity]

Dirt Cheap?

Sure. We paid about half-price for our BLT. I think of that as dirt cheap. Prices are trending up now tho...

 

[Crusader10hky]

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.

It's not like 1 person bought direct, and then snuck in 10 of his friends to take up extra space. 1+1-1=1 Why would you care if a complete stranger is replaced by a complete stranger?

 

[Bing Showei]

@ziravan ... Difference is the builder walks away from the property. Timeshares are different.
I don't agree with the notion that "they should want a healthy resale market". "They" don't. Buyers do. Sellers do. But a timeshare developer wants the one family to have to go to Disney long after the Disney-fever that made them buy in wears off. That's what "they" want. They do not want a liquid resale market. It exists with Disney because unlike most other timeshares which I couldn't care less about getting like a hotel on some beach I don't care about... Disney timeshares are Disney. Thus they develop their own resale market because there is demand for it. There is no demand for other timeshares so their value falls to 0.

@Matty B13 ... It is not a good selling tactic to say "hey you can always sell". That is an internet thing and prevails out here. The goal of a timeshare is that it's so awesome you'll love the ownership and want to go for life. You're not simply hedging a couple near-term trips at a discount on the anticipation that you'll be able to sell in 5 years when it's assumed you won't want it any more.

@Bing Showei ... You're looking at it like you've bought 50 years of club and that's sellable. Only the property interest is sellable. The Membership Benefits were offered to you and only you as a perk for buying. That didn't need enforcing before the internet made easy paths to buy and sell, thus we're seeing the amendments which are really just being done to enforce standard timeshare intent.

Didn't say they're freeloaders. I'm saying that Disney offered one family some perks as an incentive to buy their timeshare. They're not offering that perk to some other guy who's buying your points from you. Come buy the points here! At Disney. We'll offer you the same perks. That's the whole point. Incentivize direct sales.

Really... a liquid timeshare is not a goal of a developer. It just isn't. Many people above said DVC... Is... a... Timeshare... And that should be remembered at all times. The goal is to get the buyer to go long after they want to by having them sink in lots of money up front. Don't convince yourself that "Disney timeshares" should be some liquid, easy to use for a year thing that you can just pass on to the next owner.

Either you've never been to a direct sales tour with a guide, or you are very generously dismissing the sales tactics and position of DVD as it relates to it's Vacation Club.

My guide went as far as to say, "I have a cousin who ended up not wanting to do this anymore and since he broke even in five years, he was able to sell back the contract for no loss. Because prices are a little higher now, you will break even in 6 to 7 years."

This is clearly a direct contradiction to what you're suggesting, that Disney wants you to be locked in to 50 years. If anything, guides play DOWN the fact that you're locked into 50 years. Time and again, a lot of long time DVCers will talk about the evolution of their points usage, going from park warrior to relaxing at the resorts.

For research purposes, I JUST called DVD about booking a tour to learn more about DVC. The conversation goes as follows.

Me: So we're interested in taking a tour, but the biggest hurdle I'm going to face is that my wife is worried about such a long commitment.
Guide: Well, it is a deeded interest, so if any point you decide this doesn't work, you can sell it.
Me: Oh! Disney will buy back my contract?
Guide: We have something called Right of Refusal, so you'd have to find a seller yourself.
Me: Oh interesting. Would I lose any money?
Guide: I have no idea. You'd have to do your own research on the internet to find out what's happening out there.

The guide DIRECTED ME to find out about the thriving resale market. So I'm not buying for a second that DVD doesn't leverage the resale market to further it's own direct sales. The idea of breaking even and getting out whenever you want is built into the sales pitch. To ignore this seems disingenuous.

 

[MrInfinity]

It's not like 1 person bought direct, and then snuck in 10 of his friends to take up extra space. 1+1-1=1 Why would you care if a complete stranger is replaced by a complete stranger?

Because the timeshare developer sold to complete stranger 1 to force (encourage?) complete stranger 1 to go to Disney for 50 years. If compete stranger 2 wants to go, Disney would rather complete stranger 2 buy from them, so that now stranger 2 is going and stranger 1 is still locked into going. If stranger 2 is going to circumvent buying by buying stranger 1's ownership, Disney will say "ok, but the perks we offered to stranger 1 are his... if he sells, those do not extend to you. If you want the perks, come buy from us, thus leaving stranger 1 still locked in." This is basic Timeshare stuff. That's the whole point. To make stranger 1 keep going. Even in down times. Even when kids move out.

 

[disneynutz]

DVD as a timeshare has something that most others do not. While DVD makes money on the original sale or on reselling points taken via ROFR or foreclosure either directly or through one of their resale partners, DVC owners will be spending money at WDW or DL. Disney now has a dedicated guest base and income for life. That income can add up to hundreds of dollars per contract for admission, food, and extras.

Bill

 

[Mia Kylie and Co]

Sure. We paid about half-price for our BLT. I think of that as dirt cheap. Prices are trending up now tho...

Right. But I guess to me it's being a smart consumer with my money. We buy our cars "used". They are good cars with a extended warranty. We will get many many years out of these cars. The price we paid for our New "used" cars were much cheaper than if we bought brand new. With the way DVC direct prices have increased it doesn't make financial sense for many to buy direct. And I know my car analogy doesn't fully translate to DVC. And while I know DVC is a Timeshare. It is a very unique timeshare with the expectation (pretty much) that you will not only travel and stay at your timeshare, but you will go to the parks, eat at their restaurants, buy their merchandise ....

 

[Crusader10hky]

I got a call from DVC yesterday at about 6:35 PM CST that my name had come up on the wait-list. I thanked them for following through, but I told them that I know after weighing the benefits I just wasn't sold on it yet. I told him in a week I might irrationally change my mind, but that I know there are a whole lot of people that are anxiously awaiting this phone call and it wouldn't be fair to hold them up.

So to whoever received a call from Bill at 6:40PM CST, You're Welcome!



I've made my peace with not buying direct, especially until we see how this all shakes out. I just got a sick feeling about stretching for a 25pt contract in the wrong use year to a resort that did not inspire me. In 7 years they may completely change the system again just look at the last 7 years. And that's fine if they do, but we all have a tendency to go 'just a little further' down the path that we're led, even if we should be comfortable where we are.

I had a friend remind me about the potential Star Wars resort etc. It got me thinking that maybe there will be something down the road that makes me actually want more points and a new resort and the money I spent on this contract that I wasn't crazy about could have been better spent.

That said, as a Father with a wife and 2 daughters, the Force doesn't get much support around here. Now if they take that level of immersion to a Pink Princess Unicorn Glitter Castle Resort, we're sold.

 

[CraigInPA]

DVD as a timeshare has something that most others do not. While DVD makes money on the original sale or on reselling points taken via ROFR or foreclosure either directly or through one of their resale partners, DVC owners will be spending money at WDW or DL. Disney now has a dedicated guest base and income for life. That income can add up to hundreds of dollars per contract for admission, food, and extras.

Hundreds? My wife and I count the figure spent on admission, food, and extras in the thousands of dollars per year... However, while that money goes to Disney, it doesn't trickle down to DVD, who is paying for perks out of its marketing budget. It's not DVC, to whom we pay maintenance fees, that is paying for the perks. So, DVD has every right to decide who gets those perks. That they keep grandfathering older contracts to get these perks is astounding to me.

 

[kboo]

....

That said, as a Father with a wife and 2 daughters, the Force doesn't get much support around here. Now if they take that level of immersion to a Pink Princess Unicorn Glitter Castle Resort, we're sold.

I actually *hid* a Disney princess doll set that my DD1 got for her 2nd birthday, that's how hard I was fighting the princess thing. With DD2, forget it, she is all into her older sister's princess stuff. We are in it to win it, for at least another 10+ years. I've given up. We are total Disney frequent fliers. And if there was ever a Pink Princess Unicorn Glitter Castle Resort built, we would join you on the list of charter members.

@Mia Kylie and Co, of the 6 cars DH and I have owned in the last 30 years, only our very first cars have been new. The rest we buy used and drive until they have well over 100k miles and fall apart. I have no problem owning "used" DVC. I can go out and buy my own custom floor mats and racing stripes, and put my new owner's manual into a fancy leatherette sleeve.

 

[kniquy]

But I think sticking with our resale only will be best.. (need some home repairs too!)

I think you are wise. I think many are frantically buying because they must be included in the minimal perks that they offer, but if they actually look at the financial requirement it is putting on them -- up front cost and extra in yearly MF's -- what are they really saving?

Edit to add: When we bought resale in 2015 i didn't even research or consider the "perks" we planned and were more focused on what it would cost to stay at these deluxe resorts compared to our buy in and MF =knew it was a win to ultimately save money on the room portion of our stay. Maybe that was just poor research on my part or that i was focused on the actual product that i was buying. I really focused on what resort we wanted, what we could afford and how we could get the most points out of our money.

 

[Crusader10hky]

Because the timeshare developer sold to complete stranger 1 to force (encourage?) complete stranger 1 to go to Disney for 50 years. If compete stranger 2 wants to go, Disney would rather complete stranger 2 buy from them, so that now stranger 2 is going and stranger 1 is still locked into going. If stranger 2 is going to circumvent buying by buying stranger 1's ownership, Disney will say "ok, but the perks we offered to stranger 1 are his... if he sells, those do not extend to you. If you want the perks, come buy from us, thus leaving stranger 1 still locked in." This is basic Timeshare stuff. That's the whole point. To make stranger 1 keep going. Even in down times. Even when kids move out.

I can see your point on this. And from Disney's perspective, that is absolutely the ideal situation. When I read your post, I took as that was your opinion as a Direct Purchaser (which you are of course entitled to) and I just don't see why someone would feel so strongly about defending the Disney's cashflow, or why one DVC member would care whether or not another DVC member received the same benefit. When I show up for my first BLT stay this year following my initial resale purchase, I don't intend to wear a Scarlet 'R' around my neck. At the same time, I'm truly ok with not receiving the incidental benefits because I knew the rules before I signed up.

Even if the benefits did transfer to resale purchasers, I don't see how that diminishes your 'club feel'.

Also, if someone buys a timeshare on a random beach, they still have the right to resell it as well. The resale value may not be there for them, but they can still sell it. Part of the DVC sales pitch is that it holds its value better than your average timeshare, thus justifying the higher cost.

 

[brent02139]

I just broke down and called DVD to start the paperwork. I was going to watch the resales(our next trip is 2020), buy a small contract, then add 25 points later. But this change and the small savings from resell (because it's a small contract) didn't make sense for me to go resale any more. I guess their tactic worked on me.

 

[Crusader10hky]

I just broke down and called DVD to start the paperwork. I was going to watch the resales(our next trip is 2020), buy a small contract, then add 25 points later. But this change and the small savings from resell (because it's a small contract) didn't make sense for me to go resale any more. I guess their tactic worked on me.

They definitely changed the playing field in their favor. It changes the equation and the value of entering via the resale market is lower on the lower point contracts. There is nothing wrong with that. If I were you I wouldn't feel bad that their change encouraged you to buy the shiny new points, as long as you can afford it. Congrats!

I'm bummed that this happened so soon after I put my plan in motion and purchased resale, but honestly the number of points I needed would not have changed. If I had to all of a sudden replace 50 of my resale points with 50 direct points in my initial figures, I probably would have held off for a few years to save more. I'm almost glad I took the plunge before the change or I may have talked myself out of it.

But that line on a chart where buying resale vs direct just went higher.

 

[SuzGM84]

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....

Updated - got our 25 SSR pts, Dec UY. Guide emailed us and I called her right back. Very thankful to have gotten in under the wire. The add-on was an eventual plan for DH and I, either later this year or next - just came a little earlier than anticipated.

 

[Ben E N]

Updated - got our 25 SSR pts, Dec UY. Guide emailed us and I called her right back. Very thankful to have gotten in under the wire. The add-on was an eventual plan for DH and I, either later this year or next - just came a little earlier than anticipated.

I'm glad to hear that so many guides are working hard to get people their points quickly. I was almost certain that Disney would intentionally drag their feet in order to force more people to buy after the 2/25 deadline.
Their helpfulness in getting people these points, and benefits, also makes me feel like the grandfathering will most likely stay. They seem to want to take care of "their own", even though these people initially bought via resale. We will have to see in the long run, though.

 

[disneynutz]

DVD as a timeshare has something that most others do not. While DVD makes money on the original sale or on reselling points taken via ROFR or foreclosure either directly or through one of their resale partners, DVC owners will be spending money at WDW or DL. Disney now has a dedicated guest base and income for life. That income can add up to hundreds of thousands of dollars per contract for admission, food, and extras.

Bill

 

[jarestel]

I've mentioned this before in other threads, but once a direct purchaser signs on the dotted line that particular purchaser has no more value to DVD/DVC than a resale purchaser. DVD has the money so going forward, unless the purchaser buys additional direct points, they are of no further benefit to DVD. Given that, it's almost impossible to imagine that "tiered" membership in "the club" won't become a reality at some point based on direct points ownership levels. Figuring out a way to leverage and monetize the largest customer component within DVC (direct points purchasers) by selling something more or less intangible like the perks that promote a feeling of exclusivity opens up some nice future revenue streams. Of course, make sure to pay attention to the "don't buy a real interest in DVC based on membership extras which may go away at any time, blah, blah, blah" which will no doubt remain a standard inclusion in all contracts.

Sorry all, feeling cynical today following a weekend of Disney price increases and policy changes!

 

[MrInfinity]

I can see your point on this. And from Disney's perspective, that is absolutely the ideal situation. When I read your post, I took as that was your opinion as a Direct Purchaser

I'm happy with my small-direct, most-resale purchase. And I'm glad they keep grandfathering folks in. But they really have to. When I bought direct, I signed up for membership extras. As long as membership extras are there, I am grandfathered in. Others have posited that they could cancel membership extras and create membership bonuses (or whatever) which in theory might be possible, but would not make business sense. There is no goal to take benefits away or punish owners... the membership extras are there to incentivize new direct sales.

I just don't see why someone would feel so strongly about defending the Disney's cashflow, or why one DVC member would care whether or not another DVC member received the same benefit.

Well, I'm a DVC member. I like seeing DVC grow. I tell all my friends about it and really don't have much negative to say about it (I could think of a few tiny things, but not much!). Ultimately rising prices and making perks more exclusive is good for us. By making the perks more exclusive or expensive, they will be better perks. And I don't mind when Disney makes money. That makes the world go 'round. So they want to fix the handling of perks to leverage them to incent new direct purchases. I don't have a problem with that. Should I?

And I don't think I made the case that I care who gets one perk vs another. All I've said is that I think it's reasonable for them to leverage their membership extras to drive direct sales. This is not an intrinsic perk, as in get in however you can and you're automatically entitled to this stuff... This is "buy from us at full retail prices and we'll give you this...". I think that's normal. Or, "Oh you're thinking about 50 points. Well you know, if you upgrade to 75.....". That's going to be huge. Every off the street buyer who might have bought 50 will see value in pushing the next level. This is the main driver behind this change. (IMO)

When I show up for my first BLT stay this year following my initial resale purchase, I don't intend to wear a Scarlet 'R' around my neck. At the same time, I'm truly ok with not receiving the incidental benefits because I knew the rules before I signed up.

We're BLT too. And love it. Enjoy!!