Just spoke to Marriott rep., do you think Disney would ever do this?

[JBx3]

I oftened wondered if buying resale Disney would ever NOT be recognized the same as purchasing direct.

Here is what a Marriott rep. just said......with Marriottt converting to a disney like point system, all resales of Marriott will most likely be limited to booking ressies 2 months out. When buying direct from Marriott is will be 12 mos. out for 7 mights stays and 10 months out for less than seven nights.

We are looking to buy Disney resale, our first contract with Disney was direct.

My question? Would Disney ever attempt to limit all of the resales from booking in advance of all their direct contracts?

My second question? Was this another Marriott direct pitch or do you think their is validity behind their comment?

 

[bookwormde]

This whould move the resale value from 20-30% down to allmost 0, you can bet the attornies are the only ones who will come out in the end.

bookwormde

 

[JBx3]

Yes, you got that right. I am not sure if her intentions were meant for all resales going forward or ones in the system already prior to the point conversion.

I want to do my first Disney resale contract but this one got my nerves moving.

When doing a resale disney, does that contract go to disney, meaning, are the contracts from disney or is it different like a third party contract?

 

[CarnotaurDad]

Won't happen. Wouldn't give it a second thought. For all of Disney's faults, they know better in this regard. The "Right of First Refusal" already guarantees a floor for purchases, which is something that Marriott does not have.

 

[ACDSNY]

I doubt it would ever happen as too many DVC memberships are a combination of points bought resale and direct.

 

[disneynutz]

I look at todays Disney in a different light. If a change makes Disney money, they will probably do it.

Bill

 

[ChiSoxKeith]

But right now, if you buy resale at the same resort and same use year, the points aren't seperate. They're one in the same. Disney would have to go back through their records and try and cull who bought resale and who bought direct. It would be a logistical nightmare.

 

[ssawka]

I look at todays Disney in a different light. If a change makes Disney money, they will probably do it.

Bill

Yes, disneynutz, this is true, but I think this policy would actually result in Disney making less money rather than more. I think first time buyers would be less likely to buy if they didn't think they could sell it down the road. (i.e. It becomes a riskier financial decision) The other thing is that although Disney makes a ton of money off of selling DVC points, I think their main motivation is to build resorts and have the "owners" pay to maintain them and then have all those owners/renters available as park guests.

 

[JBx3]

I tend to agree with all of you but again, disneynutz has a valid point on the money issue!

Perhaps Marriott rep. comment is a pitch to buy direct vs. resale or I would think that when they set a date to convert to a points system, they could separate and track by datye all future resales and perhaps limit booking time frames that way?

 

[CMOORE185]

But right now, if you buy resale at the same resort and same use year, the points aren't seperate. They're one in the same. Disney would have to go back through their records and try and cull who bought resale and who bought direct. It would be a logistical nightmare.

This is not true. They are under the same member ID number but each one has a different contract number.

 

[JCerniglow]

The information provided to you by the Marriott rep is blatently false. We own both Marriott and disney. Bought both direct. The new marriott system does not discriminate against resales except to charge them more to enter the new points program. Some sales people will say anything to get a sale.

 

[disneynutz]

But right now, if you buy resale at the same resort and same use year, the points aren't seperate. They're one in the same. Disney would have to go back through their records and try and cull who bought resale and who bought direct. It would be a logistical nightmare.

Disney knows who bought what, when, and for how much. The Guides use a program that keeps info on members and prospective members. DVC Accounting also has the information.

Bill

 

[JimMIA]

I think some timeshare systems already have major differences between owners who bought direct vs. resale. Maybe one of the real timeshare experts can tell us.

But I don't see Disney doing that, especially in this economic environment. They are having trouble selling the inventory they have, and such a move would only add uncertainty for prospective customers and make sales more difficult.

I think the same is true for the question about whether Disney could limit us to staying only in our home resorts. Could they really do that? Yes. Would it make any sense for them? NO. The ability to use our points at any DVC resort is a very important sales point for DVC, and without that benefit the program would be far less valuable to prospective buyers.

I agree with Bill that Disney will do whatever puts money in their pocket, but I think those kinds of changes would take money OUT of their pocket.

 

[JimMIA]

The "Right of First Refusal" already guarantees a floor for purchases, which is something that Marriott does not have.

The only thing ROFR guarantees is that Disney has the option to buy contracts they think are underpriced. ROFR guarantees absolutely NOTHING to owners.

If you look at some of the ROFR information threads you will see that resale prices have decreased substantially over the last year or two...with Disney doing very little to prop prices up.

 

[culli]

Won't happen. Wouldn't give it a second thought. For all of Disney's faults, they know better in this regard. The "Right of First Refusal" already guarantees a floor for purchases, which is something that Marriott does not have.

Most Marriotts do have ROFR. I can't see how Disney could easily do this as they can't change iltems that are in the deed. Some things they could easily do is stuff like Wyndham VIP program. Wyndham is an example of a company that would try to hose the resale over Disney. One thing to keep in mind once the resorts are sold the TS companies need MFs. Resale does play a role for the TS companies as it helps ensure they are getting MFs. Yes it may hurt selling new propoerites but Wyn is another perfect example. You can buy a $30k TS on ebay for $1 and some even have free closing and transfer. Crazy yes but people buy from the developer every day instead of resale. Think about how you feel if you just bought 300pts of BLT in the 30k range to find out that if you tried to resell it it would be worth about $500? But happens every day with Wyndham. Marriott has seen there prices drop signifcantly as they have not been as agressive on their ROFR. Also remember everything a company buys via ROFR they are not getting MFs in the system.

Keep in mind resale is very less known, we represent a very small percentage of owners. Plus people don't believe in resale they think something has to be wrong.

 

[disneynutz]

Yes, disneynutz, this is true, but I think this policy would actually result in Disney making less money rather than more. I think first time buyers would be less likely to buy if they didn't think they could sell it down the road. (i.e. It becomes a riskier financial decision) The other thing is that although Disney makes a ton of money off of selling DVC points, I think their main motivation is to build resorts and have the "owners" pay to maintain them and then have all those owners/renters available as park guests.

I think that if Disney sold mouse poop, people would buy it. 99% of the people buying into the DVC have no idea what they are buying or what the rules and policies are. Most don't know anything about resale or how much the resale prices have fallen.

Even with the disappointing info about BLT, people post on the DIS almost daily how excited they are because they just bought there direct. Most don't think about down the road or how much money that they will spend every year at Disney.

You are correct about Disney making a ton of money from selling points and gaining a locked in owner who will spend money every year at Disney. Once points are sold, they are attached to a money spender for life. If not you, then the person who you sell your points to.

That is why Disney doesn't take the time or effort to improve the DVC, they don't have to. Does anyone really think that it take years to fix the member website or to add online features, it's a big game. Inch forward so you can show some progress to the membership, but don't spend very much money or time doing it.

The DVC has been so profitable, the last couple of years, it has saved Disney's Parks and Resorts balance sheet. As more finance people get moved into key management positions at DVD/Disney, the problems for members are getting worse.

If this trend continues, we will be selling 24 of our 26 contracts.

Bill

 

[JBx3]

I think some timeshare systems already have major differences between owners who bought direct vs. resale. Maybe one of the real timeshare experts can tell us.

But I don't see Disney doing that, especially in this economic environment. They are having trouble selling the inventory they have, and such a move would only add uncertainty for prospective customers and make sales more difficult.

I think the same is true for the question about whether Disney could limit us to staying only in our home resorts. Could they really do that? Yes. Would it make any sense for them? NO. The ability to use our points at any DVC resort is a very important sales point for DVC, and without that benefit the program would be far less valuable to prospective buyers.

I agree with Bill that Disney will do whatever puts money in their pocket, but I think those kinds of changes would take money OUT of their pocket.

I agree with JimMIA and disneynuts, that if they could make money treating resale and direct separately they would but I also agree it makes no sense at all. Lets hope they keep their heads straight, I am ready for my first Disney resale offer!

 

[chalee94]

The new marriott system does not discriminate against resales except to charge them more to enter the new points program.

actually, resales that close after june 20, 2010 cannot be converted to the points program if the previous owner was not a points member...so that will likely drive the value down for resellers who have not converted to the points program.

edited to add: i haven't seen anything on TUG about the 2 month limitation on resales either, though.

The only thing ROFR guarantees is that Disney has the option to buy contracts they think are underpriced. ROFR guarantees absolutely NOTHING to owners.

If you look at some of the ROFR information threads you will see that resale prices have decreased substantially over the last year or two...with Disney doing very little to prop prices up.

i agree.

it drives me crazy to see people suggest that disney will take the hit if supply and demand drive down the value of DVC contracts.

ROFR just means disney can scoop up cheap contracts to the extent they think they can resell them at a profit. the market - supply and demand - determines resale prices. if the market starts collapsing, DVC has little incentive (or ability) to try to "prop up" resale prices.

 

[drusba]

I have been going through my mind how legally DVD could possibly make resale purchasers have shorter and different booking periods than original purchasers and I have yet to come up with a way DVD could do it. They reserve the right to change the booking windows so that resort owners could have only a one-month advantage but they have not reserved any right that they could have different booking periods depending on how you bought into DVC.

People assume, and I often hear it on these boards, that DVD can just do anything it wants. No it cannot. There are many things it cannot change either because things are considered material rights of ownership or because it reserved no right to do so in the documents that were provided as part of every purchase. Each original purchaser from Disney has a contract that includes whatever the offical documents said at the time and all of those heretofore have expressed that each owner will have the same home resort and other resort reservation periods (again they can change the number of months out for reserving but it must apply equally to all owners).

When an owner sells, he sells the same rights he had and the purchaser gains all the same rights under the documents given to the original purchaser. Absent from those documents is the reservation of any discretionary right to make resale purchasers have shorter reservation periods. If DVD were to try to do it, that would be a material change to the ownership rights of any exisiting member and it would require a vote of the actual members (not DVD voting for the members) to make such a change.

The only possible way Disney could make such a change, assuming it can legally do it at all, is for a new resort. For example, it could attempt to put into the public offering documents and contracts for Aulani before it starts to sell that it reserves the right to provide for different booking periods for purchasers from orginal Aulani owners who buy from Disney. That way the new purchaser from Disney would be agreeing to that fundamental restriction that affects his ability to sell when he purchases.


Marriotts switching to a points system has its own legality issues. It of course did not have booking agreements before because set weeks do not require any. It is offering to existing owners a right to switch to a new system and when doing so it can set restrictions it wants which the exisiting owner would be agreeing to as part of the switch. They are trying to avoid any legal issues by making it all the owners choice via a new contract why theorectically not affecting ownership interests of set week owners who choose not to change, i.e., they will still have their set week.

 

[ssawka]

That is why Disney doesn't take the time or effort to improve the DVC, they don't have to. Does anyone really think that it take years to fix the member website or to add online features, it's a big game. Inch forward so you can show some progress to the membership, but don't spend very much money or time doing it.

Not to change the topic of the thread, but ITA on the website. If it's not revenue generating forget it. Basically, Disney already has your $ by the time you ever log into the members site. I'm in the IT field, and I've worked for many companies that made their $ building sites for others, but their internal IT systems were pathetic. If the customers ever saw the internal systems, they probably wouldn't hire any of those firms.