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

[Maistre Gracey]

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.

I'm far from a legal guru, but I always thought DVC reserved the right to change anything in the POS if they believed it was in the Club's best interest?

I thought that's how they did the new booking policy..??

MG

 

[drusba]

I'm far from a legal guru, but I always thought DVC reserved the right to change anything in the POS if they believed it was in the Club's best interest?

I thought that's how they did the new booking policy..??

MG

Not correct, they reserve on many things not others or on soime things have limited reservations. There is no general provison that allows them to change anything and everything, it just depends on the particular provisions involved and reservations they made as to them and they cannot change anything that would be considered a material right of ownership. They can change booking periods, e.g., 11 months could be 3 and 7 months could be 2 and switching from booking 11 months out from date of departure to booking up to seven nights 11 months out from date arrival is the kind of change they can make . But they cannot make a change that would give resale purchasers less time to reserve than purchasers from Disney because that would affect a material right of ownership of the existing owners.

 

[wdrl]

I'm far from a legal guru, but I always thought DVC reserved the right to change anything in the POS if they believed it was in the Club's best interest?

I thought that's how they did the new booking policy..??

MG

There are things that are specifically spelled out in the Master Declaration of Condominium, and those things can change only if permitted by that same document. For example, if a MDC permits a point reallocation of up to 20% a year, then Disney cannot arbitrarily change that requirement to 35%. Was the original booking policy specifically spelled out in the MDC? Or did it just say that Disney had the right and obligation to establish a booking process?

 

[JBx3]

i feel a bit relieved that educated DVC'ers have responded with answers that I believe are valid and after reading these, my guess is the Marriottt rep. could only have said something like this based on 2 scenarios.

1. a comment that gets you to come back to a direct buy vs. resales

or

2. perhaps something not elaborated on yet is the possibilty that FUTURE resales to resales may contain a different agreement or contract?

My guesstimate right now on the Marriott rep. comment leans to #1 above. As one previous poster stated and this seems to be confirmed is if you are a Marriott owner and choose not to convert to points, when you do sell, the new buyer has NO OPTION to convert to points, basically you buy resale as is!

I do hope Disney keeps their heads above this. It is almost certain that id current MVC holders do not convert to point system offerred, their resale values must diminish.

Drusba and others, i appreciate your thought process on this.

 

[bookwormde]

There are a few declaerations that under FL timeshare law they can not change, but the vast majority can be changed if it is the "best interests fo the majority of owners". POS is just a snapshot of the rules at one mement and are broadly subject to change.

bookwormde

 

[ktmmt]

Remember, DVC goes to disney more then non DVC members. when we go, we also buy passes, food plan etc. Marriott is not make money like disney once the customer is on-site.

 

[spiceycat]

as 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.

you are forgetting their other resorts. If you can buy OKW, SSR at say 10% for the price that the current owner paid - why would you ever stay (except using these points) at the moderate or value resorts.

if you include BLT, BCV, BWV, VWL - then why stay at the deluxe.

Disney not only needs DVC resales up - but needs to make sure that no one can stay on property for less. which is why they RoFR in the first place.

DVC is not alone product like the Marriot timeshares it is part of WDW - as along as WDW stays popular - won't work about DVC.

so far SSR is the only one that is selling resale at less than people brought in at. oh forgot HH and VB - but since they are not on WDW property - they don't count. It has to be DVC on WDW property.

 

[chalee94]

DVC is not alone product like the Marriot timeshares it is part of WDW - as along as WDW stays popular - won't work about DVC.

this is true...but it's part of the demand side of the equation that i referenced.

if gas prices go up to $8 or demand for travel to wdw dries up for whatever reason, values for DVC would plummet. if wdw can't fill the mods and deluxes anyway and they are having trouble selling the points they already own, they aren't going to lay out the cash to scoop up DVC contracts that they won't be able rent out or re-sell, right?

as the economy soured last year or two, we saw this on a small scale. DVC prices for resales tended to fall as more people lost their jobs or whatever and put their contracts up for sale. a higher supply meant falling prices...and DVC clearly moved back the price at which they would exercise ROFR. the notion that DVC resale prices have a "guaranteed floor" because of ROFR is unrealistic.

it's true that DVC didn't fall nearly as far as marriott and other timeshares nor abandon ROFR entirely - because as you say people were still traveling to wdw and staying at the mods and deluxes and the villas. this was partly due to discounting and promotions but the result was that demand for travel to wdw didn't collapse nearly as badly as other areas. traffic to wdw was such that DVC could still get some cash value from ROFRed contracts, either by renting to visitors or selling contracts to those visitors.

VB and HHI resales sell for less than SSR because there is more demand to be on property - it's not because DVC cares more about SSR owners and is trying to guarantee SSR owners a pricing floor. supply and demand determine the relative value of a VB contract relative to a SSR contract...and DVC makes ROFR decisions accordingly.

also, if the economy double dips and SSR prices start to fall into the $50s and you are desperate to sell, seeing a lot of SSR contracts already out there - you might offer your contract for $45 to get some cash. in that case, whether disney exercises ROFR or not, $45 is what you will get. so to say that DVC owners are "guaranteed" some form of price protection "because of ROFR" is just not the case...

 

[donaldbuzz&minnie]

We bought DVC assuming that it would be nice if we could sell it someday if we had to at a nice price, but knowing it could be worth $0. Our hope in buying DVC was that we would be able to unload it to someone even if we had to give it away, which is often not the case with other timeshares. Any $ we might get back in resale would be the icing on the cake.

We also bought 2 properties that were on the grounds of Disney hotels, figuring they would have to keep them up (at least the grounds) or it could reflect badly on the hotels. (They wouldn't be properties no "real" guest would never see.)

Also, unlike other timeshares, DVC is located somewhere people will always want to visit, which increases the chance that we could get rid of our points if we need to. We just don't want to be in the position of having to pay yearly maintenance on a timeshare we can no longer use.

We are under no illusions that Disney will do anything that benefits them whenever they can do it legally. We still believe, though, that DVC is worth the much higher price than other great resale properties because of advantages of location that others don't have.

 

[JBx3]

We bought DVC assuming that it would be nice if we could sell it someday if we had to at a nice price, but knowing it could be worth $0. Our hope in buying DVC was that we would be able to unload it to someone even if we had to give it away, which is often not the case with other timeshares. Any $ we might get back in resale would be the icing on the cake.

We also bought 2 properties that were on the grounds of Disney hotels, figuring they would have to keep them up (at least the grounds) or it could reflect badly on the hotels. (They wouldn't be properties no "real" guest would never see.)

Also, unlike other timeshares, DVC is located somewhere people will always want to visit, which increases the chance that we could get rid of our points if we need to. We just don't want to be in the position of having to pay yearly maintenance on a timeshare we can no longer use.

We are under no illusions that Disney will do anything that benefits them whenever they can do it legally. We still believe, though, that DVC is worth the much higher price than other great resale properties because of advantages of location that others don't have.

Very good assessment. And yes, if Disney can benefit in anyway by doing or changing something, I sure they will find a way. As there are different opinions by all of us, I think one opinion that I can conclude to as being reality so far is of all the timeshares out there, disney seems to be the most favorable to be able to unload and re-sell if a member chooses simply because Disney has so many other things to offer besides just DVC lodging and I can't see the parks ever disappearing. That itself seems to make DVC resales hold up a bit better than other well branded name timeshares.

 

[WelcomeHome]

What the Marriott rep told you is not true. Don't let the Marriott rep mislead you, the ONLY thing the new Marriott program has in common with DVC is that they are now both points systems.

If you look at the Marriott board on TUG, you will find an overwhelming majority of angry and disallusioned customers. The new Marriott plan:

- Marriott does not provide voting rights to points members (Marriott maintains exclusive control of all future decisions)

- The cost of points is very high (while you can purchase as little as 1,000 points, you would need to buy at least 2,000 points for a 1 bedroom costing around $20,000 in order to go to any desirable locations during prime season - and maintenance on that amount would be exactly $800- how's that for an "introductory offer")

- You'll have to compete with "Premier" customers who have at least 6,500 points and and a 13 month priority window which means they can book the best locations an entire month ahead of you.

- Marriott reserves the right to raise purchase prices, maintenance fees, annual "club" dues and points requirements as much as they want any time they want.

I'm afraid Marriott is going to go after unsuspecting DVC customers because they're claiming their new program is very "Disneyesque" - but nothing can be further from the truth! Many Marriott owners were shocked when the details of the new program were announced after June 20th.

Don't take my word for it. Demand to see the points charts before you buy and calculate how many points you would have to buy in order to go to the resorts you want during the season you want. Read the TUG threads to learn about the extremely one-sided aspects of Marriott's new program that the sales reps are not telling you about.

I'm so grateful that I also purchased DVC because of the severe disappointment the many formally loyal Marriott owners (including myself) are feeling as a result of the new system. In all fairness to Marriott, this is only my opinion, I'm simply suggesting that you investigate and make an educated decision before you buy into Marriott's new "game."

Best wishes,
David

 

[JBx3]

Dave, great post.

I literally had to demand a point chart after telling the rep. that I was going to drop my consideration for MVC. She finally e-mailed me point charts. and here are the issues.

1. Fri and Sat. points way out of line comapared to Mom thru Thurs.
2. After seeing their points for a 7 night stay during paltinum weeks at HHI, I dropped out of the Marriott arena direct for sure.
3. I am not even a MVC owner but after seeing current owners if converting to points, still come up short on point total for a 7 night stay. What a rip!
4. If I would pursue resale, I am afraid with the new MVC attitude, that they will favor point stayers first and previous week owners second! Just my gut thought.
5. I have compared apples to apples and have decided to place an offer resale with DVC

In the end, thank you, I did review the new Marriott game and direct it is very costly, quite frankly well overpriced. If i buy resale, I am fearful of not getting a solid prime week based on my above explaination. If I buy resale from a previous owner who DID convert to points, I then need to buy more points to get a FULL week stay from Marriott. Until the dust settles at MVC, I am out.

Waiting for a DVC owner to accept offer on a resale. Right now we are comfortable with DVC. Thanks againfor your post.

 

[brianm27]

The Marriott rep will never make a dime off a resale. It is in his / her best interest to make you believe resale is unwise.

 

[JBx3]

The Marriott rep will never make a dime off a resale. It is in his / her best interest to make you believe resale is unwise.

Yes, and sometimes amazing at what extent they will try to feed you something!

 

[Dean]

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?

As noted, what you were told is inaccurate. Based on current info which could change as the program is new, retail buyers will buy trust based points without a home resort and resale buyers that close going forward will only have the options that have been in place previously which are to reserve a week at their home resort and trade through II. As it stands now new resale buyers will not have the option to join the new points program. I think most expect that to change but for a price which might include a higher price or a min retail purchase. It's likely that the internal trading preference with Marriott through II will change or go away at some point for those not in the new program. Those in the FL club will still have those options as well. Those resorts with split week or lockoff options will still have those rights. Many timeshares differentiate between retail and resale but some more than others. DVC cannot penalize resale owners in reservations but they could make other perks retail dependent such as the discounts, ME, add back in valet, etc. If they did they'd likely either grandfather or offer for current members to upgrade for a price. I'd say that thre is less than a 25% chance DVC will ever do this but it's not zero by any stretch.

 

[JBx3]

As noted, what you were told is inaccurate. Based on current info which could change as the program is new, retail buyers will buy trust based points without a home resort and resale buyers that close going forward will only have the options that have been in place previously which are to reserve a week at their home resort and trade through II. As it stands now new resale buyers will not have the option to join the new points program. I think most expect that to change but for a price which might include a higher price or a min retail purchase. It's likely that the internal trading preference with Marriott through II will change or go away at some point for those not in the new program. Those in the FL club will still have those options as well. Those resorts with split week or lockoff options will still have those rights. Many timeshares differentiate between retail and resale but some more than others. DVC cannot penalize resale owners in reservations but they could make other perks retail dependent such as the discounts, ME, add back in valet, etc. If they did they'd likely either grandfather or offer for current members to upgrade for a price. I'd say that thre is less than a 25% chance DVC will ever do this but it's not zero by any stretch.

It did take a while for me to not only learn about MVC which is new to me but also the facts as you mentioned, seemed like I was working to hard for it to happen, however, I think it was my timing of their point instsallment. I started researching in May and actually visited Grande Ocean June 19, I think one day before the new system release. Really was not offered much assistance on their end in fact gathering. Supposedly, they could not discuss the new system, yet it made no sense for me to try and learn the old system at that point.

I did follow a bunch on tugg and really it was the only place I felt I could learn MVC.
I really got hung up on if buying resale, there was no point conversion offered and the only way to go points was if previous owner of resale converted. I allowed to many if's and but's to enter the picture.

I stuck it out with DVC on a resale offered but just learned, the owner countered and for me countered to high so believe it or not the door is back open.

I know there are 1,000's of happy Marriott owners.

Dean, read many of your threads as well as sure know how experienced and respected you are on the boards. With the door open again and knowing what you know about how much I know about MVC, would you look again into it or stay in a comfort zone with another DVC resale? THanks

 

[WelcomeHome]

I know there are 1,000's of happy Marriott owners.

-------------
--

 

[littlestar]

I've noticed quite a few Marriott Hilton Head owners over on Tug also own at Waterside by Spinnaker and at some other nice properties on Hilton Head. It might not hurt to investigate other brands besides Marriott.

 

[NewDCLGuy]

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

Bill

TPTB at DVC seem to understand that the best way to make Disney money is to treat their customers fairly and provide a quality product.

The legal foundation for DVC gives Disney extrodinary powers to changes things and rip us off. They have almost a 20 year track record. While I don't agree with every decision they've made, they simple aren't in business to harm DVC members in the interest of making a quick buck.

 

[NewDCLGuy]

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).

Disney can simply have the owners (via their proxy - Disney Vacation Development, Incorporated) vote to change the contract. Or if they can't change it, to shut down the existing program and replace it with an almost identical program with different rules. If you look at what Disney actuall did with the OKW extention, you'll see the power they have. The only real protection we have are Florida and federal laws... which isn't much. In summary: DVC = Vader; mebers = Lando.)

The question isn't *if* Disney could do this, it's why Disney would want to.