New owners can now buy 50 points from Disney

[Mick@Tink]

Simply put, I don't like it. I understand that Disney, like any business, has to do what it has to do to remain competitive and profitable.

 

[LouisianaDisneyFan]

I don't think I'm even going to mention this to DH, as we just purchased 160 at BLT less than a month ago. DH wanted to purchase 125, as that was the amount that would cover our typical annual stay, but we were told that we HAD to meet the minimum for buy-in and that there was no way this amount could go lower. We had actually asked about getting 125 at BLT and then 75 at BWV, but we were told we also could not split it up between resorts to meet the minimum. DH will definitely feel like we were misled. We haven't even received our closing papers yet, but of course, our check for the full amount was cashed on Day 1.

 

[dvc at last !]

I think they are only doing the buy-in at the certain resorts, i.e., not going to get a 50 point contract for Beach Club. But, one of the perks in adding on a small contract (25 or 50) to your existing contract, by going through Disney, you get the points immediately and they get added to your same use year.

Is Disney still offering $0 closing costs, too ?

 

[LouisianaDisneyFan]

Is Disney still offering $0 closing costs, too ?

We had to pay closing costs as well... but then our "minimum" was 160... so who knows anymore?!?!

When were they offering $0 closing costs?

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

I don't think I'm even going to mention this to DH, as we just purchased 160 at BLT less than a month ago. DH wanted to purchase 125, as that was the amount that would cover our typical annual stay, but we were told that we HAD to meet the minimum for buy-in and that there was no way this amount could go lower. We had actually asked about getting 125 at BLT and then 75 at BWV, but we were told we also could not split it up between resorts to meet the minimum. DH will definitely feel like we were misled. We haven't even received our closing papers yet, but of course, our check for the full amount was cashed on Day 1.

Your guide can make such a difference for this. There have been reports of doing a split between two resorts for the initial buy in and then there was the 100pt minimum at AKV at least and I think a person or two were allowed that at BLT. I remember getting hassled and having to insist just upon splitting my VGC add-on. Anything that is a little different with my guide is then something very special that is being done for me! lol I feel it may be more trouble to buy direct than resale most times!

They started doing closing costs for initial purchases in late 2008 or so. Prior to that Disney covered closing costs on all purchases and still do for add-on's.

 

[amystevekai&bump]

Your guide can make such a difference for this. There have been reports of doing a split between two resorts for the initial buy in and then there was the 100pt minimum at AKV at least and I think a person or two were allowed that at BLT. I remember getting hassled and having to insist just upon splitting my VGC add-on. Anything that is a little different with my guide is then something very special that is being done for me! lol I feel it may be more trouble to buy direct than resale most times!

They started doing closing costs for initial purchases in late 2008 or so. Prior to that Disney covered closing costs on all purchases and still do for add-on's.

Yes Kathy is right, we were one of the ones who were able to split our contract between AKV (100 pts) and BLT (100 pts). I did speak to a Manager to have it a approved, but there were no problems - we bought in July 2009.

 

[dcfromva]

DVCNews.com is reporting that you can now purchase 50 points directly from DVC. This is only for the resorts in active sales.
What do you think?

I do find this a little annoying because in Sept 2008/Oct 2008 there was no how no way they would permit me to split a BLT contract into smaller 55point contracts. Can't be done! I asked in Fl and I asked in CA. I asked it be referred to the manager.... Still no dice. And now, it's okay? Wasn't it Jan 2009, they announced no more small add ons--at least for BLT? I don't think that lasted very long. Oh well. I guess the bottom line is wait long enough and something will change...

I noticed a couple of days ago, on the sales chart for 2010, on DVCNews.com, that sales this year where in line with sales in 2006.

I planned to do an add on at BLT in Jan 2010, but they raised the price in Oct 2009-- It is a good thing they haven't offered any decent incentives since then because I haven't even been tempted to purchase any add ons...

 

[dcfromva]

I think the larger contracts are favored for making reservations at the 11months. There are more points to work with, thus more options and more flexibility. You most likely can't "walk" your reservation very much with a 50point contract...

I think the small contracts have an advantage on the wait list. Say, you have 1,000 points and you use those points for several annual visits. If something happens and your plans fall through--you are going to be very limited in what you can W-L with only having 2 W-Ls available for your entire contract. Especially if you are trying to rebook within 7months and you need more than one room for a family gathering...

The 50 point contract will probably not have multiple visits/multiple rooms. The chances for W-L match would be much greater with fewer days W-L'd.

I think a 50 point contract could be quite useful. With banking and borrowing you can stretch the points out to 150 points every 3 years. If you straddle your UY, you could even stretch it out to 200points every 4 years. (though it might be tough to make the points come out exactly correct). This could be a really good thing for a young family for which a studio would work. (Afterall, there are folks who don't visit WDW every year. )

 

[nunzia]

We had to pay closing costs as well... but then our "minimum" was 160... so who knows anymore?!?!

When were they offering $0 closing costs?

I haven't heard they ever did this on the first contract. There is no closing costs on add ons. (edited..just read the PP who mentioned that they didn't have closing costs fees earlier on)
Is it just me or does it seem, with all these trial and error things DVC is pulling, they are just throwing darts at a board on how to make more money in a short amount of time?

 

[needtogomore]

Both, actually.

They can be used one time, not banked, and it has been reported that if you cancel the reservation they are used for, you lose them...they do not go into your account; and you can "buy" them once per use year.

Can you buy 15 points and bank 15 you own?

 

[dvc at last !]

We had to pay closing costs as well... but then our "minimum" was 160... so who knows anymore?!?!

When were they offering $0 closing costs?

We did an add-on about 2 years ago. At that time there was
$0 closing costs. Maybe it was for add-ons only !

 

[Mickey'sApprentice]

I know that many of you disagree, but I am happy about the minimum point requirement change. I think it opens the system up to a lot of people that might not be able or willing to purchase otherwise.

I think I would have preferred DVC expanding the 100 point buy-in to all resorts, than 50 points for just the four in current sales.

I am very concerned that Disney won't tell these small buyers that they need 160 points to make regular trades to RCI, etc.

 

[JumpinJ]

I know that many of you disagree, but I am happy about the minimum point requirement change. I think it opens the system up to a lot of people that might not be able or willing to purchase otherwise.

I think I would have preferred DVC expanding the 100 point buy-in to all resorts, than 50 points for just the four in current sales.

I agree! I practically begged my guide to let me buy 100 points at BLT when I was there in March. I refuse to finance through Disney with the crazy financing rates and could not afford the full buy in for 160 points. Plus for my trip needs I did not want that many. 100 points would do me fine. But I could only purchase 100 points at AK, not BLT. Didn't want to purchase at AK.

Too bad this is happening now and not 6 weeks ago since I already purchased resale but would have preferred 100 points at BLT. Although from what I've read, it's only for sales through an ISA, not direct through Disney. Hmm....I'll have to call my guide tomorrow and grill him!

Yes selling many smaller contracts will add a small percentage to the call volumes etc. But then again, many people only need a smaller amount of points. They don't want 160 or more. Should they be exluded or forced to purchase more points?

And really, if you're worried about extra calls, and volume, shouldn't we have some sort of IQ questionnaire before buying? Because if we cut out the people who call over and over about the same thing because they just don't understand, then you could probably cut out a whole lot of calls! (and if you can't smell the sarcasm there, please don't respond...).

J

 

[disneynutz]

Calling MS won't be an issue when the new calling MS policy is put into place. One call per reservation and a $10 fee for each additional call.

It seems fair to me, why should the Members who only call once a year, pay the same through dues as the people who call every week? Same argument as charging for Valet.













The above is intended to make us think about what the future will probably be like if we continue to let the DVC make decisions for the Membership without our input.


Bill

 

[LouisianaDisneyFan]

Calling MS won't be an issue when the new calling MS policy is put into place. One call per reservation and a $10 fee for each additional call.

Where are all these changes printed? And when does this policy come into play? So... if you decide later to add DDP and call back, they'll zap you with a $10 fee?!

 

[Chuck S]

Where are all these changes printed? And when does this policy come into play? So... if you decide later to add DDP and call back, they'll zap you with a $10 fee?!

Don't worry. There is no such fee, nor has any such fee structure been announced. Is it possible at some point, yes. Is it likely, no. Disneynutz was addressing the concern of additonal calls to Member Services. We've seen people here on the board advocate calling SEVERAL times a day to check on reservation avalability. I think if it ever became a problem for Member Services, some sort of limit would be imposed. But, besides call volume, a relatively large number of the smaller contracts can directly affect room demand/availablity.

 

[katieandemismom]

This should actually put MORE rooms into service. If they are only allowing it for resorts not sold-out, they need to sell the points so they can put all the rooms into rotation. Otherwise there will be a large part of a resort that cannot be booked on any given day.

Completely makes sense to me! Disney doesn't want to have to finance people any more than necessary (I'm sure they took a good washing over the last year). Smaller contracts allow cash up front and immediately - no worries about loan defaults.

To me it means more people to help pay maintenance costs so hopefully lower dues and more rooms available for booking at BLT, AKV, and SSR.

 

[BeccaG]

This makes no sense to me for a few reasons.

First wern't they limiting BLT owners at one point to minimum add ons of 100 or something like that? This is a 180 from that.

Second DVC sales are up, I think something like 11%, even in this economy so falling sales can't be a motive. . .

So what's left as am explination, pure greed?

 

[BeccaG]

Could they get into a situation where people with 160 or more points get the 11/7 window and people with less might get a 10/7 window?

I don't see why not as I know of other timeshares that do it but I would expect the longer booking window would be given to contracts much larger than 160.

 

[BeccaG]

Could they get into a situation where people with 160 or more points get the 11/7 window and people with less might get a 10/7 window?

I don't see why not as I know of other timeshares that do it but I would expect the longer booking window would be given to contracts much larger than 160.