New owners can now buy 50 points from Disney

[LouisianaDisneyFan]

They wouldn't be able to reduce from the 11 month window for those who purchased what was stated as the "minimum purchase" when buying directly from Disney. The 11 month window was a BIG part of the selling strategy and changing that would result in a huge outcry from those of us who purchased points just for the ability to book what we wanted when we wanted. At the moment, we are a party of two... we certainly don't need even the 160 points for the amount of time and space we typically desire at each of our Disney resorts each year. I would predict a class-action lawsuit if Disney made a change that limited folks from booking ahead for their home resort when they had met all their contractual obligations with Disney.

 

[Chuck S]

They wouldn't be able to reduce from the 11 month window for those who purchased what was stated as the "minimum purchase" when buying directly from Disney. The 11 month window was a BIG part of the selling strategy and changing that would result in a huge outcry from those of us who purchased points just for the ability to book what we wanted when we wanted. At the moment, we are a party of two... we certainly don't need even the 160 points for the amount of time and space we typically desire at each of our Disney resorts each year. I would predict a class-action lawsuit if Disney made a change that limited folks from booking ahead for their home resort when they had met all their contractual obligations with Disney.

They can not eliminate the priority booking window completely. They can reduce the window from the current 4 month home resort window (11 to 7 is 4 months) to a one month booking window, for example 11 months for home resort, 10 months for non-home resort.

The ability to walk a reservation already gives some preference to home resort owners with larger contracts.

 

[dis-happy]

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?

Some thoughts...

A. Disney wants the dollars people spend to be spent with them, whether it be hotel rooms, small contracts, or dining. They continually add incentives to cause this to happen in all categories.

B. Sales may be up (although I can't say one way or the other) but people giving back contracts to DVC may also be (probably is) up. The fact that they are now "renting" points to members for $15. per point sounded to me like they have a glut of points they are holding (could be from rofr too) and want to get some money back for the maintenance fees.

Either way, I wouldn't call it greed, just a business model trying to be made more profitable and common to all large companies.

 

[disneynutz]

Either way, I wouldn't call it greed, just a business model trying to be made more profitable and common to all large companies.

I call it a greedy business model.

When Disney, who was built on Magic and Customer Satisfaction deliberately decides to make policy and other changes that have a negative effect on Guests and DVC Members while increasing prices, I call it greed.

Bill

 

[Dean]

I don't understand why this is a problem. Yes, there will be more people with points, but there won't be anymore points. If anything, the phone lines will be busier.

With that said, it could effect maintenance fees. My thought is that Disney is getting in on the small contract business. This won't be something that they actively market. They still want to sell 160 point contracts, but will now be able to sell fewer points.

I admit that dh and I would have bought in 2002 had DVC been willing to sell me 75-100 points.

In addition to the extra work and business of MS, etc; there are other factors including that smaller points owners tend to go for less days and use smaller units. Ultimately it will represent an increase in the per member cost of running the system. I'm not saying it's wrong, just that there are increased costs and other factors that negatively impact the system and present owners as a group.

Can you buy 15 points and bank 15 you own?

Yes.

 

[AirGoofy]

Is Disney still offering $0 closing costs, too ?

Yes, we added on 25 points with no closing costs and it went to our original use year. Plus, when we bought them, since it was late into our use year, we were able to bank them immediately.

 

[dis-happy]

I call it a greedy business model.

When Disney, who was built on Magic and Customer Satisfaction deliberately decides to make policy and other changes that have a negative effect on Guests and DVC Members while increasing prices, I call it greed.

Bill

Really? They could do a lot more to save money that would impact guests and members far more aversely. Disney is a luxury to most people (well maybe not to all DISers) and is affected by the economy more than most. There isn't a company in America hardly that isn't striving to stay solvent and remain in business for the long term. If DVC can coax disposable income from people by lowering the point minimum, and they aren't doing anything illegal in the process, I don't see it as greed (and honestly, I personally don't like that they are doing it). There'd be a much greater howl if park hours were drastically cut, fireworks went to 2 days per week, and MS required 7 day stays to lower costs.

 

[dbs1228]

They can not eliminate the priority booking window completely. They can reduce the window from the current 4 month home resort window (11 to 7 is 4 months) to a one month booking window, for example 11 months for home resort, 10 months for non-home resort.

The ability to walk a reservation already gives some preference to home resort owners with larger contracts.

What do you mean by "walk a reservation?" Am I guessing people may book there ressie at home resort 1 - 2 weeks before they actually need it (booking a 14 day stay when they really only need 7 days) just to secure the actual time frame they need and then cancel the 1st part of the ressie? Not sure if that is what you mean but that thought has crossed my mind.
Just curious

 

[disney ny]

Disney was offering no closing costs for new members who bought at sold out resorts. I bought in last month at WLV at 100 points with no closing costs as a brand new member.

 

[LouisianaDisneyFan]

Disney was offering no closing costs for new members who bought at sold out resorts. I bought in last month at WLV at 100 points with no closing costs as a brand new member.

My guess is that the difference you paid in price per point buying directly through Disney versus if you had purchased resale was enough to have covered that closing cost (and then some).

 

[DebbieB]

What do you mean by "walk a reservation?" Am I guessing people may book there ressie at home resort 1 - 2 weeks before they actually need it (booking a 14 day stay when they really only need 7 days) just to secure the actual time frame they need and then cancel the 1st part of the ressie? Not sure if that is what you mean but that thought has crossed my mind.
Just curious

That's pretty much it but you don't need to do extra days to walk. Say you wanted to check-in on April 16. On May 10, you call and book the nights of April 10-16. That holds April 16. Then the next day, call and cancel April 10 and add April 17. Then the next day, call and cancel April 11 and add April 18. Keep on going until you hit the last night you really want. It's really unnecessary unless it is a very popular reservation.

 

[disneynutz]

Really? They could do a lot more to save money that would impact guests and members far more aversely. Disney is a luxury to most people (well maybe not to all DISers) and is affected by the economy more than most. There isn't a company in America hardly that isn't striving to stay solvent and remain in business for the long term. If DVC can coax disposable income from people by lowering the point minimum, and they aren't doing anything illegal in the process, I don't see it as greed (and honestly, I personally don't like that they are doing it). There'd be a much greater howl if park hours were drastically cut, fireworks went to 2 days per week, and MS required 7 day stays to lower costs.

I'm talking beyond the 50 point buy in reduction. Disney knows that you can't do much with 50 points and if they can get people hooked, additional add-ons will follow.

How much profit is enough? Disney is profitable every year, yet they continue to make cuts that negatively affects their Guests and DVC owners. Isn't that greed?

 

[dizfan]

One positive. In a few years, we should see an increase in small point contracts available at various resellers.

Simple supply and demand say that we may see small point contracts prices dropping on the resale market making it less expensive to do a small addon outside of Disney.

 

[Chuck S]

I'm talking beyond the 50 point buy in reduction. Disney knows that you can't do much with 50 points and if they can get people hooked, additional add-ons will follow.

How much profit is enough? Disney is profitable every year, yet they continue to make cuts that negatively affects their Guests and DVC owners. Isn't that greed?

It begs the question...whose greed? Is it the greed of "the company", or the greed of the investors and investment firms?

Honestly, if the company were run "Walt's Way" and was satisfied with lower profit and happy guests, chances are the investment houses would still demand more. Remember, Disney has always been profitable, even during the final years of Eisner, when arguably the parks were more consumer/guest friendly than they are now. But not "profitable enough" to keep the mutual funds and retirement funds from voting against him. If you think they voted against him because he "lost the magic" you are sadly mistaken. The only magic Wall Street cares about is the ability to turn higher and higher profits.

 

[dis-happy]

I'm talking beyond the 50 point buy in reduction. Disney knows that you can't do much with 50 points and if they can get people hooked, additional add-ons will follow.

How much profit is enough? Disney is profitable every year, yet they continue to make cuts that negatively affects their Guests and DVC owners. Isn't that greed?

My Watchlist
Disney beats Street on earnings and revenue
By Annalyn Censky, staff reporterFebruary 9, 2010: 6:28 PM ET


NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Walt Disney Company's profit and revenue sailed past analysts' expectations Tuesday, as a solid showing from the media giant's TV networks offset a lackluster performance from its movie studios and theme parks.

A mixed bag from Disney units
Disney's largest division -- TV networks including ESPN and ABC -- rebounded due to higher ad sales, with revenue rising 7%. Higher broadcast and cable ad sales also helped rivals News Corp (NWSA) and Time Warner Inc (TWX, Fortune 500). beat earnings expectations last week.

Revenue in the company's movie studio and theme parks, which account for about half of Disney's total revenue, were nearly flat.


Disney as a whole may be making a profit, but the theme parks are just trying to stay even with ever rising costs. In large business each division has to carry its own weight accounting wise. There were a lot of layoffs and management buyouts a couple of years ago.

Also, a lot of the "less kind and gentle DVC" stems from there being a much larger DVC membership than just a few years ago. What you can afford to do for a (relatively) few people becomes cost prohibitive with many more. Example: the Merry Mixers. We used to get unlimited cookies, last year members were given a ticket for 2. At some point they needed to cap the cost. I still don't see that as greed; better that than to cancel Merry Mixers altogether. The cost has to come from somewhere in the budget....no pixie dust magic is going to pay the bills.

 

[Disney Doc]

That's pretty much it but you don't need to do extra days to walk. Say you wanted to check-in on April 16. On May 10, you call and book the nights of April 10-16. That holds April 16. Then the next day, call and cancel April 10 and add April 17. Then the next day, call and cancel April 11 and add April 18. Keep on going until you hit the last night you really want. It's really unnecessary unless it is a very popular reservation.

Daily calls to MS to walk a reservation are a thing from the past. Ever since changing to 11 months from CHECK-IN day (instead of 11 months from CHECKOUT day), you no longer EVER have to call day-by-day any more. You have that unit locked up for a week - no one else can reserve it until your checkout day. As long as you call on the day before the original checkout (May 16 in the above example), you can then shift the reservation an entire week.

 

[nytimez]

Remember, Disney has always been profitable, even during the final years of Eisner, when arguably the parks were more consumer/guest friendly than they are now.

Hear, hear.

 

[JumpinJ]

Just to check out this info about the small contracts (for new members) I did some research. I checked the DVC News website. It stated that this was not available through DVC directly, but possibly through their Independent Sales Agents at the Doorway to Dreams centers in Chicago and New York.

I called Chicago today and asked if this was possible. She said typically no. I advised her I was looking at buying 100 points at BLT and was told in March by my guide I couldn't. She said they could do smaller contracts at some of the other resorts that are for sale, but probably not BLT.

It wasn't an outright no, but it wasn't a definite yes either. She offered to have me speak to a guide on the phone to get more info, but I didn't have the time right then.

So it definitely isn't something that they're just offering. I got the impression it might be possible, but probably not at BLT.

J

 

[bookwormde]

I am surprised that they did not restrict this offer to SSR, as a way to kick start sales since all indications are that SSR sales are minimal (not even keeping up with ROFR).

bookwormde

 

[LouisianaDisneyFan]

Okay, this is probably conspiracy theory thinking here... but...

With all of the reports about furnishings at BLT falling apart and already needing replacement, Disney may be feeling the squeeze to raise maintenance fees there to start refurbishment much earlier than most members would have planned. Since the low MF at BLT was a selling point for buyers, then Disney certainly wouldn't want to raise them before selling out the resort. Perhaps lowering the minimum purchase there is a way to quickly sell out the resort so that MF can be raised and refurbishment can begin on the owner's nickels instead of Disney's.