NO MORE free valet parking for DVC members.

[Dean]

I didn't notice my dues went down any when free valet parking was discontinued! We just stayed at VWL, and we did not use valet, but I can tell you it makes it darn awkward when loading and unloading, because you can't get to the bellman without the valet loading the trolley. I thought the valet was rude when she discovered we weren't going to valet, only off load. Also, the (quite empty) valet lot was much bigger than the "stuffed to the gills" self park.

No question they need to adjust the lots. The valet was NOT being charged before, it was included free as part of the requisite for the contract initially from what I can gather. Regardless, I doubt you'd have seen dues go down, only just not up as much going forward. Not that it really matters whether they go up or down as philosophically it's not an option appropriate to spread to everyone given the current specifics. No doubt they need to revisit the lots but he problem might be that the number of spaces or lots may be tied to the contract, remember I'm just speculating here. I'm sure this will change again at some point but I'm convincing myself that one of the more likely options would be removal valet parking altogether. If not, I'm sure it will be cut back significantly going forward.

 

[DebbieB]

I don't think they will remove it if they want to continue to project the image of a "deluxe" resort. The DVC's that have valet parking are connected to a "deluxe" resort. I travel alot for business, every Hilton has valet parking and they charge something like $18 a day. Most also charge for self-parking, which I would not be surprised is next. If you are dressed up for a nice dinner, you are not going to want to walk a mile from self-parking.

 

[Dean]

I, personally, don't look at it as paying someone else's way. It you choose not to use it, then that's a personal decision. If I choose to use it, then I have taken advantage of the perk. I don't use Internet service, but I certainly don't feel that I'm paying for someone else because they do. It certainly doesn't bother me. I choose not to utilize this "free" service.

You really can't say 100% whether the majority wants or does not want the valet service to continue "free of charge". We can only go by the members on this board that voice their opinion.

I am an OKW owner. When I purchased there was no slide, therefore, no maintenance cost or lifeguard costs. We don't use the slide. My children are young adults that really don't need lifeguards. I am paying for this benefit, but at this point am not using it. At some point I hope to take my grandchildren there & I'm sure they will use the slide & I will also appreciate the lifeguards more & the fact that they are there. It will come full circle for us.

We rarely use the free recreation available (ping pong, shuffleboard, etc.) & we never participate in the poolside activities, but I know I pay for these things in my dues. It's very rare that we "rent" a movie from Community Hall, but every unit has a DVD player. I certainly don't need one, but I paid for replacement of them from a VHS to a DVD player. I rarely watch TV when I'm on vacation & could care less what kind of TV is in the units, but I know I'll be paying for replacements to flat screen TV's.

Really, I'm highly doubtful that there is one person that uses every free or discounted service that is offered to them, yet we are all paying for them in our dues. They are member benefits & they make your vacations more enjoyable. By continuing to "tweak" them or take them away does not make members happy.

And again, I know I can pay out of pocket for valet, but if I'm going to pay additional for something that was once a "free" perk that I used why doesn't someone else have to pay to rent a DVD player if they are going to watch a movie - I don't need that DVD player in my unit. (just a small example)

You may not look at it as paying someone else's way but that's exactly what it would be, someone has to pay. These are not free options, there is a cost involved in almost everything and a cost involved in doing pay to play by enforcement or simply to provide the service. The question then simply becomes what is the cost, how many use it, how easy would it be to enforce pay to play and are there any volume discounts. One would also consider what the standards are for similar resorts. In all of these areas sharing costs among all the membership for valet comes down squarely on the side of pay to play. No one questions whether there are perks that all pay for and not everyone uses but decisions have to be made. The before and after is that there was not a cost (to DVC or DVD at all) and now there is a cost of $12 per car per day, someone has to pay. That's a fact, there is no rationalizing that will change that. The only questions is WHO is going to pay it, those that use it or everyone including those who don't which is a majority of the DVC membership. Looked at practically there is no currently volume discount, no difficulty in targeting those using it and no real enforcement cost. IMO, there is NO rational way to justify having others pay for those that use it in this situation.

I don't think they will remove it if they want to continue to project the image of a "deluxe" resort. The DVC's that have valet parking are connected to a "deluxe" resort. I travel alot for business, every Hilton has valet parking and they charge something like $18 a day. Most also charge for self-parking, which I would not be surprised is next. If you are dressed up for a nice dinner, you are not going to want to walk a mile from self-parking.

Few timeshares have valet parking outside Vegas or if they do, it is often much higher and often mandatory. As you note, many have a self parking charge that is easily as much as the current charge for valet parking.

 

[tjkraz]

If Disney pays Mears a set contract price based on previous valet traffic, Mears can provide valet service at a fraction of the cost today.

You're making a pretty big assumption on the nature of the relationship between Disney and the parking vendor. I can't imagine why Disney would pay the a vendor to operate a revenue-generating operation on Disney property. That business model makes no sense.

More likely, either the vendor is paying a fixed fee for the rights to operate the valet parking service or the revenue is shared by both the service provider and Disney according to a pre-determined schedule.

Certainly Disney (not DVC) has a great deal to lose here. That fact alone leads me to question exactly how much say they have in the ability to provide free or even discounted valet services to DVC members.

Disney does surrender some control when they allow outside vendors to operate on property. Look at things like the Dining Plans and Tables in Wonderland. Disney cannot obligate restaurants like Raglan Road or Yak & Yeti to participate in either of these programs. Ultimately each establishment decides whether to participate in the discount dining programs or not. Similarly, Disney cannot compel the valet parking outfit to provide free or reduced-cost service to DVC members.

One would believe that Disney/DVC would have already run the financial projections before deciding not to continue the funding, and likely they didn't show a projected significant drop off in dining revenue. Disney makes very few decisions without looking at the finances.

Not only that but they have years worth of data on valet parking usage at non-DVC resorts like the Poly, Grand Floridian & Yacht Club, plus AKL and Contemporary where free DVC parking was just added months ago.

At worst they may have underestimated the volume of DVC members who are willing to pay for valet. But it will take months to evaluate even that statistic as member patterns are certain to change in the coming months.

They are member benefits & they make your vacations more enjoyable. By continuing to "tweak" them or take them away does not make members happy.

Bear in mind that many members are also budget conscious. Losing benefits appears to be what lowers your satisfaction level but there are thousands of other members whose satisfaction is driven by their annual dues bill. Go back 3 or 4 years in the forum archive and see how many people were up-in-arms over the OKW pool slide they are now obligated to staff and maintain.

DVC has to strike a balance between cost, benefit and appropriateness of any perk offered to members. Some of the decisions are certainly difficult and even unpopular. But that doesn't make the decisions wrong by an objective measure.

And again, I know I can pay out of pocket for valet, but if I'm going to pay additional for something that was once a "free" perk that I used why doesn't someone else have to pay to rent a DVD player if they are going to watch a movie - I don't need that DVD player in my unit. (just a small example)

There may eventually come a day when DVD players and free movie rentals are not available. But don't overlook the cost component of the item being discussed. DVD players probably cost Disney $20 when purchased in bulk. A single player could last for months or years in a villa room. The DVDs themselves run about $20-30 (perhaps much less since all they stock are Disney products.) A resort's DVD procurement budget is probably in the neighborhood of $400-500 per year.

Compare that to valet parking which is $12 per guest, per day. Pretty big difference, financially speaking.

 

[MELSMICE]

Go back 3 or 4 years in the forum archive and see how many people were up-in-arms over the OKW pool slide they are now obligated to staff and maintain.

DVC has to strike a balance between cost, benefit and appropriateness of any perk offered to members. Some of the decisions are certainly difficult and even unpopular. But that doesn't make the decisions wrong by an objective measure.

There may eventually come a day when DVD players and free movie rentals are not available. But don't overlook the cost component of the item being discussed. DVD players probably cost Disney $20 when purchased in bulk. A single player could last for months or years in a villa room. The DVDs themselves run about $20-30 (perhaps much less since all they stock are Disney products.) A resort's DVD procurement budget is probably in the neighborhood of $400-500 per year.

Compare that to valet parking which is $12 per guest, per day. Pretty big difference, financially speaking.

I am well aware of the OKW debate about the slide as I am an OKW owner. I knew the slide would not benefit me, given the age of my kids, etc., however, I didn't object to the slide, even considering the cost factor. It's all part of the enjoyment package when on vacation, IMO.

Like I said, the DVD example was a small one. Bottom line, however, is that there is a cost involved. Another example is the fitness center. I rarely, if ever, use it. I walk outside. Why should I pay dues to maintain that part of the recreation - why not have a fee to use the fitness center?

Obviously, you can't please everyone, however, dues will continue to rise over the course of time. Continuing to take away benefits that people have enjoyed is not good business practice.

 

[DVCPAT]

There are perks that are win/win but they all cost nothing or almost nothing like dining and AP discounts. Unfortunately this particular perk is AT BEST win/lose with the majority subsidizing the minority if the costs were rolled into dues. The only question was whether those that used it were going to "lose" by having to pay the costs of whether some that didn't use it were going to lose by subsidizing those that did use it. The only way to make it win/win would be to negotiate a price that cut the TOTAL cost to around 20-30% of what the costs would have been assuming no change in volume after the price change. Of course there could be further losses such as a total loss of valet going forward as well which wouldn't surprise me at the DVC resorts in question.

Why do you think Disney originally offered DVC members free valet parking? Why would they offer such a great convenience to guests (with kitchens) to visit resorts that feature restaurants and gift shops? I think it’s the same reason Disney builds gift shops at the exit point of theme park rides…..to get you to spend money.

Then again....the elimination of the valet perk might not have anything to do with costs. It could be due to free dining. Why give free valet parking to restaurants that offer free food?

 

[tjkraz]

I am well aware of the OKW debate about the slide as I am an OKW owner. I knew the slide would not benefit me, given the age of my kids, etc., however, I didn't object to the slide, even considering the cost factor. It's all part of the enjoyment package when on vacation, IMO.

Understood. My only point is that there is another group of owners not nearly as altruistic as you who would be very, very upset if their dues had increased an additional 3-4% (or whatever the amount may be) to fund "free" valet parking for other owners.

 

[Chuck S]

Why do you think Disney originally offered DVC members free valet parking? Why would they offer such a great convenience to guests (with kitchens) to visit resorts that feature restaurants and gift shops? I think it’s the same reason Disney builds gift shops at the exit point of theme park rides…..to get you to spend money.

Then again....the elimination of the valet perk might not have anything to do with costs. It could be due to free dining. Why give free valet parking to restaurants that offer free food?

The restaurants are not offering "free food," they are still paid the normal price per meal they would get from the paid DDP. The "free" DDP is in lieu of other room discounts, like buy 4 get 7.

Nor do I believe it was to "encourage" DVC members to restaurant hop and store hop from resort to resort, or else OKW would have offered valet services to encourage use of Olivia's.

It was a courtesy perk paid for either through contract agreement, or DVC Marketing. Likely due to increasing labor costs, the valet vendor wanted more per DVC valet use, and DVC marketing decided not to fund it. And the DVC Board decided not to add a new component to the dues to fund it.

 

[TLSnell1981]

And, it still stinks.

 

[MELSMICE]

Understood. My only point is that there is another group of owners not nearly as altruistic as you who would be very, very upset if their dues had increased an additional 3-4% (or whatever the amount may be) to fund "free" valet parking for other owners.

Do we know for sure that our dues would have increased this much? I haven't gone back to reread the thread so I'm not sure. Did DVD/DVD explain that our dues would have increased had they kept the valet perk?

 

[SuzanneSLO]

Do we know for sure that our dues would have increased this much? I haven't gone back to reread the thread so I'm not sure. Did DVD/DVD explain that our dues would have increased had they kept the valet perk?

I think it is anyone's guess what the total dues woudl go up if valet was still free, but as I haveposted before, each owner can do their own calculation based on the new cost.

Say you use 240 points and stay 5 nights. Valet parking will now cost you $60. As a result, the cost per point for this stay goes up $0.25 if you valet park and nothing, if you don't. Even better, each owner gets to decide whether or not to pay the increased cost! -- Suzanne

 

[MELSMICE]

I think it is anyone's guess what the total dues woudl go up if valet was still free, but as I haveposted before, each owner can do their own calculation based on the new cost.

Say you use 240 points and stay 5 nights. Valet parking will now cost you $60. As a result, the cost per point for this stay goes up $0.25 if you valet park and nothing, if you don't. Even better, each owner gets to decide whether or not to pay the increased cost! -- Suzanne

Yes, but did DVC/DVD confirm that dues would have gone up if free valet would have been continued?

 

[Maistre Gracey]

I think it is anyone's guess what the total dues woudl go up if valet was still free, but as I haveposted before, each owner can do their own calculation based on the new cost.

Say you use 240 points and stay 5 nights. Valet parking will now cost you $60. As a result, the cost per point for this stay goes up $0.25 if you valet park and nothing, if you don't. Even better, each owner gets to decide whether or not to pay the increased cost! -- Suzanne

Just to point out..
You should not figure $12/day. That rate entitles you to valet at all Disney resorts that offer valet.
When valet was free for Members, it only entitled us to park at DVC resorts.

MG

 

[DebbieB]

Why do you think Disney originally offered DVC members free valet parking? Why would they offer such a great convenience to guests (with kitchens) to visit resorts that feature restaurants and gift shops? I think it’s the same reason Disney builds gift shops at the exit point of theme park rides…..to get you to spend money.

Then again....the elimination of the valet perk might not have anything to do with costs. It could be due to free dining. Why give free valet parking to restaurants that offer free food?

It used to be free for everyone. When they started charging, DVC members were exempt at DVC resorts. So it wasn't really an "added perk" but really an "exemption" from the new charge.

 

[tjkraz]

Yes, but did DVC/DVD confirm that dues would have gone up if free valet would have been continued?

Yes, they did.

Just to point out..
You should not figure $12/day. That rate entitles you to valet at all Disney resorts that offer valet.
When valet was free for Members, it only entitled us to park at DVC resorts.

MG

That doesn't mean we wouldn't have been charged the full $12 fee going forward.

In lieu of any evidence to the contrary, I'm inclined to believe they were demanding DVC pay the entire $12 daily fee--or a rate very close to that. If deep discounts were being offered it would have gone a long way toward justifying the subsidization via annual dues. Or we may have at least been given a discounted nightly rate (say, $8-10 per vehicle.)

 

[MELSMICE]

Yes, they did.

Do you have a link or anything to that? I haven't gone back in the thread or done any research on it specifically.

 

[tjkraz]

Do you have a link or anything to that? I haven't gone back in the thread or done any research on it specifically.

It's on DVCMember.com under the NEWS menu:

Complimentary valet parking for Disney Vacation Club Members at Disney Vacation Club Resorts at the Walt Disney World® Resort was discontinued effective October 11, 2009.

Similar to other fee-based services, such as additional housekeeping service or additional room amenities, only those Members who choose to valet park will be charged, instead of increasing the annual dues for all Members to cover the costs.

Self parking will continue to be complimentary at all Disney Vacation Club resorts. For drivers choosing to use the valet service, the cost is $12 a day, effective October 11, 2009. Members and Guests with disabilities will continue to receive complimentary valet parking.

Once paid, the valet parking service can be used for the entire day at any resort without paying the fee again.

 

[Maistre Gracey]

That doesn't mean we wouldn't have been charged the full $12 fee going forward.

True, but if they did I had better get full services in return.

I valet park for three reasons:
1) At the resort I'm staying at (would be covered by DVC).
2) For dinner (covered by TIW).
3) To visit the BW (would be covered by DVC).

So, there is no reason I would need full service, and I would rather see just the DVC resorts for a reduced rate.

MG

 

[jdg345]

I just returned from the VWL and valet parking is dead. I think Disney made a bad business decision canceling free valet. If Disney pays Mears a set contract price based on previous valet traffic, Mears can provide valet service at a fraction of the cost today. I also noticed fewer people using bell services making our bell man very nervous. His exact words were “thank goodness I can sing and dance”.

Disney provided members free valet to keep them on-site. One Disney CM told me DVC members have been a godsend for business during slow periods. Disney needs to convert the vacant valet parking lots into additional guest parking. With out free valet……the food at Disney hotel restaurants isn’t good enough to walk a mile for. It’s less expensive and more convenient to dine off-site.

Yup, that seems to certainly be the case. It appears the costs were about to skyrocket and disney did not want to absorb those costs. Perhaps they felt the reward ratio was simply not enough.

I agree with Dean that if traffic continues to decrease, disney may put themselves back into a position where it's not worth paying the valet company at all. The question is: Does Disney take it back inhouse at that point (unlikely, imo), or does Mears take the hit in order to get some of something versus all of nothing.

 

[jdg345]

What's sad, IMO, is that it might possibly cost the members only a few dollars more in their dues.

Taking away the perk is obviously causing members to choose not to valet park, thus taking away tips from the valet drivers. This in turn, is causing them to make less money, which means they will spend less, because you can't spend what you don't make any more.

And yes, I can pay the $12 plus tips to help these valet CM's myself, but like everyone else, I most likely won't take between $15-$20 additional out of my pocket each time I visit a resort on my vacation. $5-$6 is a lot different for a tip then the cost of valet on top of the tip.

Bottom line is, we all pay for something in our dues that we don't necessarily use. It's always frustrating when something is taken away that was something you did use.

This is just my opinion, obviously!

I agree with this point. It seems many times when something is taken away that people don't use, they chime in positively with a comment like, "I didn't use it anyways, now I'm glad I don't have to pay for it". The reality is as you state: we all are paying for stuff we don't necessarily use. If perks continue to disappear, those folks that were happy about the loss of this perk may not find anyone willing to speak for them when one of 'their' perks gets removed.