NO MORE free valet parking for DVC members.

[Duckfan-in-Chicago]

Regarding BWV parking. Is the lot to the left as you are driving up to BWV for valet only? I glanced at that lot and saw some blocked off but didn't pull in to see if everything was. It certainly was empty though.

If you make a sharp left right after the guard shack, there is a short drive that splits the lot on the left side of the entrance road. The biggert lot created by this split is the valet lot(right side of the split because the valet should have priority over the guests to the closest spots when half the time they drive one car to park and pick up another) The smaller is a self-park that is usually less crowded than the other one. At least it usually was up till this change.

 

[Dean]

If you make a sharp left right after the guard shack, there is a short drive that splits the lot on the left side of the entrance road. The biggert lot created by this split is the valet lot(right side of the split because the valet should have priority over the guests to the closest spots when half the time they drive one car to park and pick up another) The smaller is a self-park that is usually less crowded than the other one. At least it usually was up till this change.

The self parking lot there is actually quite large if the entire thing is open, it's just somewhat spread out tracking all the way back from just past the guard gate to the tennis courts. Someone did say recently that they were using this area for employee parking and gave the impression it wasn't open for self parking, at least for that one time.

 

[Disney*All-Stars*]

According to what I've read in Disney Files, DVC members are no longer going to get free valet parking at DVC resorts. Has any gotten upset over this? I sure am. That was the best perk and now my way of getting around (to and from resort, etc) is going to change a bit. I am sorry for the valet parkers because I didn't mind tipping them. The reason for this change is to not raise member dues according to the article. Well, I would go for the slight increase because valet parking for a one week stay will now cost $84.00. I don't think the increase would be or should be that much. I think Disney is looking for a way to make some money just like the airlines with their luggage and extra room charges.

 

[tjkraz]

There is an extensive thread on the subject which started back in October when the perk was removed.

The gist is that neither members nor Disney were paying for free valet up to this point. Valet parking services are outsourced and operated by a non-Disney entity. Until now they had been providing the service entirely for free.

When the contract came up for renewal they refused to allow the free parking.

DVC looked at rolling the cost up in member dues but ultimately determined it was a benefit better paid for by those who are actually using the service rather than all members sharing the cost.

Some of us have held out hope that the valet vendor would at least offer a discount to DVC members given the volume of traffic they have lost, but so far that hasn't happened.

There really isn't much DVC could do other than forcing all of us to pay for valet whether we use it or not. Someone has to pay the bill.

 

[ORD2KOA]

The gist is that neither members nor Disney were paying for free valet up to this point. Valet parking services are outsourced and operated by a non-Disney entity.

Am I the only one who thinks this makes no sense whatsoever? (I'm not saying your post doesn't make sense.) Could the vendor possibly be paying lower wages than Disney itself? Sheesh.

 

[Tara]

Originally Posted by tjkraz

The gist is that neither members nor Disney were paying for free valet up to this point. Valet parking services are outsourced and operated by a non-Disney entity.

Am I the only one who thinks this makes no sense whatsoever? (I'm not saying your post doesn't make sense.) Could the vendor possibly be paying lower wages than Disney itself? Sheesh.

I'm not following your question in relation to the post you quoted...what does the vendor wage have to do with it?

Yes, I think what tjkraz posted does make a lot of sense, and so does the decision to discontinue free valet parking. I wish it were still free as I've been an active user of the service, but I understand why it isn't now. I figure I'd pay for it one way or the other - through dues or through direct payment anyway. (And I continue to valet park and pay for it since the rule changed.)

 

[Dean]

According to what I've read in Disney Files, DVC members are no longer going to get free valet parking at DVC resorts. Has any gotten upset over this? I sure am. That was the best perk and now my way of getting around (to and from resort, etc) is going to change a bit. I am sorry for the valet parkers because I didn't mind tipping them. The reason for this change is to not raise member dues according to the article. Well, I would go for the slight increase because valet parking for a one week stay will now cost $84.00. I don't think the increase would be or should be that much. I think Disney is looking for a way to make some money just like the airlines with their luggage and extra room charges.

The problem is that the increase would be that much and for no other reason but to reduce the costs of a relative few. Basically you'd take the full price of the valet parking and divide it by the total members (points) AT THAT RESORT. Thus you'd have other members directly subsidizing the perk. There is not another perk or usage item at DVC that I can think of that is comparable. The internet would be the closest comparable option but it is CHEAP and there is a significant savings to the total cost by having it spread over the entire membership, the exercise room is the other somewhat comparable option. There are also other options that some don't use but we all pay for (pool, etc) but non as definable and easy to decide who to charge and how as valet parking. IF they can negotiate a significant savings with the contractor, I hope they do so. Even then it shouldn't be spread among other members unless there is a significant bottom line savings in doing so. IMO there are criteria that should be met for any perk to be paid for by the membership as a whole. These include considerations of a cheaper OVERALL cost by doing so (economy of scale), an option that a significant number of people use, an option that is difficult to separate who to charge and who not to (like pools) and items that are considered park of the basics at a similar resort. DVC has always drawn a line between what is included and pay to play. On one end you've got the All Inclusive type options like dining, water sports, etc and closer to the line you've got the daily housekeeping, towel packs, etc. Ultimately the resort and system must look at the options and decide what's reasonable to just roll in to the fees vs having those that use an option pay for it.

Am I the only one who thinks this makes no sense whatsoever? (I'm not saying your post doesn't make sense.) Could the vendor possibly be paying lower wages than Disney itself? Sheesh.

The contractor kept this option in place to get the bid originally, Disney and DVC were not paying money to the contractor for this option. Thus the price went from 0 to $12 per car per day for either DVC or the member to pay.

 

[Hopefully]

According to what I've read in Disney Files, DVC members are no longer going to get free valet parking at DVC resorts. Has any gotten upset over this? I sure am. That was the best perk and now my way of getting around (to and from resort, etc) is going to change a bit. I am sorry for the valet parkers because I didn't mind tipping them. The reason for this change is to not raise member dues according to the article. Well, I would go for the slight increase because valet parking for a one week stay will now cost $84.00. I don't think the increase would be or should be that much. I think Disney is looking for a way to make some money just like the airlines with their luggage and extra room charges.

I would NOT go for the "slight increase" referred to by the OP since I never use valet parking. While I am sorry for those who lost a frequently used perk, I think this is a fair decision

 

[CarolAnnC]

Up

 

[ORD2KOA]

I'm not following your question in relation to the post you quoted...what does the vendor wage have to do with it?

Yes, I think what tjkraz posted does make a lot of sense, and so does the decision to discontinue free valet parking. I wish it were still free as I've been an active user of the service, but I understand why it isn't now. I figure I'd pay for it one way or the other - through dues or through direct payment anyway. (And I continue to valet park and pay for it since the rule changed.)

I understand why it was pulled as a perk and I wasn't questioning tjkraz's post. It just seems absolutely ridiculous to me that they would outsource the parking to another company to begin with.

 

[crisi]

I understand why it was pulled as a perk and I wasn't questioning tjkraz's post. It just seems absolutely ridiculous to me that they would outsource the parking to another company to begin with.

But it isn't. The risk is on the vendor if the usage patterns change (which is what I suspect happened - the original contract was signed in a better economy where more cash guests used valet - when the economy tanked, the vendor wasn't breaking even on their staffing commitment for just cash guests - but they were parking all these DVC guests for FREE!). The vendor contracts to provide the valet. Disney doesn't have to worry about insurance for the valets, or valet service profitability - that becomes the vendor's problem.

Disney has a pretty good reputation for how they treat their employees. Outsourcing anything allows them to have a vendor who has less employee overhead (i.e. doesn't pay as much, offers fewer benefits), while Disney maintains its reputation.

 

[tgropp]

I would NOT go for the "slight increase" referred to by the OP since I never use valet parking. While I am sorry for those who lost a frequently used perk, I think this is a fair decision

How about another fair decision. NO more free internet in the rooms.....discounted annual passes.....as a matter of fact any other freebies that I do not use. I think that this would be a fair decision.

 

[snowbunny]

How about another fair decision. NO more free internet in the rooms.....discounted annual passes.....as a matter of fact any other freebies that I do not use. I think that this would be a fair decision.

While I'll miss the valet perk, these are completely different things. Free internet does not cost bupkis (that's why it's free at the Super 8 and every other budget chain), nor does a discounted annual pass involve money out of pocket for DVC.

 

[Mickey'sApprentice]

If you let me have free valet...I promise I won't use the fitness center.

Think about that one.

 

[Maistre Gracey]

If you let me have free valet...I promise I won't use the fitness center.

Think about that one.

MG

 

[Chuck S]

If you let me have free valet...I promise I won't use the fitness center.

Think about that one.

Fitness centers are becoming a common, and expected, amenity in average hotels, like Hampton Inn and Comfort Inn, As is free internet, but not valet parking.

And the one-time cost to provide a few execise machines is nothing compared to funding at least 3 employees per shift, 3 shifts a day, 7 days a week. 24x7x3=504 employee hours per week, plus benefits, unemployment insurance, workmens comp, overhead...you're easily looking at $250K per year per resort.

 

[Maistre Gracey]

Fitness centers are becoming a common, and expected, amenity in average hotels, like Hampton Inn and Comfort Inn, As is free internet, but not valet parking.

And the one-time cost to provide a few execise machines is nothing compared to funding at least 3 employees per shift, 3 shifts a day, 7 days a week. 24x7x3=504 employee hours per week, plus benefits, unemployment insurance, workmens comp, overhead...you're easily looking at $250K per year per resort.

Exercise equipment is not a one time expense.. Commercial grade machines are usually updated every few years. In addition, it costs money to maintain them, and staff the facility.
A commercial machine is easily $5000.

Insurance for a gym/fitness room?? You can bet it's not cheap.

MG

 

[Brian Noble]

Trying to draw circles around some things, but not others, as "expected" doesn't seem to be very useful.

The bottom line is that anything not specifically spelled out as granted to purchasers in the POS can be taken away at any time. That includes the AP discount, fitness centers (unless they are part of the declared condominium), and free internet. As with all such decisions, whether they are or are not taken away will boil down to what's deemed (by Disney) to be best for Disney and its bottom line.

 

[Maistre Gracey]

Trying to draw circles around some things, but not others, as "expected" doesn't seem to be very useful.

The bottom line is that anything not specifically spelled out as granted to purchasers in the POS can be taken away at any time. That includes the AP discount, fitness centers (unless they are part of the declared condominium), and free internet. As with all such decisions, whether they are or are not taken away will boil down to what's deemed (by Disney) to be best for Disney and its bottom line.

The issue isn't whether or not it's "legal", but rather whether or not we are happy about it and rather see dues increase to maintain it.

MG

 

[Dean]

Trying to draw circles around some things, but not others, as "expected" doesn't seem to be very useful.

The bottom line is that anything not specifically spelled out as granted to purchasers in the POS can be taken away at any time. That includes the AP discount, fitness centers (unless they are part of the declared condominium), and free internet. As with all such decisions, whether they are or are not taken away will boil down to what's deemed (by Disney) to be best for Disney and its bottom line.

I'd agree to a point Brian but in this situation it really doesn't get to that point. It's simply a decision by the Management company of what is and what is not appropriate costs to share between members vs what is appropriate to do pay to play.

The issue isn't whether or not it's "legal", but rather whether or not we are happy about it and rather see dues increase to maintain it.

MG

In terms of this former perk and assuming no further negotiations that alter the landscape, there is not one valid reason I can think of to share the costs across all members. The only reason I've seen put forth in support of having everyone pay for this perk for the relative few simply boils down to the fact that some want the perk but want others to supplement their stays. That there might be other perks that could be done pay to play that others don't use doesn't change that.

Exercise equipment is not a one time expense.. Commercial grade machines are usually updated every few years. In addition, it costs money to maintain them, and staff the facility.
A commercial machine is easily $5000.

Insurance for a gym/fitness room?? You can bet it's not cheap.

MG

There's still a major cost difference between the 2. I could certainly see that there is a cost to the fitness facilities and that it is also likely used by a relative minority. However, as has been pointed out, there is a certain amount of expectation that a resort have this option, as there is a pool. Plus there would be additional costs to make the fitness facilities pay to play in terms of front desk usage, dedicated personnel and the like. It's likely the option would be to do away with those facilities rather than make them pay to play if a choice had to be made. IMO it's a valid discussion whether we have fitness facilities and whether they be pay to play but it has nothing to do with the reasonableness of the various decisions regarding the valet parking options or any other resort components or perks. Each option should be addressed on it's own merits taking into account how many people use it, whether there is a volume discount or price break if done across the membership, costs associated with either option and the expectations of the masses as it pertains to the perception of a resort. Valet parking comes out on the short end of each and every component when considering spreading it across the entire membership. Even then it wouldn't be the entire membership but only those that have valet parking options.