pre purchase clarification

[Dean]

There is a big diffrence between a nominal $95 fee and impacting a major portion of thier sales pitch . You think anyone would buy BLT at $160pp if that is the only place they can go . If they dropped the option to use points to other dvc resorts . They would have to lower the price (something that is not going to happen) .

The same goes for the speculation around here that they will remove a trading option with the likes of rci . Although most here dont feel trading out is agood use of points it still makes their product look better .

Not to mention the above mentioned uproar from members.

You have a lot more faith in people than I do. Many people are like lambs to the slaughter and that's rarely more true than when it comes to Disney. It's not difficult to put a spin on anything, esp where Disney is concerned. How many times have we seen people post they were willing to spend thousands of more dollars because of their comfort with buying from Disney or for the perks that were a horrible value to start with. I think DVC will continue to have some type of trading option but simple history tells you they've changed exchange companies twice and made multiple smaller changes along the way that most members were never aware of.

The answer to your question is yes, I think DVC could sell BLT only with no other options (exchange or even other DVC resorts) at $160 a point, even at $200 a point. The question becomes how fast would it sell and how hard would they have to pitch it. Timeshares routinely sell memberships for tens of thousands of dollars that could be bought for pennies otherwise. I have a friend who I sent to Gatlinburg. I didn't think to warn him about the sales process and they did tour and buy. When he returned, I made him aware of the other options and costs and he stayed with the retail purchase. I felt bad that he'd been conned into buying and that I'd had a part in it simply by not warning him. I do not turn in names for sales prospects, even when I send people to various locations.

Your not going to convince me till you give me an example of something that a potential new buyer will look at and then move on .

None of the above mentioned would deter new buyers . I think any of that may come into play when they stop selling new dvc resorts . Till then I dont think it will happen .

That's just it, many potential buyers do move on, always have and always will. The question is whether there are enough to sustain the system and if not, they will either shut it down or change tactics. As I noted above, people often aren't very clear thinking when it comes to Timeshare, esp DVC. Might there be a break point where sales could not be sustained, sure, but I think we're a long way from that. IMO, DVC ceased being a reasonable retail purchase for anyone quite a while ago, somewhere at or under $100 a point retail. Even at that time resale was somewhere in the 80-85% range of retail for most options and now retail prices are up 50% and resale down 25%.

 

[ELMC]

Your not going to convince me till you give me an example of something that a potential new buyer will look at and then move on .

None of the above mentioned would deter new buyers . I think any of that may come into play when they stop selling new dvc resorts . Till then I dont think it will happen .

I'm not trying to convince you of anything. The point I'm trying to make is that throughout the history of DVC, they have made changes to the non guaranteed aspects of the program that people previously thought would remain unchanged. It has happened before and it could very well happen again.

 

[JimMIA]

You think anyone would buy BLT at $160pp if that is the only place they can go . If they dropped the option to use points to other dvc resorts .

Yes. Anyone who would pay $160 pp for BLT would pay $160 pp for BLT alone. Entire timeshare systems have been built on the premise that prospects will buy anything and everything with minimal understanding of the details.

They would certainly NOT tell prospects they couldn't book at other resorts -- unless the prospects directly asked that question...in which case the accuracy and ethics of the answers would vary somewhat. Instead, they'd tell the prospect (truthfully) that ONLY if they owned at BLT could they use points at BLT.

That would be the effect of pulling BLT out of the club -- it's a two way street. If BLT owners couldn't use their points at any other resort, owners of other resorts would not be able to book at BLT. And THAT would become the sales point, rather than wide usage of points.

The same goes for the speculation around here that they will remove a trading option with the likes of rci .

You are aware that DVC actually DID stop using RCI for a number of years...right?

They didn't eliminate exchanges altogether, but they started with RCI, changed to II, and then switched back to RCI a couple of years ago.

They've also suspended the ability to book DCL cruises with points for almost a year at a time on at least two occasions...including once recently.

 

[RobDoc]

When DVC first began, owners received free park passes. That's gone. Free valet parking? Gone. A lot of people were surprised when these perks were taken away.

Free park passes was NEVER a perk - it was a sales incentive for early buyers (just like discounts, APs, cruises, etc. have been). The incentive came with a definitive end date (December 31, 1999) and all buyers knew it ended at that time. It was never perk that could be taken away and ended on 12/31/99 just as declared in the purchase documents. No one was surprised when the Theme Park Admission Program ended since it had a finite ending date from the very beginning. It has been followed by a multitude of sales incentives ever since - including and discounted rate available today for direct purchase.

Perks come and go - the AP discount is a perk, the Owners Locker discount is a perk, discounts at WDW restaurants are perks, discounts for WDW shopping are perks, a discount on WDW tours is a perk, sneak previews for attractions are perks, pool hopping is a perk, valet parking was a perk. There are more perks available now than when DVC began and yet some choose to harp on free park passes - which never was a perk.

 

[ELMC]

Free park passes was NEVER a perk - it was a sales incentive for early buyers (just like discounts, APs, cruises, etc. have been). The incentive came with a definitive end date (December 31, 1999) and all buyers knew it ended at that time. It was never perk that could be taken away and ended on 12/31/99 just as declared in the purchase documents. No one was surprised when the Theme Park Admission Program ended since it had a finite ending date from the very beginning. It has been followed by a multitude of sales incentives ever since - including and discounted rate available today for direct purchase.

Perks come and go - the AP discount is a perk, the Owners Locker discount is a perk, discounts at WDW restaurants are perks, discounts for WDW shopping are perks, a discount on WDW tours is a perk, sneak previews for attractions are perks, pool hopping is a perk, valet parking was a perk. There are more perks available now than when DVC began and yet some choose to harp on free park passes - which never was a perk.

Fair point I suppose. But regardless of what you call it, the point stands that it was a financial benefit to owning DVC that no longer exists. I would suggest that your assertion that "all buyers knew it ended at that time" assumes a well educated consumer base, which I'm not willing to concede given the nature of timeshares and the newness of DVC. That being said, I'll try to elaborate a bit more when making a point, so thanks again for pointing this out.

 

[moobar25]

Since I'm pretty new in DVC...is the ability to stay at various resorts a PERK? Or is it simply the way the DVC system works?

Thanks Doc for clarifying - never knew about all those incentives and perks way back when.

 

[JimMIA]

You have a lot more faith in people than I do. Many people are like lambs to the slaughter and that's rarely more true than when it comes to Disney. It's not difficult to put a spin on anything, esp where Disney is concerned. How many times have we seen people post they were willing to spend thousands of more dollars because of their comfort with buying from Disney or for the perks that were a horrible value to start with.

To people who don't know much about timeshares, I'm sure Dean's comments sound harsh. May be, but the comments are accurate and honest.

REALITY is harsh sometimes...including with the better timeshares like DVC and a few other really good ones.

The answer to your question is yes, I think DVC could sell BLT only with no other options (exchange or even other DVC resorts) at $160 a point, even at $200 a point.

I can hear the chuckles from people who think NObody would ever pay $200 per point.

Again, REALITY.

There are not one, but several, timeshare systems who sell their product EVERY DAY for the equivalent of $200 per DVC point...and higher.

I have a friend who I sent to Gatlinburg. I didn't think to warn him about the sales process and they did tour and buy. When he returned, I made him aware of the other options and costs and he stayed with the retail purchase. I felt bad that he'd been conned into buying and that I'd had a part in it simply by not warning him.

Ouch! Bluegreen or Wyndham?

 

[JimMIA]

Since I'm pretty new in DVC...is the ability to stay at various resorts a PERK? Or is it simply the way the DVC system works?

To me, the best way to think of it is that it is the way DVC has always worked since they built their second resort. And the ability to use DVC points across the entire system is a fundamental component of the DVC system as we know it -- just like it is with Wyndham, Bluegreen, Marriott, and numerous others.

That ability to use points throughout the entire system is one of the most important pillars DVC's sales program is based on. And not only that, changing that feature would be a difficult legal exercise. I do NOT expect it to be changed.

But it is NOT guaranteed. Regardless of the likelihood of changes, changes are possible.

 

[Deb & Bill]

...REALITY is harsh sometimes...including with the better timeshares like DVC and a few other really good ones.I can hear the chuckles from people who think NObody would ever pay $200 per point.
...

Heck, I didn't think they would sell much at $100 a point. Boy, was I wrong.

I do remember discounted Length of Stay tickets (we bought them a few times for our guests) until the MYW tickets and the AP discount came around. Now, no LOS discounts.

 

[Dean]

Ouch! Bluegreen or Wyndham?

BG. I did everything I knew to give him the opportunity to cancel while he had the chance but it is ultimately his decision and I didn't want to cross over that line of appropriateness from providing info to telling someone else what to do.

Since I'm pretty new in DVC...is the ability to stay at various resorts a PERK? Or is it simply the way the DVC system works?

You'll likely get varying opinions. As I read it, the ability to use points at other DVC resorts is contractual for the resorts in the club. You'll get some disagreement on whether they can differentiate between qualified and non qualified points as for reservation windows at other club resorts, my opinion is they cannot based on this variable alone. Resorts could be removed from the club but generally only in specifics circumstances. New resorts could be excluded though. My perspective is that all owners will have the same home resort window and the same non home resort window contractually. I further feel that while the BVTC and a regular exchange company could be taken away, I think this is so unlikely as to be a non issue. I think it's unlikely the parks will close during DVC's existence or that any resort will be removed from the club. After that I believe everything else is on the table including all perks (non contractual options), reallocations, Pool Hopping, discounts and all cash type exchanges that are currently available. Even assuming that Disney will cont to run the system is an assumption I'm not willing to make. My view on timeshares is to expect the worst and hope for the best.

 

[Sammie]

This isn't the first time I've heard this speculated on. While I know nothing is guaranteed, can you imagine the uproar DVD would create if they instituted a change like that??? <I couldn't find a smiley that consisted of a bunch of DVC members with pitchforks and burning torches...>

I think it would cause a huge uproar to those that purchased direct from Disney, however if resale continues to undermine direct sales, I could see DVC limiting resale points to home resort usage only from some pre-announced time in the future going forward or even limiting resale points to home resort during peak DVC booking periods or change the booking window to favor direct points.

 

[RobDoc]

Fair point I suppose. But regardless of what you call it, the point stands that it was a financial benefit to owning DVC that no longer exists. I would suggest that your assertion that "all buyers knew it ended at that time" assumes a well educated consumer base, which I'm not willing to concede given the nature of timeshares and the newness of DVC. That being said, I'll try to elaborate a bit more when making a point, so thanks again for pointing this out.

Call it a "financial benefit" if you wish, but it was NEVER a perk. It was merely an incentive to purchase (a "financial benefit") - just like the current cash discounts that lower the current price for direct purchases. The incentive was even passed along to early resale purchases for those buying these contracts by resale - since the program was attached to the contract itself. The Free Park Admission Program was never included in any publication as a member perk. There was no Member website but DVC Members did receive a list of "Perks" available for their stay and park admission was never included in that list. Those eligible did receive park admission on their resort ID thru the end of 1999. In the early days, the Resort ID was not a room key. Originally, we all received a Ving Card to enter our villa. The Resort ID was to identify us as a WDW Resort Guest. The admission days were stamped with a date and punched when passing thru a turnstyle. These were Length-of-Stay passes and members received passes totaling 1/2 of the occupancy (2 passes for Studios and 1BR villas, 4 passes for 2BRs and 6 passes for GVs). The passes were good for the number of nights of the stay - they could not be used for arrival and departure days but members could choose which date would be included. Unused days could not be carried over as they were good only for the dates of that stay. For each day one of those passes was used, DVD had to reimburse WDW Theme Parks about $35.

You can suggest what you wish, but all buyers were clearly informed that the passes ended in 1999 - both verbally and in writing. There was no reason to be "well educated" since it was very clearly spelled out from the start and it applied only to purchases made from 1991 into 1995 (for OKW and VB buyers). Those purchasing later at OKW, VB or even HH and BWV never had this an an option and never had any free park passes even if they purchased prior to 1999. The sales incentive ended in early 1995 prior to the start of sales for HH and BWV even though the program itself ran thru 1999.

I made no "assertions". These are merely the facts and can easily be verified using the DVC documents of those who purchase during that time frame. It doesn't really matter what you are "willing to concede" since calling this program a "perk" is inherently incorrect - it was just an incentive to purchase and nothing more.

 

[ELMC]

To me, the best way to think of it is that it is the way DVC has always worked since they built their second resort. And the ability to use DVC points across the entire system is a fundamental component of the DVC system as we know it -- just like it is with Wyndham, Bluegreen, Marriott, and numerous others.

That ability to use points throughout the entire system is one of the most important pillars DVC's sales program is based on. And not only that, changing that feature would be a difficult legal exercise. I do NOT expect it to be changed.

But it is NOT guaranteed. Regardless of the likelihood of changes, changes are possible.

One example of a timeshare system going through a similar change is Marriott Vacation Club. Once a floating week system, it has now changed into a hybrid system that still allows ownership of weeks but also has a vacation club point aspect to it as well. The existence of the two structures affects the availability of inventory at different resorts depending on the type of membership owned.

Personally, we converted our week at Grande Vista to an annual allocation of vacation club points. This allows us to book stays for less than a week without losing the extra days. But because we did not make an additional purchase at the time, our membership is titled in a way that we are frozen out of some of the inventory at different resorts. It hasn't impacted us yet and I don't know if it will in the future. But this is a good example of timeshare systems making significant and drastic changes to their structure. Like Jim said...not likely but definitely possible.

One thing I do know is that Marriott is using this change as a reason to launch a major sales initiative. Some say that people would revolt if they couldn't use their DVC points to stay at other resorts. I suggest that they would simply buy more home resorts.

 

[Dean]

One example of a timeshare system going through a similar change is Marriott Vacation Club. Once a floating week system, it has now changed into a hybrid system that still allows ownership of weeks but also has a vacation club point aspect to it as well. The existence of the two structures affects the availability of inventory at different resorts depending on the type of membership owned.

Personally, we converted our week at Grande Vista to an annual allocation of vacation club points. This allows us to book stays for less than a week without losing the extra days. But because we did not make an additional purchase at the time, our membership is titled in a way that we are frozen out of some of the inventory at different resorts. It hasn't impacted us yet and I don't know if it will in the future. But this is a good example of timeshare systems making significant and drastic changes to their structure. Like Jim said...not likely but definitely possible.

One thing I do know is that Marriott is using this change as a reason to launch a major sales initiative. Some say that people would revolt if they couldn't use their DVC points to stay at other resorts. I suggest that they would simply buy more home resorts.

Other than new or largely unsold Marriott resorts, I doubt it'll make any difference on availability for some time to come, if ever. I agree they are taking the opportunity for scare tactics related to availability.

 

[Lil' Grumpy]

i see we're back doing this again & the same players are
presenting their point of views.

is anyone surprise that the responses are in line with the
ways they best meet their own investments?

while i am no timeshares expert, i see the same patterns
repeating & the implications one can derived from them.

some are better than others, & i think it is self evident-
for new comers if they pay attention.

from time to time, there are references to my professional
line of work. reality, is a curious thing - for many reasons.
yes , it can be a single point or number or measurement.
but it also can be found between 2 margins. ( & because i
used this theory to help others, is why i came up with a
t~test that shows the proof. )

the reason for acknowledging the above is exactly the way
i am learning from the responses -it does not matter if
i agree or disagree- instead the "value" is all about the things
i can apply toward using our investments. very helpful
in doing problem solving instead of getting frustrated.

for example, a neutral subject, like favorites movies &
the roles the actors/actresses are "adopting" to tell a story.
when watching, i think most recognize the movie roles
are not "real". because in my line of work, the primary
objective is to be effective @ a specific level- where one
can resume meeting all their needs within their desired
community-& to "forget" all about us. that's when we
"feel" we are doing our jobs. so lil'~details like this are
very important to guide us- accuracy is the key. the
unrealistic presentation in most hero/villian, in that
both have good & bad personalty traits. so for those
who are wanting to make the world a better place,
work on oneself .


i have thrown out a few things that i wanted to see the
type of feedback on the direction dvc may be heading.
some didn't get any, & those are the ones i think are
most likely come true. but the primary feeling i still
worry most about, is the lack of leadership & the
wrongs being done inside the ranks. i don't think the
leaders ever sit down & look what they could do
to take care of the owners and increase their sales
& profits. why owners? if they made the changes
that are needed, owners should be their guides biggest
referrals. management- our first visit, and the room
had been vandalized, why wasn't those that permitted
this fired?! those that made the current contact with rci,
everyone should have been looked @ for conflict
of interest & fired. but the current leaders should be
motivated toward the future. and they need to look
@ the resales & the trends they bring with them.

i have yet to hear about any dvc owner trading out so
they could resale on e-bay. what should that mean
to those running dvc?

i also think sooner or alter, dvc is going have to "manage"
the inside resorts trading ( like ssr to akl ) because of the
trends.

oh, i also think dvc owners must be willing to help themselves.
i think someone posted from last year meeting about not
getting blt? if you don't own there , then why didn't they
learn what they needed to do to give them the best chance?

i can see owners being given an extra day @ the 7 months
vs re-sales , because most owners are not concern about
the second market--their goal--is disney vacations.

dvc leaders should be active seeking the owners that are
direct. they should be their priority because they are
their future. they already know who is what, & i am
waiting for them to start.....after all....isn't value getting
what you pay for?


...fyi, reality is so important in our successes that i defined
it so there isn't any misunderstandings when i am using
it as a concept, reality is something that is true today,as
it was tomorrow, as it will be in the future. a value.

 

[BestDadEver]

T

That ability to use points throughout the entire system is one of the most important pillars DVC's sales program is based on. /I].

You disagree with me then say this , idk . So you think they can remove one of the"most important pillars" of there system and not only continue to get the same price but more . Lmao

I disagree .

A lot of above posts saying you didn't think they would get $100 pp . I agree in the current system the price incresses could be endless . My point was if they take away half of what is good about it thay can't sell for such a high price .

 

[BestDadEver]

B

You'll likely get varying opinions. As I read it, the ability to use points at other DVC resorts is contractual for the resorts in the club. You'll get some disagreement on whether they can differentiate between qualified and non qualified points as for reservation windows at other club resorts, my opinion is they cannot based on this variable alone. Resorts could be removed from the club but generally only in specifics circumstances. New resorts could be excluded though. .

With this statement why are you arguing with me that they could remove the ability to stay at other dvc resorts . Facepalm

 

[BestDadEver]

I think it would cause a huge uproar to those that purchased direct from Disney, however if resale continues to undermine direct sales, I could see DVC limiting resale points to home resort usage only from some pre-announced time in the future going forward or even limiting resale points to home resort during peak DVC booking periods or change the booking window to favor direct points.

I have thought of that too . Another reason I buy direct . All the doom and gloom around here , never mentions what they might do to deter resale purchases . Imo that would be where they start removing perks .

I dont think that resale is that overwhelming about yet due to the poll that was here about how bought resale and direct . I was suprised how many bought direct .

 

[Dean]

I have thought of that too . Another reason I buy direct . All the doom and gloom around here , never mentions what they might do to deter resale purchases . Imo that would be where they start removing perks .

I dont think that resale is that overwhelming about yet due to the poll that was here about how bought resale and direct . I was suprised how many bought direct .

With this statement why are you arguing with me that they could remove the ability to stay at other dvc resorts . Facepalm

As I read the POS and state statutes, I do not see how they can take away access to current club resorts other than as is specified to remove the resorts from the club. They could create a new system and give some access over others but this would only apply to new resorts or undeclared sections of any existing resorts. I see this as just as unlikely as many of the other scenarios. Marriott has given some owners reservation priority over others but it's not based on qualified vs non qualified members. Bluegreen has created a VIP system that gives some priority for wait lists but not formal reservations. Wyndham has a VIP program but I can't speak to the specifics in this area. Buying direct for what might be is not a reasonable choice, IMO. $40-60 a point for a possible future benefits or preventing a possible future issue is a pretty expensive insurance policy given that NONE of the current differences between qualified or non qualified are reasonable to even consider unless you simply have the points to use, much less to buy for. If one buys for the core services (DVC usage) as is the only reasonable choice, there is not current difference and it's VERY unlikely there will be any real difference going forward.

 

[DougEMG]

I've only ever bought resale, some have the full benefits as direct points do and some don't. My assumptions when I bought were and still are

1 - Disney will do whatever it takes to hit their dvc sales targets, and if that means making resales look less attractive by eliminating perks from resales, they will do that.

2 - No perk is ever going to be worth the price difference between buying direct and resale.

3 - Resorts can and might be removed from the DVC trading club, but individual owners can not be prevented from trading within DVC resorts as long as their resort belongs to the club.

4 - New resorts do not have to belong to the old club.

In the end I bought at places I'm happy staying at. Some I originally bought for the low price, some I bought because I wanted the location with the home resort booking advantage. But if every perk was eliminated (I'd really miss the annual pass discount) and no trading between resorts was allowed, I'd still be very happy with my purchases.

So I definitely believe in buying the cheapest resort that you are happy staying at if you can't trade out.