Riviera Sales by the numbers (vs CCV) for 2019 - (December added 1/16/2020)

[Cyberc1978]

Although I was fully aware of the restrictions before purchasing, my guide did tell me about the restrictions.

I certainly didn’t expect that, but I’m glad they did. Kudos for that.

 

[ELMC]

I hear ya, and obviously I wish there was no restrictions and maybe one day they will reverse that decision.

I'm not sure any purchase of DVC would result in a proportionate return once you sell. In theory it should work but resale prices don't always increase along with direct, and of course some actually decline (or will) over time.

Like it or not, we live in an environment where anyone who purchased resale up until 2018 can get out now at a profit. That's unheard of in the timeshare industry and it colors the way we look at DVC. We actually have expectations that our timeshares will hold or increase in value and we get disappointed when that doesn't happen. But timeshares losing value is the industry standard. In that respect, I give all the credit in the world to Disney. The fact that they are now moving in the direction of other timeshares is bothersome, but they are still a significantly better product.

That said...I believe that we are on a bubble. This pricing trajectory we have been on for the past three years is simply not sustainable. I don't know how, when, or why things will change, but they have to. What is happening in the DVC market is unsustainable.

However, in fairness, I was also the one who said that buying VGF direct was a bad idea because it was too expensive. At the time it was too expensive compared to resale prices in the 70s. Eventually I'll be right. It's coming soon...

It played into my decision to purchase, regardless of how DVC was marketing their product. No matter what large purchase I make in life, I want to know that there is an exit strategy. It's not so much that I would want to profit from selling my contracts, although I would in the current market. It was knowing that I could sell them, unlike a lot of timeshares that you cannot unload, no matter what the price is.

I agree completely.

DVC has reached a price point where many of the people who are justifying direct purchases are doing so based on the assumption that they can sell in ten years and recoup some of their costs. This goes beyond what you talk about with exit strategy, it's actually part of the calculation that makes the numbers of an initial purchase work. We haven't seen that before. Even the most diehard direct advocates are using a net price on Riviera of $100 based on the fact that they will purchase for $188 and sell for roughly $90 after commission ten years from now. It's great that that is a possibility that even exists, as it doesn't with most other timeshares. But it's a shaky foundation to build upon and a lot can change in that time. I think that's what has people spooked. These new restrictions are a harbinger of the changes that could decimate the inherent resale value of a DVC contract. That has people nervous, and rightfully so.

 

[ELMC]

An added bonus that some people can "make money " on the initial purchase. I don't think it's an added bonus that you should be able to recoup proportionate amount on your purchase. While DVC may not be a "non depreciating asset" like land or stocks, it very much an investment in lower vacation costs and should continue to provide "value" for 50 years. DVC is not like buying a retail product that within a few years you should not expect to get anywhere close to it's original purchase price on Craigslist.

To your point, I think many of us are spoiled. I know I am. I'm currently holding several contracts all of which I can see for close to twice what I paid for them and still I complain. In some ways I would actually be happier if the prices stayed suppressed. Then I would actually be buying more and using it like a timeshare instead of worrying about how to monetize the darn thing. Disney is a victim of its own success and I think it's a bit shortsighted for me to complain. For what it's worth, I bought a Marriott timeshare in the early 2000s for about $15,000. I could probably sell it for $800 today. I use it every year and I'm happy as a clam. But my DVC that I can sell for double...that I complain about. The irony is not lost on me.

That said...I am starting to question whether or not the equation that DVC was originally built on still applies today. The savings on future vacations has become a more nebulous claim in this pricing environment. The only thing keeping it from being completely out of whack is the recent spike in hotel rates.

 

[CanadaDisney05]

DVC has reached a price point where many of the people who are justifying direct purchases are doing so based on the assumption that they can sell in ten years and recoup some of their costs. This goes beyond what you talk about with exit strategy, it's actually part of the calculation that makes the numbers of an initial purchase work. We haven't seen that before. Even the most diehard direct advocates are using a net price on Riviera of $100 based on the fact that they will purchase for $188 and sell for roughly $90 after commission ten years from now. It's great that that is a possibility that even exists, as it doesn't with most other timeshares. But it's a shaky foundation to build upon and a lot can change in that time. I think that's what has people spooked. These new restrictions are a harbinger of the changes that could decimate the inherent resale value of a DVC contract. That has people nervous, and rightfully so.

IMO I believe its less about making the calculations work, and people feeling comfortable dropping large sums of cash knowing there is a safety net and they need to get out.

 

[CanadaDisney05]

That said...I am starting to question whether or not the equation that DVC was originally built on still applies today. The savings on future vacations has become a more nebulous claim in this pricing environment. The only thing keeping it from being completely out of whack is the recent spike in hotel rates.

I think this is the equation though. DVC's prices have estimates of future hotel price increases already built in. If your assumption is that room rates will stay the same for 50 years, then no DVC doesn't make sense at today's prices.

 

[Brianstl]

I think this is the equation though. DVC's prices have estimates of future hotel price increases already built in. If your assumption is that room rates will stay the same for 50 years, then no DVC doesn't make sense at today's prices.

I would think we have to be closing in a some kind of peak in hotel prices. It isn't just Disney. Industrywide the increase in prices have far outpaced inflation, plus there should be a downward pressure on the rates from services like Airbnb that really hasn't had an impact to this point that it should.

 

[lmhall2000]

Just throwing this out there. We had 1.5 hours with a DVC agent at Aulani last week. She kept pushing Aulani (probably higher commission/availability), but she did do a soft sell on Riviera- as soon as we stated our objections- she resignedly agreed as if she’s heard the same issue from others (restrictions pretty much tank the appeal, and there’s no ‘wow’ Disney factor). We come home and I had questions when viewing properties and that little chat button popped up- it eventually led to a phone call where once again, there was a query why Riviera was off the table. You could sense the frustration...he was very polite -but there’s very little pitch he has to secure that sale. Something’s gonna give. Disney will be forced to make changes to this product.

 

[CanadaDisney05]

I would think we have to be closing in a some kind of peak in hotel prices. It isn't just Disney. Industrywide the increase in prices have far outpaced inflation, plus there should be a downward pressure on the rates from services like Airbnb that really hasn't had an impact to this point that it should.

I agree hotel prices have outpaced inflation. With these long term analyses people get hung up about inflation, but forget what inflation really is. It's an average of how much prices of regular goods are going up. Like any average, there will be items that grow larger than the average, others that grow lower than the average, and even some that decrease. Having said that, even at inflationary increases, DVC should still works out (on most resorts) in the long run. It just makes the breakeven that much longer

 

[ELMC]

IMO I believe its less about making the calculations work, and people feeling comfortable dropping large sums of cash knowing there is a safety net and they need to get out.

People who can do that probably enjoy their ownership much more than I do.

I agree hotel prices have outpaced inflation. With these long term analyses people get hung up about inflation, but forget what inflation really is. It's an average of how much prices of regular goods are going up. Like any average, there will be items that grow larger than the average, others that grow lower than the average, and even some that decrease. Having said that, even at inflationary increases, DVC should still works out (on most resorts) in the long run. It just makes the breakeven that much longer

I agree to a point. The fact is that DVC prices and Disney hotel room prices have increased at a rate close to ten times inflation over the past decade and beyond. That's just too much of an outlier for my comfort.

 

[CanadaDisney05]

I agree to a point. The fact is that DVC prices and Disney hotel room prices have increased at a rate close to ten times inflation over the past decade and beyond. That's just too much of an outlier for my comfort.

Just anecdotally, I don't think this is unique to Disney. I believe hotel prices have gone up significantly in many places across the world.

 

[kboo]

It seems the only people who want it to fail are people here hoping that RIV owners lose big on their contract, as if to prove a point to DVD that they should have never introduced the resale restrictions.

I've explained my reasoning for buying RIV direct, and mostly kept quiet with all the people who want RIV to fail. But it's getting to me. Because whether or not the "Never Riviera!" camp means to or not, the implication is that those of us who did buy RIV direct must not know what we are doing. Or that we are somehow disloyal for deciding to buy RIV direct. I don't think RIV "failing" is going to help any owners - resale, direct, grandfathered - as others on this thread are saying, there isn't going to be a rollback of the resale restrictions no matter how many current owners "boycott" RIV. The chatter and activism here isn't going to change their minds either.

I can understand your point of view. Can you say the same?

Why should RIV buyers who are validating Disney’s new restrictions by purchasing RIV, expect resale buyers to pay top dollar for a restricted contract when there are others available or they could simply rent or pay cash and have freedom of choice?

Buying RIV is not a political act, and I am not validating the restrictions by buying RIV. I certainly don't expect potential RIV resale buyers to pay "top dollar" for RIV resale and indeed, 9-10 months ago I was sure I was willing to wait for a cheap RIV resale to use exclusively at RIV. I decided I'd pay a premium (not a whole lot, actually) to have points now and another home resort in the EP/HS area because, for various reasons, we decided we would not buy either BCV or BWV, resale or direct, given the features of the resorts themselves, the layouts of the villas, the cost at the time, and years left on the contracts. (If BWV had ANY dedicated 2br, that might have been a different story).

Then it shouldn’t matter to you that there are supposedly resale buyers who want the resort to fail. Problem solved. But I believe in their hearts many RIV buyers don’t believe that they won’t get their money back out of resale. Therein lies the problem.

There are a few too many negatives in that sentence, but I guess you are saying that you believe too many RIV buyers look at their RIV direct purchases as an "investment"? I'd be curious to see how that lines up with DVC buyers in general. And the DIS might not be the best place since we are largely an echo chamber here of pretty informed owners. Which I guess gets me back to the point above - that owners here who have bought RIV direct (making an informed choice) - are insinuated to either be disloyal or dumb? I think that's the insinuation that matters - not that there exist resale buyers who seem happy to hear negative news about anything RIV-associated. There have been plenty of threads saying bad things about particular resorts ("who would ever stop at BLT" and "VGF is too snobby" are 2 threads I remember from the last couple of years), but this time feels different.

The best advice I can give you is to drown out the noise. I am more interested as a new Riviera owner that their evac procedures resulted in a 3 hour delay in starting back up the Skyliner as well as the frequent and long stops. I don't think this means it will fail nor do I think they won't fix the issues. However, they did open the Skyliner months before Riviera opened. I don't think this is a coincidence. They need to see their weak spots and get it sorted out. It's going to take them some time to figure it out, but I really think they will. Personally, I cannot wait to stay there!

^^^ This, for sure. Whether I own at a particular resort or not, I want to see the system as a whole do well. That benefits all of us - all of our points are easier to rent, resale values are strong-ish if we have some major disaster, we won't lose everything, etc. It sets Disney apart from other timeshares.

No matter what large purchase I make in life, I want to know that there is an exit strategy. It's not so much that I would want to profit from selling my contracts, although I would in the current market. It was knowing that I could sell them, unlike a lot of timeshares that you cannot unload, no matter what the price is.

I agree! And while I know I could sell BLT and VGF now and essentially have vacationed a LOT for free lodging in the last few years, I also know that if I *have* to sell RIV anytime in the future, we are NOT going to recover anything close to what we paid. That said, given where we are in our lives and how we have planned financially, even with a financial catastrophe, we'll not need to sell RIV. (touches wood)

That said...I believe that we are on a bubble. This pricing trajectory we have been on for the past three years is simply not sustainable. I don't know how, when, or why things will change, but they have to. What is happening in the DVC market is unsustainable.

However, in fairness, I was also the one who said that buying VGF direct was a bad idea because it was too expensive. At the time it was too expensive compared to resale prices in the 70s. Eventually I'll be right. It's coming soon...

At least you are self aware!

I know this plays into the whole "big bad Disney" storyline, but if Disney can make the same amount of $ by charging more money to fewer people, does anyone think they wouldn't do that? The people who do go will have less crowds to contend with (granted, some people will always complain about crowds), and maybe they'll be happier and spend more money and come back more often.

I've also said on these boards before, that Disney probably makes a lot of $ through financing direct contracts too; if there's a huge crash and many of their direct owners have to sell, how much do they really care? The mortgages will get paid off if the owner goes by resale, or they foreclose and they get the points back. I'm not saying I agree with this or that I think it's ok, but if you're looking at the bottom line (and they are a for profit company, last I checked), I don't think they much care if resale prices are low if they can make a big distinction between them. We may think the distinction between direct and resale is stupid (or worse), but if anything it reduces ROFR pressure for them.

IMO I believe its less about making the calculations work, and people feeling comfortable dropping large sums of cash knowing there is a safety net and they need to get out.

Yes. And also why the vast majority of DISers say you should "never" buy unless you are able to do so paying cash and having that much cash tied up indefinitely.

A little background - My parents and inlaws owned RCI and other timeshares starting about 35 years ago - none of them are worth anything now and are not sellable. I think we actually agreed to just let a resale company take them rather than pay the $500/year in maintenance fees. I think my sister uses one of them from time to time, but that's about it. But, we had many years of terrific vacations all over the world with those timeshares. They were not nearly as luxurious as the DVC ones, and involved a lot of planning, sometimes years in advance, but we went to lots of places and stayed in 1-2 bedrooms where, if paying cash, we would have crammed all 4 of us into a hotel room (if we'd gone at all).

 

[Madame]

I've explained my reasoning for buying RIV direct, and mostly kept quiet with all the people who want RIV to fail. But it's getting to me. Because whether or not the "Never Riviera!" camp means to or not, the implication is that those of us who did buy RIV direct must not know what we are doing. Or that we are somehow disloyal for deciding to buy RIV direct. I don't think RIV "failing" is going to help any owners - resale, direct, grandfathered - as others on this thread are saying, there isn't going to be a rollback of the resale restrictions no matter how many current owners "boycott" RIV. The chatter and activism here isn't going to change their minds either.



Buying RIV is not a political act, and I am not validating the restrictions by buying RIV. I certainly don't expect potential RIV resale buyers to pay "top dollar" for RIV resale and indeed, 9-10 months ago I was sure I was willing to wait for a cheap RIV resale to use exclusively at RIV. I decided I'd pay a premium (not a whole lot, actually) to have points now and another home resort in the EP/HS area because, for various reasons, we decided we would not buy either BCV or BWV, resale or direct, given the features of the resorts themselves, the layouts of the villas, the cost at the time, and years left on the contracts. (If BWV had ANY dedicated 2br, that might have been a different story).



There are a few too many negatives in that sentence, but I guess you are saying that you believe too many RIV buyers look at their RIV direct purchases as an "investment"? I'd be curious to see how that lines up with DVC buyers in general. And the DIS might not be the best place since we are largely an echo chamber here of pretty informed owners. Which I guess gets me back to the point above - that owners here who have bought RIV direct (making an informed choice) - are insinuated to either be disloyal or dumb? I think that's the insinuation that matters - not that there exist resale buyers who seem happy to hear negative news about anything RIV-associated. There have been plenty of threads saying bad things about particular resorts ("who would ever stop at BLT" and "VGF is too snobby" are 2 threads I remember from the last couple of years), but this time feels different.


^^^ This, for sure. Whether I own at a particular resort or not, I want to see the system as a whole do well. That benefits all of us - all of our points are easier to rent, resale values are strong-ish if we have some major disaster, we won't lose everything, etc. It sets Disney apart from other timeshares.



I agree! And while I know I could sell BLT and VGF now and essentially have vacationed a LOT for free lodging in the last few years, I also know that if I *have* to sell RIV anytime in the future, we are NOT going to recover anything close to what we paid. That said, given where we are in our lives and how we have planned financially, even with a financial catastrophe, we'll not need to sell RIV. (touches wood)


At least you are self aware!

I know this plays into the whole "big bad Disney" storyline, but if Disney can make the same amount of $ by charging more money to fewer people, does anyone think they wouldn't do that? The people who do go will have less crowds to contend with (granted, some people will always complain about crowds), and maybe they'll be happier and spend more money and come back more often.

I've also said on these boards before, that Disney probably makes a lot of $ through financing direct contracts too; if there's a huge crash and many of their direct owners have to sell, how much do they really care? The mortgages will get paid off if the owner goes by resale, or they foreclose and they get the points back. I'm not saying I agree with this or that I think it's ok, but if you're looking at the bottom line (and they are a for profit company, last I checked), I don't think they much care if resale prices are low if they can make a big distinction between them. We may think the distinction between direct and resale is stupid (or worse), but if anything it reduces ROFR pressure for them.



Yes. And also why the vast majority of DISers say you should "never" buy unless you are able to do so paying cash and having that much cash tied up indefinitely.

A little background - My parents and inlaws owned RCI and other timeshares starting about 35 years ago - none of them are worth anything now and are not sellable. I think we actually agreed to just let a resale company take them rather than pay the $500/year in maintenance fees. I think my sister uses one of them from time to time, but that's about it. But, we had many years of terrific vacations all over the world with those timeshares. They were not nearly as luxurious as the DVC ones, and involved a lot of planning, sometimes years in advance, but we went to lots of places and stayed in 1-2 bedrooms where, if paying cash, we would have crammed all 4 of us into a hotel room (if we'd gone at all).

1. Never said it was a political act- this is preposterous

2. I doesn’t matter if it wasn’t your intention to validate the resale restrictions by buying, you did Vote with your wallet and all that.

3. I was responding DIRECTLY to someone intimating that everyone who wants the resale restrictions to fail want RIV buyers to lose money - I literally fought tooth and nail so that I could personally NOT benefit from the 2020 point chart. That is not how I personally feel and I can only speak for myself.

4. I am a very reactionary poster - ie it was PP who started slinging accusations & I simply presented the other side.

 

[kboo]

1. Never said it was a political act- this is preposterous

2. I doesn’t matter if it wasn’t your intention to validate the resale restrictions by buying, you did Vote with your wallet and all that.

3. I was responding DIRECTLY to someone intimating that everyone who wants the resale restrictions to fail want RIV buyers to lose money - I literally fought tooth and nail so that I could personally NOT benefit from the 2020 point chart. That is not how I personally feel and I can only speak for myself.

4. I am a very reactionary poster - ie it was PP who started slinging accusations & I simply presented the other side.

1 and 2 seem to be directly in conflict - if by buying something I am voting with my wallet, then I guess buying RIV direct is political, no? I personally don't think Disney cares and we educated buyers here are unlikely to make a difference on the resale restriction. But I am also not placing a value judgment on someone's personal choices. There are some things I actively boycott because of my views about that company and how it does business. While I am also not happy about the resale restrictions, in the general scheme of things, I will not allow go as far as boycotting buying RIV if, on everything else, it checks the boxes I need to check. (I'm not like this about other things - I was a vegetarian for many years and still aspire to be vegan for personal and political reasons, and I am still much more concerned about the raising and sourcing and environmental impact of many foods I eat).

3 - I am not understanding your comment about the 2020 point charts?

4 - I have tried not to be reactionary, and in quoting your posts, it's not meant to accuse you alone of anything - it's that you presented to most cogent view of the other side. So to the extent that you feel personally attacked, that wasn't what I meant and I don't want you to feel that way. At the same time, it's hard not to feel defensive when many of the posts denigrating RIV boil down to, "who would ever buy something like that?" The "Who would ever stop in BLT" and "VGF is too snobby" posts seem to have at least some healthy representation on both sides, but since RIV direct owners are still very much in the minority here, it makes the "RIV sucks" threads feel like an echo chamber.

 

[Madame]

1 and 2 seem to be directly in conflict - if by buying something I am voting with my wallet, then I guess buying RIV direct is political, no? I personally don't think Disney cares and we educated buyers here are unlikely to make a difference on the resale restriction. But I am also not placing a value judgment on someone's personal choices. There are some things I actively boycott because of my views about that company and how it does business. While I am also not happy about the resale restrictions, in the general scheme of things, I will not allow go as far as boycotting buying RIV if, on everything else, it checks the boxes I need to check. (I'm not like this about other things - I was a vegetarian for many years and still aspire to be vegan for personal and political reasons, and I am still much more concerned about the raising and sourcing and environmental impact of many foods I eat).

3 - I am not understanding your comment about the 2020 point charts?

4 - I have tried not to be reactionary, and in quoting your posts, it's not meant to accuse you alone of anything - it's that you presented to most cogent view of the other side. So to the extent that you feel personally attacked, that wasn't what I meant and I don't want you to feel that way. At the same time, it's hard not to feel defensive when many of the posts denigrating RIV boil down to, "who would ever buy something like that?" The "Who would ever stop in BLT" and "VGF is too snobby" posts seem to have at least some healthy representation on both sides, but since RIV direct owners are still very much in the minority here, it makes the "RIV sucks" threads feel like an echo chamber.

I don’t think that we have the same definition of political - I speak French, so it could be a language barrier. For me, I feel that the actions we take are more indicative of our true sentiments than words which are so often not reflective of our truths.

It isn’t a question of boycotting. It is literally the message sent to DVC by educated (product educated) buyers of RIV - that message is that the buyer accepts the restrictions and the direction of DVC in general. That is how they will spin it no matter what your intentions. That’s not political in my understanding of the word, but YMMV.

2. PP was indicating that all anti-restrictions posters are hoping that RIV buyers lose money. This is not reflective of my personal moral system - no I’m not a saint, but a 10 step follower with a code I attempt to live by in order to keep on the right path.

I have demonstrated this when I jumped all over FB etc educating members about the lock-off premium. I could personally have benefited from the proposed chart as we are 2 bd dwellers in magic season and could have saved many points.

Instead I fought against my own best interest. I resent anyone who implies that because I am anti-restrictions, that I am hoping members lose money. It makes me angry. I will no longer fight against the lock-off premium. I have learned that hard lesson as many of the people who benefited from it being overturned cheer on other social media sites, thrilled that those dirty resalers are now getting their due, too vengeful to understand that they too are getting screwed.

I do not feel attacked. I’m not that invested - remnants of getting burned and spurned for my point chart efforts. I believe RIV will be a gorgeous resort. CBR is my favourite mod. I love the pool, the food court, the laid back vibe, everything about the place. I do not hate RIV. Nor, however, will I indicate my agreement with the direction DVC is headed, by ever buying there.

 

[Spark65]

I am curious how many direct buyers initially bought solely with the intention of selling at a profit? I see this whole Riviera argument really about people trying to save money staying at Disney and selling in the future to make money. I think the profit factor in buying Disney shouldn't be a fall back plan.

If I wanted a true real estate investment I would buy real property/land not a timeshare with end dates.

 

[Madame]

I am curious how many direct buyers initially bought solely with the intention of selling at a profit? I see this whole Riviera argument really about people trying to save money staying at Disney and selling in the future to make money. I think the profit factor in buying Disney shouldn't be a fall back plan.

If I wanted a true real estate investment I would buy real property/land not a timeshare with end dates.

I don’t view it as an investment. The problem is there are Disney people and there are timeshare people. Many of us, myself included, would never buy another timeshare. They have a horrendous reputation and stories abound about having to PAY someone to offload it.

We bought because DVC was DIFFERENT. The point system, the retained value, the Disney difference. Now they are completely changing what we bought. Does DVC not realize that many of us ONLY bought because it was not a traditional timeshare? Evidently not as they are systematically dismantling and destroying what attracted and assured many of us.

 

[Spark65]

I don’t view it as an investment. The problem is there are Disney people and there are timeshare people. Many of us, myself included, would never buy another timeshare. They have a horrendous reputation and stories abound about having to PAY someone to offload it.

We bought because DVC was DIFFERENT. The point system, the retained value, the Disney difference. Now they are completely changing what we bought. Does DVC not realize that many of us ONLY bought because it was not a traditional timeshare? Evidently not as they are systematically dismantling and destroying what attracted and assured many of us.

Well I am a Disney person we have been going for over 20 years. We didn't buy it solely as a timeshare in that regard but it gave us a way to go more often with savings on the rooms and the other blue card perks were never considered.
We used to stay at the Poly but the costs got to be too much so finally buying there gave us a more affordable option. We also bought because of the ability to transfer it to our kids, who happen to be in their 20's and still love going.
In the end we never bought to sell but to pass on to my kids and now that our family is growing we need bigger digs. Resorts with larger rooms like AKL or CC (wife loves AKL) one just doesn't have the time left worth the cost and my wife does not like CC so the foot was down on that one .
So we have bought RIV as well it gives us the years we want and larger rooms and I like it's proximity to Epcot. I will never be in a position to have to sell either we used disposable money to buy and we leave our children and hopefully grandchildren with a piece of the magic.

For the cost of going to Jamaica 3 times I can buy 160 points and go to Disney for 50 years and I like Disney.

 

[Madame]

Well I am a Disney person we have been going for over 20 years. We didn't buy it solely as a timeshare in that regard but it gave us a way to go more often with savings on the rooms and the other blue card perks were never considered.
We used to stay at the Poly but the costs got to be too much so finally buying there gave us a more affordable option. We also bought because of the ability to transfer it to our kids, who happen to be in their 20's and still love going.
In the end we never bought to sell but to pass on to my kids and now that our family is growing we need bigger digs. Resorts with larger rooms like AKL or CC (wife loves AKL) one just doesn't have the time left worth the cost and my wife does not like CC so the foot was down on that one .
So we have bought RIV as well it gives us the years we want and larger rooms and I like it's proximity to Epcot. I will never be in a position to have to sell either we used disposable money to buy and we leave our children and hopefully grandchildren with a piece of the magic.

For the cost of going to Jamaica 3 times I can buy 160 points and go to Disney for 50 years and I like Disney.

Many have the intention of never selling. I don’t either. Life happens - like my father dead at 46 of a brain tumour, or a deep recession, loss of pension etc, etc. It is a blessing indeed to be in a secure economic position, but life is precarious at times.

 

[Bing Showei]

Buying RIV is not a political act, and I am not validating the restrictions by buying RIV.

2. I doesn’t matter if it wasn’t your intention to validate the resale restrictions by buying, you did Vote with your wallet and all that.

A Direct Riviera purchase is affirmative support for the current resale restrictions. There's not much debating that. If no one bought Riviera, Disney would have to ask "Why is this not selling? What's different about this product than what we've sold so well in the past. Is this worth us continuing down this path? Have we taken this a step too far?"

I've made no attempt to hide that I hate the new restrictions. I want those new restrictions to be withdrawn. I want the new restrictions to fail. But they won't fail. They won't fail because people who don't know what a "resale" is will continue to buy on a whim. People who are so rich they don't really care will pay cash and not think twice about it. People who are super knowledgeable and amazing contributors on the DISboards will continue to buy the resort. Not enough people are bothered by the restrictions for it to make a difference with sales. Sales are keeping pace with CCV. Riviera, Reflections, and every timeshare that comes after it will sell out just like every other timeshare that came before it.

So why are informed, educated, intelligent people buying Riviera? Because they're self-serving. They made a personal choice that their family benefits more from owning at Riviera than protesting and not owning there. They made a personal choice that they would be happier owning than taking a stand agains the ills of the new restrictions. They are happier owning Riviera than sitting on the sidelines wishing they didn't have to pay cash to stay near Epcot during F&W.

In this same vein, every resale buyer post-2011 laid down the foundations for Disney to create the latest resale restrictions. As a post-2016 resale owner, I said to Disney in no uncertain terms, "You have created a 2nd class system of owners, and I am OK with that. I will buy into and support the system and reaffirm the choices you've made to do this." My purchase encouraged Disney to explore what else they can do to differentiate the direct product from the resale product. Reduced value contracts continued to sell and sell well. Buying resale post-2011, every resale owner acquiesced to the creation of a two-tier system that told Disney they haven't taken the restrictions far enough.

And today, keeping my timeshare, I'm telling Disney that what they're doing with the resale restrictions is OK with me and I will continue to support the system. There's not much debating this either.

So as someone who rails so hard against the restrictions, why do I keep my ownership? Because I'm self serving. I made the personal choice that my family benefits more from owning than protesting and not owning. I made the personal choice that I would be happier owning, despite spouting from my soapbox about the ills of the new restrictions. I am happier owning than sitting on the sideline wishing I didn't have to pay cash to stay on site.

So here we are. Every owner is culpable. I don't begrudge Riviera owners for buying. They're doing the same exact thing I'm doing: deciding what's best for their family. I'm not buying Riviera. Not because I'm making some kind of grand statement or protest, but because I have assessed that my own family is better served not doing that. You can be sure if after detailed, thoughtful, and thorough analysis, it was determined that this was a good move for my family (read: my wife wanted to own there), that while I would be just as upset with the restrictions... just probably a lot less vocal.

Kudos to your for speaking out, kboo. The reality is in this little Disney timeshare game, The Walt Disney Company, Inc., Riviera owners, resale owners, direct owners, we're all just making choices that best serves our own needs, and no owner owes anyone else anything.

I'll be making more of an effort to delineate my displeasure with resale restrictions from Riviera ownership. My apologies to any Riviera owners I've offended if that has been muddled in the past.

 

[Madame]

A Direct Riviera purchase is affirmative support for the current resale restrictions. There's not much debating that. If no one bought Riviera, Disney would have to ask "Why is this not selling? What's different about this product than what we've sold so well in the past. Is this worth us continuing down this path? Have we taken this a step too far?"

I've made no attempt to hide that I hate the new restrictions. I want those new restrictions to be withdrawn. I want the new restrictions to fail. But they won't fail. They won't fail because people who don't know what a "resale" is will continue to buy on a whim. People who are so rich they don't really care will pay cash and not think twice about it. People who are super knowledgeable and amazing contributors on the DISboards will continue to buy the resort. Not enough people are bothered by the restrictions for it to make a difference with sales. Sales are keeping pace with CCV. Riviera, Reflections, and every timeshare that comes after it will sell out just like every other timeshare that came before it.

So why are informed, educated, intelligent people buying Riviera? Because they're self-serving. They made a personal choice that their family benefits more from owning at Riviera than protesting and not owning there. They made a personal choice that they would be happier owning than taking a stand agains the ills of the new restrictions. They are happier owning Riviera than sitting on the sidelines wishing they didn't have to pay cash to stay near Epcot during F&W.

In this same vein, every resale buyer post-2011 laid down the foundations for Disney to create the latest resale restrictions. As a post-2016 resale owner, I said to Disney in no uncertain terms, "You have created a 2nd class system of owners, and I am OK with that. I will buy into and support the system and reaffirm the choices you've made to do this." My purchase encouraged Disney to explore what else they can do to differentiate the direct product from the resale product. Reduced value contracts continued to sell and sell well. Buying resale post-2011, every resale owner acquiesced to the creation of a two-tier system that told Disney they haven't taken the restrictions far enough.

And today, keeping my timeshare, I'm telling Disney that what they're doing with the resale restrictions is OK with me and I will continue to support the system. There's not much debating this either.

So as someone who rails so hard against the restrictions, why do I keep my ownership? Because I'm self serving. I made the personal choice that my family benefits more from owning than protesting and not owning. I made the personal choice that I would be happier owning, despite spouting from my soapbox about the ills of the new restrictions. I am happier owning than sitting on the sideline wishing I didn't have to pay cash to stay on site.

So here we are. Every owner is culpable. I don't begrudge Riviera owners for buying. They're doing the same exact thing I'm doing: deciding what's best for their family. I'm not buying Riviera. Not because I'm making some kind of grand statement or protest, but because I have assessed that my own family is better served not doing that. You can be sure if after detailed, thoughtful, and thorough analysis, it was determined that this was a good move for my family (read: my wife wanted to own there), that while I would be just as upset with the restrictions... just probably a lot less vocal.

Kudos to your for speaking out, kboo. The reality is in this little Disney timeshare game, The Walt Disney Company, Inc., Riviera owners, resale owners, direct owners, we're all just making choices that best serves our own needs, and no owner owes anyone else anything.

I'll be making more of an effort to delineate my displeasure with resale restrictions from Riviera ownership. My apologies to any Riviera owners I've offended if that has been muddled in the past.

As an SSR owner I’ve heard worse for a lot longer