The new resale rule: The Empire Strikes Back

[cseca]

Who are all these people who took resale values into consideration at all (or to a great extent) into their purchase decision? I never did - never was even the teeniest consideration at all. I really don't think I'm dumb or that unique in that way. So I don't see it affecting direct sales in a negative way (due to loss in resale value), and I don't think Disney does either, since that's the exact reason why they are doing it - to enhance direct purchases.

One of those peoples would be me.
Maybe not the original contract but the subsequent addons were definitely influenced by the "history" of DVC quality and resale values.

Now, maybe I'm the stupid one but I tend to want to know how something performs before I plunk down a big chunk o' $.
Again, understanding that it is not an investment BUT still I want to know how the company have been faring. Then again, I'm not a risk taker and don't like to do something that involves a lot of $ without doing a good amt of research.

 

[Dean]

The big issue for me is the move towards ownership distinctions. Could Disney Vacation make a distinction between new owners and current owners? Seems to me if they give new owners more annual "perks" or even booking advantages, over current owners, then that would generate more direct sales. If that did happen, I'm wondering if those who currently have no problem with ownership distinctions might view this issue differently.
Scott

Sure, Marriott has done so as recently as this past June and Bluegreen has several times. There are several ways they could. One is to create a DVC II and change the rules for new resorts. Another is to create a new trust with different rules and convert all future buyers into the trust no matter what what home resort.

It isn't about me getting my way considering the decision effects so many of our fellow members. It simply is that DVC/Disney has purposely made a decision that will likely minimize the resale value of mine and fellow members owner interest. It really is that simple. IMHO they really don't care as long as it yields what they want as a business. But I believe what they sorely forgot is that every direct buyer is a potential resale buyer and if word possibly gets out, direct buyers may think twice if they know that their purchase price is immediately going to plummet quite significantly. In the end the whole thing may just backfire on them. I wonder what their response will be if asked about resale by one of their potential direct purchasers?? Loved to be present for that one!!!! I can't imagine paying in the 100's per point and not taking resale value into consideration.

The thing that is so discouraging is that so many fellow members won't even know that this is going on until after March 20th. They will discover what has happened at some point in the future and may then also find that their resale values have taken an unanticipated and unexpected nose dive. Pretty sad.

How many people are affected or how they feel about it is somewhat irrelevant other than as it actually affects sales, not resales. The reality is that any buyer either knew or should have known that changes would happen and that perks weren't guaranteed.

So is it possible for them to make a decision that all direct buyers who purchase after a certain date will be given a 9 month booking window at other DVC reorts (I.e., their non home resorts)? It would certainly generate direct sales. I'm just wondering what their limits are.
Scott

Not with the current system. They could if they create a new system, even using existing resorts. And there are ways around it to a degree because they could create a differential for the wait list if they wanted.

And this is why this change should be a MAJOR concern to everyone.

HBC

Concern no, reality check, certainly. It's simply a realization of what many of us have said for years, buy the points to use at the resorts and look at everything else as fluff that is not guaranteed. Anything else is misguided and far too risky. To a degree, each and every buyer should even consider the possibility that the parks might close in the near future.

 

[Sammie]

So is it possible for them to make a decision that all direct buyers who purchase after a certain date will be given a 9 month booking window at other DVC reorts (I.e., their non home resorts)? It would certainly generate direct sales. I'm just wondering what their limits are.
Scott

Dean answered the 9 month question, Thanks Dean.

I don't think the perks will be limited to new direct buyers but rewards for more points, which would encourage both new buyers and members to have more points.

Basically they want it to look like this: resale: bad
lots of direct points: good

 

[Mjkre]

"....Yet, I'm not even seeing a discussion about it."


Seriously, I just have to ask, did you not see the 40+ pages of comments on this topic under the 'Direct Purchase Benefits Announced' thread?

 

[Dumbo_Husband]

Am I missing something here? I would think the DVC re-sale market is what keeps DVC alive. What if people just simply dropped out and stopped paying their maintenance, etc.? Is there really enough direct, new contract demand to keep the system printing money for Disney? Maybe there is given the new direction Disney is taking on re-sale vs. direct. We'll see after March 20th.

 

[canoe86]

We have been seriously considering buying. when I first hear this, my initial thought was....I better buy now. The more I thought about it, I think I can get a better price on the resale market AFTER this rule.

Any thoughts?

 

[Tiggr88]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott
So is it possible for them to make a decision that all direct buyers who purchase after a certain date will be given a 9 month booking window at other DVC resorts (I.e., their non home resorts)? It would certainly generate direct sales. I'm just wondering what their limits are.
Scott

Not with the current system. They could if they create a new system, even using existing resorts. And there are ways around it to a degree because they could create a differential for the wait list if they wanted.


I thought the only thing that was contractually guaranteed was a one month booking advantage. If so, what would stop them from doing this? Couldn't they change the booking window to 11 month at your home resort, 10 months for other DVC for direct buyers, 7 months for other DVC for resale buyers? Is it that it would only apply to new purchases in the original question and not all direct buyers? Or do I not understand the current process correctly?

 

[StitchBuddy]

Wow!! We had finally decided we would buy a resale as soon as we get our house paid off. Should be end of this year. Now, I don't think I am as interested. I bet a lot of people will feel the same way. While I know you should really only buy in to use at Disney, the fact that you had other options was great. Not now!!! They just lost me! I think I will spend my dollars where they are more appriciated. Funny thing is my DD is growing up, but still wanted it for grandkids etc... Now I feel less sure of the future of DVC. Not to mention dues do nothing but go up, up, up!! I am really glad we didn't buy direct either!! Just think if you need to get rid of it.

 

[Mississippian]

We have been seriously considering buying. when I first hear this, my initial thought was....I better buy now. The more I thought about it, I think I can get a better price on the resale market AFTER this rule.

Any thoughts?

This is exactly right. There appears to have been a flurry of sales at the Timeshare Store as people rush to buy in under the old rules. But more contracts will be put up for sale, and many people are going to be "taken in" by the Disney salesmen that the resale contracts aren't as good, which will lower resale prices.

And they aren't as good, in that you won't be able to throw away points on things you shouldn't be doing anyway. But that won't matter to the knowledgeable buyer, who will be paying even less on the resale market, and will have a contract that is just as good as it ever was.

Current owners are going to take a hit, though, when they get ready to sell.

 

[laura-k]

How many people are affected or how they feel about it is somewhat irrelevant other than as it actually affects sales, not resales. The reality is that any buyer either knew or should have known that changes would happen and that perks weren't guaranteed.

How true -Remember the big Valet Parking change ,when I purchased this was a perk -By the time I had my first stay ,they had done away that perk-
Although many members voiced their " feelings" wrote emails and complained -it didn't matter

 

[disneynutz]

Wow!! We had finally decided we would buy a resale as soon as we get our house paid off. Should be end of this year. Now, I don't think I am as interested. I bet a lot of people will feel the same way. While I know you should really only buy in to use at Disney, the fact that you had other options was great. Not now!!! They just lost me! I think I will spend my dollars where they are more appriciated. Funny thing is my DD is growing up, but still wanted it for grandkids etc... Now I feel less sure of the future of DVC. Not to mention dues do nothing but go up, up, up!! I am really glad we didn't buy direct either!! Just think if you need to get rid of it.

Sadly the number of people who are aware of what's happening to the DVC is so small, we don't have any impact on Disney sales.

They will continue to build additional resorts and reshape the DVC into the image of other timeshare companies without regard to the effect on the owners that helped make them successful.

Bill

 

[MKCP1984]

Hey MDSD8700, fellow Tinley Park resident.... and fellow DVC member!!! Good to know I'm not the only one thinking Disney while being buried waist-deep in the snow.

I agree with those who purchased DVC points with all intentions of using each and every one of them. --And-- loving the rental options when not able to use them and the flexibility to stay at other resorts. My plan is to experience each resort at least once, and to return to our favorites as much as possible.

I will be disappointed if the Disney company restricts our options any further, but I won't be surprised. And, if so, the worst case scenario is a (forced) yearly Disney vacation at SSR.

 

[bicker]

It simply is that DVC/Disney has purposely made a decision that will likely minimize the resale value of mine and fellow members owner interest.

Which doesn't refute what you were replying to one bit. Again: Just because you don't get your way doesn't mean that the process for arriving at the decision was in any way flawed. There simply might be other things that prevailed over your preferences. Legitimate, honorable, respectable, appropriate, legal, goodly, and/or deserving other things - even though you don't like it.

It simply is that DVC/Disney has purposely made a decision that will likely minimize the resale value of mine and fellow members owner interest.

Yes, they did, and with apparently good reasons (read the rest of the thread for explanations about why this is very good for Disney).

It really is that simple.

It is; I'm not sure why you're making it hard.

IMHO they really don't care as long as it yields what they want as a business.

You are again confusing "caring" with "obeying". It is absolutely not necessary for someone to obey you to care about you.

In the end the whole thing may just backfire on them.

Anything is possible. It could rain frogs tomorrow. However, given the way DVC typically sells, there is no reason to think that this change isn't the best decision for Disney.

 

[bicker]

I'm just wondering what their limits are.

Read the papers you sign before you sign them. Everything that you're guaranteed is outlined in them. Anything not specified, is not guaranteed.

That is my understanding after reading many different posts on these boards and our DVC contract. It looks like they can do just about anything if we are reading things correctly.

No, not "just about anything" but they can do lots of things, including turning off banking and borrowing, exchanges, etc. All of that is clear from reading the papers you had to have signed to be member. If any of this is a shock to you, then you didn't do your own due diligence when you made your real estate purchase.

It's simply a realization of what many of us have said for years, buy the points to use at the resorts and look at everything else as fluff that is not guaranteed. Anything else is misguided and far too risky. To a degree, each and every buyer should even consider the possibility that the parks might close in the near future.

100% on-target.

 

[bicker]

Am I missing something here? I would think the DVC re-sale market is what keeps DVC alive. What if people just simply dropped out and stopped paying their maintenance, etc.? Is there really enough direct, new contract demand to keep the system printing money for Disney?

I'm sure Disney makes some money from operating DVC, but it seems pretty limited. They do indeed make money on sales. They don't make money on re-sales. Beyond that, if folks stop paying maintenance, then they're in default on an obligation, and their ownership interest can be confiscated. Effectively, Disney (or DVC, perhaps) gets to sell those points again, without having had to pay for them.

 

[maminnie]

I find it nothing short of astonishing that there are so many people who just have the attitude " we had good use of it so I don't care my asset has unnecessarily been reduced in value" . Have we really become such a "throw away society" that simply because something has provided some service we are happy to consign it to the trash, even if it has a sizable intrinsic value? Or is it simply that people love Disney so much they will allow a sub division to take money away from them ( or their children) without a murmur, because to voice dissatisfaction would ruin the dream?

I guess we get the treatment and leadership we deserve.

Must admit, I just don't get it.

I too just don't understand how people can say they just don't care. As I have said a number of times, for those that bought when per point costs were more reasonable, there was nothing except the economy and supply and demand (including new resorts) that seemed to be effecting resale values. There was nothing historically for any of us to assume that our purchase (I won't use the word investment as that seems to bother many on these boards) would decrease significantly in value. It is only this latest new rule for resales that may change things.

I personally feel there are those that definitely did look into resale value before they purchased unlike others. I know we did.

The posts by people who don't care about this latest change and possible effect on their purchases really surprise me........

 

[maminnie]

Which doesn't refute what you were replying to one bit. Again: Just because you don't get your way doesn't mean that the process for arriving at the decision was in any way flawed. There simply might be other things that prevailed over your preferences. Legitimate, honorable, respectable, appropriate, legal, goodly, and/or deserving other things - even though you don't like it.

Yes, they did, and with apparently good reasons (read the rest of the thread for explanations about why this is very good for Disney).

It is; I'm not sure why you're making it hard.

You are again confusing "caring" with "obeying". It is absolutely not necessary for someone to obey you to care about you.

Anything is possible. It could rain frogs tomorrow. However, given the way DVC typically sells, there is no reason to think that this change isn't the best decision for Disney.

Bicker:

I HAVE read every post about this topic just like you. I still find it hard to believe that people don't care about this.

This isn't about me or obeying me, it is about all members. I have been a member for a number of years and did research the purchase extensively. Resale values have held steady with ups and downs associated with the economy and supply and demand not DVC rule changes.

It may be a good decision for Disney and that's great for them......but it was at the expense of its members. A company is only as good as the customers that support them. Without them, they are nothing.

 

[epd0407]

Read the papers you sign before you sign them. Everything that you're guaranteed is outlined in them. Anything not specified, is not guaranteed.

No, not "just about anything" but they can do lots of things, including turning off banking and borrowing, exchanges, etc. All of that is clear from reading the papers you had to have signed to be member. If any of this is a shock to you, then you didn't do your own due diligence when you made your real estate purchase.

100% on-target.

Your blanket defense of Disney in this matter is troubling. Your distorting the truth in their defense. Although you bring up what is in the contract as binding and the whole truth "which I agree it is legally" the substance of what you left out is whats important. Many people go down to Disney and take the tour and hear all about this wonderful DVC membership. "I will qualify that the phone guides do the same". When the Sales "liars" are done and they get your money will you deny what exactly they told you comes with this membership? On first contact with my "direct" guide some of the first things he touted are the banking and borrowing along with the ability to stay at ANY DVC resort. I dont know of ANY member who on day one while thinking about purchasing was provided a "contract" in its entirety to read... "Hell, im well within my process and I have yet to see one".

I remember from my law classes and according to local laws anyway that a verbal contract does have some weight and if this was to be changed in that manner I would be the first to seek out an attorney and file a class action lawsuit against Disney. The way Disney is selling these is borderline deceptive if that is the case. I know I have NEVER received a disclaimer from a guide I talked to.

If you willing to just roll over and play dead while Disney does what they want without a fight after you have dished out so much money is saddening. They made this change, if you dont at least make your opinion known to them they will consider doing anything they want in the future to devalue your investment. scenarios like this have happened throughout history where a leader starts small all of a sudden all freedoms are taken away.

 

[bicker]

I still find it hard to believe that people don't care about this.

Who said that they didn't care? No one I could see. Everyone cares: Disney cares; DVC cares; DVC members care. We all care. I think people would be far better off moving past the idea that anyone "doesn't care" - it is incorrect, and a red herring.

This isn't about me or obeying me (kind of a silly statement IMHO) it is about all members.

The word was chosen deliberately. You are asserting that they should do what you want them to do. That's called obedience. So it isn't a silly statement. If anything is silly, is saying that they should do what you want them to. They should do what's best for them, just like you do what's best for you.

And I acknowledge that your perspective is indeed "all about the members" - i.e., it views the situation from the standpoint that the only thing that matters is what is best for the members. That's an unreasonable expectation.

It may be a good decision for Disney and that's great for them......but it was at the expense of its members. A company is only as good as the customers that support them. Without them, they are nothing.

And Disney is among the best, even though they didn't obey you in this case.

 

[Sandisw]

I too just don't understand how people can say they just don't care. As I have said a number of times, for those that bought when per point costs were more reasonable, there was nothing except the economy and supply and demand (including new resorts) that seemed to be effecting resale values. There was nothing historically for any of us to assume that our purchase (I won't use the word investment as that seems to bother many on these boards) would decrease significantly in value. It is only this latest new rule for resales that may change things.

I personally feel there are those that definitely did look into resale value before they purchased unlike others. I know we did.

The posts by people who don't care about this latest change and possible effect on their purchases really surprise me........

Just wondering why you are surprised that many of us bought to use our timeshare?

What other reason is there to own a timeshare but to use it? Every DVC member certainly can look at this and determine their own opinion of what it does or does not do to what they bought.

In the cases, like you, who may have really needed it to hold its value, you used past performance to sway your decision. Some of us chose to look at past performance as a bonus, not a guarantee.

And, yes, Disney is a business and to be honest, as a member who may want to cruise at some point using my points, the fact that there will be less people able to choose that option could turn into a benefit to me as a direct purchaser.

I guess I just don't really see how this move says Disney doesn't care about its members. Their job is to keep the DVC program up to par and if making resale points not as flexible as direct purchase points (for however long they choose to do that) keeps DVC up and running, then that is what they should be doing.