Tiered Benefits

[tjkraz]

My apologies.

I've read too many posts on various boards where people have been using the "unlimited fastpass" wording to the point whenever I read the free FPs, I assume that's what they are referring to. I assumed and made a ___ out of myself.

No worries.

Does the 350k estimate on families include all family members or just owner(s)? If it's really 350k total, as I suspect for marketing purposes (sounds like a lot of others are "in" so you should be too), then it stands to reason that on any given day, there are on average 1000 DVC members spread through 4 parks. That means 250/park.

There are about 3000 two bedroom equivalent DVC villas at WDW right now with a max occupancy of at least 9. Even assuming that not every room will be filled to capacity, 15,000 - 20,000 guests is a fair estimate for the total population on average. So the numbers are quite a bit larger than your estimates.

Many WDW attractions have a capacity of 1500 - 2000 riders per hour. So even when you spread DVC members out over the 4 theme parks, our numbers are large enough to have a noteworthy impact on the experience of every other park guest. 4000 - 5000 people potentially getting front-of-the-line access to Toy Story Mania and Soarin would not go unnoticed.

Additionally, it's my understanding that DVD actually reimburses the Parks & Resorts division for every instant FastPass given out. DVD doesn't have the ability--nor necessarily the resources--to distribute as many of those passes as they wish.

But when you start looking at it as a VIP perk--perhaps with as little as 5-10% of members participating--suddenly the numbers aren't quite so frightening. 250-500 passes per park, per day can be absorbed much more easily than 5000 per park, per day.

 

[Chuck S]

Does the 350k estimate on families include all family members or just owner(s)?

It is likely the number of memberships and/or actual names on the deeds. It won't include non-deeded family members or any minor children. I suspect the 350K estimate is also quite low, as they were touting that figure a few years ago.

 

[sean-1966]

I don't know how keen I am with this. What does the number of points a member have matter, or for that matter where they got those points? I think DVC better think long and hard before they do this. As DVC members we should all be equal and treated the same. BTW, we own 380 points that we bought from Disney...

 

[Chuck S]

I don't know how keen I am with this. What does the number of points a member have matter, or for that matter where they got those points? I think DVC better think long and hard before they do this. As DVC members we should all be equal and treated the same. BTW, we own 380 points that we bought from Disney...

I have to disagree. Many (I would say most) timeshares have some sort of preferred status for those that buy direct rather than resale. It is where the developer (DVD/Disney) makes their profit. Rewarding those that buy direct, even with something that doesn't cost much, would not be a bad thing...whether it be a super express check-in, extra discounts on souvenirs or dining, fastpasses, expanded trade out options, even a free park pass now and then, free valet or whatever...I'm OK with it, as long as the basic, represented benefits and booking windows remain the same for all members.

I would not like to see earlier booking windows for those that own a lot of points, dues reductions (unless funded by DVD, and not increasing everyone elses dues) or adds any cost to the other members.

 

[frank808]

My number one gripe is why the distinction between resale and direct? There would be no resales unless some one bought from Disney the full direct price. We pay the same dues if we bought our points resale or direct.
What everyone forgets is that Disney already made their money when the points where sold first, so why be so greedy and give more perks to those that bought direct and take away perks for resales? Disney sold the points with those perks and whether the points belong to member A or member B that bought the points from member A, the perks should remain the same. Yes other timeshare companies do this, but does it make it right for Disney? Not changing the current system for resale or direct should be the way for Disney and not about $$ only.

 

[frank808]

I'm not sure Disney would offer unlimited FPs as the perk. My reasoning is that in today's internet age, it would only take one person to abuse the system and get 100 TSM FPs to upset the guests. While 99.9% wouldn't do this, it only takes one or two bad apples to get the internet abuse with upset customers.

Disney's theme parks rely heavily on the return visitor. All DVC owners were at one time, a first time visitor. Would any of us have returned year after year, if we knew someone could skip to the front of the line whenever they wanted? In addition, however many times they wanted?

I could see a limit given at checkin. Perhaps 1 valid per FP attraction, or something resembling the good old A, B, C, D, E ticket ride passes. Even then I suspect they will require a platinum DVC card to be shown to prevent renters from receiving the FPs. Or something based on length of stay for platinum DVC owners?

Why not have FP for a benefit. If you stay onsite at any of the Lowes hotels at Universal, everyone with a room key gets front of the line privileges. Does any one know the max guests staying at portofino, hard rock and the other hotel combined? This seems like a worthwhile perk as I stay at portofino for that perk and convenience.

 

[Mtnman44]

Because every realse is a potential lost sale for DVC. They want the sale from years ago, and they want the sale for the new members buying today.

My number one gripe is why the distinction between resale and direct? There would be no resales unless some one bought from Disney the full direct price. We pay the same dues if we bought our points resale or direct.
What everyone forgets is that Disney already made their money when the points where sold first, so why be so greedy and give more perks to those that bought direct and take away perks for resales? Disney sold the points with those perks and whether the points belong to member A or member B that bought the points from member A, the perks should remain the same. Yes other timeshare companies do this, but does it make it right for Disney? Not changing the current system for resale or direct should be the way for Disney and not about $$ only.

 

[vicki_c]

so why be so greedy

Yes other timeshare companies do this, but does it make it right for Disney? Not changing the current system for resale or direct should be the way for Disney and not about $$ only.

Because they are a business, in business to maximize profits.

Why do people think Disney is somehow magical and not all about the money? I think people would be less disappointed if you just accepted the cruel world factual truth - they are a company, in business to make money, no different than any other company who has shareholders to answer to.

I don't say that cynically at all - I love Disney and I find almost everything about being there very magical, but I don't really ever forget that they are a business and do pretty much everything and anything because it is good for the bottom line.

 

[Chuck S]

Because they are a business, in business to maximize profits.

Why do people think Disney is somehow magical and not all about the money? I think people would be less disappointed if you just accepted the cruel world factual truth - they are a company, in business to make money, no different than any other company who has shareholders to answer to.

I don't say that cynically at all - I love Disney and I find almost everything about being there very magical, but I don't really ever forget that they are a business and do pretty much everything and anything because it is good for the bottom line.

Exactly...remember Michael Eisner was not given a no confidence vote by the investment houses because he "lost the magic." It was because the company wasn't maximizing profits. If the company stock and divends were flying high, it wouldn't have mattered at all if people felt things were less magical, it IS all about profit, the same as oil companies, insurance companies, or any other business.

 

[Laurabearz]

Any thoughts on whether existing resale owners would be grandfathered?

 

[Inkmahm]

Why not have FP for a benefit. If you stay onsite at any of the Lowes hotels at Universal, everyone with a room key gets front of the line privileges. Does any one know the max guests staying at portofino, hard rock and the other hotel combined? This seems like a worthwhile perk as I stay at portofino for that perk and convenience.

Sounds good to me. We have never been to Universal but we are adding a few days to our March trip so that we can go see Harry Potter. Once I found out about Front of the line benefits for staying at a Universal hotel, it was easy to decide not to use DVC points to stay at DVC and commute to Universal. For that benefit alone, we are staying on property at Universal.

I'd love Fast passes at Disney as a DVC member. Like someone said earlier though, I have 655 points so I suspect the cutoff will be 675!

 

[vicki_c]

Sounds good to me. We have never been to Universal but we are adding a few days to our March trip so that we can go see Harry Potter. Once I found out about Front of the line benefits for staying at a Universal hotel, it was easy to decide not to use DVC points to stay at DVC and commute to Universal. For that benefit alone, we are staying on property at Universal.

I'd love Fast passes at Disney as a DVC member. Like someone said earlier though, I have 655 points so I suspect the cutoff will be 675!

Totally off topic, but I thought the FOTL privilege didn't apply to HP. We used the purchased FOTL one day @ US/IOA (not the resort one) but we didn't do HP that day but other things, but I read here that the FOTL didn't include HP.

Back to the speculation and nazel-gaving ...

 

[Jason@dvcstore]

Like someone said earlier though, I have 655 points so I suspect the cutoff will be 675!

Jason

 

[Dean]

Is there anything that would prevent DVD/DVC from offering platinum DVC members special benefits here?

Perhaps 25% of the member cruise accommodations would be opened up to platinum members a week before everyone else. In addition, offer special events or gifts only to the platinum members.

(NOTE: not suggesting that this would be the only platinum perk, but could be part of the platinum perk bundle.)

In general no, though there would be limitations in some areas. The limitations are a lot less than many people think though. They can also reduce benefits and increase costs for current members and then add those benefits back in for any group they so chose.

As Dean has said, the only way that this program will have any positive impact on sales is if it provides some truly desirable benefits. Providing such benefits will come at a cost to DVC. And I don't see why they would want to pay for those benefits to be extended to resale buyers.

That's correct as I see it. More specifically to my expectations is they have to create a wide enough gap. Unfortunately there are 2 ways to create the gap, add on for the VIP group and take away from the standard group. I would expect a combo IF there are such changes.

Does the 350k estimate on families include all family members or just owner(s)?

That's total owners with 148, 184 "owner families" as of the end of 2009.

I don't know how keen I am with this. What does the number of points a member have matter, or for that matter where they got those points? I think DVC better think long and hard before they do this. As DVC members we should all be equal and treated the same. BTW, we own 380 points that we bought from Disney...

Why would they all have to be treated equally overall, because one feels right and one doesn't?, they really aren't now. Other than the contractual obligations, it's really up to them. Many other timeshares have gone the VIP route AND the devaluing resale route as well and it appears they've done so fairly to very successfully. I don't buy for a second that it would hurt sales significantly in ANY group, even those of us here on DIS though you'll see people that say it will. I think the disney name and good will affects wouldn't change enough to matter even in the worst case scenario.

My number one gripe is why the distinction between resale and direct? There would be no resales unless some one bought from Disney the full direct price. We pay the same dues if we bought our points resale or direct.
What everyone forgets is that Disney already made their money when the points where sold first, so why be so greedy and give more perks to those that bought direct and take away perks for resales? Disney sold the points with those perks and whether the points belong to member A or member B that bought the points from member A, the perks should remain the same. Yes other timeshare companies do this, but does it make it right for Disney? Not changing the current system for resale or direct should be the way for Disney and not about $$ only.

Once the sale has made, they move on. Actually each and every resale is a potentially lost retail sale. It's not a zero sum situation, each one who buyers retail adds to the number of points sold, a resale buyer is just shuffling paper.

Any thoughts on whether existing resale owners would be grandfathered?

Thoughts yes but no guarantees. I think it's likely they would be UNLESS they come up with a system that really doesn't grandfather even retail buyers which is what Marriott did. Some of he more credible sources have included the grandfathering in their "rumor". Most of the other changes that I know of in timeshares did grandfather, I can't think of an exception where there was no grandfathering for resale but there was FULL for retail but I know of a lot where they chose a cutoff off date. The ones likely to get stuck are those in the process of buying when/if this comes down. Since some of the rumors included the end of this year as the cutoff, I'd hate to be in escrow right now.

 

[marynvince]

yikes, in escrow now, hope they hurry........

 

[Ramsfan28]

Just because you can afford to buy more points means you get special benefits?

I do not think it is fair to give those that could afford huge amounts of points (aka rich people) more benefits that say someone who has low to medium points.

All DVC members should get the same perks/benefits/discounts as any other member.

Not sure I agree - I travel a lot and stay quite a bit with Marriott and Starwood, they tend to take care of me and give me upgraded rooms, better amenities, etc. This is a loyality perk, and rewards me for staying with them.

A person that only stays a couple nights with most hotels doesn't warrant the same treatment as a guest that stays many nights. It is just smart business to reward the more frequent guests.

 

[culli]

For some reason people forget DVC is a timeshare, they do not practice all the same tactics as other TS companies. However, in the end they are a TS and not sure why people think they will not operate like one. Marriott, Wyndham among others have some sort of preferential treatment to their developer purchased and higher "pts/weeks" owners.

They do whatever they can to make resale purchasers feel like scum of the earth (or at lease Wyn does). However, the base product is the base product and as much as they would like to they have not been able to take it away. What they can do is offer benefits that are not tied to the contract - I'm not exactly sure all the rules. But one could look at Wyndham VIP to look at the other end of the spectrum of what DVC could do - now if they do it is another conversation. Marriott is another (I don't know specifics and I'm not a Marriott owner) that I believe turned their TS ownership upside down.

If anyone bought DVC for any other reason than the guaranteed benefits in the contract.....well you made a mistake. If you bought resale for any other reason and without a thought that they can treat resale buyers differently then you also made a mistake. I bought both DVC direct and resale for different reasons but the main reason is what is in the contract...staying at Disney. Hey I'm all for benefits at a VIP level if I qualify, if I don't oh well so be it. I still have the contract to stay onsite at Disney. If you buy a certain amount of pts to get VIP benefits that is another mistake - these will not be guarenteed and subeject to change when they feel like it (such as the current perks).

I own significant resale pts with Wyndham and you want to talk about being treated like scum....well they do it even though I pay more MFs (due to size of my contracts) then most of their customers. However, I bought Wyn resales to stay at some very nice properties and have learned to navigate the system. If you understand the landscape Wyn resale is one of the best deals out there.

I doubt DVC will go to these extremes as other companies but I find it laughable at peoples' attitudes if some with 1000 pts gets something I don't and I own 160pts I'm done with Disney they OWE me. If this is you, I suggest you sell your DVC pts now and never get involved in TS ownership again. If they don't do it now remember they can always do it later if they want. This whole thread is based on speculation of a comment made at the annual meeting. However, if any of this speculation bothers you and nothing happens take this opportunity to sell now as this should be an eye opener of what DVC can do if they choose to take the path of others. If you are on the fence go to a Wyndham (which I believe is the largest TS company in the world BTW) presentation and then compare those flat out lies, deception and plain BS to DVC. DVC so far has been very straightforward been fair to everyone especially compared to their peers.

Ok I will get off my soap box and I'm sure there are many out there that would love to blow me up off it

 

[marynvince]

Seems like i see many of those mentioned on sale on ebay for $1.00. Basically people looking to get out from under the yearly maintenance commitment.

Doesn't this lack of backing the product by the TS developer devalue it?

This is one area where I see DVC as different.

 

[culli]

Seems like i see many of those mentioned on sale on ebay for $1.00. Basically people looking to get out from under the yearly maintenance commitment.

Doesn't this lack of backing the product by the TS developer devalue it?

This is one area where I see DVC as different.

Depends if they included ROFR in their contract, Marriott does this as well. If it is not in their contract they can't do it. ROFR is only to support or make money for the TS company.

 

[OldsDr]

Just because you can afford to buy more points means you get special benefits?

I do not think it is fair to give those that could afford huge amounts of points (aka rich people) more benefits that say someone who has low to medium points.

All DVC members should get the same perks/benefits/discounts as any other member.

Doesn’t this happen everywhere. People who stay at a concierge level can afford to. Does that mean that because I cannot afford it a rich person should not be able to get it? Some people can't afford to stay at Grand Floridian(me included), but I don’t begrudge anyone getting special treatment or a better pool because they can afford it. Look at Vegas, they make most their money from the average guy, but they treat their high rollers like royalty. Same thing with owning 1000 points vs.160 points. They are selling more people 160 point contracts, making most their money from the people who can afford only 160 points, but if a person has 1000 points they are giving more money to Disney on an individual basis, This is from initial purchase and time spent at the parks. Why shouldn’t they be rewarded? If I want all that special treatment it just gives me more of a reason to make and save more money. I have no issue with perks as long as nothing is taken away from what the average person already gets, which in reality is not much more than a room.