I guess I would like to think that Disney would care to try to avoid a situation where the majority of owners would move from being proud of being DVC members to feeling like they'd been fleeced.
Disney can chase only new prospects if they'd like, but it seems to me that they will be shooting themselves in the foot if they don't try to keep the members they've got happy enough to want to keep emotionally buying in and then financially adding on, whether through Disney or via resale. Up until recently, buying DVC resale was like buying a used car that retained a value fairly close to buying a quality new car. The perception that DVC kept its value added to the perceived value of DVC for many of its owners, and created an environment that encouraged add-ons. Since resale prices and Disney prices were reasonably close, we did as I think many other DVC members did, and added some points direct from Disney, and some from resale. Now we've stopped. We're waiting to see which way the wind blows from here on out.
I do see why Disney wants to "incentivize" people to add on from them instead of buying resale. But if the resale market ends up selling a stripped product for pennies on the dollar (as most timeshares are sold at resale), but still offers the chance to stay on Disney property, there aren't enough fastpasses in the world to entice reasonably knowledgeable people to buy a contract from Disney for $10,000 dollars when they can get the same number of points for $1,000. Instead of being perceived as a special product, Disney may be moving toward offering the equivalent of a very ordinary car that loses most of its value as soon as it is driven off the lot. Is that really going to help Disney attract members to keep coming back and buying more?
Plenty of other timeshare companies have gone out of business when they can't keep attracting customers, but Disney has one disadvantage others don't. Disney timeshares are on Disney property, often tied to Disney deluxe hotels. Does Disney really want to put themselves in the position of having the resale market dip so low that a product originally perceived as high-quality becomes firesale material? There are already enough problems with the occasional owners who don't take pride in the property they own to bother to keep their children from gouging the furniture. Do we really need tons of owners who don't value the property at all because they paid almost nothing for it? A real vicious circle could get started if maintenance fees become so high that more and more people bail out into the resale market, which creates more new owners who buy ever cheaper points, which create worse maintenance problems. Not the best reputation to get started for a product on Disney property that Disney wants to market as high quality.
). I think this may be a bit extreme for even a fairly advanced first-time timeshare purchaser. Even if they do extensive research (using TUG, reviewing complaint boards and/or the DA's office for litigation), it will likely be only for several months before their purchase, and they likely focused on the variances to make their decision instead of the similarities. Such focus would cause a reasonable person to lean heavily on the good differences and ignore the true similarities for a period of time (years?).
...
Bill
