What else can Disney do to discourage buying Resale?

[babesboo99]

or dining plan prices can be lowered for people buying direct I would definitely buy then . I have a resale contract now was planning on buying direct anyway but not sure if I can do it in the week that is left

 

[Ben E N]

or dining plan prices can be lowered for people buying direct I would definitely buy then . I have a resale contract now was planning on buying direct anyway but not sure if I can do it in the week that is left

That one would be a good move by Disney. More money upfront with the direct sales cost, plus it would get more people who are staying in rooms with full kitchens to instead spend their money eating out around Disney World. In most cases, the dining plan is a worse deal than just paying out of pocket anyway, so they would have little to lose.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

The issue with all of the suggestions is they come from different divisions. So DVC does have to pay for those things. They can't just offer theme park passes for free and not have it be a line item on the DVC P&L, because parks aren't going to write off that on THEIR P&L from the goodness of their hearts. Similar with DDP (which is through resorts - "free dining" is actually paid for via the resorts and is part of THEIR P&L, which is why inventory is so strict and limited).

Like any big company, the different groups run in parallel, and one group can't just borrow a benefit from another without there being some form of payment. For stuff like DDP or parks passes, it ends up being a fairly expensive proposition without a lot of qualification.

Something like a one-time park pass (with new purchase) is much more feasible than ongoing, because it can be qualified against purchase size, and it also has a limit and a single line item to be charged against.

This is also why MoonLight Magic events work - they are paying for the park rental and the amenities, but they are limited in scope and duration. Both the parks and DVC have clear accounting for the expense and income.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

The issue with all of the suggestions is they come from different divisions. So DVC does have to pay for those things. They can't just offer theme park passes for free and not have it be a line item on the DVC P&L, because parks aren't going to write off that on THEIR P&L from the goodness of their hearts. Similar with DDP (which is through resorts - "free dining" is actually paid for via the resorts and is part of THEIR P&L, which is why inventory is so strict and limited).

Like any big company, the different groups run in parallel, and one group can't just borrow a benefit from another without there being some form of payment. For stuff like DDP or parks passes, it ends up being a fairly expensive proposition without a lot of qualification.

Something like a one-time park pass (with new purchase) is much more feasible than ongoing, because it can be qualified against purchase size, and it also has a limit and a single line item to be charged against.

This is also why MoonLight Magic events work - they are paying for the park rental and the amenities, but they are limited in scope and duration. Both the parks and DVC have clear accounting for the expense and income.

Disney could pay those divisions for those ongoing benefits but with the size of the membership that owns direct points it would be a tremendous cost I'd guess. Still, they are reaching a point that they have to add things - like the Moonlight Magic vs take away as that's getting fairly bare bone.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

Disney could pay those divisions for those ongoing benefits but with the size of the membership that owns direct points it would be a tremendous cost I'd guess.

Well, yeah. That is certainly possible, but the probability is pretty low given the cost that would be involved. That's why I point more to one-time incentives at buy in, or load-limited incentives (like the Soarin' tour, or Moonlight Magic) as the more likely path. Profit margins.

I have definitely seen people point to Moonlight Magic as a reason to buy direct even in the face of $50pp spreads to resale. Their values are not mine, clearly.

 

[Spork24]

I could totally see them dropping the FP booking window on resale points to 45 days. Put them after on property cash guests (and full DVC members) but still before off property.

I would do it if I ran dvc and needed another infinitive to drive direct sales.

 

[Ben E N]

I could totally see them dropping the FP booking window on resale points to 45 days. Put them after on property cash guests (and full DVC members) but still before off property.

I would do it if I ran dvc and needed another infinitive to drive direct sales.

I wouldn't see that benefitting Disney at all. The benefit they have with the 60 day booking is it locks you into Disney 2 months in advance. This means that you are planning to spend the whole day there, including meals and snacks. If you drop booking down to 45 days, you encourage people who are staying on property to start looking to spend their days elsewhere, driving potential easy business away.
Why would they drop booking at their own resorts to 45 days, when people staying at good neighbor hotels are getting 60?

 

[_auroraborealis_]

If you drop booking down to 45 days, you encourage people who are staying on property to start looking to spend their days elsewhere, driving potential easy business away.

Or, book throwaways to get 60 days.

 

[Spork24]

I wouldn't see that benefitting Disney at all. The benefit they have with the 60 day booking is it locks you into Disney 2 months in advance. This means that you are planning to spend the whole day there, including meals and snacks. If you drop booking down to 45 days, you encourage people who are staying on property to start looking to spend their days elsewhere, driving potential easy business away.
Why would they drop booking at their own resorts to 45 days, when people staying at good neighbor hotels are getting 60?

I don’t think that 15 days is as significant as you might think in people planning offsite days. If you have a trip planned for 7 months you will have had PLENTY of time to decide to do something offsite. DVC sales is a huge part of yearly park and resort profit annually, and they have shown they are willing to spend money (events and discounts) to keep the balance of direct vs resale sales at a level they find acceptable.

The purpose of this thread was to ask what else they could take away from resale, and the best answer IMO is fast passes. Also the average DVC owner is very different than Joe traveler who may be more influenced by a booking window.

 

[SL6827]

What ever they do decide to do next, do you think Disney will continue to grandfather resale buyers that have purchased before any new restrictions are placed?

 

[thelionqueen]

What ever they do decide to do next, do you think Disney will continue to grandfather resale buyers that have purchased before any new restrictions are placed?

Yes, contracturally they have to.

 

[thelionqueen]

I think there needs to be a compromise between direct and resale buyers. Regardless of the cost of membership buyin, DVC owners are (generally speaking) Disney’s most loyal guests and drive a significant amount of revenue into many different areas of the Disney company. So, they need to walk a very fine line to keep direct sales growing while not pushing the resale market into a downward spiral. Each need the other in order for a strong brand/product.

 

[Ben E N]

I don’t think that 15 days is as significant as you might think in people planning offsite days. If you have a trip planned for 7 months you will have had PLENTY of time to decide to do something offsite. DVC sales is a huge part of yearly park and resort profit annually, and they have shown they are willing to spend money (events and discounts) to keep the balance of direct vs resale sales at a level they find acceptable.

The purpose of this thread was to ask what else they could take away from resale, and the best answer IMO is fast passes. Also the average DVC owner is very different than Joe traveler who may be more influenced by a booking window.

By taking away 15 days, you are sending those members closer to the end of the line. By that point, FOP and 7DMT are gone. If I already had my flight paid for, and could only get FPs for Dinosaur and Small World, I sure would be looking to go elsewhere. Especially considering I am spending over $1000 a year just to help pay for salaries and property taxes that work to help Disney out.
Insulting a large group of people wouldn't help drive new business. As another downside, it would insult enough people to have them sell for cheap, widening the divide between direct and resale costs, only furthering the problem of trying to convince people to buy direct.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

Yes, contracturally they have to.

No, they don't have to. Aside from the underlying real estate interest, no other benefit is guaranteed by contract.

 

[Spork24]

By taking away 15 days, you are sending those members closer to the end of the line. By that point, FOP and 7DMT are gone. If I already had my flight paid for, and could only get FPs for Dinosaur and Small World, I sure would be looking to go elsewhere. Especially considering I am spending over $1000 a year just to help pay for salaries and property taxes that work to help Disney out.
Insulting a large group of people wouldn't help drive new business. As another downside, it would insult enough people to have them sell for cheap, widening the divide between direct and resale costs, only furthering the problem of trying to convince people to buy direct.

I would assume they would grandfather everyone in, thus not “insulting” anyone as they would have known before buying.

 

[Spork24]

What ever they do decide to do next, do you think Disney will continue to grandfather resale buyers that have purchased before any new restrictions are placed?

I would think Disney will always grandfather people. There is very little benefit to Disney to strip benefits from current members. Anything that might cause the current members to start selling in larger numbers is bad for Disney.

 

[AmyPK]

It seems Disney really wants to discourage buying resale for obvious reasons, however, one of the perks of DVC is that it somewhat holds it’s value. If it becomes too difficult to resell a contract will it also hurt direct sales? Would Disney ever consider further restrictions on resale contracts such as eliminating the 11month window for home resort, or only allowing use of your points at your home resort?

I thought that also, but I wonder how many buyers of DVC have resale value as a priority. I know all we were thinking about was all the vacations we are going to take, the perks, and staying at Deluxe resorts.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

Right now, the perks that are grandfathered are all subject to change, and new perks could very well have tiers of application that exclude people currently getting benefits.

• RCI is not a 50-year contract, and is subject to change for everyone.
• The Epcot Lounge is not permanent.
• Heck, TOTW is not technically permanent, although it's part of the condo association so any use of the space may have to cascade to all.
• Ticket discounts vary year to year, keeping in mind that in days of yore DVC got length-of-stay tickets free. No one is grandfathered to that; benefit is gone. (as is the free valet parking!)
• The cruise and Disney Collection exchanges could be dropped. Points change annually. It is unlikely to go away entirely, but it could if it made sense from the perspective of those other divisions.
• Events come and go.

 

[thelionqueen]

No, they don't have to. Aside from the underlying real estate interest, no other benefit is guaranteed by contract.

Actually the terms of the contract specifically outline the terms of ownership in fine detail. I’m speaking of the ability to book the various DVC resorts not the perks

 

[jodifla]

I think the direct perks will focus on tickets. With the way tickets are increasing in price, it is the best carrot.