Why did Disney not bundle in the tax and parking?

[sethschroeder]

I have no clue but I think it's more fair that they didn't. Considering the high cost of the tax, I think it's more appropriate to charge whoever actually stays there, vs the owner. If a VDH owner decides to use their points at WDW why should they have to pay for parking and transient tax at VDH? The possible parking fees (not confirmed ???) and tax stink, but personally I think DVC got it right by having that paid by the folks actually staying there.

Why should I have to pay for the parking lot at WDW that you then use atls a VDH owner?

 

[Matty B13]

As I posted somewhere, the current lots already exist and nothing new was added.

So, since those belong to the hotel, there may not have been a way to determine an appropriate share to include for DVC owners, or the hotel division didn’t want it that way.

Parking lots at a lot of other resorts existed before they were converted to DVC, ie. Poly, VGF 2.0, CCV and they included the parking in their dues. So this is just another change that DVC has made to the "Club" which isn't for the better, at least for the existing resorts.

I just wish they would have left it the way is was before the restrictions. It was a great timeshare system before this change, and everyone gave great reviews about...... but now you have to read the fine print for every new resort and figure out if it is right for you and your family. Now even Direct Owners have to figure out the best way to move forward. Just like the Genie+ and Lighting Lanes they are confusing the system.

I can only imagine what people outside of Disboards and the other on-line communities miss when buying into DVC. Before the restrictions it was almost a no-brainer to buy into DVC if you were going at least every other year, but now you have to do a lot of "math" to see if it works. Even with the new minimum of 100 points which is still over $20k for the first time buyers, and I would hope that would at least make people pause before just purchasing.

 

[DVCsloth]

I know it's silly, but I still love getting my $0 balance due at check out! We drive to WDW, but the car stays parked most of the time unless we do a grocery run. I do think they didn't include it was to soften the blow of how expensive it is to buy there.

 

[DonMacGregor]

Parking lots at a lot of other resorts existed before they were converted to DVC, ie. Poly, VGF 2.0, CCV and they included the parking in their dues. So this is just another change that DVC has made to the "Club" which isn't for the better, at least for the existing resorts.

Poly, CCV and VGF2 didn't add any occupancy capacity to their respective resorts, they just converted existing rooms to DVC. VDH is adding 340 rooms to a 1,000 room hotel, increasing the number of rooms by a third.

 

[Sandisw]

Parking lots at a lot of other resorts existed before they were converted to DVC, ie. Poly, VGF 2.0, CCV and they included the parking in their dues. So this is just another change that DVC has made to the "Club" which isn't for the better, at least for the existing resorts.

I just wish they would have left it the way is was before the restrictions. It was a great timeshare system before this change, and everyone gave great reviews about...... but now you have to read the fine print for every new resort and figure out if it is right for you and your family. Now even Direct Owners have to figure out the best way to move forward. Just like the Genie+ and Lighting Lanes they are confusing the system.

I can only imagine what people outside of Disboards and the other on-line communities miss when buying into DVC. Before the restrictions it was almost a no-brainer to buy into DVC if you were going at least every other year, but now you have to do a lot of "math" to see if it works. Even with the new minimum of 100 points which is still over $20k for the first time buyers, and I would hope that would at least make people pause before just purchasing.

Just because it was done at WDW one way doesn’t mean that the hotel division wanted it the same for VDH.

And in all the cases you mention, those rooms existed as part of the hotel before being converted to DVc so the some total of rooms remained similar. Even BLT replaced part of the CR when built so that parking lot existed as well.

So, maybe that played a role in how things were done at some of the WDW resorts.

Just like with any shared resorts, agreements are made between DVD and the hotel division
For all we know, maybe the hotel division did not want to give up control of the parking lot for VDH and a different agreement had to be made..or, what they wanted as an owner s share made more sense to keep it out because the felt fewer owners would be parking over cash guests?

It’s not like this benefits DVD in any real way to keep it out of dues…

Obviously I am just speculating and anyone who is really interested should reach out to DVD to inquire why it was done this way to see what the answe is.

 

[Matty B13]

Just because it was done at WDW one way doesn’t mean that the hotel division wanted it the same for VDH.

Yes, but is this "Fair" to existing DVC owners who pay dues for this amenity at other DVC resorts? Shouldn't All DVC resorts trade into the system, do so on an equal bases?

 

[Royal Consort]

Yes, but is this "Fair" to existing DVC owners who pay dues for this amenity at other DVC resorts? Shouldn't All DVC resorts trade into the system, do so on an equal bases?

I don't think fairness has anything to do with it. The DVC resorts can trade into each other via the BVTC but that doesn't make the resorts equal. They are individual hotels you purchase an interest in. That's it. Some have land for parking associated with the ground lease and others do not. Land is a premium in California and there is likely to be increased demand and lack of supply. Placing a monetary value on parking therefore reduces this demand.

I am certain the lack of parking options/paid parking is going to dissuade some members though and I agree that it feels like a shock if you're used to WDW resorts (remember they have the benefit of land in Florida).

 

[Sandisw]

Yes, but is this "Fair" to existing DVC owners who pay dues for this amenity at other DVC resorts? Shouldn't All DVC resorts trade into the system, do so on an equal bases?

Actually no because this is about home resort And what amenities the resort provided owners via dues.

VDH does not provide parking. In terms of trades, the agreements with BVTC actually allow for different rules for different resorts.

Technically, they could charge owners to fee to trade into certain resorts and not others. They can create a different trading point chart for non owners.

So, in that respect it’s fair. There was obviously a reason that VDH owners are not being asked to pay for a share of maintaining the parking lot.

It’s really not different than the CA resorts and AUL having a TOT when FL properties do not.

 

[Matty B13]

I don't think fairness has anything to do with it. The DVC resorts can trade into each other via the BVTC but that doesn't make the resorts equal. They are individual hotels you purchase an interest in. That's it. Some have land for parking associated with the ground lease and others do not. Land is a premium in California and there is likely to be increased demand and lack of supply. Placing a monetary value on parking therefore reduces this demand.

I am certain the lack of parking options/paid parking is going to dissuade some members though and I agree that it feels like a shock if you're used to WDW resorts (remember they have the benefit of land in Florida).

I understand the parking premium concept at VDH and the need for the fee, but since the owners of VDH don't pay for this at their resort why should owners pay for the parking of VDH owners at their resorts? The same thing could be accomplished by rolling the fee into the dues just like every other DVC resort.

Yes, trading into the BVTC has never truly been equal, but before the RIV resale restrictions were put in place, the trading was fairly equal among resorts for direct and resale owners.

 

[Matty B13]

So, in that respect it’s fair. There was obviously a reason that VDH owners are not being asked to pay for a share of maintaining the parking lot.

I think you mean allowable by the BVTC agreement, but it isn't "Fair".

 

[Sandisw]

I think you mean allowable by the BVTC agreement, but it isn't "Fair".

Nope, I actually meant what I said. It’s a fair system.

Fair is not the same as equal. If one resort includes parking and another does not, then as long as everyone staying at the resort that has free parking gets free parking and everyone staying at the resort thst charges for parking gets charged, then it is a fair system.

Exchanging to another resort is an option. No one has to do that so the charge for parking isn’t forced on anyone.

Not any different than AKV owners who pay for the CL lounge and those trading in who snag a room get it for free...even though an AKV who is staying at any other resort wont get CL because its not offered.

 

[DVacationer]

You would be out of your mind to buy the new Disneyland Tower…Unless you are buying it to rent it out.

 

[Epcot Forever Forever]

They are providing NO transportation of any kind

Don’t rule it out!

 

[AC168]

Total speculation here but one possibility for leaving it out is that the parking price at DH is more subject to market conditions … ie when it gets used a lot the price goes up to encourage people not to park.

 

[Sandisw]

Total speculation here but one possibility for leaving it out is that the parking price at DH is more subject to market conditions … ie when it gets used a lot the price goes up to encourage people not to park.

They just eliminated all parking fees for cash guests at WDW, but they are still charging for parking at DH?

 

[DonMacGregor]

They just eliminated all parking fees for cash guests at WDW, but they are still charging for parking at DH?

They charge $35 per night for self parking at all three DLR hotels. The only people who get free parking are DVC members staying on points at VGC.

They also charge for DTD parking: $10 for the first hour, and $7 for each additional 20 minutes. You can get validated at certain restaurants and if you spend $20 in certain shops, but you still pay the first $10 regardless (and that’s in the Simba lot that NEVER fills up. Ever.)

https://disneyland.disney.go.com/guest-services/parking/

 

[Sandisw]

They charge $35 per night for self parking at all three DLR hotels. The only people who get free parking are DVC members staying on points at VGC.

So is the lot for VGC the same lot that is used for others? I don't know much about DL, as you can tell!!!

 

[DonMacGregor]

So is the lot for VGC the same lot that is used for others? I don't know much about DL, as you can tell!!!

I added DTD parking to my post, if you want to really be offended. And yes, it is the same lot.

 

[Sandisw]

I added DTD parking to my post, if you want to really be offended. And yes, it is the same lot.

So, then that does bring up an interesting point as to why it will be different for VDH? Or, maybe they are still trying to negotiate how much the charge will be and it will be included in future dues?

It's only open for just under 4 months for 2023...so maybe it was left out for now, especially given how high that starting rate is.

 

[DonMacGregor]

So, then that does bring up an interesting point as to why it will be different for VDH? Or, maybe they are still trying to negotiate how much the charge will be and it will be included in future dues?

It's only open for just under 4 months for 2023...so maybe it was left out for now, especially given how high that starting rate is.

Well, when they added the DVC wing at GCH they added several levels of parking under the building, which is now used for valet, opening up spaces for self-parking, and they may have expanded the regular self- parking area just a little as well. Remember, VGC is a tiny resort and didn’t require anywhere near the expanded capacity a 340-room tower does.