Will DVC Ever Tier the Point System?

[dizfan]

Keep in mind incentives change based on what Disney wants to sell.
Last year, BLT was $96/point for 160 points. I think AKV and SSR were even less than than, but I am certain.
There was a stretch where BLT was $115 and AKV was significantly less. wdrl has data showing AKV sales picked up during that stretch.
VGC had some huge discounts for awhile there.
OKW had the $90/point deal. wdrl has data showing OKW sales picked up significantly.

It's a marketing tool.
Give discounts on product X increase sales for awhile, but then they slow. Then, give a discount on product Y to increase it's sales until they slow. Then, give a discount on product Z to increase it's sales.

In most cases, the best deal is buying resale and not direct. Resale prices are based on supply and demand (with a dash Disney ROFR).

 

[BigTigger]

The longer we have DVC, the less the argument to buy where you want to stay seems to makes sense if you can't decide when you want to go during the exclusive period from 11 to 7 months ahead.

We own OKW still and also owned BWV until recently and neither was ever available at our home resorts in the last 4-5 years for week long trips in a 2BR unit unless we booked before the 7 month window opened. We could always get something, but it was usually VWL or SSR that was available. I'm sure if we took two 1BR's or waitlisted we may have gotten it eventually, but I think the OP that felt BLT was the cat's meow may be disappointed if all their stays aren't booked 7 months or more ahead.

 

[Lil' Grumpy]

this covers alot of ground, but in some ways makes alot
sense, in balancing out the prices & competition among
those trying our @ 7 mos., so i think drusba's suggestion
has real potential. my guess, they would "adopt" a
selection process based on availability...placing blt, wlv ,&
beach club together.

[ most frequent observation i have read, are those blasting
@ blt & are owners @ the other resorts. sometimes i wondered if it
due to throw others off track. ]

when we were deciding on a resort , most of the reasons why we went
blt haven't been mentioned. those reasons have not changed.

"one lil~thing" guiding our choice was getting enough points to do
the mk one-bedroom for all our trips. right away we knew 160
wasn't going do it.

i also read how many saved $5,ooo going ssr resales. maybe so,
but we would not have blink on that comparison. [ in 50 years,
it only come out $100 more a year for blt? [excluding the extra
years]. to us, this eliminated ssr from the start. then i started
reading how many on the boards never want to stay there, or
even those just buying resales traded for another resort. do
the love bugs nesting there during the "off-season?

[ i am not sure why, because they never gave specifics.] something
else is becoming more & more apparent, why should blt owners
want to spend their points @ ssr when they cost $30 more?
[example] . the only thing i can think of ...is the tree houses,
but since they would have to be done @ 7mos. , seem very
unlikely.

as for the timestore's observation... i think was a poker jesture. or
a bluff game @ best. . blt , to me , is the disney's ace , & if you 're holding
an ace , in a card draw, i think one would be feeling pretty confident
toward who or what disney will decide to support or take away.
especially since the organization is a business for profit system. i know
you won't find us trading to ssr unless it was for the tree houses.


in general,
*some how , my observations have the uncanny ability to upset
others. they are not intended. we are new & just trying to "apply
logic" in using our points so they will do the best job they can for our
family. "renters" are another concern that were never part of this
equation. so while we may be holding blt's aces, any "business" in this
area, is like a wild card. [ we never even heard about associates until
this came up with member services]. though in a few ways , i can see
some good points if there were stronger/better regulations. [ the
recent renter who got burned, is pretty scary & taking risks always
make me feel jittery]. however, if i was in a dvc's power position ,
& could make changes, i think i would do my best to protect the
owners..all of'um....since they would be my butter, butter jam! and
from what little i know- about dvc stuff, i would add changes to
owners being able to transfer more than once a year. in that
way, owners could trade their points @ the different resorts
offering special stuff liked the tree houses for ssr, thus increasing
all the owners' memberships & keeping their values, in their homes.

hoping, nothing too shocking

 

[thedon3]

I do not think there should be any tier system. The DVC is for all to enjoy there stay at a resort of there chosing. Its just like anything else in life, if you got joined in the early days is was x price, too join today it is x price. That's the way it is.

 

[Disney Dad Canada]

I'm actually one who covered both sides of the equation. I originally bought 2 SSR contracts via resale at $68/point (180 points total), and after touring BLT a couple weeks ago I added on 130 points there at $108/point via Disney directly.

This way for me I have "the best of both worlds" (to quote Hannah Montana). I can book BLT every other year at the 11 month window with 260 points (130 banked plus 130 current year), and then book either SSR every other year with 360 points at 11 months (180 banked plus 180 current year), or see what other resorts are available at 7 months.

This way, I have the reassurance in knowing I have BLT every other year, and the flexibility of trying out all the other resorts the other years.

 

[dianeschlicht]

this covers alot of ground, but in some ways makes alot
sense, in balancing out the prices & competition among
those trying our @ 7 mos., so i think drusba's suggestion
has real potential. my guess, they would "adopt" a
selection process based on availability...placing blt, wlv ,&
beach club together.

[ most frequent observation i have read, are those blasting
@ blt & are owners @ the other resorts. sometimes i wondered if it
due to throw others off track. ]

when we were deciding on a resort , most of the reasons why we went
blt haven't been mentioned. those reasons have not changed.

"one lil~thing" guiding our choice was getting enough points to do
the mk one-bedroom for all our trips. right away we knew 160
wasn't going do it.

i also read how many saved $5,ooo going ssr resales. maybe so,
but we would not have blink on that comparison. [ in 50 years,
it only come out $100 more a year for blt? [excluding the extra
years]. to us, this eliminated ssr from the start. then i started
reading how many on the boards never want to stay there, or
even those just buying resales traded for another resort. do
the love bugs nesting there during the "off-season?

[ i am not sure why, because they never gave specifics.] something
else is becoming more & more apparent, why should blt owners
want to spend their points @ ssr when they cost $30 more?
[example] . the only thing i can think of ...is the tree houses,
but since they would have to be done @ 7mos. , seem very
unlikely.

as for the timestore's observation... i think was a poker jesture. or
a bluff game @ best. . blt , to me , is the disney's ace , & if you 're holding
an ace , in a card draw, i think one would be feeling pretty confident
toward who or what disney will decide to support or take away.
especially since the organization is a business for profit system. i know
you won't find us trading to ssr unless it was for the tree houses.


in general,
*some how , my observations have the uncanny ability to upset
others. they are not intended. we are new & just trying to "apply
logic" in using our points so they will do the best job they can for our
family. "renters" are another concern that were never part of this
equation. so while we may be holding blt's aces, any "business" in this
area, is like a wild card. [ we never even heard about associates until
this came up with member services]. though in a few ways , i can see
some good points if there were stronger/better regulations. [ the
recent renter who got burned, is pretty scary & taking risks always
make me feel jittery]. however, if i was in a dvc's power position ,
& could make changes, i think i would do my best to protect the
owners..all of'um....since they would be my butter, butter jam! and
from what little i know- about dvc stuff, i would add changes to
owners being able to transfer more than once a year. in that
way, owners could trade their points @ the different resorts
offering special stuff liked the tree houses for ssr, thus increasing
all the owners' memberships & keeping their values, in their homes.

hoping, nothing too shocking

First of all, I think FOR NOW BLT does seem to be the "ace" as you put it, but that is always open to change. Each new resort becomes the "ace" of the moment, and that too will fade as time goes on. Some resorts are always going to remain the ace for some of us. For example, I find every DVC resort other than OKW to have odd room arrangements, and even my second home of AKV doesn't please me in that department. To me, OKW is the "ace". It must also be the "ace" to quite a few others too, because there are a LOT of non-OKW owners staying there all the time. Could it be the appealing point cost?

My point is that no one DVC resort is or should be "above" any other, and to my mind they aren't. Each has an "ace" quality for some group of people. OKW for those who want point value, large rooms, quiet locations etc. etc. and BLT for those who want to feel like they are in a NYC hotel. BCV and BWV have that Atlantic coast vibe and proximaty to Epcot going on. AKV is just a destination in itself, and VWL is all about atmosphere.

As for your comment about some of your observations having an ability to upset others unintentionally....I think it might be more the way you write than what you say. Using short cuts for anything other than texting can be annoying to some.

Sorry, after rereading my last paragraph, I realized that it looked like a slam. I was not intending that at all...Just making an observation.

 

[rlmas]

just a few thought from a relative newby to DVC (2005) and posting on these forums, but I do read a lot here. I think of the cost to buy each point as its fraction of the cost of the resort. BLT seems like it would have cost much more to build than SSR being many years later. I think of the number of points to stay at a resort per night as the way to discriminate based on desirability. Does this make sense?

 

[Chic]

And thus the old wisdom of buy where you want to stay comes into play. They could wave there wand tomorrow and take away the ability to book at resorts you dont own at and that would end the whole discussion.

This will never happen because the main reason people join and remain DVC members is the ability to stay where you want, when you want. If DVC made this change, there would be thousands of people selling their DVC contracts dirt cheap and DVC would end up buying back the majority of its past sales leaving them with a major financial loss.

 

[Chic]

First of all, I think FOR NOW BLT does seem to be the "ace" as you put it, but that is always open to change. Each new resort becomes the "ace" of the moment, and that too will fade as time goes on.

I agree!!! For those of us who have stayed at BLT on more than one occasion, it's becoming obvious that this resort was built on the "cheap" and is already showing major wear and tear after being open less than a year. Low quality furnishings are beginning to fall apart, the A/C units in a lot of the Villas are not able to compete with the Orlando heat, bathroom fixtures are rusting and malfunctioning, kitchen appliances and washers/dryers are having issues, Top of the World Lounge probably won't survive another year, etc. I enjoy staying at BLT due to location but I predict a huge increase in maintenance fees to cover all of the short cuts taken during construction.

 

[Lil' Grumpy]

can't have your cake & eat it too.

obviously not a blt owner. [ i seen the pictures, & it was self evident
of abuse, not normal wear.holes in the walls, and tearing off
cabinet doors, or spilling 2-liters bottles ].

we are betting that magic kingdom isn't moving, and this is why
we felt blt is top card in this game called dvc. [ my guess, the
time share guy is selling ssr more than anything else and any
connection to blt is going to increase his sales.] not that
there is anything wrong with that [ per jerry], but there are
limitations.

as for the top lounge, i think some of the impressions had to do with
a beach-club lounge that was shut down. however, we went with
the points we needed to have the type of room/view we wanted.
i think if they closed it, then these rooms will be in more demand.

but i think the major factors that would go into any tier system
would depends on the size of the resorts. [ i haven't stayed @ blt,
but i believe all of them have certain appeals that make them
a bargain to their owners. ] the other factor specific to blt..are
the rooms with best/desirable views. as all this sort itself out,
disney will respond to those owners who was "sold" on this
presentation. [ we were & "doubled up" based on the rooms that
could give us the views.] and i think as more owners realized
what going on with the rooms, the more they will process their
expectations with dvc services. i know we did with positive
results. we didn't do anything special or have any inside
connections. it are the owners' rights to expect the promises
made to them. when more figure this out, the less desirable
rooms will go to others.



over & over, i have read 2-types of reports. those not owning @
blt are always negative more than the owners. if you don't like
it, why did you come back? [ to me, that is a positive endorsement
not a negative one.]

 

[disneynutz]

This will never happen because the main reason people join and remain DVC members is the ability to stay where you want, when you want. If DVC made this change, there would be thousands of people selling their DVC contracts dirt cheap and DVC would end up buying back the majority of its past sales leaving them with a major financial loss.

Disney's lack of exercising their ROFR since the first of the year seems to indicate that they don't care about resale prices. In order for thousands of people to sell their contracts, thousands have to buy.

We tend to forget that only a small percentage of owners use the internet and know about resales. Disney makes sale presentations everyday, 7 days a week, 365 days a year. Hundreds of thousands of points have been sold direct and all they had to do is offer financing, a limited time deal, a couple of fast passes and a ice cream cone.

Bill

 

[ELKHUNTER]

When a DVC purchase is made the individuals making the purchase know the cost of the resort and booking arrangements set by Disney. So when you willing pay more to stay at a certain resort knowing the rules, why start complaining and just live with your decisions.

 

[NewDCLGuy]

Such a system would geatly annoy a significant number of members and do Disney no good. People love to dream up such ideas on the Internet, but Disney doesn't want to do that.

 

[dianeschlicht]

When a DVC purchase is made the individuals making the purchase know the cost of the resort and booking arrangements set by Disney. So when you willing pay more to stay at a certain resort knowing the rules, why start complaining and just live with your decisions.

Exactly. If you buy into a resort that has a large initial outlay...you know that when you buy. You can't then turn around and complain because someone else who bought in many years ago at a cheaper price and a resort with less point cost is staying at your "pricey" resort. That's not how it works in the DVC system.

To a degree all points are created equal. Of course, if you need more to stay at a different resort than your own, you know that isn't completely true, but you have a choice.

 

[lah3hh]

Slightly different twist on the original question...

I think if Disney goes to any kind of 'tiered' system it is going to be based on how many points you own in total. I actually got a member survey a short while ago asking my opinion about perks and which ones I prefer.

Throughout that survey was the notion that they may be considering 'perks' to be given in a tiered manner so perhaps they incorporate a tiered system as well when it comes to making reservations...who knows??!!

As far as the cost of points at BLT vs. SSR...that is Marketing 101. When you need to push a certain product you 'better' the price. They have been doing this for as long as I have been a member. If you are able to buy in at those better prices then good for you and good for them. SSR is a beautiful resort and one preferred by many (including myself) and them selling it at $90.00 a point does not de-value it at all. It makes it a tempting price for me to buy in more!!!

This happens whenever they have a few locations they are trying to bring to closure of sales and move onto the new ones such as Aulani.

DVC as a whole is a wonderful product and I trust Disney feels and acts accordingly. Ok I guess it is time for my next drink from the Kool Aid.... But seriously, I love DVC and trust they will do what is best for the product that we all bought into.

 

[disneynutz]

Slightly different twist on the original question...

I think if Disney goes to any kind of 'tiered' system it is going to be based on how many points you own in total. I actually got a member survey a short while ago asking my opinion about perks and which ones I prefer.

Throughout that survey was the notion that they may be considering 'perks' to be given in a tiered manner so perhaps they incorporate a tiered system as well when it comes to making reservations...who knows??!!

About a year ago, there were some pretty strong rumors about a VIP program where high point owners would receive some extra perks like a VIP Host to make ADR's and room reservations. Even the Guides were talking about it. The subject turned up on a couple of surveys and not much more. Many said that Disney would never support a class system because that is not the Disney way.

I know that Disney currently has VIP Hosts for the Parks and Resorts, so it is their way. The building of the new multi million dollar homes at WDW also proves that they think that it is good business.

Bill

 

[rentayenta]

Who really cares? Buy whatever points which gives you personally the most value. I consider SSR points to have more value than BLT. If someone offered me 100 points right now of my choosing, I would take OKW or SSR. Why? Because those points buy a lot more vacation days at SSR or OKW than they do at BLT (prior to 7 months of course). So for me, they are "worth more". After factoring in purchase price, the value ratio for me goes up even more.

 

[JimMIA]

About a year ago, there were some pretty strong rumors about a VIP program where high point owners would receive some extra perks like a VIP Host to make ADR's and room reservations. Even the Guides were talking about it. The subject turned up on a couple of surveys and not much more. Many said that Disney would never support a class system because that is not the Disney way.

I don't know about Disney and a class system, but some other timeshare programs have VIP programs.

Wyndham has several programs, one of which is actually called VIP, oddly enough. That program, as I understand it, first requires that you buy direct from Wyndham (at +/- 10X what you can buy resale for) and buy at least 300,000 points. 300K sounds like a lot to us, but it's actually a medium-sized account in the Wyndham world.

There are 3 VIP levels (300K, 500K, 1 Million) and they get varying benefits including free upgrades, discounted points for reservations made w/in 60 days of arrival (50% discount for 1M owners), and lots of exemptions from various Wyndham "nuisance fees." There are some other benefits I haven't listed. With the 10 or more X price differential, I think most Wyndham folks think VIP is not worth purchasing direct.

I could see DVC going to some kind of perks-benefit VIP program...especially if the guides are already telling prospective buyers it's coming in an attempt to sell them more points!

I mean, guides wouldn't lie...would they?

 

[Who's your Mickey?]

Actually, DVC is already a tiered system.

It cost more points to stay a night a BLT or BCV than SSR or OKW. There are many reasons it costs less per point at one resort over another including when the points expire, how much availability (size of the resorts), demand, etc.

Exactly...

Also, why should someone who purchased points way back when they cost half of what they do today be peanlized for having the foresight to do so. When we bought (at BLT) we were told that we could buy into any resort with availability. They were pushing Kidani and BLT at the time, but we could have chosen SSR (we have friends who own there). In the end, we chose to purchase BLT because we felt it was the best decision for us. Also, by purchasing at BLT, we have a 4 month jump on booking BLT on those who chose other resorts as their home. The system seems to work just fine. Why try to change it now?