Would you buy again?

[suebeelin]

I'm new to this part of the Disboards but I'm curious how many of you who bought DVC years ago would do it all over again with today's Disney. Do you feel like DVC is still a good value today as it was years ago? Obviously this question will field a number of different answers but I'm interested what you folks think. We are probably going to buy a resale contract soon. We have young kids and I think it's a good time to buy with all of the new things coming to the parks in the next 5 years.

Nope. Not at these prices, even the resale prices. I would definitely rent instead.

 

[mustinjourney]

Maybe we do live in Europe, and I lied about living in Houston...I would love to live in Paris for a year. Every time I take a "where you should live quiz" that is what comes up. Maybe one day...

I’m in Paris now. It’s overrated.

Of course, if I actually spoke or understood French, I might think differently.

 

[kboo]

We take quite a few non-Disney vacations every year too. Our families think we are crazy because we are "always out of town". Truth be told, we take a vacation every 2-3 months, but people think that is a crazy amount. I wouldn't change the number of Disney vacations we take. My kids are young, and there are only so many places I want to take them at this age. As they get older, I already know that there will be less Disney trips in there and more "cultural trips" to Europe, Asia, Australia, etc. My DH just told me last week that he apologized for anything he ever said about buying Disney points because he loves the flexibility and rentability (I know it isn't a word) of them. DVC has worked out well for us so far.

Ha! Sometimes I think you are just my Houston-based long-lost twin. Between February and August of this year, we are flying on trips every month except May. 2-3 are non-vacation, though - work or family or both. My DH was somewhat resistant to buying DVC but after our last stay he kind of said the same thing. We never have points left to rent, however.

I've grown up loving Disney. My kids are doing the same thing. Long term, I love Disney and Disney World. It's easy escapism. I definitely understand those who are concerned about their future, though. The past couple of years have come with some really cool news about the future of the parks, but also some concerning news. No MK nighttime parade, paid parking, etc.
Whether it is worth all of that or not is really a sliding scale based on each individual's interests and tolerance.

I feel the same way about the "easy escapism" and about recent changes. Even in the last 5 years, I've noticed several changes in the crowds and how much more "effort" it takes. And compared to our trips of 10-20 years ago? No question it is much more expensive, involves more planning, and is much more crowded. But... it's the same elsewhere, for other vacations. More security, more crowds, more $. One benefit of being a frequent Disney traveler is that we are not as discombobulated as first-time or new visitors are.

A lot of the "would you buy again" answer seems to be dependent on stage of life. We're at the stage of life where we see many, many years of Disney vacations in our future and buying resale and direct were still worthwhile purchases.

Exactly - I don't have the time or inclination to hunt for the best discount or email code, and our vacation times are more restricted now. My girls are 6 and 2, and so we are looking at 10-15 more years of vacations with them; Disney World is just one of the places we will take them. (They are also going to Bermuda and Paris this year.)

I feel the same way. For Younger kids this is a safe and happy place to take them. I’m hoping it stays that way for the next 10 years or so. Hopefully they will have memories of a happy childhood. That would be worth all the cost and more.

The look in my kids' eyes when they are enthralled by the Disney magic is priceless. My 2yo is obsessed with Minnie.

I’m in Paris now. It’s overrated.

Of course, if I actually spoke or understood French, I might think differently.

Ha! Last time I was in Paris for work, I got a stomach bug that had me vomiting hourly in the depositions I was taking. Definitely overrated that time.

I've only owned for a year, but we started thinking about DVC in 2014-2015. I do wish we'd bought in then, and even now I wish I could turn back the clock and have bought a larger BLT contract that first time around. I would not buy direct now, but if they created a resort that was walking distance to a park, I would consider it. I would also do a BLT add on at @TexasChick123 's price point, or a BWV contract for around what they were going for a year or so ago. I may have to wait until 2019 to do that, though. DH is putting the brakes on for now, though his mom is coming on our November trip, so that may be a reason for getting more points (bigger villas).

 

[TexasChick123]

Ha! Sometimes I think you are just my Houston-based long-lost twin. Between February and August of this year, we are flying on trips every month except May. 2-3 are non-vacation, though - work or family or both. My DH was somewhat resistant to buying DVC but after our last stay he kind of said the same thing. We never have points left to rent, however.

We choose to spend our disposable income on vacations. I would love to remodel my kitchen, but the hurricane last year has put that on hold for a year or two more because the materials and labor are so expensive down here right now.

I've only owned for a year, but we started thinking about DVC in 2014-2015. I do wish we'd bought in then, and even now I wish I could turn back the clock and have bought a larger BLT contract that first time around. I would not buy direct now, but if they created a resort that was walking distance to a park, I would consider it. I would also do a BLT add on at @TexasChick123 's price point, or a BWV contract for around what they were going for a year or so ago. I may have to wait until 2019 to do that, though. DH is putting the brakes on for now, though his mom is coming on our November trip, so that may be a reason for getting more points (bigger villas).

Just buy some cheaper SSR points and use those to stay at one of the Epcot resorts. Once Riviera opens, we should be able to book some rooms there for a few years and get our Epcot resort "fix". I think there will be better availability at all the other resorts at least for a little while since a lot of people will be trying to stay at the new resort. Booking Riviera with SSR points = winning!

 

[mustinjourney]

Ha! Last time I was in Paris for work, I got a stomach bug that had me vomiting hourly in the depositions I was taking. Definitely overrated that time.

Went out last night with coworkers to a nice French restaurant. I got escargot. I’ve gotten it several times in Texas and the snails have always been out of the shell. Well. Not in France.

Let’s just say I felt like Julia Roberts in pretty woman. While i didn’t shoot one off th table, it was quite the learning curve.

 

[Minniesgal]

Love my DVC but totally would not buy in at todays prices.

 

[miTnosnhoJ]

There is a fallacy in the thought that if one would not buy in at today’s prices, that they should sell their points. This would be true in an environment of no transaction costs. But in the real world, the seller absorbs transaction costs of 8 to 10%. This can make it beneficial to hold onto your points, even if you would not buy now.

 

[Cabius]

There is a fallacy in the thought that if one would not buy in at today’s prices, that they should sell their points. This would be true in an environment of no transaction costs. But in the real world, the seller absorbs transaction costs of 8 to 10%. This can make it beneficial to hold onto your points, even if you would not buy now.

Plus, the value of buying resale (w/o many owner perks) has to be discounted against holding a membership that is grandfathered into those perks.

 

[Dean]

There is a fallacy in the thought that if one would not buy in at today’s prices, that they should sell their points. This would be true in an environment of no transaction costs. But in the real world, the seller absorbs transaction costs of 8 to 10%. This can make it beneficial to hold onto your points, even if you would not buy now.

Plus, the value of buying resale (w/o many owner perks) has to be discounted against holding a membership that is grandfathered into those perks.

But that's not really the principle involved. The question is whether you would buy in again for what you could sell for without the drain of commissions or loss of perks, if not, the principle says one would sell.

 

[BEASLYBOO]

I'm new to this part of the Disboards but I'm curious how many of you who bought DVC years ago would do it all over again with today's Disney. .

Bought in 2000, 210 OKW resale points, answer to your question, yes I would buy, in a heartbeat but I couldn't afford today's prices. I enjoy it as much now as I did when I first purchased. My son then 2 is now 21 and still goes with me but he also goes alone with his friends. We still do the parks but we really enjoy Food and Wine week-ends now! Usage has changed but not the enjoyment of the resorts, new and old. Right now I have 6 reservations on the books! I don't care about DVC perks, as a Florida resident I get a discount on yearly passes, I use those discounts/perks.

 

[kboo]

Just buy some cheaper SSR points and use those to stay at one of the Epcot resorts. Once Riviera opens, we should be able to book some rooms there for a few years and get our Epcot resort "fix".

Hmmm... Well, since you did it, I should go looking for an SSR contract about $6-10pp more now ...
Actually, we are going to use SPG points for Swolphin until DH declares that he wants to stay in a 1BR or larger in the future. It's our "no more wire hangers" moment.

Went out last night with coworkers to a nice French restaurant. I got escargot. I’ve gotten it several times in Texas and the snails have always been out of the shell. Well. Not in France.

Ha! Escargot is much prettier (and hence more appetizing) in the shell.
It's hard to be a vegetarian in Paris - I have decided to be more flexitarian when I am there.

 

[Cabius]

But that's not really the principle involved. The question is whether you would buy in again for what you could sell for without the drain of commissions or loss of perks, if not, the principle says one would sell.

Nonsense!

“I would not buy a limited membership for $20k” does not mean “I should sell my fully-perked membership for $15k (after transaction fees and taxes)”.

If I value a membership at $18k, then it would make perfect sense to hold an existing membership without being willing to buy a new one. A new purchase would cost $2k more than it is worth to me, but selling it would net me $3k too little! And that’s without even considering that, due to perks, the product I hold and the product I would buy are materially different.

You are right that in a frictionless market the choice to hold an asset is economically synonymous with the choice to buy it. Keeping an asset that I could sell for $20k is the same as buying that asset for $20k.

But this isn’t a frictionless market, and the economic impact of buying vs holding is asymmetric. Keeping an asset that I could sell for $15k is NOT the same as buying a less-valuable version of that asset for $20k, and pretending that fees and taxes don’t exist doesn’t change that fact.

 

[Disneybuckeye]

Yes I would buy in again and even at today’s prices. A two bedroom villa at BWV with my family for a week is priceless.

We are currently in Colorado looking at vacation property to vacation in and rent. We also own a lake house where we spend many weekends. We also do one other week long trip a year to the beach or Europe. We believe in working hard to play hard and our kids are always happy to come along on a free vacation.

 

[Dean]

Nonsense!

“I would not buy a limited membership for $20k” does not mean “I should sell my fully-perked membership for $15k (after transaction fees and taxes)”.

If I value a membership at $18k, then it would make perfect sense to hold an existing membership without being willing to buy a new one. A new purchase would cost $2k more than it is worth to me, but selling it would net me $3k too little! And that’s without even considering that, due to perks, the product I hold and the product I would buy are materially different.

You are right that in a frictionless market the choice to hold an asset is economically synonymous with the choice to buy it. Keeping an asset that I could sell for $20k is the same as buying that asset for $20k.

But this isn’t a frictionless market, and the economic impact of buying vs holding is asymmetric. Keeping an asset that I could sell for $15k is NOT the same as buying a less-valuable version of that asset for $20k, and pretending that fees and taxes don’t exist doesn’t change that fact.

We'll have to disagree as the discussion is if one owns now and whether one should continue to own. It would assume one could buy and be whole as the decision process goes, not whether they could replace the same exact situation if they didn't own is irrelevant to the principle/thought process. Obviously there are other factors including emotional components, future assumptions and possible future personal changes.

 

[mustinjourney]

Hmmm... Well, since you did it, I should go looking for an SSR contract about $6-10pp more now ...
Actually, we are going to use SPG points for Swolphin until DH declares that he wants to stay in a 1BR or larger in the future. It's our "no more wire hangers" moment.



Ha! Escargot is much prettier (and hence more appetizing) in the shell.
It's hard to be a vegetarian in Paris - I have decided to be more flexitarian when I am there.

try not eating carbs in Paris. I gave up. Breakfast is practically impossible.

 

[ziravan]

what I find interesting is that if someone says they wouldn't buy in at today's prices, yet continue to keep their contracts, then from an economical standpoint, they are effectively "buying in" at today's prices since they are foregoing selling their contracts. Ignoring transactional costs -- if you choose to keep a contract instead of receiving $30,000 for it -- that is no different than paying $30,000 for the same contract (from a purely economic decision). In other words, if you currently own DVC but think that resale prices provide no value, then economically you'd be better off selling the contract and using cash for future vacations.

I will concede that selling your contracts have some transactional costs, so you wouldn't net the exact same amount -- so it's not perfect -- but it's more or less accurate.

I'm not saying anyone is wrong -- I'll probably be saying the same thing 20 years from now when I see contracts selling for $600 a point. It's more to the psychological factor of it being harder to pay out of pocket for something as opposed to selling something (that has an emotional value) and getting cold, hard cash in return.

I disagree with this.

I bought a rather large BCV contract - 250 points - resale at the end of the recession pricing at $84/point.

And it’s grandfathered in for the 2016 restrictions.

Would I pay $135/point for the same contract without perks? No, I wouldn’t.

But that doesn’t mean I want to sell.

The question isn’t whether BCV is worth selling today at $34,000. It’s whether it was worth buying for $22,000 with perks included. And those are two very different questions.

No, we wouldn’t sell at today’s prices, but we wouldn’t buy either. That doesn’t mean that we are effectively “buying” at today’s prices. Your point is taken but that not how it works:

One of the things that we really like about DVC is that we believe it to be a great value for us. In large part that’s because we know that we bought at a great time. Maybe we didn’t hit the absolute market low of buying in the $60’s at the top of the recession, but we hit close enough.

My wife used to say that we wouldn’t sell our contract at any price and that’s likely true. But that’s not the same as saying that we’d buy at today’s prices; we wouldn’t.

Having $34k in my hand right now isn’t worth nearly as much as owning a $21K-bought 250 point grandfathered BCV contract.

 

[ziravan]

Now. I DID just buy an AKV resale contract, so I guess in some ways, I would buy again. But, as with most things, it’s more complicated than that.

I would not have bought a resale AKV contract at current prices without the perks. Since I’m already qualified for perks, that purchase decision was building on previous purchase decisions.

Besides, it really is a small add on. It would not carry its weight in its own right.

 

[mustinjourney]

no, we wouldn’t sell at today’s prices, but we wouldn’t buy either. That doesn’t mean that we are effectively “buying” at today’s prices. Your point is taken but that not how it works:

So let’s assume 8% transaction costs. If you won’t sell at $135, then that means you still think the contract is worth more than $124 a point.

Grandfathered points with perks muddy the calculation and I get that, so it’s hard to say how much those are worth.

But I still stand by the premise that if you continue to hold a contract, then you are effectively voting that it has more value to you than the equivalent amount of cash you’d get for selling.

That’s ultimately what my point was.

 

[ziravan]

So let’s assume 8% transaction costs. If you won’t sell at $135, then that means you still think the contract is worth more than $124 a point.

Grandfathered points with perks muddy the calculation and I get that, so it’s hard to say how much those are worth.

But I still stand by the premise that if you continue to hold a contract, then you are effectively voting that it has more value to you than the equivalent amount of cash you’d get for selling.

That’s ultimately what my point was.

I understand, in theory.

In practice, I wouldn’t pay current prices for an initial purchase and certainly not $135 for BCV. And yet, I wouldn’t sell at that price, either.

The grandfathered perks are part of it. Thinking I got a really great deal is part of it. The other contracts I own that complement it are part of it. There are too many intangibles in play to make this a good direct transactional comparison.

The intangibles muddy the comparison to the point that it’s just not comparable.

 

[SherylLC]

I am confused as to why people think "I wouldn't buy at these prices" means "I have to sell my bargain from years past." Just because you keep it because you are still enjoying it doesn't mean you think it is worth current pricing! *scratches head*