DVC=Premium Car

chalee94

DIS Veteran
Joined
Aug 14, 2006
I can't afford a Club 33 membership, so I didn't buy one.

Lower point contracts mean more members trying for a finite number of rooms.
That's just generally true for any point based timeshares. It comes with the "flexibility." There is ALWAYS a finite, fixed number of villas and the points only go that far. If you complain that there is "nothing available", I can typically point you to last minute villas at HHI and VB in February. A lot of people complain that there is nothing available when SSR still has openings.

Disney has done their part to make things worse by selling small contracts (in part, to compete with resale) and adding new resorts like Poly and CCV with bungalow/cabin point imbalances.
 

The Jackal

DIS Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2017
Or...you can think of buying a Tesla instead of a Cadillac. You don't have to buy gas, you don't have to get an oil change and you get federal and state rebates. Is DVC the Tesla Model 3?
But if I get into a minor fender bender the Cadillac can be repaired in less than a week, but the Tesla will take 3-5 months. Poor planing by Tesla on repairs.
 

keishashadow

Proud Redhead...yes, I have some bananas!
Joined
Dec 30, 2004
Consider another deluxe product, like Cadillac. Really any upscale car manufacturer would fit here.
I’ve owned a Cadillac. It was a lovely Seville, with a big V8. Finally put it out to pasture when the maintenance costs soared as it aged. Have read more than a few posts here over the years where people stated the DVC maintenance fees had risen to point where they felt the need to sell.

There are some families who cant afford a BMW, and there are some families who can't afford Disney.
And there are some families who can’t afford Disney or DVC but still go into debt to experience it.

Will say that I think both Cadillacs & BMWs are lovely vehicles. I have friends who wouldn’t drive anything but Mercedes, etc. Yet, they sincerely congratulated us on our last two vehicle purchases, a Colorado & an Altima. There is something out there for everyone

I love having our DVC options. However, when it comes to using the term ‘premium’ on any TS, well, I’m just not buying into that. Now, if you tell me you own a beachfront vacation home in Florida, that’s another subject all together.
 
  • sleepydog25

    Been here awhile
    Joined
    Aug 27, 2004
    Both sides of this debate have valid points. Yep, DVC isn't for everyone, and if you understand the product, the associated costs, and want to buy in, good on you. Conversely, as a long-time DVC owner, I've seen DVC alter the playing field in often legal but less than flattering ways. The greedy point grab several months ago is a prime example--that one likely would have brought a lot of legal hassle so they changed the points back to where they had been. DVC's insistence the past few years on "industry standard" is fine if you're aware of such and have no qualms with it. My long-stated view is that Disney in general and DVC in particular used to set the standards not meet them. That's a corporate mentality shift which I don't appreciate. And I'll continue to say as much down the road until it comes time when I no longer believe the cost is worthwhile.
     

    DisneyLore

    Mouseketeer
    Joined
    Sep 5, 2017
    When I originally purchased the product, I had the right to convey exactly what I received to a resale purchaser. If I bought a Cadillac and sold it to you, you got the same car. Disney has spent the last several years damaging the resale product so that DVC owners cannot convey to a purchaser the same product which they originally acquired. These changes have been "legal" but they do put owners in an adversarial position, where many of us can no longer recommend the product as the restrictions go farther and farther. The DVC of the first 10 years was different than the current product, but the timeshare industry is full of shysters and verbal deceptions that Disney seems willing to consider their new "standard."
    I'm not sure I want to jump into this fray as you seem very disenchanted with your purchase, but I did want to note that your comparison of reselling your car and the purchaser getting the same car isn't exactly accurate either. If you bought a brand new car from Cadillac, you would likely get perks like manufacturers warranty and maybe free oil changes for 5 years or even an extended warranty. If you sell your car (after using it for a few years) your purchaser maybe getting the same car but not the same perks. No manufacturers warranty, no free oil changes, and no extended warranty. So while the car is the same, the perks are not. They, of course, want to incentivize you to buy new (direct from Disney). Losing those perks doesn't lessen the quality of the car your purchasing, it just in some ways makes the buyer decide if they want a cheaper used car or a more expensive new car.

    Anyway, that is just my two cents, take it for what it's worth (2 cents at most! LOL) Have a lovely day! :)
     

    Bing Showei

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Sep 10, 2017
    I'm not sure I want to jump into this fray as you seem very disenchanted with your purchase, but I did want to note that your comparison of reselling your car and the purchaser getting the same car isn't exactly accurate either. If you bought a brand new car from Cadillac, you would likely get perks like manufacturers warranty and maybe free oil changes for 5 years or even an extended warranty. If you sell your car (after using it for a few years) your purchaser maybe getting the same car but not the same perks. No manufacturers warranty, no free oil changes, and no extended warranty. So while the car is the same, the perks are not. They, of course, want to incentivize you to buy new (direct from Disney). Losing those perks doesn't lessen the quality of the car your purchasing, it just in some ways makes the buyer decide if they want a cheaper used car or a more expensive new car.

    Anyway, that is just my two cents, take it for what it's worth (2 cents at most! LOL) Have a lovely day! :)
    Right, the services on the car may change, but the physical car itself is functionally the same. Charles qualifies the analogy effectively in an earlier post where he likens the used car sold to another buyer as compromised (speed limited to 45mph) when compared to the car you had purchased.

    As it is your timeshare ownership when conveyed to another buyer, prior to 2019, wasn't effectively different (outside of a reduced RTU) in terms of how the product functioned, the new restrictions make your sold property a very different product. The ownership interest you convey to a new buyer is valued differently than the ownership you hold. Take OKW-E for example. After 2042, that contract remains good at all Disney timeshare properties for you as an owner, but for the new buyer, that property's value will be reduced by six properties. Additionally, any resort that opened after January 2019, are also off limits.

    The POS clearly states that you are buying an ownership interest in one property with zero expectation that future resorts will be built, but just as it makes no guarantee that the theme parks at WDW will continue to run/be maintained, owners have come to expect that the parks, transportation, adjoining hotel amenities, and exchange into future resorts would remain available, as flexibility has always been a big selling point of Diseny's timeshare pitch. Until the latest restrictions were applied, that was pretty reliable and made Disney's model an industry leader in timeshare management.

    Today, Disney seems content to sell properties that will function more in line with "industry standard." An industry that has the reputation it does for a reason.
     

    chalee94

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Aug 14, 2006
    I did want to note that your comparison of reselling your car and the purchaser getting the same car isn't exactly accurate either. If you bought a brand new car from Cadillac, you would likely get perks like manufacturers warranty and maybe free oil changes for 5 years or even an extended warranty. If you sell your car (after using it for a few years) your purchaser maybe getting the same car but not the same perks. No manufacturers warranty, no free oil changes, and no extended warranty. So while the car is the same, the perks are not...
    It's an analogy, so it's not a perfect 1:1 fit, yes.

    What I'm attempting to explain is that when I purchased DVC, I could have sold the next year and the new purchaser would have received exactly what I bought, including perks. In your analogy, it would be like buying a new car and, at that time, the rule was that the perks of 100,000 mile engine warranty and 5 years of oil changes *were* also valid to convey to someone if I resold the car in 2 years (for example). So a person who bought the car a year before I did might have resold their car in two years with the perks intact - the new buyer would still get oil changes for the remaining 3 years or so. And it had been that way for over a decade. But then they change the rules 1.5 years into my ownership, so while I can still sell the car, the perks are no longer transferable...

    Should that change my willingness to buy a car from that seller again? Would your goodwill toward the seller change at all? Should it affect the price I'm willing to pay next time? Wouldn't a rational person discount any further implied promises of perks?

    The analogy breaks down with timeshares because it becomes an issue of what is considered a perk. A car dealer isn't going to cause literal damage to your car to make your resale less competitive but if Disney starts trying to mess with booking windows or point charts, at some point they may do more to test the limits of their legal rights.

    DVC is still worth it if it is less expensive for you than a comparable onsite stay and you already visit WDW regularly. But if you run into trouble after you purchase (job loss, health issues), you should be aware that Disney has been taking steps to limit what you can resell. For some, that should definitely push them toward renting DVC rather than making a long term commitment. Potential new owners are often looking at the goodwill which was established in the "old days" and don't realize the erosion which has been occurring over the last few years.
     
    Last edited:

    Andyman33

    Mouseketeer
    Joined
    Dec 28, 2012
    my biggest concern with the changes are it is damaging their resale values and therefore lowering the total value you are purchasing - whether from disney or not. if you buy a cadillac you pay more up front but in 5 years it is worth more than say a chevy of similar size and specs -- now I feel like you are paying for a cadillac up front and part of the reason you are willing to "pony up" is that there is some value --- most timeshares that isn't the case -- disney wasn't a terrible investment i feel -- they are lowering what I can value my points for which in turn will limit me purchasing more points -- not because i can't afford them but because part of the value in the disney timeshare was that there was some investment to it and it could be sold later and not put on ebay for 1$ -- will be a sad day when disney timeshares are soon to be on ebay for 1$ but its gonna happen with how they are limiting their product
     

    Anthony1971

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Mar 11, 2005
    i Bought my points 16 years ago direct. I have already stayed my welcome so I truly do not care what I get if I sell but for the record as of now I can get back what I paid.
    But seriously if you buy resale you can not stay at the new resorts.....as of now I just do not see this a problem...
    I will start with the better of the 2 that I would likely stay at which is the one by fort wilderness.... but look closely as the transportation will likely stink and that is not the worst....there is no getting around the entire back of the resort faces the camp ground -while camping has a place in my heart- the advertising could be... hey daddy look at all the people in the tents....
    Has anyone looked at the location of well let’s just call it paradise tower.... you will have a choice of a view of a highway or a view of a Gas station.... Seinfeld Kenny roasters chicken comes to mind sitting on you balcony at night...
    I just don’t see the same level of thought going into the new resorts as the past... the locations are just poor choices... while I am sure the will be dressed up there is just no way of hiding the views....
    I do enjoy my DVC and am very happy with a lot of the now original resorts and who knows maybe I will like one of the new ones but I certainly am not concerned about them being huge hits and becoming the next have to stay at DVC resort....
     

    DougEMG

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Aug 14, 2008
    I just bought a 1 year old car and a 6 month old car, both still included the manufactured warranty.
     

    TiggerBouncy

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Mar 4, 2013
    As a self-elected Disney fanboi here, I do not like the analogy for one major reason. When you purchased your caddi, the rules were "You can resell, and the buyer gets all of the goodies like free oil changes, and our comfortable lounge while we change your oil". Then - some 2 years down the road, they changed the rule so that the buyer has to wait outside in the humid and hot sun while they pour cooking grease into the engine.

    I.E. when many people purchased DVC, the rules were they could resell and there were things that make it attractive to a potential buyer. However, the rules are changing - not just to the people who buy now, but to the people who are selling.

    ALL THAT SAID, It still doesn't matter to me. I still argue that I did not purchase DVC to sell it. I expect the resale value of anything which is enjoyed with fair value use to go down over time (there are some exceptions to this rule such as land). The problem in my mind is that owners have come to EXPECT the value of their purchase to rise while at the same time they get fair value use out of it. I.E. DVC owners have come to expect based on past performance that they will get to eat their cake, and then resell the left over portion of the cake at the same or greater price than when they purchased it at the bakery. The model falls apart if they never enjoyed this benefit previously. However, the universe being what it is, the cards fell in such a way to DVC value increased over time, and it has thus become an expected benefit.
     

    spencercl

    Earning My Ears
    Joined
    Jul 3, 2019
    View attachment 435212View attachment 435213View attachment 435214View attachment 435215View attachment 435216

    Again, not sure if you are a shill or a well intentioned but doe-eyed naif but the chart shown includes 1BR and studios, so increasing those point costs arbitrarily to line Disney's pockets at the expense of members would have qualified as easily documented and actionable fraud and deceit.
    Total points for the resorts have not changed the allocation can change. That is in the contract.
     

    chalee94

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Aug 14, 2006
    Total points for the resorts have not changed the allocation can change. That is in the contract.
    They did change, though.

    It's not a "reallocation" when they increase point costs across the board for studios and 1BRs with no corresponding decreases. Those increases would have increased the total points for the year for that resort. Thousands of extra points above what DVD originally sold. Thousands of extra points for Disney to rent at pure profit.

    I'm sure you know - whether you are employed by Disney or not - that they spent months carefully planning those changes. Lots of timeshare companies pull shady stunts like that. (Most have language in the contract that overrules any verbal promises made by a salesperson - but most didn't put out a metric ton of DVDs that include video of those verbal promises as pictured on page 1.)

    So while you seem eager to stand by Disney no matter what ("Hey, those point chart increases were reversed after legal action was threatened, so no big deal..."), for the rest of us, it's a concerning example of the sorts of shenanigans that we can expect from this current group of executives.
     

    crvetter

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Nov 26, 2018
    They did change, though.

    It's not a "reallocation" when they increase point costs across the board for studios and 1BRs with no corresponding decreases. Those increases would have increased the total points for the year for that resort. Thousands of extra points above what DVD originally sold. Thousands of extra points for Disney to rent at pure profit.

    I'm sure you know - whether you are employed by Disney or not - that they spent months carefully planning those changes. Lots of timeshare companies pull shady stunts like that. (Most have language in the contract that overrules any verbal promises made by a salesperson - but most didn't put out a metric ton of DVDs that include video of those verbal promises as pictured on page 1.)

    So while you seem eager to stand by Disney no matter what ("Hey, those point chart increases were reversed after legal action was threatened, so no big deal..."), for the rest of us, it's a concerning example of the sorts of shenanigans that we can expect from this current group of executives.
    Through my involvement in the thread getting the original 2020 point charts overturned and many calls with DVC management, I just want to clarify a few points.

    Technically @spencercl is correct the total number of points has never changed at a resort, because DVC is only contractually obligated to consider the total number of points to book a resort as if all lockoffs are booked as 2 bedrooms. This leads to the point you are making (and the contract for VGF actually outlines) which is the lockoff premium. Essentially DVC has said that the points to book at 1 bedroom and studio could be more than the point costs to book a 2 bedroom lockoff.

    So in a resort without any dedicated studios and/or 1 bedrooms (VGF, SSR, etc) they feel they can increase studios and 1 bedrooms year over year without any decrease anywhere else because the total number of points to book the entire resort hasn't changed from the legal requirements. I specifically asked could the points required for a studio at VGF increase 20% each year (the limit it is allowed in the POS) indefinitely and they said yes, but would never do so because it wouldn't be in the best interest. Some of us on the other thread took them to task on many points specifically that increasing the lockoff premium wasn't in the best interest of the members and/or that they can't reallocate points across room types. DVC hasn't admitted any wrong doing and denied any points people brought up but simply reverted the change "due to member feedback".

    Also VGF's POS does specifically state that points for the 1 bed and studio can increase without corresponding decrease because they are all apart of the lockoff. They also stated promotional material isn't legally binding, for example the DVD referenced above as promotional material which wasn't meant to outline every point of the POS (same with the Product Understanding Checklists) but only meant to give a broad understanding. Again many of us took them to task on this as a change in DVC's reading of the POS as these items weren't really an issue before.
     

    CanadaDisney05

    Mouseketeer
    Joined
    Mar 20, 2017
    Through my involvement in the thread getting the original 2020 point charts overturned and many calls with DVC management, I just want to clarify a few points.

    Technically @spencercl is correct the total number of points has never changed at a resort, because DVC is only contractually obligated to consider the total number of points to book a resort as if all lockoffs are booked as 2 bedrooms. This leads to the point you are making (and the contract for VGF actually outlines) which is the lockoff premium. Essentially DVC has said that the points to book at 1 bedroom and studio could be more than the point costs to book a 2 bedroom lockoff.

    So in a resort without any dedicated studios and/or 1 bedrooms (VGF, SSR, etc) they feel they can increase studios and 1 bedrooms year over year without any decrease anywhere else because the total number of points to book the entire resort hasn't changed from the legal requirements. I specifically asked could the points required for a studio at VGF increase 20% each year (the limit it is allowed in the POS) indefinitely and they said yes, but would never do so because it wouldn't be in the best interest. Some of us on the other thread took them to task on many points specifically that increasing the lockoff premium wasn't in the best interest of the members and/or that they can't reallocate points across room types. DVC hasn't admitted any wrong doing and denied any points people brought up but simply reverted the change "due to member feedback".

    Also VGF's POS does specifically state that points for the 1 bed and studio can increase without corresponding decrease because they are all apart of the lockoff. They also stated promotional material isn't legally binding, for example the DVD referenced above as promotional material which wasn't meant to outline every point of the POS (same with the Product Understanding Checklists) but only meant to give a broad understanding. Again many of us took them to task on this as a change in DVC's reading of the POS as these items weren't really an issue before.
    Tell me if my understanding of the "lockoff premium is correct".

    2 BR is more points that 1BR + Studio. So technically, they can increase the point requirements of studios and 1BR lockoffs, but only up to the point where combined they equal to that of a 2BR? So there really is a legal maximum they can increase it by. It just so happens that currently the point charts are less than the maximum.
     

    crvetter

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Nov 26, 2018
    Tell me if my understanding of the "lockoff premium is correct".

    2 BR is more points that 1BR + Studio. So technically, they can increase the point requirements of studios and 1BR lockoffs, but only up to the point where combined they equal to that of a 2BR? So there really is a legal maximum they can increase it by. It just so happens that currently the point charts are less than the maximum.
    Basically 2 BR is less points than that of a 1 BR + Studio. For instance at VGF (a resort with no dedicated Studio or 1 Bedroom, which is where this is problematic) has a cost of 17 and 33 for a studio and 1 bedroom in the Adventure Season on Sunday to Thursday night. If I booked a 1 Bedroom and Studio separately it would cost me 50 points; however, a 2 bedroom standard view that night is only 46 points. Thus the lockoff premium is 4 points out of 46 or a 8.7% increase in point cost. There is some argument for a moderate increase in point costs (stops people from booking rooms just in case they may need a 2 bed, no need to make adjoining room requests since more likely to book the cheaper option, increased costs in turning over rooms booked separately, etc) but the concern was it was being done not in the best interest of members but that of DVC since they were increasing 1 bedroom point costs (traditionally the last rooms to book) and members wouldn't see any of the breakage income because all DVC resorts were receiving the max allowed per the POS thus the rest went back to DVC (well technically first to BVTC).

    Now since DVC only needs to balance points at a resort considering all Rooms that are a part of a lockoff as a lockoff (thus in the case of VGF all rooms are 2 bedrooms or grand villas) when they increase the points to a studio or 1 bedroom there doesn't need to be a corresponding decrease anywhere else. This is because the 2 bedroom points didn't move in the example I laid out (though in the real 2020 original allocations things were more complicated). So theoretically at VGF (and any resort without a dedicated unit type) could have those non-dedicated units increase each and every year with no decrease occurring anywhere else.

    The practical limit on how high a studio could go is when it is parity with a 1 bedroom, the limit on how high a 1 bedroom could go is when it's on parity with a 2 bedroom, and so forth. Thus the "worst" case point chart is probably one where each room type costs the same point wise.

    The thread that goes into deep details on all things point charts is:

     
    Last edited:

    chalee94

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Aug 14, 2006
    They also stated promotional material isn't legally binding, for example the DVD referenced above as promotional material which wasn't meant to outline every point of the POS (same with the Product Understanding Checklists) but only meant to give a broad understanding.
    Executives can say anything they like. But if they push things again, a court would have the final say as to whether the "broad understanding" explained in the promotional materials was actually deceptive and fraudulent.
     

    crvetter

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Nov 26, 2018
    Executives can say anything they like. But if they push things again, a court would have the final say as to whether the "broad understanding" explained in the promotional materials was actually deceptive and fraudulent.
    Not in disagreement, but it really depends on the disclosures given with the the promotional material in the end. As I expressed (and you can follow my posts in the thread to see my opinions) to DVC was that they are changing the interpretation from what the original management of DVC intended. Unfortunately everything is ultimately an interpretation, but push come to shove it will simply be an interpretation by an arbitrator initially. But I also tread carefully when talking to the executives, especially considering it was the Compliance Department head everyone spoke with, they likely will be fully prepared to address all complaints/legal concerns that were brought up last December and still make similar changes.
     

    SL6827

    Them, loving the lake. Me- not so much!
    Joined
    Apr 23, 2017
    This game that DVC attempted to play with the lock off premium was sorry as he**, but I think it will be re-visited in the future. Pushing me to think the future with DVC will closely follow every other timeshare industry.
     

    Connect

    Disney News and Updates

    Get Daily Email Updates

    Subscribe to the DVCstore.com
    mailing list!

    BUY DVC


    SELL DVC


    DVC POINT CHARTS


    DIS PODCASTS

    Top