# DVC Direct Price Increase



## TravelTime (Jan 14, 2019)

https://www.dvcresalemarket.com/blog/anticipated-direct-price-increase-coming-january-16/

“It is being reported by DVCNews.com and DVCInfo.com that a direct price increase is coming on January 16th. Although there was never a formal announcement, which is unusual as it tends to drive selling urgency for direct sales, this increase comes as no surprise with a 27% buy back rate on right of first refusal in December. Note that Disney Vacation Club has not confirmed increases, so prices may be subject to change...”​
Grand Cal will be $260 and Grand Floridian will be $245. Astronomical increases in less than 2 years. Grand Floridian was $185 direct in Dec 2017, a 32% increase since then. Poly was $176 in Dec 2017, now it is going to $235, a 34% increase. Grand Cal was $185, now $260, a 41% increase.

The economy must be really hot right now. No wonder the Fed is increasing rates. It needs to slow down inflation!

Here are prices in 2017:
https://dvcinfo.com/dvc-direct-price-increases-january-17/

Compare to new prices as of Jan 16, 2019:
https://www.dvcresalemarket.com/blog/anticipated-direct-price-increase-coming-january-16/


----------



## MichaelColey (Jan 14, 2019)

Wow.  That's just dumbfounding to me.  We bought our small 25-point contract resale for a fraction of that.  Fortunately, it was before they removed most of the restrictions on resale contracts, so we're grandfathered in with most of the perks.


----------



## littlestar (Jan 14, 2019)

Holy smokes! Beach Club Villas is going up a lot and it expires in 2042.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 14, 2019)

littlestar said:


> Holy smokes! Beach Club Villas is going up $40 a point direct from Disney. And it expires in 2042.



Location, location, location.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 14, 2019)

I still think Disney may be making a mistake if it does not allow resale owners at its new resorts to internally exchange into other resorts. To me, the smaller the delta between resale and direct, the easier it is to sell direct. If DVC shuts down the resale market, I think selling direct to many of us will be harder. With all the Disney boards, words spreads quickly to Disney’s most loyal customers.

Disney can argue that most DVC buyers are not aware of resale and prefer to buy direct. However, if Disney were not threatened by resale, they would not be trying to shut it down. So I see some possible inconsistences in their strategy. I am not yet convinced they will make the resale restrictions on the new resorts as extreme as you can only use at your home resort.


----------



## MichaelColey (Jan 14, 2019)

littlestar said:


> Holy smokes! Beach Club Villas is going up a lot and it expires in 2042.



I know, right?  That's something like $10/point/year on top of maintenance fees.  That'll make it close to $20/point/year total.  With studios averaging almost 20 points/night, that's $400/night for a studio.  About $750/night for 1BR, and approaching $1000/night for a 2BR.  The savings just isn't there anymore.

I stay off-site in 2BR or 3BR timeshares for less than 1/10th of that.  I don't mind 10 minutes of driving.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 14, 2019)

MichaelColey said:


> I know, right?  That's something like $10/point/year on top of maintenance fees.  That'll make it close to $20/point/year total.  With studios averaging almost 20 points/night, that's $400/night for a studio.  About $750/night for 1BR, and approaching $1000/night for a 2BR.  The savings just isn't there anymore.
> 
> I stay off-site in 2BR or 3BR timeshares for less than 1/10th of that.  I don't mind 10 minutes of driving.



A studio at 20 points a night is $140 - $160 depending on your average cost per point. It now ranges between high $6s to $7s pp. Only a few places are about $8 pp in MFs. My average right now is a little under $7 pp.

A 1 br ranges from about 30-50 points per night (only more during very high seasons and only at the high end for the premium resorts like VGF with lake view). So that would range from $210 to $350 per night on average. It could be lower and not much higher.

Not sure where you got your numbers.


----------



## littlestar (Jan 14, 2019)

Glad we bought our Beach Club Villas points back in 2002 for $80 a point. Our first DVC purchase in February of 2002 was at the Villas at Wilderness Lodge for $75 a point. Amazing how the prices have increased.


----------



## Lisa P (Jan 14, 2019)

MichaelColey said:


> With studios averaging almost 20 points/night, that's $400/night for a studio.  About $750/night for 1BR, and approaching $1000/night for a 2BR.  The savings just isn't there anymore.





TravelTime said:


> A studio at 20 points a night is $140 - $160 depending on your average cost per point.


Maybe somewhere between... for a new purchaser.

Beach Club will now be $225/point purchased from DVC. With only 23 years left on the contract, that's $9.78/point/year (rounded to $10) for purchase plus $6.94/point/year (rounded to $7) for annual dues, equals $17/point *for a new BC purchaser*. At 20 points a night, a studio would be $340/night. At 40 points a night, a 1BR would cost $680/night. Seasons give a wide range: studios are 15-28 points per night, 1BRs 27-56, and 2BRs 37-71.

I agree, Michael, it seems like a savings is not really a given anymore, with so many alternatives, both onsite and offsite, to making a new DVC purchase. Waiting to see the hotel rate increases that they apparently anticipate with the openings of new attractions under construction.


----------



## MichaelColey (Jan 14, 2019)

Lisa P said:


> Maybe somewhere between... for a new purchaser.
> 
> Beach Club will now be $225/point purchased from DVC. With only 23 years left on the contract, that's $9.78/point/year (rounded to $10) for purchase plus $6.94/point/year (rounded to $7) for annual dues, equals $17/point *for a new BC purchaser*. At 20 points a night, a studio would be $340/night. At 40 points a night, a 1BR would cost $680/night. Seasons give a wide range: studios are 15-28 points per night, 1BRs 27-56, and 2BRs 37-71.


Exactly. And that doesn’t even factor in interest, opportunity cost of the purchase price, or future MF increases. The real price is even more than that. 

I just can’t see any way to justify $700/night for a 1BR DVC (and even more for bigger units). My net cost exchanging into a very nice 2BR or 3BR off-site timeshare is less than that for a WEEK.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 14, 2019)

MichaelColey said:


> Exactly. And that doesn’t even factor in interest, opportunity cost of the purchase price, or future MF increases. The real price is even more than that.
> 
> I just can’t see any way to justify $700/night for a 1BR DVC (and even more for bigger units). My net cost exchanging into a very nice 2BR or 3BR off-site timeshare is less than that for a WEEK.



I guess we do not really know our cost until we sell. The cost will depend on how many years on the contract and what price you can sell at. My contracts are not 20 years nor did I pay that much per point. I think the analysis you are listing is the worst case. But it does make me wonder why anyone would buy the resorts expiring in 2042 at full retail price.


----------



## Dean (Jan 15, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> I still think Disney may be making a mistake if it does not allow resale owners at its new resorts to internally exchange into other resorts. To me, the smaller the delta between resale and direct, the easier it is to sell direct. If DVC shuts down the resale market, I think selling direct to many of us will be harder. With all the Disney boards, words spreads quickly to Disney’s most loyal customers.
> 
> Disney can argue that most DVC buyers are not aware of resale and prefer to buy direct. However, if Disney were not threatened by resale, they would not be trying to shut it down. So I see some possible inconsistences in their strategy. I am not yet convinced they will make the resale restrictions on the new resorts as extreme as you can only use at your home resort.


The only way to prove it is to have it not sell so they have to reduce the price or offer incentives.  If it sells, it's "worth" that amount to someone.


----------



## ljmiii (Jan 16, 2019)

MichaelColey said:


> I just can’t see any way to justify $700/night for a 1BR DVC (and even more for bigger units)....


When people ask me if they should buy DVC I ask three questions in return, "Do you plan on visiting WDW at least once every two years for at least the next 10 years?", "Can you plan at least 7 and ideally 11 months in advance", and "Do you really want to pay a premium to stay 'on property'?" Only if the answer to all of these questions is 'Yes' should you buy.

$700/nt is less (depending on the day substantially less) than paying cash. Assuming you can find cash availability at all. I just looked for a day around Easter and saw no availability at BCV (for any size room) and a 1BR at BLT is $1202-$1365 per night including tax.



TravelTime said:


> But it does make me wonder why anyone would buy the resorts expiring in 2042 at full retail price.


As the RE broker says, "Location, location, location."  If you want to stay at a resort that is walkable to EPCOT and HS for the next 22 years you are going to pay through the nose - one way or the other.


----------



## ljmiii (Jan 16, 2019)

MichaelColey said:


> Exactly. And that doesn’t even factor in interest, opportunity cost of the purchase price, or future MF increases. The real price is even more than that.


It also doesn't factor in the residual value of the contract in 2042-ish. Which *could* be $0...or could be a number substantially higher than that. Roughly speaking there are four camps of belief as to what DVC will do for the WDW resorts as 2042 approaches. Nothing, offer a better executed OKW-style extension, offer a option to 're-buy' before opening sales to the general public, and offer an option to 'pre-buy' at a discount off the general public prices.  Only in the first of those four cases is the value of existing contracts $0.

(BTW, I say "WDW resorts" as it is unclear if DVC will keep Vero and HHI. There is also a school of thought that DVC will blow up the resorts in 2042 and start fresh...but I don't see them spending that kind of money if they don't have to - the buildings will only be 50ish years old at that point. It isn't as if we see similar speculation that Disney will blow up the Contemporary or Grand Floridian or any other of their resorts that are of a similar age or older.

*Maybe* to put a tower at BCV because of the location...but most of Disney's money at the Beach and Yacht Club comes from the hotel/convention side so I don't see that happening.)


----------



## rickandcindy23 (Jan 16, 2019)

On Disboards, there is a thread for ROFR.  We should start one here for resales of DVC.  I don't know that TUGgers have gone as crazy over DVC as Disboards people. 

I bought our SSR and OKW contracts at $50-$65 per point quite a few years ago.  I will be very old in 2042, when OKW expires.   I don't think I will care much.


----------



## ljmiii (Jan 16, 2019)

rickandcindy23 said:


> On Disboards, there is a thread for ROFR.  We should start one here for resales of DVC....


I'm not saying we shouldn't, but the usual advice I've read on TUG is for everyone to post their ROFR experiences (no matter what timeshare system) on rofr.net


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 16, 2019)

rickandcindy23 said:


> On Disboards, there is a thread for ROFR.  We should start one here for resales of DVC.  I don't know that TUGgers have gone as crazy over DVC as Disboards people.
> 
> I bought our SSR and OKW contracts at $50-$65 per point quite a few years ago.  I will be very old in 2042, when OKW expires.   I don't think I will care much.



I suspect there are very few DVC owners among Tuggers. Many of the folks who have been commenting on the recent threads seem to be non owners. It would be nice to know which Tuggers are DVC owners to get some perspective on their comments.

I think the ROFR information on Disboards and elsewhere is more helpful than ROFR.net or TUG because they have hundreds of people reporting every quarter for all the resorts. I do not think there are enough Tuggers to get broad enough data here.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 16, 2019)

ljmiii said:


> It also doesn't factor in the residual value of the contract in 2042-ish. Which *could* be $0...or could be a number substantially higher than that. Roughly speaking there are four camps of belief as to what DVC will do for the WDW resorts as 2042 approaches. Nothing, offer a better executed OKW-style extension, offer a option to 're-buy' before opening sales to the general public, and offer an option to 'pre-buy' at a discount off the general public prices.  Only in the first of those four cases is the value of existing contracts $0.
> 
> (BTW, I say "WDW resorts" as it is unclear if DVC will keep Vero and HHI. There is also a school of thought that DVC will blow up the resorts in 2042 and start fresh...but I don't see them spending that kind of money if they don't have to - the buildings will only be 50ish years old at that point. It isn't as if we see similar speculation that Disney will blow up the Contemporary or Grand Floridian or any other of their resorts that are of a similar age or older.
> 
> *Maybe* to put a tower at BCV because of the location...but most of Disney's money at the Beach and Yacht Club comes from the hotel/convention side so I don't see that happening.)



They might rebrand some of the DVCs that are not as interesting or do not have as much of a following or emotional connection to their owners. I could see OKW and SSR being re-branded with a new theme. They are known as the “sleep around” resorts. DVC would only need to change theming and decor. They do this all the time anyway during refurbishments. I would not want them to change the theme in the classic and very popular DVC resorts like VGF, VGC, AK, Poly or BLT. Similarly BW and BC have a big following too so they would be better off keeping those themes going.


----------



## MichaelColey (Jan 16, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> I suspect there are very few DVC owners among Tuggers. Many of the folks who have been commenting on the recent threads seem to be non owners. It would be nice to know which Tuggers are DVC owners to get some perspective on their comments.



I own a 25 point DVC contract that I bought resale before most of the restrictions were added. I use it mainly for the perks, but enjoy a night every year or two at a DVC property for my ~$125/year MF. I’ve got tremendous value out of the perks, mainly buying discounted APs (five of us, three times, always with a promotion, so even better than the normal DVC discount). We also enjoy the DVC lounge at Epcot. 

Like many (non-DVC) timeshare owners, I’m very frugal, and DVC isn’t frugal.


----------



## MOXJO7282 (Jan 16, 2019)

MichaelColey said:


> Exactly. And that doesn’t even factor in interest, opportunity cost of the purchase price, or future MF increases. The real price is even more than that.
> 
> I just can’t see any way to justify $700/night for a 1BR DVC (and even more for bigger units). My net cost exchanging into a very nice 2BR or 3BR off-site timeshare is less than that for a WEEK.


I say the same thing about the Marriott program in an age where just about everyone is internet savvy, how the hell do they keep selling these points at such obscene prices when all people have to do is do a quick internet search to find the same or very similar accommodations that can be had much lower than retail.

DVC is slightly different because people get crazy about staying onsite, which I totally understand but at some point the price just becomes obscene and prices out all but the wealthiest. I guess there is still a lot of very wealthy people again or at least Disney and Marriott think so because they just keep raising their prices year after year.


----------



## littlestar (Jan 16, 2019)

We will soon be down to 275 DVC points total. We sold a 50 point Saratoga contract this last week to reduce our dues/points.

We started looking at DVC in 2001 (but held back after 911 happened) and finally bought our first contract in February of 2002. No way would I pay $200 a point or more for DVC today. DVC is the only ownership in our timeshare portfolio that we bought some contracts retail.

With the changes/restrictions coming for the future DVC resorts, we are warning family and friends to tread carefully with the new DVC (not as easy an exit strategy like in the past because of resale not being able to trade amongst DVC resorts). More like the leisure suit, sweaty armpit timeshare sales tactics (disguised with pixie dust) we all know and love - ha. The old DVC club was good while it lasted, though (I suppose the original 14 DVC resorts’ contract language should offer an easier exit strategy for those owners thank goodness).


----------



## Lisa P (Jan 16, 2019)

ljmiii said:


> When people ask me if they should buy DVC I ask three questions in return, "Do you plan on visiting WDW at least once every two years for at least the next 10 years?", "Can you plan at least 7 and ideally 11 months in advance", and "Do you really want to pay a premium to stay 'on property'?" Only if the answer to all of these questions is 'Yes' should you buy.


Sounds like good advice, helpful in determining a good fit with DVC.


ljmiii said:


> $700/nt is less (depending on the day substantially less) than paying cash. Assuming you can find cash availability at all. I just looked for a day around Easter and saw no availability at BCV (for any size room) .... If you want to stay at a resort that is walkable to EPCOT and HS for the next 22 years you are going to pay through the nose - one way or the other.


Looking at Disney's website for cash rental nights between 4/13/19 - 4/27/19, the 2 weeks surrounding Easter this year, Sat-Sat, at BCV:

Short stays (3+ nights) during both weeks and a 7-night stay during the first week (between 4/13/19 - 4/20/19) tend to only show availability in studios.
7 nights of the second week (4/20/19 - 4/27/19) shows availability in all 3 unit sizes at BCV - studio, 1BR, 2BR.
14 nights, the full 2 weeks of Easter (4/13/19 - 4/27/19) shows availability in all 3 unit sizes.

It's only ~3 months out but apparently Disney holds back their limited prime season rental inventory for the big spender of a longer rental stay. Costs are better for the DVC member (vs. cash rental for a week) in all unit sizes but pretty close for a 1BR week, even after adding taxes to the cash rental (both over $6K for the week). For the few hundred dollars difference, the cash renter gets daily housekeeping (which would cost a similar amount if the DVC member purchased it) and the cash renter is not committed to annual dues.

However, renting from Disney for cash is not the only alternative to buying DVC. Renting from a current owner or from a points broker would cost about the same ($17/point) or less and it carries NO ongoing commitment. So it's hard to understand the value of actually buying direct at DVC's new, higher prices.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 16, 2019)

Here's a comparison. I know many people will criticize and say there are cheaper ways to get this but that is assuming they can find availability from a member renting points or a broker.

A 1 BR Club villa at Animal Kingdom for Easter week (highest point season April 20-27) is 466 points for the week. This works out to $3467 based on a cost per point $7.44 in MFs.

The price to rent this is $10,440 on the Disney website.

This is a difference of $6937.

AK has 38 years left on the contract.

Assuming you bought 466 points @ the new 2019 price of $176, your retail price for 466 points would be $82,016.
The break even is 11.82 years.

Assuming you bought 466 points @ $100 per point resale, your resale price would be $46,600.
The break even is 6.7 years.

After BE, all you get is savings and the savings increase as the rental prices increase.

Obviously this does not take into account the opportunity costs. However, in this analysis, we should assume you would have gone to AK every year or rented out your points.

I used an expensive example since it is peak season and requires a huge contract of 466 points.

But you can see why people are still buying direct and resale. If this is how someone likes to spend their vacations, then DVC is a great deal, even after price increases.

Plus if someone decides they changed their mind, they can still get some money back before the 38 years ends.

I did not include any perks such as AP discounts, 10-20% discount of food and other perks. That makes BE a little faster.

Grand Floridian, where I have a large chunk of my points, has no availability in any category for Easter week this year.

Some people may argue $10,000 is a lot to spend on one week's vacation. However, we used to easily spend this much in the past for a week. That is why I started buying timeshares at places I thought I might enjoy. The savings start to add up after 6-10 years. Some of my timeshares have a shorter breakeven. I think based on prices I have purchased at (almost all resale) as well as the style of travel we enjoy, our breakeven has tended to be 1-6 years on average across all of the various points programs and weeks we own.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 16, 2019)

People ask who buys all those private tours at Disney. Uhm, I should not admit this but I do. I have 3-4 planned for Ak and 1 for Epcot. I did get 15% off as a DVC member or an AP holder. It added several hundred dollars to my stay. Some of the private tours were not very expensive, believe it or not. The rhino and elephant excursions at AK are about $35 or so, less the 15% discount.


----------



## Dean (Jan 16, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> Here's a comparison. I know many people will criticize and say there are cheaper ways to get this but that is assuming they can find availability from a member renting points or a broker.
> 
> A 1 BR Club villa at Animal Kingdom for Easter week (highest point season April 20-27) is 466 points for the week. This works out to $3467 based on a cost per point $7.44 in MFs.
> 
> ...


For most of the time one can count on discounts inc Easter at 15-20%.  Premier times with DVC tend to be some of the worst $$$ values comparatively speaking.  The rental price, which can be better than owning since there are no home resort restrictions if you can find an owner, would be in the range of $7500 for 466 points and no tax.  Even if you go yearly and assume you'd use that money for the trip, the break even is much longer since the opportunity costs/TVM are real even if one doesn't want to think about them.  I ran the numbers.  Comparing to renting at the current price of $16 per point adjusting for inflation on dues and rental costs at 4.5% and assuming a 5% ROR on the money (averaging out the first few years in a MM and the rest at market rates), I get a 14 year break even at $100 per point and a 24 yr break even at $176 PP.  If you use cash it'll be a little quicker comparing to DVC but basically almost no one would consistently do DVC on cash.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 16, 2019)

Dean said:


> For most of the time one can count on discounts inc Easter at 15-20%.  Premier times with DVC tend to be some of the worst $$$ values comparatively speaking.  The rental price, which can be better than owning since there are no home resort restrictions if you can find an owner, would be in the range of $7500 for 466 points and no tax.  Even if you go yearly and assume you'd use that money for the trip, the break even is much longer since the opportunity costs/TVM are real even if one doesn't want to think about them.  I ran the numbers.  Comparing to renting at the current price of $16 per point adjusting for inflation on dues and rental costs at 4.5% and assuming a 5% ROR on the money (averaging out the first few years in a MM and the rest at market rates), I get a 14 year break even at $100 per point and a 24 yr break even at $176 PP.  If you use cash it'll be a little quicker comparing to DVC but basically almost no one would consistently do DVC on cash.



I think both of our assumptions have flaws. Most people would not actually fit my hypothetical example. But if they did, renting 466 points for AK Club House would not be all that easy. If I used that assumption instead, then of course BE is longer. But even if we assume 14 years for BE, that is not all that long if you plan to hold for 38 years, 45 years or 50 years. And if you decide to sell, you will get some money back. So both of our assumptions and analyses are pure hypothesis.

However, my point was this is why DVC seems like it makes sense for many people. This is why DVC can keep raising prices.

If we all calculated TVM and opportunity costs in making any purchase decisions, we would vacation in our backyard in flyover country. There is no way I would live the life I have or taken the risks I have in my life if I considered TVM and opportunity costs for every decision.

I think what many people here miss is that there are semi-rationale explanations as to why DVC can raise prices and why people still buy.

On a side note, I stay in 1 BR units with views whenever that is an option, even when traveling by myself and always when traveling with DH. I pay a premium for that. If I considered TVM and opportunity costs, why not stay in a studio or hotel room with no view?


----------



## Dean (Jan 16, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> I think both of our assumptions have flaws. Most people would not actually fit my hypothetical example. But if they did, renting 466 points for AK Club House would not be all that easy. If I used that assumption instead, then of course BE is longer. But even if we assume 14 years for BE, that is not all that long if you plan to hold for 38 years, 45 years or 50 years. And if you decide to sell, you will get some money back. So both of our assumptions and analyses are pure hypothesis.
> 
> However, my point was this is why DVC seems like it makes sense for many people. This is why DVC can keep raising prices.
> 
> ...


I didn't compare to the charts, did you use the new costs for the 1 BR for that time looking at 2020 & beyond?  Obviously every variable you change changes the outcome specifics but not the principles.  I strongly disagree that it's all or nothing on the TMV.  If you're investing $50K up front for vacation, those that can do so like it's a cup of coffee don't buy timeshares and don't worry about the costs of retail.  I draw a line at 5 years and anything before 5 years I consider short term at MM rates and anything over I consider long term and would assume an 8% yield yearly over time (yes after taxes).  I average it out to 5% for simplicity but if I break it out in this scenario it will lengthen the break even modestly I suspect.  Certainly there are perks that might or might not add value and are not guaranteed and having control can be good but there's also risk and commitment, for example dues went up this year more than double the assumptions I used.  Rental costs have also lagged the up front costs historically so there's a good chance the numbers I used of $16 a point compared to the other assumptions won't keep up and would reduce the cost of renting compared to owning over the assumptions.  I believe that even a discounted rack rate comparison for DVC a fools comparison unless one consistently does so pre DVC anyway or stays in suites consistently.  I think I've only seen one person post they always did suites on cash and thus for them, anything is going to be a savings no matter how poor it compares otherwise.  And I don't ever recall anyone say they stay at DVC 1 BR or larger consistently on cash.  Remember that a timeshare stay at Disney is different than a cash stay even in the same unit.  On one hand you have parking fees but get daily housekeeping, on the other you don't have the tax and you have more control.  But who's to say in 20 years the dues won't be more than the cash price would be, historically 30-35% discounts for deluxe resorts have been common for one group or another and 10% almost guaranteed.

The bottom line is DVD keeps raising prices because enough people will buy in.  Basically they do so because they can, whether it makes sense for a given person or not.  I've seen MANY, MANY examples historically of people that it would cost them more than OOP but they got emotionally tied to the idea of owning and conned themselves into it being a savings.  Of course it's not just a savings issues, there's a value issue but for the current example it's a DVC say in the same unit so the value of a given stay in terms of amenities is the same.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 16, 2019)

Dean said:


> I didn't compare to the charts, did you use the new costs for the 1 BR for that time looking at 2020 & beyond?  Obviously every variable you change changes the outcome specifics but not the principles.  I strongly disagree that it's all or nothing on the TMV.  If you're investing $50K up front for vacation, those that can do so like it's a cup of coffee don't buy timeshares and don't worry about the costs of retail.  I draw a line at 5 years and anything before 5 years I consider short term at MM rates and anything over I consider long term and would assume an 8% yield yearly over time (yes after taxes).  I average it out to 5% for simplicity but if I break it out in this scenario it will lengthen the break even modestly I suspect.  Certainly there are perks that might or might not add value and are not guaranteed and having control can be good but there's also risk and commitment, for example dues went up this year more than double the assumptions I used.  Rental costs have also lagged the up front costs historically so there's a good chance the numbers I used of $16 a point compared to the other assumptions won't keep up and would reduce the cost of renting compared to owning over the assumptions.  I believe that even a discounted rack rate comparison for DVC a fools comparison unless one consistently does so pre DVC anyway or stays in suites consistently.  I think I've only seen one person post they always did suites on cash and thus for them, anything is going to be a savings no matter how poor it compares otherwise.  And I don't ever recall anyone say they stay at DVC 1 BR or larger consistently on cash.  Remember that a timeshare stay at Disney is different than a cash stay even in the same unit.  On one hand you have parking fees but get daily housekeeping, on the other you don't have the tax and you have more control.  But who's to say in 20 years the dues won't be more than the cash price would be, historically 30-35% discounts for deluxe resorts have been common for one group or another and 10% almost guaranteed.
> 
> The bottom line is DVD keeps raising prices because enough people will buy in.  Basically they do so because they can, whether it makes sense for a given person or not.  I've seen MANY, MANY examples historically of people that it would cost them more than OOP but they got emotionally tied to the idea of owning and conned themselves into it being a savings.  Of course it's not just a savings issues, there's a value issue but for the current example it's a DVC say in the same unit so the value of a given stay in terms of amenities is the same.



Most people, even very wealthy people, do not think like this when it comes to vacations. A timeshare is not an investment or a stock. Many Tuggers tend to call timeshares their "portfolio" and do endless financial analysis on it. To me, that is foolish.

I disagree wholeheartedly that wealthy people would not join a vacation club. Who buys all the fractionals? Disney may not be Four Seasons or Ritz Carlton but I think people of all economic levels can relate to it.

TUG is a different market and group of people. Of course, no one in TUG would be renting 1 BR suites at cash prices consistently year after year. Frankly, I never even knew hotels and resorts had 1 BR suites until I discovered timesharing.

I think Disney understands people and what the market can bear. In my business, I charge the highest prices in my field. And the more I raise my prices above the competition, the more demand I seem to get. However, I know my limits and I tend to price 20-50% above average. I do not go way beyond that or then I would have no business.


----------



## Dean (Jan 16, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> Most people, even very wealthy people, do not think like this when it comes to vacations. A timeshare is not an investment or a stock. Many Tuggers tend to call timeshares their "portfolio" and do endless financial analysis on it. To me, that is foolish.
> 
> I disagree wholeheartedly that wealthy people would not join a vacation club. Who buys all the fractionals? Disney may not be Four Seasons or Ritz Carlton but I think people of all economic levels can relate to it.
> 
> ...


We'll have to agree to disagree on who buys DVC and Marriott timeshare.  Ritz and Four Seasons is a different market but I doubt Bill Gates or similar owns one.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 16, 2019)

Dean said:


> We'll have to agree to disagree on who buys DVC and Marriott timeshare.  Ritz and Four Seasons is a different market but I doubt Bill Gates or similar owns one.



Bill Gates is not in the wealthy population. He is in the stratosphere of a market of his own. Many times, people seem to confuse the "wealthy" with the 0.0001%. Very different. The top 1% of our country is the working rich. I read that anyone earning over $400K a year is considered to be in the top 1%. Very different than the uber rich.

Bill Gates owns Four Seasons, though. Not a fractional but an entire chunk of it. But for Bill Gates, owning one or a few hotels would be a fractional, I guess.

Similarly, many uber rich people enjoy buying luxury hotels.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/two-vi...-run-luxury-hotels-its-been-a-slog-1500226911

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Seasons_Hotels_and_Resorts

*Four Seasons Hotels Limited*, trading as *Four Seasons Hotels and Resorts*, is an international luxury hospitality company[3]headquartered in Toronto, Ontario.[4] Four Seasons operates more than 100 hotels worldwide.[5] Since 2007, Bill Gates (through Cascade Investment) and Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal have been majority owners of the company.[6


----------



## Dean (Jan 17, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> Bill Gates is not in the wealthy population. He is in the stratosphere of a market of his own. Many times, people seem to confuse the "wealthy" with the 0.0001%. Very different. The top 1% of our country is the working rich. I read that anyone earning over $400K a year is considered to be in the top 1%. Very different than the uber rich.
> 
> Bill Gates owns Four Seasons, though. Not a fractional but an entire chunk of it. But for Bill Gates, owning one or a few hotels would be a fractional, I guess.
> 
> ...


Timeshares are a risk and aggravation, there's no reason to fool with them if there's no benefit and for most, if there's not a true savings and or real added value without much or any additional cost.  Timeshare have real and significant cost (some more than others) and potential real value (for some anyway, esp DVC).  To not at least consider the costs up front and ongoing is foolish, IMO and those where it's so insignificant in their world that it'd be unreasonable to think about it don't buy timeshares.  Obviously the best time to consider the costs & risks is going in but one should at least be aware.  It'd like getting an inheritance and blowing the money because it was "found money", one can do so and many do, but not responsible.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 17, 2019)

Dean said:


> Timeshares are a risk and aggravation, there's no reason to fool with them if there's no benefit and for most, if there's not a true savings and or real added value without much or any additional cost.  Timeshare have real and significant cost (some more than others) and potential real value (for some anyway, esp DVC).  To not at least consider the costs up front and ongoing is foolish, IMO and those where it's so insignificant in their world that it'd be unreasonable to think about it don't buy timeshares.  Obviously the best time to consider the costs & risks is going in but one should at least be aware.  It'd like getting an inheritance and blowing the money because it was "found money", one can do so and many do, but not responsible.



Yes I know that you have said this many times on TUG. Most people should not buy timeshares at all and should just put all their money in the bank and save. I was just trying to explain why some people may not always see it as foolish. No different than purchasing an expensive Hawaii week. Many people buy them resale and the BE point is long, if ever, and many times there is no residual value. Or buying a new car. Or paying for an expensive gym. Or any other discretionary purchase where there are cheaper and nearly identical alternatives. It is all foolish.


----------



## elaine (Jan 17, 2019)

DVC has an intangible premium for us even though we are bargain "mid-luxury" shoppers. We have DVC (resale AKV) and love it. We  are staying over Easter for 5 nights in 2 studios for annual fees of about $1300. A 1 BR when we took our kids over Christmas was about the same for 5 nights. We feel like we are on a land-cruise when staying at DVC. We can charge everything, or get the dining plan, kids can come and go, beautiful pools (DH and I sometimes only go into WDW 1X).
2 years ago we stayed in a 3BR at HGVC SW. Beautiful unit, pools, etc. But it felt like a nice condo stay and DH had to drive back and forth with teens 2X/day. We're going to try BC next year to see if that is a compromise alternative. But, for now, I'm very happy at our $80 PP price, esp. as I can likely sell in 5-7 years and recoup most capital outlay. No way is it worth it at $150+ IMHO.
I agree with Dean, otherwise, TS are getting to be a big hassle. We were thinking of buying a HGVC or Marriott--but too many issues reading on TUG even about these TS.


----------



## Dean (Jan 17, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> Yes I know that you have said this many times on TUG. Most people should not buy timeshares at all and should just put all their money in the bank and save. I was just trying to explain why some people may not always see it as foolish. No different than purchasing an expensive Hawaii week. Many people buy them resale and the BE point is long, if ever, and many times there is no residual value. Or buying a new car. Or paying for an expensive gym. Or any other discretionary purchase where there are cheaper and nearly identical alternatives. It is all foolish.


I agree with you, most should not buy timeshares.  Many can't afford it (even those that buy) and many don't understand what they're getting into.  Sales staff are good at their job as a rule and often get people to buy that shouldnt'.  My statements were to extreme situations, not trying to draw a line in the sand you or I might be on opposites ends of, basically principles to use to evaluate the big picture.  If you don't want to think or care what you're spending or what value you're getting, that's your decision but for most it is a foolish approach IMO.  But then when most people have a net worth of zero or less and most get to retirement without anything substantial, I personally think it's an important area to pay attention to.  My basic point is to think about what you're doing, to basically pay attention.  If you do and you decide to spend $100K on a European river cruise, I'm OK with that as long as it doesn't hurt you or your family.  I'm not telling people what to do but I reserve the right to have an opinion on the principles involved.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 17, 2019)

I do not think people are broke due to timeshares. I doubt very many people actually own them, especially with the terrible reputation they have. Most people laugh at timeshare owners and think we are foolish for buying into a scam.


----------



## chalee94 (Jan 17, 2019)

ljmiii said:


> It also doesn't factor in the residual value of the contract in 2042-ish. Which *could* be $0...or could be a number substantially higher than that. Roughly speaking there are four camps of belief as to what DVC will do for the WDW resorts as 2042 approaches. Nothing, offer a better executed OKW-style extension, offer a option to 're-buy' before opening sales to the general public, and offer an option to 'pre-buy' at a discount off the general public prices.  Only in the first of those four cases is the value of existing contracts $0.



IIRC, in a couple of cases, prices went down after presales to current members so there is a risk in jumping in early, which makes pre-offers very similar to "nothing." DVC is unlikely to be offering deep discounts unless things change considerably.

So I still think "nothing" is the heavy favorite - the new resale rules will discourage any thought of extensions for the time being as Disney rolls old resorts into the DVC2 club. And many current owners are either 1) too old to have any interest in owning after expiration or 2) too skittish about what additional changes DVC will make that damage their ownership. We'll see but I'd bet very heavily on "nothing."



ljmiii said:


> (BTW, I say "WDW resorts" as it is unclear if DVC will keep Vero and HHI. There is also a school of thought that DVC will blow up the resorts in 2042 and start fresh...but I don't see them spending that kind of money if they don't have to - the buildings will only be 50ish years old at that point. It isn't as if we see similar speculation that Disney will blow up the Contemporary or Grand Floridian or any other of their resorts that are of a similar age or older.



ever stayed at the Spicebush in Hilton Head? used to be a Marriott but now it isn't. I suspect that Disney will sell off VB and possibly HHI after 2042 expiration of the DVC leases. it's not like demolition is the only option...


----------



## ljmiii (Jan 17, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> I do not think people are broke due to timeshares. I doubt very many people actually own them, especially with the terrible reputation they have. Most people laugh at timeshare owners and think we are foolish for buying into a scam.


I hate to disagree with you TravelTime, but those who know of TUG's existence much less those who post on its forums are an insignificant portion of the timeshare market. And even here we do get the occasional newbie with a sad story about how their financial life is falling apart and wondering how to best get out from timeshare ownership.

In the wider world of FB ignorance and stupidity is rampant and at times painful to watch. Their stories are horrible. Even worse...it does require a certain awareness to find the better FB DVC and MVCI groups. I know there is a sea of people further distant from TUG's shores that know even less.

I don't know if I'd say they are broke *because* of timeshares. But the ability of someone with basically no money to go into debt for tens of thousands of dollars who then has to try to pay off the purchase at 20% interest plus MFs has not been helpful.


----------



## geist1223 (Jan 17, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> I do not think people are broke due to timeshares. I doubt very many people actually own them, especially with the terrible reputation they have. Most people laugh at timeshare owners and think we are foolish for buying into a scam.



We bought our first timeshare together before we were married. I put my share on a no interest Credit Card and every 12-18 months I would roll it over to a new No Interest credit card. Patti pulled her half out of Investments. Her financial advisor was horrified. But a couple years later after we had traveled all over the USA, Canada, Mexico, Hawaii, Europe, Australia, etc she changed her mind saying that we got a lot out of it and we were among the very few she knew that used their timeshare fully and had a great time. This was also after she joined us for a trip to the BI and 2 weeks in Australia.


----------



## ljmiii (Jan 17, 2019)

chalee94 said:


> ever stayed at the Spicebush in Hilton Head? used to be a Marriott but now it isn't. I suspect that Disney will sell off VB and possibly HHI after 2042 expiration of the DVC leases. it's not like demolition is the only option...


Sorry, I should have been clearer. The comment about some people believing that DVC will demo the resorts referred to the WDW resorts, not Vero or HHI. I would assume that if DVC wished to divest itself of its Atlantic Coast resorts it would sell them as you suggested.

Not that I think any of them will be demo'd. It just seems to be an argument of the 'nothing' crowd that the day each resort's contracts runs out DVD will then demo that resort to build a new one.

Which seems to me to be absurd. As I said, it isn't as if they are THAT old - the MK Disney resorts are twenty plus years older and no one talks about ripping down the Grand Floridian hotel in 23 years. Also, Disney wouldn't allow DVD to impact it's revenue stream - thus I don't see them giving DVD permission to 'blow up' BCV if the changes would impact the Yacht and Beach Club's hotel and convention business.


----------



## ljmiii (Jan 17, 2019)

chalee94 said:


> So I still think "nothing" is the heavy favorite - the new resale rules will discourage any thought of extensions for the time being as Disney rolls old resorts into the DVC2 club. And many current owners are either 1) too old to have any interest in owning after expiration or 2) too skittish about what additional changes DVC will make that damage their ownership. We'll see but I'd bet very heavily on "nothing."


Anything could change, but thus far DVC has been careful to not directly impact their existing customers. Which is part of why I think 'nothing' is by far the least likely of the four options.

As for extensions I think the primary lesson DVC learned (aside from don't try to sell something that DVC arguably just gave away for free) is to wait until the end date is much closer. Would any extension limit resale use in those extra years? Of course. Would any extension price be based on then current direct prices at new resorts? Of course...and many owners wouldn't/couldn't buy for that reason.

Also, there is no reason to expect 'now current owners' to be 'then current owners' when the average length of ownership of a DVC contract is around 10 years.


----------



## Dean (Jan 17, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> I do not think people are broke due to timeshares. I doubt very many people actually own them, especially with the terrible reputation they have. Most people laugh at timeshare owners and think we are foolish for buying into a scam.


I've seen quite a few over the years that created quite a mess in part due to timeshares including a path to bankruptcy.  But there are always always multiple factors, not just the timeshare by itself.  One big problem is that those that don't pay attention do so in multiple areas, not just with a timeshare.  Not paying attention is a symptom of a larger problem for many, not simply a choice to ignore the costs/risks in a single area.  Personally I think the risk avoidance is more important than the cost and it's the area people pay the least attention to.  For DVC specifically they tend to assume around the best case scenario and ignore the risks.  Not that we can anticipate everything or live in fear, but at least consider what happens with divorce, loss of loved one, loss of job, disability, medical issues, etc.


----------



## Steve Fatula (Jan 17, 2019)

ljmiii said:


> And even here we do get the occasional newbie with a sad story about how their financial life is falling apart and wondering how to best get out from timeshare ownership.
> 
> I don't know if I'd say they are broke *because* of timeshares. But the ability of someone with basically no money to go into debt for tens of thousands of dollars who then has to try to pay off the purchase at 20% interest plus MFs has not been helpful.



And much more for me, but it's just my opinion just like Dean can have his opinion about how other should behave, it's not timeshares for the average person that makes them broke, as TravelTime noted, the new car things, ridiculous cell phone plans, horrible cable bills, house they cannot afford, etc. I see all that waste and timeshares pale in comparison. The way I see things at least. But it's my view. I have no right to say others should deal with those details, and I don't accept anyone saying how I should treat financial issues. 

If you have enough money for a TS including future fees, and, they provide value and enjoyment to you, go for it. I did, and it's the greatest thing I ever did. Should one consider the costs? Of course, just like they should for anything else in life. Sure, cars don't have endless fees right, or do they? People I see continually buy that expensive new SUV (or here pickup trucks for 40G), so, while not identical, it's the same problem to me except worse. But if it brings them joy, I have no quarrel, as long as it doesn't drive them broke. 

You can consider is it a worthwhile "investment" if you wish, that's your way. Not everyone sees it that way. It is neither wise or unwise, it's just we are all different and have different needs.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 17, 2019)

Steve Fatula said:


> And much more for me, but it's just my opinion just like Dean can have his opinion about how other should behave, it's not timeshares for the average person that makes them broke, as TravelTime noted, the new car things, ridiculous cell phone plans, horrible cable bills, house they cannot afford, etc. I see all that waste and timeshares pale in comparison. The way I see things at least. But it's my view. I have no right to say others should deal with those details, and I don't accept anyone saying how I should treat financial issues.
> 
> If you have enough money for a TS including future fees, and, they provide value and enjoyment to you, go for it. I did, and it's the greatest thing I ever did. Should one consider the costs? Of course, just like they should for anything else in life. Sure, cars don't have endless fees right, or do they? People I see continually buy that expensive new SUV (or here pickup trucks for 40G), so, while not identical, it's the same problem to me except worse. But if it brings them joy, I have no quarrel, as long as it doesn't drive them broke.
> 
> You can consider is it a worthwhile "investment" if you wish, that's your way. Not everyone sees it that way. It is neither wise or unwise, it's just we are all different and have different needs.



Steve, you said this better than I ever could. I think people who are financially devastated by timeshares might have been living on the edge before the purchase. They probably make many financial mistakes. I still look back on the housing bust as an example. Most people who lost their homes could not afford the payments. Some just stopped paying because they saw the decline in value and just wanted out. But the vast majority of people survived the housing bust and the Great Recession intact (or even better off). If you do not have the money and a timeshare could bankrupt you or negatively affect your lifestyle by going into debt, then it is most certainly a terrible thing. However, even if one makes a foolish decision by purchasing a timeshare, it they can afford it, even if they do not get max value out of it by knowing all the TS hacks, they will not go bankrupt from the purchase.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 17, 2019)

I asked my super duper financially conservative friend who has been a senior financial manager at major Fortune 500 companies and consulting firms and graduated from University of Chicago’s school of business with an MBA as to how she makes purchase decisions. She said:

To answer your question on the evaluating stuff.  Both.  However with investments the long term horizon is most important.  Time value of money and NPV.  However,  product features are important and available funds.  It really depends on the objective of the purchase.​I agree with her. I think with investments, everyone should take TVM and opportunity costs into account. With discretionary purchases where I have available funds, I am more likely to use other factors to make the decision including enjoyment and other intangible benefits.


----------



## Dean (Jan 17, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> I asked my super duper financially conservative friend who has been a senior financial manager at major Fortune 500 companies and consulting firms and graduated from University of Chicago’s school of business with an MBA as to how she makes purchase decisions. She said:
> 
> To answer your question on the evaluating stuff.  Both.  However with investments the long term horizon is most important.  Time value of money and NPV.  However,  product features are important and available funds.  It really depends on the objective of the purchase.​I agree with her. I think with investments, everyone should take TVM and opportunity costs into account. With discretionary purchases where I have available funds, I am more likely to use other factors to make the decision including enjoyment and other intangible benefits.


But that's just it, people tend not to make good decisions in most areas and bad decisions in one area over time, they tend to make bad decisions in general or good decisions in general (nothing is perfect).  It's theory vs practicality.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 17, 2019)

Dean said:


> But that's just it, people tend not to make good decisions in most areas and bad decisions in one area over time, they tend to make bad decisions in general or good decisions in general (nothing is perfect).  It's theory vs practicality.



I agree people are irrational. But I do not see that most people are stupid and foolish for making some bad decisions. Most people I know are fine money managers and make decent decisions based on their needs and budget and live within their means. I guess I have many responsible friends and family. None own timeshares as they all think timeshares are a scam. In fact, I do not tell anyone I have timeshares because they will criticize. I told some folks once and I was beat up for buying into the scam. But then when I tell them about my trips, they are jealous. People are definitely irrational and it is hard to change people’s minds once they have a firm opinion based on strongly held beliefs.


----------



## Dean (Jan 17, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> I agree people are irrational. But I do not see that most people are stupid and foolish for making some bad decisions. Most people I know are fine money managers and make decent decisions based on their needs and budget and live within their means. I guess I have many responsible friends and family. None own timeshares as they all think timeshares are a scam. In fact, I do not tell anyone I have timeshares because they will criticize. I told some folks once and I was beat up for buying into the scam. But then when I tell them about my trips, they are jealous. People are definitely irrational and it is hard to change people’s minds once they have a firm opinion based on strongly held beliefs.


I believe that to be unclear is to be unkind.  It sounds like we mostly agree, it's just the specific wording where we're separated.


----------



## Lisa P (Jan 17, 2019)

Dean said:


> For most of the time one can count on discounts inc Easter at 15-20%. ... Comparing to renting at the current price of $16 per point ... a 24 yr break even at $176 PP.  If you use cash it'll be a little quicker comparing to DVC but basically almost no one would consistently do DVC on cash.


Totally agree. Given that this thread is about the higher prices of buying in now from DVC, and most people don't normally rent DVC rooms for cash, the comparison that seems to make the most sense here, would be between the costs for a new DVC purchaser vs. the costs for those people of staying in comparable rooms on property by using alternate means... renting points, seeking AP discounts on deluxe rooms, etc.



TravelTime said:


> ...my point was this is why DVC seems like it makes sense for many people.


I guess it has always seemed to make sense to me for many new purchasers within certain demographics but these rising prices are resulting in it making sense for fewer new purchasers. For me, this thread is not reflecting on the wisdom of past decisions under the circumstances at the time. IMO, it's about how we, as TUG members, consider or advise others who are considering the current/future terms of DVC purchases. Yes, there are intangibles which do matter, but the monetary value is asked about regularly whenever people post, "Is it worth it?"



TravelTime said:


> I doubt very many people actually own [timeshares], especially with the terrible reputation they have.


ARDA reports that there are "over 9.6 million" households owning one or more timeshares. "Timeshare ownership generally increases with household income peaking among owners with $100k or more (11.0%)." http://www.arda.org/aif-foundation/research/timesharedatashare/overview.aspx


----------



## Lisa P (Jan 17, 2019)

ljmiii said:


> ...some people believing that DVC will demo the resorts referred to the WDW resorts... Not that I think any of them will be demo'd. ... it isn't as if they are THAT old...


The reason I've wondered if DVC may want to demo OKW is because of what they did in the past with the property now known as Saratoga Springs Resort. When it was first developed, it was the Walt Disney World Conference Center, then the Village Resort, then the Disney Village Resort, then the Disney Institute, and finally, SSR. Along the way, there were sections called Vacation Villas, Fairway Villas (townhomes), Treehouse Villas, Club Lake Villas, and Grand Vista Suites. All of these condos and houses (except the Treehouses) were demolished and the higher density Saratoga Springs condo buildings were added around the central spa facilities. When demo'd, those buildings were not "THAT old" either.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 17, 2019)

Lisa P said:


> The reason I've wondered if DVC may want to demo OKW is because of what they did in the past with the property now known as Saratoga Springs Resort. When it was first developed, it was the Walt Disney World Conference Center, then the Village Resort, then the Disney Village Resort, then the Disney Institute, and finally, SSR. Along the way, there were sections called Vacation Villas, Fairway Villas (townhomes), Treehouse Villas, Club Lake Villas, and Grand Vista Suites. All of these condos and houses (except the Treehouses) were demolished and the higher density Saratoga Springs condo buildings were added around the central spa facilities. When demo'd, those buildings were not "THAT old" either.



Interesting history on SSR.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 17, 2019)

It sounds like DVC direct is not a great fit for most people on TUG. I must say that the upfront costs of buying into Aulani resale is about half the direct price. Also AK, SSR and OKW are still relatively inexpensive resale. Some of these resorts can still make sense depending on the person's objectives. I bought Aulani for $82.50 pp about a year ago. It is still in the $80s and $90s with many reputable agents. To me, that is a great deal for DVC given today's economy and in light of the price increases. I have also found I can get anything I want at the 7 month mark but I do not go for studios. So technically for people who want 1 or 2 BRs, you can own somewhere you can afford and trade at 7 months. I did not want to take a risk and we have the disposable income, so I bought at the various resorts I thought I might want to stay at. I am probably going to sell some contracts in the future and consolidate into 2 home resorts since I found that exchanging at 7 months is easier than people have reported on TUG. I think we need to give new Tuggers accurate information and not poo poo DVC just because it seems expensive or direct prices are so high. I am concerned that comparing DVC to the cheaper and less flexible alternatives like renting points and discounts on hotel rooms is not accurate. The cash prices for deluxe resorts are high and the discount does not get you a cheap room, even after a discount. And availability and selection are usually limited for cash rooms. When I did the AK 1 BR Club room comparison, I chose that only because I had trouble finding something comparable on the hotel booking site. I have been told it can be hard to rent points and get what you want. You also lose control when renting points and might need to be more flexible than what is available. I could see doing this once in awhile but not regularly. You are still paying at least double to almost triple to rent from an owner on a cost per point basis. I think there are many DVC haters on TUG and I am not sure why. Just because something is expensive does not make it bad. There are 126+ million HHs in the USA. So timeshare market share is about only about 7% of US households. I think this is small.


----------



## chriskre (Jan 17, 2019)

I own two DVC contracts and bought both direct even as a TUG member!  LOL

At the time when I purchased SSR they were doing incentives which brought
the price close to resale with no closing costs and with the ability to book immediately.
I was making good money and was tired of staying off site and knew that I
was going to continue to visit Disney for the rest of my life.  I have been to
Disney more than 100 times in my lifetime.  I am the perfect target for DVC.

DVC also does owner financing so it does not show on your credit and at the 
time I was buying and selling real estate and did not want any obligations
on my credit report hindering my investing.  

I only bought 150 points but have banked and borrowed that small contract
to double what I own in the years I wanted to have an annual pass.

Now DVC is allowing smaller direct first time buyers, so 100 or even as low
as 50 points is now the entry point.  More people can afford $200 points if the
contracts are only 50 points.  They can then bank and borrow and do a trip
every 3 years and still feel they are beating Disney's prices, especially in
studios.

You also have the ability to rent additional points from Disney for $19 a point in 
the years you need additional points without dealing with a points broker or
unknown owner and taking a risk.  I think owning DVC is all about lowering
your risk, not necessarily financial risk but hassle and stress risk.
It's pretty much a hassle free ownership for those who learn the
club rules and actually use what they bought.    

When I saw that Poly was going TS I definitely wanted to own there because it
was the first resort I had stayed in at Disney as a child and the nostalgia of
those times sold me on the resort before it was even built as a TS.  I bought
direct again from Disney, but the price was $144 or $146 at the time.  I don't
remember exactly but in the $140s.  Again Disney financed it but I paid it off
after a year.  Poly is one of the original Disney hotels and I would say that it's
definitely not the highest and best use of the land.  If Disney had wanted they
could have leveled the buildings and built high rises like BLT or GF but they
did not, so I don't think they are thinking to level the other older resorts like
BWV and BCV.  Riviera is pretty tall so I can see them doing it with OKW in the
future with the renewed desirability of Disney Springs.  I'd hate to see it
happen because I love the feel of OKW, but there is so much potential for
them to pack in more units there if they build up and could still try to keep
the Key West vibe and not disturb the rest of the club during the rebuild.

Sad to say but I don't think the new purchasers are going to have a hint of
a clue as to the trap the mouse has set for them.  Even I a TUGger at the time
of purchase did not understand DVC enough and bought at a resort that I really
have little interest in staying at because Disney sells you on the idea that points
are points, stay where you want.  I think that was probably true before SSR came
on board, but afterwards with the influx of all those owners it's definitely harder
to get what you want without owning multiple contracts or going off season.
Luckily I prefer the off season so I don't need to own where I want to stay except
at Poly which seems to be booked all the time. 

I do wish the Mouse had an in-house rental program for owners.   I still don't 
know why they aren't getting in on that action themselves.  Seems like an easy
thing for them to do for themselves and for their members.  Maybe one day they'll
add that no hassle feature to the club.


----------



## frank808 (Jan 18, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> I suspect there are very few DVC owners among Tuggers. Many of the folks who have been commenting on the recent threads seem to be non owners. It would be nice to know which Tuggers are DVC owners to get some perspective on their comments.
> 
> I think the ROFR information on Disboards and elsewhere is more helpful than ROFR.net or TUG because they have hundreds of people reporting every quarter for all the resorts. I do not think there are enough Tuggers to get broad enough data here.


We own DVC, MVC and HGVC.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Dean (Jan 18, 2019)

Lisa P said:


> The reason I've wondered if DVC may want to demo OKW is because of what they did in the past with the property now known as Saratoga Springs Resort. When it was first developed, it was the Walt Disney World Conference Center, then the Village Resort, then the Disney Village Resort, then the Disney Institute, and finally, SSR. Along the way, there were sections called Vacation Villas, Fairway Villas (townhomes), Treehouse Villas, Club Lake Villas, and Grand Vista Suites. All of these condos and houses (except the Treehouses) were demolished and the higher density Saratoga Springs condo buildings were added around the central spa facilities. When demo'd, those buildings were not "THAT old" either.


They kept some of the common buildings and rehabbed them.  Plus to build SSR they scrapped the Eagle Pines project that had been announced and renderings released.  One of 2 resorts that got to the point of being announced formally but did not happen, the other at the site of what is now Marriott's Newport Coast.  Of course there are a lot of other resorts that were in the works that didn't happen as well but we have less information about them.


----------



## Dean (Jan 18, 2019)

I think there are many DVC haters on TUG and I am not sure why. Just because something is expensive does not make it bad. There are 126+ million HHs in the USA. So timeshare market share is about only about 7% of US households. I think this is small.[/QUOTE]That's more than I would have expected, if accurate, I would have guessed it to be under 1%.  There's no doubt that DVC isn't your typical timeshare in some ways.  My observations over the years is that the perception is partly because DVC is a specialty product and partly because of the attitudes of the members.  I can't count the number of times where someone said they would never have bought a timeshare but they bought DVC. I've seen 2 times on DVC specific sites where people said they didn't own a timeshare but owned DVC.  Some want to quibble that it's a vacation club, not a timeshare.  And to be honest, DVC Members can be elitist more than the average.  Realize that at least a couple of those DVC haters on TUG are former DVC members.  DVC is a great system to use for WDW stays, less so for other options.  But is is expensive, far more so than other similar products, mostly because they can.  And to be honest, there are some things they do poorly.  Side by side there are better resorts out there in many situations, ignoring location and theming which of course you can't truly do.


----------



## Panina (Jan 18, 2019)

Dean said:


> I think there are many DVC haters on TUG and I am not sure why. Just because something is expensive does not make it bad. There are 126+ million HHs in the USA. So timeshare market share is about only about 7% of US households. I think this is small.


Where I think  “DVC haters on TUG” can be found there are timeshares haters on Tug too so DVC is just part of the pack of what the haters hate.

It’s great to have choices in timeshares to find what works for you.  I am a DVC lover but I chose not to buy as I am happy trading in to Saratoga.  I prefer to spend my money elsewhere.  For my preferences it is more cost effective to trade in and to have a guarantee to go other places more then DVC.


----------



## ljmiii (Jan 18, 2019)

chriskre said:


> I own two DVC contracts and bought both direct even as a TUG member!  LOL
> 
> At the time when I purchased SSR they were doing incentives which brought
> the price close to resale with no closing costs and with the ability to book immediately....


Yeah....this is part of what makes me sad.

I was in a similar situation. When I first bought DVC the pricing was such that with incentives direct and resale were more or less the same. We decided we wanted BCV and so bought resale.  Fast forward a decade or so and after one too many times of being 'shut out' at 7 months we decided to buy at BLT. But by this time DVC had started to treat resale buyers differently...and I was staggered by the spread between direct and resale prices. So of course I bought resale.

For the past few years DVC has put more and more restrictions on contracts...and are somehow surprised that people still buy resale. I wish there was someone I could tell, "Dummkoff - people are buying resale BECAUSE of the restrictions!" Ah well...


----------



## Dean (Jan 18, 2019)

Panina said:


> Where I think  “DVC haters on TUG” can be found there are timeshares haters on Tug too so DVC is just part of the pack of what the haters hate.
> 
> It’s great to have choices in timeshares to find what works for you.  I am a DVC lover but I chose not to buy as I am happy trading in to Saratoga.  I prefer to spend my money elsewhere.  For my preferences it is more cost effective to trade in and to have a guarantee to go other places more then DVC.


I've been on DVC related sites almost daily since before there was a true internet starting 1995. Plus likely the most widely read and subscribed since it's inception in 1998.  Yes there are all types in all areas but I have long since held the opinion that a much higher proportion of DVC Members are elitist and feel entitled compared to the general timeshare population.  Still, it's not everyone and likely not the majority.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 18, 2019)

I have not gotten the sense that DVC owners are elitist or more entitled than anyone here on TUG. They just love Disney. People buy Disney to stay at Disney. If you love something, you will sing its praises but that does not mean you think you are superior to anyone else. I also see there is a lot of price consciousness on the Disney boards, just like here on TUG, so I do not see the DVC crowd as elitist. Many are just average people who love Disney to death (literally, they will never sell their points). There are also many Disney haters on the Disney boards. It is a bit irritating to read hate threads on a forum that is supposed to be magical.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 18, 2019)

Dean said:


> I think there are many DVC haters on TUG and I am not sure why. Just because something is expensive does not make it bad. There are 126+ million HHs in the USA. So timeshare market share is about only about 7% of US households. I think this is small.


That's more than I would have expected, if accurate, I would have guessed it to be under 1%.  There's no doubt that DVC isn't your typical timeshare in some ways.  My observations over the years is that the perception is partly because DVC is a specialty product and partly because of the attitudes of the members.  I can't count the number of times where someone said they would never have bought a timeshare but they bought DVC. I've seen 2 times on DVC specific sites where people said they didn't own a timeshare but owned DVC.  Some want to quibble that it's a vacation club, not a timeshare.  And to be honest, DVC Members can be elitist more than the average.  Realize that at least a couple of those DVC haters on TUG are former DVC members.  DVC is a great system to use for WDW stays, less so for other options.  But is is expensive, far more so than other similar products, mostly because they can.  And to be honest, there are some things they do poorly.  Side by side there are better resorts out there in many situations, ignoring location and theming which of course you can't truly do.[/QUOTE]

This is a pretty common post on Mouseowners and Disboards. It does not sound entitled or elitist to me. The poster sounds realistic. There are also many negative posts but I will not share them.

It was never an investment for us, quite the opposite, I saw it for what it was, a timeshare, which could lose money, but I wanted onsite accommodations and years of vacations with my family.​


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 18, 2019)

I love this post:

We sold our condo in a 55+ bldg. in FL and now use DVC as our snowbird getaway. No crabby old people. Kids laughing, families having fun.
Many resorts to pick from. Mission accomplished.​


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 18, 2019)

Another good one:

I joined DVC in 2009 at VWL (ok, ok, BRV). My purpose was to "prepay" for accommodations at my favorite resort (WL) at a discount to cash ressies. I have carefully tracked and compared my actual cash outlay to DVC (including the time-value of money and MFs) to the notional cash cost of my vacation lodging at WDW. My membership has saved me a material amount of money even if I plug in rooms at moderate or value resorts. This is why I purchased DVC, and this is exactly what DVC has delivered.

But wait, there's more. DVC has also delivered valuable benefits above and beyond what my original purchase price guarantees or my MFs cover:

- In addition to VWL, I have been able to enjoy several other resorts: OKW, SSR, BCV, BWV, VB, AKV, THV, BLT, and PVB (the last four were added after 2009 purchase!).
- I have received hundreds of dollars in discounts on tours, food, and merchandise.
- I have attended several, FREE after-hour parties (seven and counting).

Lastly, and incredibly, DVC is a timeshare that has not only held it's resale value, but has actually appreciated. My points have 9 less years of "value", yet, I can sell them today for more than my purchase price. I don't plan to sell, but if my circumstances change, I'll get all of my money back and keep all of my memories.

So, even if DVC could and did take away all the extras, and all that I was left with is my ability to stay at BRV (a deluxe resort) for less money than it would cost me to stay at moderate/value resorts, than you'd find me contently relaxing at Geyser Point, and most likely, I'd be talking up DVC with my fellow vacationers.​


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 18, 2019)

My sense is that if DVC owners are elitist in any way, then they have a monopoly on happiness. We are elitist about passion. We are elitist about loving life. The characters make us feel warm inside and smile. That is why I love Disney. It is the ultimate in positive thinking.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 18, 2019)

Another nice post...this is how normal people think. Whether it is true or false is irrelevant. Like I said, you can’t easily change deeply held beliefs.

I bought direct akl in 2008

I have no regrets or issues with any dvc change. It really doesn't effect me.

I looked at it as pre paying my stays for decades. I have stayed in animal kingdom,. wilderness, Saratoga, grand Floridian. Studio, 1 bedroom, 2 bedroom 3 bedroom.

I woul have never been able to stay in these accommodations without my dvc.

I love my dvc car magnet.​


----------



## PcflEZFlng (Jan 18, 2019)

Just my perspective on this. We love Disney and always have, since childhood. We own one DVC contract plus two Vistanas, and we view them all equally as timeshares, simply to be used and enjoyed, and nothing more and nothing less.

We've owned the DVC one, at a high-demand resort, since 2003, and today it just so happens could be sold on the resale market for over twice what we paid for it direct. For us, it's just "nice to know" and nothing else. There's a lot of hand-wringing going on right now over on the Disney boards about the latest price increases and postulating what the future holds, but the bottom line is that Disney concluded that the demand is there to support the latest price increase. DVC wasn't exactly cheap in 2003, either.

The two Vistana contracts, OTOH (bought direct in 2005 and 2006), are almost worthless on the resale market. But we don't care. We use them and enjoy them every year.

If we were to do it over again, the only thing we would have done differently was to buy all three of them resale (the Vistana ones at mandatory rather than voluntary resorts). But that all happened a long time before I finally discovered TUG.


----------



## Dean (Jan 18, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> I have not gotten the sense that DVC owners are elitist or more entitled than anyone here on TUG. They just love Disney. People buy Disney to stay at Disney. If you love something, you will sing its praises but that does not mean you think you are superior to anyone else. I also see there is a lot of price consciousness on the Disney boards, just like here on TUG, so I do not see the DVC crowd as elitist. Many are just average people who love Disney to death (literally, they will never sell their points). There are also many Disney haters on the Disney boards. It is a bit irritating to read hate threads on a forum that is supposed to be magical.


Like I said, I've been doing this for over 20 years and I have a different opinion.  That is the % of entitlement and elitism is higher than the average for timeshares though many aren't.


----------



## Lisa P (Jan 19, 2019)

Dean said:


> I've been on DVC related sites almost daily since before there was a true internet sorting 1995. Plus likely the most widely read and subscribed since it's inception in 1998.  Yes there are all types in all areas but I have long since held the opinion that a much higher proportion of DVC Members are elitist and feel entitled compared to the general timeshare population.  Still, it's not everyone and likely not the majority.





Dean said:


> ... the % of entitlement and elitism is higher than the average for timeshares though many aren't.


I could have posted both of these, with the same experience as Dean. This is NOT the majority but it seems to me like a MUCH higher proportion of DVC members who display this attitude in their posts than of other high end timeshare owners... more so than Hyatt, Marriott, Four Seasons, HGVC, Hapimag (Europe), etc. Other owners delight in their ownership but don't seem to compare them to others in the disparaging terms the way DVC members have so often done.  Just my opinion, like Dean's, based on over 20 years of frequenting newsgroups (pre-forums) and internet boards/forums. You are certainly welcome to disagree, with different experiences.


----------



## Lisa P (Jan 19, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> People buy Disney to stay at Disney. ... There are also many Disney haters on the Disney boards. It is a bit irritating to read hate threads on a forum that is supposed to be magical.


Many people who buy Disney, plan to stay at Disney with their points. But we've seen posts on TUG from potential buyers who intend to trade around the world or cruise or take Adventures by Disney with their points. TUG members are quick to point out that this is not a great use of DVC, unless you would otherwise lose the points. I don't think taking a cautious approach to DVC makes someone a hater. I also don't think independent forums should be considered "magical", like a marketing arm of commercial company, where pointing out limitations or negatives gets one branded as a "hater". That's pretty extreme, IMO.


----------



## Lisa P (Jan 19, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> Another good one:
> I joined DVC in 2009 at VWL (ok, ok, BRV)... So, even if DVC could and did take away all the extras, and all that I was left with is my ability to stay at BRV (a deluxe resort) for less money than it would cost me to stay at moderate/value resorts, than you'd find me contently relaxing at Geyser Point, and most likely, I'd be talking up DVC with my fellow vacationers.


That's a delightful post about enjoying a timeshare that was purchased to be used in the best way possible... but important to recognize that the terms of their 2009 purchase were DIFFERENT from the terms today. Sharing is wonderful. Giving advice to new buyers as we do here on TUG is a bit different.

Is it still going to be common for a NEW DVC buyer today to "stay at ... (a deluxe resort) for less money than it would cost ... to stay at moderate/value resorts", given today's increase in prices and restrictions on resale??? That's a really important question for TUG posters and lurkers.


----------



## littlestar (Jan 19, 2019)

Lisa P said:


> That's a delightful post about enjoying a timeshare that was purchased to be used in the best way possible... but important to recognize that the terms of their 2009 purchase were DIFFERENT from the terms today. Sharing is wonderful. Giving advice to new buyers as we do here on TUG is a bit different.
> 
> Is it still going to be common for a NEW DVC buyer today to "stay at ... (a deluxe resort) for less money than it would cost ... to stay at moderate/value resorts", given today's increase in prices and restrictions on resale??? That's a really important question for TUG posters and lurkers.


I agree. The exit strategy risk has changed with the proposed restrictions for new DVC resorts if resold. To me, it is a game changer. I would not recommend a new DVC resort purchase that has the new restriction to my friends and relatives.  I would tell them to look for a cash deal if they want to stay on Disney property (a discount code or rent from a DVC member via David’s Rentals). Or maybe a purchase at one of the original 14 DVC’s without the home resort restriction when resold.


----------



## elaine (Jan 19, 2019)

littlestar said:


> To me, it is a game changer. I would not recommend a new DVC resort purchase that has the new restriction...Or maybe a purchase at one of the original 14 DVC’s without the home resort restriction when resold.


exactly my thoughts. IMHO, resale orig. 14 DVCs is still a good option for the person who primarily wants to stay at DVC and doesn't "have" to stay at the latest, greatest DVC.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 19, 2019)

Lisa P said:


> I could have posted both of these, with the same experience as Dean. This is NOT the majority but it seems to me like a MUCH higher proportion of DVC members who display this attitude in their posts than of other high end timeshare owners... more so than Hyatt, Marriott, Four Seasons, HGVC, Hapimag (Europe), etc. Other owners delight in their ownership but don't seem to compare them to others in the disparaging terms the way DVC members have so often done.  Just my opinion, like Dean's, based on over 20 years of frequenting newsgroups (pre-forums) and internet boards/forums. You are certainly welcome to disagree, with different experiences.



I would love to see some of those posts. Maybe you and Dean could cut and paste some so we will better understand this. I have not yet noticed it but maybe I don’t notice since I like Disney. Sometimes people are more aware of certain things than others because they have been more sensitized to it, for whatever reason.


----------



## Lisa P (Jan 19, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> I would love to see some of those posts. Maybe you and Dean could cut and paste some so we will better understand this.


LOL. I guess "seeing" is believing. I get it, you haven't had the same experience as me. 
Truly, I'm not looking to convince you or anyone else to agree with me or my experiences. Whether someone on TUG shares an all-good experience or a mixed experience with Disney/DVC membership, resorts, or members on forums, it's no reflection on me or on you. It also doesn't warrant being labeled a "DVC hater", IMO. I can't condense 20+ years of DVC conversations and have no desire to hunt down posts for the sake of this discussion. Surely, we can amicably disagree on this point.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 19, 2019)

Lisa P said:


> LOL. I guess "seeing" is believing. I get it, you haven't had the same experience as me.
> Truly, I'm not looking to convince you or anyone else to agree with me or my experiences. Whether someone on TUG shares an all-good experience or a mixed experience with Disney/DVC membership, resorts, or members on forums, it's no reflection on me or on you. It also doesn't warrant being labeled a "DVC hater", IMO. I can't condense 20+ years of DVC conversations and have no desire to hunt down posts for the sake of this discussion. Surely, we can amicably disagree on this point.



I understand what you are saying and no need to post if that is too much work. I was just wondering. I do not mean to fight or challenge. I have just been posting my experience and my opinions. I do not take any of this personally. Frankly it is fun to hear different viewpoints.


----------



## Dean (Jan 19, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> I would love to see some of those posts. Maybe you and Dean could cut and paste some so we will better understand this. I have not yet noticed it but maybe I don’t notice since I like Disney. Sometimes people are more aware of certain things than others because they have been more sensitized to it, for whatever reason.


Maybe you could review posts on DVC Facebook, Mouseowners and DIS regarding the 2010/2011 reallocations, valet parking change and the current reallocation.  All total likely well over 100 pages, that'd be a good start but only a start.  But it's really not specific posts as much as it's information over time and the attitudes involved.  It's been interesting to go from DVC basher on DIS to DVC apologist without any change in my own position as others opinions have changed when they stopped drinking the Kool-aid and swung far the other way.  Personally I love DVC for what it is but I don't like to see people put themselves in jeopardy or spend a lot more than they should for a given options.  For example, I've seen many people that bought DVC mainly for DCL cruising, IMO, a horrible approach.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 19, 2019)

Dean said:


> Maybe you could review posts on DVC Facebook, Mouseowners and DIS regarding the 2010/2011 reallocations, valet parking change and the current reallocation.  All total likely well over 100 pages, that'd be a good start but only a start.  But it's really not specific posts as much as it's information over time and the attitudes involved.  It's been interesting to go from DVC basher on DIS to DVC apologist without any change in my own position as others opinions have changed when they stopped drinking the Kool-aid and swung far the other way.  Personally I love DVC for what it is but I don't like to see people put themselves in jeopardy or spend a lot more than they should for a given options.  For example, I've seen many people that bought DVC mainly for DCL cruising, IMO, a horrible approach.



I do not want to see people go into debt that they can’t afford for anything period. I have been reading all the DVC boards. I am still not sure what type of elitism you are referring to. I am surprised at how many people on the DVC boards are mad at Disney and attacking DVC. I do see a lot of awareness of DVC being a timeshare. I suspect when someone says “I own DVC but I would never own a TS” that they might mean “any other TS” besides DVC. I would not get upset about that or read elitism into it. Frankly, I think the Tuggers who know how to maximize their TS value are the winners.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 19, 2019)

Someone posted this today:

I'm starting to get so bummed out by all of the negativity I've read lately in my Disney forums. To lift my spirits, hit me with your happy stories and the things you like best about Disney!​
This is what I mean by I am not seeing elitism on the forums. I am seeing more negativity than happiness.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 19, 2019)

I like this post:

I haven’t heard negative from other sites (except one, which is ALL negative due to ego)...get off of those sites!...Disney = happiness! ​


----------



## Panina (Jan 19, 2019)

Elitism, let’s say some are that doesn’t mean most are.  I don’t think labeling any group of people based on how a few might act is a correct method of assessment.  Within any group there will be some that think they are better and know better then you.


----------



## Dean (Jan 20, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> I do not want to see people go into debt that they can’t afford for anything period. I have been reading all the DVC boards. I am still not sure what type of elitism you are referring to. I am surprised at how many people on the DVC boards are mad at Disney and attacking DVC. I do see a lot of awareness of DVC being a timeshare. I suspect when someone says “I own DVC but I would never own a TS” that they might mean “any other TS” besides DVC. I would not get upset about that or read elitism into it. Frankly, I think the Tuggers who know how to maximize their TS value are the winners.


You have a very short experience timeframe, I have almost 25 years.  My post, and Lisa P.'s are from many years of experience.  It's been some time since the posts of "I don't own a timeshare, I own DVC" but even now if you read enough you'll see posts that approximate that.  For me personally debt and afford to do in the same sentence when it comes to a luxury purchase such as a timeshare.  It really has been interesting to see things go from almost everyone having drank the Kool-Aid to the realization that Disney is a business, DVC a timeshare and the system the THOUGHT was different really is just another timeshare that happens to be at WDW.  IIRC I saw the big switch with the 2010/11 reallocation.  I'd suggest you go back and read the valet parking threads of a few years ago, esp on DIS, where grown people were actually willing to put in writing that the membership should pay for their valet parking even though it would be at full price.  

Yes many are upset with DVC right now and I can understand that.  The reallocation was a bit weird and DVC has a history of being reactive rather than proactive with all types of things.  For example, with the valet parking some arrived at WDW with free DVC valet parking and departed with a bill for parking with no warning or announcement.  Many have lost faith in DVC and some feel they did the reallocation specifically to line their pockets by generating breakage inventory.  Life's too short, if I felt that way and couldn't get past it, I'd sell esp with DVC where there is currently an easy exit though who knows what the future will bring along those lines.



Panina said:


> Elitism, let’s say some are that doesn’t mean most are.  I don’t think labeling any group of people based on how a few might act is a correct method of assessment.  Within any group there will be some that think they are better and know better then you.


Of course, my point was that as a group they seem to me to have a higher % than other timeshares and a higher % of entitlement, I stand by that observation.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 20, 2019)

If someone says “I own DVC but I would never own a timeshare,” is that any different than non-TS owners snubbing their nose at TS owners and saying it’s a scam and implying someone is dumb for buying into a TS system? Could it be that the DVC sentiment is an extension of the general population’s distaste for TSs? The other group that says this are people who own fractionals but think it is not a TS. Some vacation clubs claim they are not TSs, probably because TSs have such a bad reputation. Everyone wants to distance themselves from the word “timeshare.” I think there is inherent elitism in vacationing patterns due to the wide variety of pricing and class status inherent in the vacation market. The vacation market is always rating things and setting up class systems within their systems. I have seen entitlement (i.e. thinking you are entitled to benefits) with Marriott, Wyndham, and others too. I think there is TS entitement thinking in general. Once someone has a benefit, they never want it taken away.


----------



## chriskre (Jan 21, 2019)

I think the reason DVC owners appear elitist is because they know they can rent their timeshare points for an easy profit
and turn around and pay cash for whatever it is that is offered as an exchange in any of the exchange companies.

For example, if you can rent your 200 DVC points for $15 and make $3,000, why give your week to RCI or II
and end up with a resort where you can just rent that same week from those same exchange companies for 
$300-$1000?    

I love Marriott, Starwood, Wyndham and Hyatt but I will never give my DVC points to an
exchange company for that reason.  I've rented 3 bedrooms at Grande Vista from II for $350 a week.
It's a beautiful resort and I stay there often, but when DVC was with II this is considered a trade down
for any DVC member.   I've also rented 3 bedrooms at Marriott Marbella for $600 a week from II.  
I could just rent my DVC points and get 5 weeks of rentals in return for what they are wanting us
to just accept a one week in return for our points.  I don't think so!!!  

DVC and RCI even waives the exchange fees so they definitely know they need to offer us an incentive
to give up our points.  No way Jose.  I don't know where they are getting the inventory for RCI, but I 
suspect it's mostly developer units from the sentiment of most DVCers.


----------



## Panina (Jan 21, 2019)

chriskre said:


> I think the reason DVC owners appear elitist is because they know they can rent their timeshare points for an easy profit
> and turn around and pay cash for whatever it is that is offered as an exchange in any of the exchange companies.
> 
> For example, if you can rent your 200 DVC points for $15 and make $3,000, why give your week to RCI or II
> ...


 I use my hgvc points to trade into DVC and that is a good deal. I believe the DVC weeks in RCI are owner weeks as DVC can make a lot of money renting, they have no reason to give RCI anything.


----------



## Dean (Jan 21, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> If someone says “I own DVC but I would never own a timeshare,” is that any different than non-TS owners snubbing their nose at TS owners and saying it’s a scam and implying someone is dumb for buying into a TS system? Could it be that the DVC sentiment is an extension of the general population’s distaste for TSs? The other group that says this are people who own fractionals but think it is not a TS. Some vacation clubs claim they are not TSs, probably because TSs have such a bad reputation. Everyone wants to distance themselves from the word “timeshare.” I think there is inherent elitism in vacationing patterns due to the wide variety of pricing and class status inherent in the vacation market. The vacation market is always rating things and setting up class systems within their systems. I have seen entitlement (i.e. thinking you are entitled to benefits) with Marriott, Wyndham, and others too. I think there is TS entitement thinking in general. Once someone has a benefit, they never want it taken away.


Of course, I get that many buy DVC that would not buy other timeshares because it's Disney.  To them it's a discount to go to Disney and many would not buy other timeshares or use DVC to exchange (as they shouldn't).  That's different and would not be an example of the issue IMO, I have no problem with that and even within DVC there are many that are resort specific as well and would not have bought DVC except for X or Y resort.  My personal experience and opinion comes from reading hundreds of thousands of posts specifically DVC related.    You might want to take into account that you've got 3 people here who have over 60 yeas combined experience with DVC and with the most active DVC related site and all of which still have many positive things to say about Disney and DVC.  


Panina said:


> I use my hgvc points to trade into DVC and that is a good deal. I believe the DVC weeks in RCI are owner weeks as DVC can make a lot of money renting, they have no reason to give RCI anything.


To my knowledge they have never done routine developer deposits.  What they do is pool the points traded and deposit accordingly, usually SSR at this point.


----------



## Lisa P (Jan 21, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> I think there is inherent elitism in vacationing patterns due to the wide variety of pricing and class status inherent in the vacation market. The vacation market is always rating things and setting up class systems within their systems.


Perhaps. But the idea that a marketing program uses luxury appeal to sell is not unique to DVC. Yet I've seen SO MANY posts and threads by DVC members more-or-less stating "[my] DVC is the BEST" implying it's better than anything else out there (which of course other readers own). I'm _not_ referring to "I love my ownership", but rather to comparative statements. I've also read many, many posts from people who say things like, "If I can't stay onsite at WDW at a deluxe property, why bother? That's why I bought DVC." These kinds of _comparative_ statements may not be typed with one's nose up, and not intended as a put-down to others, but they come off as rude and... elitist. I could count on one hand the number of Hyatt, Four Seasons, or Marriott owners that I've seen initiate threads like this, though I consider these timeshares more luxurious than DVC. JMO, FWIW.



Panina said:


> I believe the DVC weeks in RCI are owner weeks as DVC can make a lot of money renting, they have no reason to give RCI anything.


Absolutely agree, Panina. I don't think most DVC members are particularly hesitant to use their points for RCI exchange, at least the first time they do it. DVC members who frequent TUG and DisBoard and learn about renting out their points are probably a relatively small subset of the full DVC membership. It's easy to forget that if people don't think they need to investigate options, they don't bother searching for them. They just ask a company rep.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 21, 2019)

I hate to say it but I agree with this statement: "If I can't stay onsite at WDW at a deluxe property, why bother? That's why I bought DVC."

I would not bother going to WDW if I have to stay offsite. But there are many places I will not visit if I cannot go the way I want to travel. I also want ocean views when I go to Hawaii or I do not want to go.

There are no forums for Four Seasons owners that I know of but believe me, there is elitism there more than at DVC.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 21, 2019)

Dean said:


> Of course, I get that many buy DVC that would not buy other timeshares because it's Disney.  To them it's a discount to go to Disney and many would not buy other timeshares or use DVC to exchange (as they shouldn't).  That's different and would not be an example of the issue IMO, I have no problem with that and even within DVC there are many that are resort specific as well and would not have bought DVC except for X or Y resort.  My personal experience and opinion comes from reading hundreds of thousands of posts specifically DVC related.    You might want to take into account that you've got 3 people here who have over 60 yeas combined experience with DVC and with the most active DVC related site and all of which still have many positive things to say about Disney and DVC.
> 
> To my knowledge they have never done routine developer deposits.  What they do is pool the points traded and deposit accordingly, usually SSR at this point.



I am not disagreeing that there could be elitism but the examples given do not sound like elitism to me. I do not see Disney as being elite so how could someone claim it is better or superior. To me, elitism would be saying I will only stay in 5 star hotels. Or insulting people who make different decisions than you. Or looking down on people who one sees as inferior. The fact that DVC owners pay a premium to own it and only want to stay there and many do not own other TSs, does not seem elitist. Perhaps some people feel insulted by that but I still do not understand why. There are many things we have preferences for but that does not mean anything at all about other people. Many people look down on Disney and make comments that it is just for kids or that it is fake or "been there, done that." In the real world outside of TSs, Disney is considered middle of the road and I know many people who would not be caught dead on a Disney property. That is why Four Seasons and Ritz Carlton moved to Orlando, I guess. However, I would not want to stay at Four Seasons or the Ritz in Orlando if I can stay onsite at WDW. I would not say that about any other city, just Orlando. The only reason I would go to Orlando is to visit WDW so why would I want to stay far away. Maybe this is elitist but it seems practical to me. I respect your experience reading the forums and I trust there must be some people who mistakenly believe that Disney is better or superior than any place else. I do not agree and I would be perplexed if I ran across a statement like that but I doubt it would bother me or that I would care. I would be happy that the person loves Disney and thinks they have the best of the best (in their opinion). My original question was why are there so many Disney and DVC haters. I guess that is a normal human reaction to what one perceives as an elitist attitude. Let's hate the other person and tear them down because I think they think they are better than me.


----------



## Lisa P (Jan 21, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> I hate to say it but I agree with this statement: "If I can't stay onsite at WDW at a deluxe property, why bother? That's why I bought DVC." I would not bother going to WDW if I have to stay offsite. But there are many places I will not visit if I cannot go the way I want to travel. I also want ocean views when I go to Hawaii or I do not want to go.


LOL.  I have a different view. When I was in high school, my mom took my sister and me on a 3-week youth hostel and Eurail train trip after visiting relatives overseas. Her 5-6 coworkers all said, "If I can't visit Europe first class, why bother? I'll save up." We had an AMAZING time. Not one of them ever did travel to Europe. I would never want to discourage people from the experiences of frequent travel by suggesting it's not worth bothering if it's not one's top choice. But that's just me.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 21, 2019)

Lisa P said:


> LOL.  I have a different view. When I was in high school, my mom took my sister and me on a 3-week youth hostel and Eurail train trip after visiting relatives overseas. Her 5-6 coworkers all said, "If I can't visit Europe first class, why bother? I'll save up." We had an AMAZING time. Not one of them ever did travel to Europe. I would never want to discourage people from the experiences of frequent travel by suggesting it's not worth bothering if it's not one's top choice. But that's just me.



I did the youth hostel thing in college. I have been many places and not stayed in nice places in the past. It is just not how I choose to travel now that I am old. This does not mean I look down on other people who make different choices. That is my point. Just because someone says they like something and would not do something different does not mean they are looking down on others. I have many well-off friends who hate to spend money on expensive hotels. That is fine with me. Frankly, I started time sharing because I can get so much more space and value and stay in very nice places for the same or less that staying in hotels. Many of my friends and family look down on me for time sharing. I do not care because I am happy with my choices. One of my very wealthy friends just asked me to pick up waffle mix at Walmart next time I am in Hawaii because they do not want to pay for shipping. I found this really funny because I know they can afford $5 extra but we all make different choices.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 21, 2019)

I did a search with the word “elitism” on one of the disney boards. I finally found a post that I would consider to be real elitism. Frankly, just down right snobbish. To me, this is elitism at its worst. This person does not want to share a gondola with people staying at a value resort!

This was the question:
Are you saying that having to share transportation with guests from Value resorts will somehow dilute the value of a DVC resort? Will DVC members actually be bothered by having to mingle with others who paid less for their hotel rooms? Would DVC members be upset that their gondola may actually travel across a Moderate or (shutter!!) a Value Resort?​
Surely I'm not the only DVC member that finds such opinions unsettling.​
This was the snobby response:
Sorry, I don't find the post you quoted as unsettling ... but honest. We once opted to book an inside cabin on a short, weekend cruise with a mid-scale line (Celebrity). We learned it was a mistake not because we didn't enjoy the accommodations but because it placed us with a table of 'undesirable' neighbors who, likely, also had inside cabins. While we generally are delighted to find that our table mates are well traveled with lots of stories, this table was filled with young adults bent on out-drinking one another. Bah.​
We've seen similar on various Disney bus routes. And, yes, we'd be unhappy to share a gondola if crowded with a similarly obnoxious, alcohol loving, crowd. So, I'll go out on a limb and say I hope that gondola cars are run in such a manner that resort-levels are separated into different gondola cars.  _This_ car is for Riviera ... _that_ car is for the value/mod on the same route.​


----------



## Dean (Jan 21, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> I am not disagreeing that there could be elitism but the examples given do not sound like elitism to me.


 It seemed you were, I do think that a larger % of members going forward are more aware of the limitations of the system and the realities than in the past so some of this should be less than historically.


> I do not see Disney as being elite so how could someone claim it is better or superior. To me, elitism would be saying I will only stay in 5 star hotels. Or insulting people who make different decisions than you. Or looking down on people who one sees as inferior. The fact that DVC owners pay a premium to own it and only want to stay there and many do not own other TSs, does not seem elitist. Perhaps some people feel insulted by that but I still do not understand why. There are many things we have preferences for but that does not mean anything at all about other people. Many people look down on Disney and make comments that it is just for kids or that it is fake or "been there, done that." In the real world outside of TSs, Disney is considered middle of the road and I know many people who would not be caught dead on a Disney property. That is why Four Seasons and Ritz Carlton moved to Orlando, I guess. However, I would not want to stay at Four Seasons or the Ritz in Orlando if I can stay onsite at WDW. I would not say that about any other city, just Orlando. The only reason I would go to Orlando is to visit WDW so why would I want to stay far away. Maybe this is elitist but it seems practical to me. I respect your experience reading the forums and I trust there must be some people who mistakenly believe that Disney is better or superior than any place else. I do not agree and I would be perplexed if I ran across a statement like that but I doubt it would bother me or that I would care. I would be happy that the person loves Disney and thinks they have the best of the best (in their opinion).


I agree that DVC is a means to an end.  They do/have done some things well and others not so much.  DVC is more flexible than most and they do theming well (though less well the last few years).  They lag on refurbishment and handling problems while in residence in my experience compared to some of the other companies.  Personally I'm OK with being on site or off site and enjoy each for different reasons, I do not consider it elitist if one has a preference for a system or even a resort.  Still, in my experience over the years, I've seen lots of examples of things that I believe would meet your definition.  Part of the problem is a single post, no matter how elitist, doesn't prove the point.  It takes a pattern over time.  Even within DVC I've seen many examples that are resort to resort or based on the price paid or the method of purchase.  Personally I'd rather be at DVC, Marriott, Bluegreen's Fountains or Hilton or even Silver Lakes, Vistana or several other mid level resorts than a high end hotel because I enjoy the space and feel more comfortable there. 

Here's some personal experiences where some would see me as elitist and this is not what I would personally call elitism for DVC or otherwise, others may disagree.  Basically in timeshares some are location oriented and some resort oriented though obviously most have some element of both.  For us personally for HH, I have no interest in staying at Harbour Pointe or SP.  I've stayed at the location and used to own a week at HP, it's just below our comfort level.  We prefer Grande Ocean over the others. For Aruba we prefer the Marriott's and though I own with Bluegreen also, I consider LaCabana near the bottom of my comfort level, I'd stay there if I didn't have choices but not otherwise. 



> My original question was why are there so many Disney and DVC haters. I guess that is a normal human reaction to what one perceives as an elitist attitude. Let's hate the other person and tear them down because I think they think they are better than me.


My answer to this question related to TUG is there are several groups that are additive.  These include the ones that have seen examples of what I'd personally consider elitist, the ones that perceive DVC as an outlier and elitist because they don't see themselves as owning a timeshare (even though most today actually technically know they do) and those that just hate Disney for whatever reason. 


TravelTime said:


> I did a search with the word “elitism” on one of the disney boards. I finally found a post that I would consider to be real elitism. Frankly, just down right snobbish. To me, this is elitism at its worst. This person does not want to share a gondola with people staying at a value resort!


I think we could find examples for lot's of resorts, to me it's the aggregate information that I am referencing.  Also recall that I was lumping elitism and entitlement together as a group, the latter is probably the bigger issue in terms of DVC Members being outliers.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 21, 2019)

If elitism means “I think my thing is better than your thing,” then that is everywhere. I see it all the time on TUG with MVC points people vs MVC weeks people (although most points people also have weeks but not necessarily the other way around). Can you imagine Disney elitism 2.0? The next battle will occur with DVC members when they start comparing legavcy 14 to new DVC. The battle will now take place with each other. I already see that battle starting. The legacy people vs the new people.

I see entitlement among all timeshare owners. Right now, I see it with the Marriott merger.

Maybe there is more entitlement and elitism among DVC owners but I see it all over the place. 

I think people like to insult others i.e. become “haters” to make themselves feel better about their own choices. It is a shame but I see that all over the place.


----------



## Dean (Jan 21, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> If elitism means “I think my thing is better than your thing,” then that is everywhere. I see it all the time on TUG with MVC points people vs MVC weeks people (although most points people also have weeks but not necessarily the other way around). Can you imagine Disney’s elitism 2.0? The next battle will occur with DVC members when they start comparing legavcy 14 to new DVC. The battle will now take place with each other. I already see that battle starting. The legacy people vs the new people.


My personal definition would be far more stringent than that, along the lines of your quote you labeled as such.  That's a very strong example but I've been many others along those lines.  DVC trash that own at a lower resort trading up, exchangers trading in, those who booked at moderates and were upgraded to SSR and the like.  Regardless most members are decent people and I do understand the entitlement to a degree given the financial investment, I just don't agree that Disney owes us more than the legal commitment though some feel they should continue to wow us above that contractual commitment.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 21, 2019)

Dean said:


> My personal definition would be far more stringent than that, along the lines of your quote you labeled as such.  That's a very strong example but I've been many others along those lines.  DVC trash that own at a lower resort trading up, exchangers trading in, those who booked at moderates and were upgraded to SSR and the like.  Regardless most members are decent people and I do understand the entitlement to a degree given the financial investment, I just don't agree that Disney owes us more than the legal commitment though some feel they should continue to wow us above that contractual commitment.



I agree that is elitism by my definition too. That is pretty horrible. I have not seen that on TUG but I did find a DVC example pretty quickly when I went looking for it. If you are seeing that kind of elitism more often among DVC owners, I would agree it is bad. If you would have given me these examples in the first place, I would have agreed with you a long time ago. I do not think any company owes us more than the agreement. We all know the perks are extras and can be taken away or changed at any time. It is hard, though, when companies do that. It is like when someone gets laid off. They know it is possible but they get angry anyway and think the company owes them. Or when people complain about price increases, yet they want a raise at work. Humans are irrational and entitled. Or maybe it is rationale to want as much as you can get. When it leads to unhappiness, then it is self defeating.


----------



## rhonda (Jan 22, 2019)

Pot calling the kettle black?

FWIW, I'm the kettle.



TravelTime said:


> I did a search with the word “elitism” on one of the disney boards. I finally found a post that I would consider to be real elitism. Frankly, just down right snobbish. To me, this is elitism at its worst. This person does not want to share a gondola with people staying at a value resort!
> 
> This was the question:
> Are you saying that having to share transportation with guests from Value resorts will somehow dilute the value of a DVC resort? Will DVC members actually be bothered by having to mingle with others who paid less for their hotel rooms? Would DVC members be upset that their gondola may actually travel across a Moderate or (shutter!!) a Value Resort?​
> ...


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 22, 2019)

rhonda said:


> Pot calling the kettle black?
> 
> FWIW, I'm the kettle.



Not sure I understand other than I must be the pot.


----------



## ljmiii (Jan 22, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> I would not bother going to WDW if I have to stay offsite...


A couple of years ago we enjoyed a 'Year of Disney'. We bought APs and banked and borrowed points to stay President's Week, Easter, and Christmas/New Years. But we're went for 9 days in August and stayed at a very nice Marriott. Except...that after making ADRs 9 days in a row in March and sitting on my computer in for the Nth time playing 30 day FP+ bingo I found myself channeling Scarlett and said...

As God is my witness...I'll never stay off-property again!

A day or two later I again channeled Scarlett and said "Fiddle-dee-dee!" (earthier expressions came to mind...though not to my lips in front of the kids).  I had no idea that you could only book 7 days of FPs with an AP!


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 22, 2019)

ljmiii said:


> A couple of years ago we enjoyed a 'Year of Disney'. We bought APs and banked and borrowed points to stay President's Week, Easter, and Christmas/New Years. But we're went for 9 days in August and stayed at a very nice Marriott. Except...that after making ADRs 9 days in a row in March and sitting on my computer in for the Nth time playing 30 day FP+ bingo I found myself channeling Scarlett and said...
> 
> As God is my witness...I'll never stay off-property again!
> 
> A day or two later I again channeled Scarlett and said "Fiddle-dee-dee!" (earthier expressions came to mind...though not to my lips in front of the kids).  I had no idea that you could only book 7 days of FPs with an AP!



I thought you can book Fast Passes for every day of your stay if you are staying onsite. Are you saying if you stay off site, they only let you book up to 7 days of FPs with an AP?

The reason I would only stay onsite at Walt Disney World is for the convenience. Disney can be the trip from hell if you do not have things planned well and/or take advantage of the onsite perks like easy transportation from airport and within WDW, early access to FP and dining reservations, extra magic hours, etc. For me, it is practicality and not elitism. Like I said earlier, I do not think DVCs are superior in any way to offsite hotels. Just that no one can beat the convenience of staying onsite. Especially since we travel from California.

However, for Disneyland, I prefer offsite so we can take the dogs and stay somewhere dog friendly. Disneyland is not so complicated like WDW.

Frankly, if WDW were not so busy and complicated, I would stay at one of the Marriotts too. Or use Bonvoy points for free nights at the Ritz.

Let me just add that I consider staying onsite at one of the themed DVC resorts to be part of the Disney experience. So that is another reason I like staying onsite. I love character breakfasts, watching animals from my balcony and other fun Disney experiences in the resorts themselves. In the future, we may go to WDW and skip the MK entirely.


----------



## ljmiii (Jan 22, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> I thought you can book Fast Passes for every day of your stay if you are staying onsite. Are you saying if you stay off site, they only let you book up to 7 days of FPs with an AP?


The problem I ran into in 2017 I was offsite for my August stay.

BUT...it turns out that the 7 day AP FP limit applies on property as well!  To be more specific, with an AP you can book FPs at 60 days for your length of stay (including split stays...so long as they are consecutive). But once you miss a day the 7 day limit applies...even if you are staying on property! 

I'm running into this now. I'm hoping to stay for 8 nights over Xmas/New Years. And thinking of staying for 2 nights for President's weekend 2020. The 8 or 9 days of FPs in Dec/Jan is no problem. But I can't book the Feb FPs until I'm down to 6 days of FPs booked...and then I would get to add them day by day at about 45 days out. When I saw this online I couldn't believe it...but I called the WDW AP 'hotline' and they confirmed it. Bleccch.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 22, 2019)

ljmiii said:


> The problem I ran into in 2017 I was offsite for my August stay.
> 
> BUT...it turns out that the 7 day AP FP limit applies on property as well!  To be more specific, with an AP you can book FPs at 60 days for your length of stay (including split stays...so long as they are consecutive). But once you miss a day the 7 day limit applies...even if you are staying on property!
> 
> I'm running into this now. I'm hoping to stay for 8 nights over Xmas/New Years. And thinking of staying for 2 nights for President's weekend 2020. The 8 or 9 days of FPs in Dec/Jan is no problem. But I can't book the Feb FPs until I'm down to 6 days of FPs booked...and then I would get to add them day by day at about 45 days out. When I saw this online I couldn't believe it...but I called the WDW AP 'hotline' and they confirmed it. Bleccch.



For February, are you staying offsite or onsite? If you are staying offsite, that policy makes sense but if you are staying onsite, it makes no sense.


----------



## ljmiii (Jan 22, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> For February, are you staying offsite or onsite? If you are staying offsite, that policy makes sense but if you are staying onsite, it makes no sense.


Sorry...I should have been clearer. The February stay would be on property. 

Thus I can book further out than 30 days...around 45-ish...but I wouldn't get to book at 60.

The guy on the AP 'hotline' didn't give a reason for the policy but the guess on FB was that the 7 day limit is to prevent AP holders from making a 'phantom' on property reservation, booking FPs at 60 days, and then cancelling the reservation and staying off property.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 22, 2019)

ljmiii said:


> Sorry...I should have been clearer. The February stay would be on property.
> 
> Thus I can book further out than 30 days...around 45-ish...but I wouldn't get to book at 60.
> 
> The guy on the AP 'hotline' didn't give a reason for the policy but the guess on FB was that the 7 day limit is to prevent AP holders from making a 'phantom' on property reservation, booking FPs at 60 days, and then cancelling the reservation and staying off property.



That still sounds strange to me. If you have an onsite reservation, if you delete it, I think the FPs disappear. I think even the dining reservations disappear. I have made reservations and cancelled them and everything disappeared.


----------



## ljmiii (Jan 23, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> That still sounds strange to me...


Strange...but true. I didn't believe it myself when I read it and so called the AP Hotline myself the next morning to verify (407-WDW-PASS if you ever need it).


----------



## chalee94 (Jan 23, 2019)

ljmiii said:


> I had no idea that you could only book 7 days of FPs with an AP!



yep - I hit this last year in my "year of Disney." I stayed about 5 weeks within a 12 month period with my AP (mostly offsite with some DVC). One trip was at the end of November, then I took a week off to visit my workplace again before heading back in early December. Had some issues booking FPs as a result since I hit the 7 day limit. That was a definite learning experience...


----------



## Tazzik (Jan 23, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> That still sounds strange to me. If you have an onsite reservation, if you delete it, I think the FPs disappear. I think even the dining reservations disappear. I have made reservations and cancelled them and everything disappeared.



If you delete the reservation within 30 days, your FP+ reservations will stay.  I did this last year, since FP+ for FoP was pretty much impossible to get if you were staying offsite.  It's annoying, but it makes the trip to the parks bearable.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 23, 2019)

They should update the system so if you delete your hotel reservation, you lose the FP to avoid people from gaming the system. It would also help them with reservation retention. I am sure they can come up with a way to prevent this problem and fix that 7-day limit for onsite reservations.


----------



## Dean (Jan 23, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> They should update the system so if you delete your hotel reservation, you lose the FP to avoid people from gaming the system. It would also help them with reservation retention. I am sure they can come up with a way to prevent this problem and fix that 7-day limit for onsite reservations.


Since you can make FP on your own without a pass or on site stay in some situations and people have to change from time to time, they likely don't want to do so.  If they did, even a change from one unit or resort to another would likely loss the FP.


----------



## Tazzik (Jan 24, 2019)

Dean said:


> Since you can make FP on your own without a pass or on site stay in some situations and people have to change from time to time, they likely don't want to do so.  If they did, even a change from one unit or resort to another would likely loss the FP.



Yeah, there could be a lot of issues with deleting FP reservations, since people often change dates, rooms, or do split stays.  They could change it so that you can only book 60 days out for each day you are staying at a resort (which would create more specific, eligible days for FP+), but I don't think that would help their bottom line.  Most people who do throw-away rooms buy one night and are able to get FP+ at 60 days for each day of their tickets (so, 1 night at the campgrounds lets you reserve FP+ at 60 days out for each day you have a park ticket).  That's just free money for WDW, so I doubt they will change that process.  We do the same thing at Universal, where 1 night in a premier hotel gets the whole family unlimited express passes for 2 days.  Most of the time, we never set foot in the room.

At the end of the day, AP tickets need to have a limit on the number of days they can reserve FP+, since the tickets themselves are unlimited.  They don't want AP holders simply taking up all of the availability inside the 30 day window.  I'd agree that you should be able to reserve FP+ at 60 days out for the entire length of your on-site stay, but it sounds like that is already possible.  The problem seems to be reserving that far out when you have already hit your maximum FP+ days for an earlier trip (unless I am misunderstanding the previous posts).


----------



## ljmiii (Jan 24, 2019)

Tazzik said:


> I'd agree that you should be able to reserve FP+ at 60 days out for the entire length of your on-site stay, but it sounds like that is already possible.  The problem seems to be reserving that far out when you have already hit your maximum FP+ days for an earlier trip (unless I am misunderstanding the previous posts).


Yes, with an AP you can reserve FP+ at 60 days for your entire reservation (or multiple reservations so long as they are contiguous) even if it is longer than 7 days. But if you miss a day then you hit the 7 day limit - even if staying on property.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 24, 2019)

It sounds like their 7 day rule only penalizes people who stay offsite at some point during a period of time when annual passholders are trying to book Fastpasses. Is that correct?

If so, then I guess it is not in their best interests to change it since their goal is to get people to stay onsite as often as possible.

I think they do need a solution for people who book an onsite reservation that they have no intention of using and then cancel it to have gotten the early FPs.


----------



## ljmiii (Jan 24, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> It sounds like their 7 day rule only penalizes people who stay offsite at some point during a period of time when annual passholders are trying to book Fastpasses. Is that correct?


No - even if you stay onsite you can't make FPs. That is the unbelievable but true absurdity of it all.


----------



## Tazzik (Jan 24, 2019)

Could you book FPs for something like 60 consecutive days to cover multiple vacations?  That seems like a terrible solution, but I'm curious if it would work.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 24, 2019)

ljmiii said:


> No - even if you stay onsite you can't make FPs. That is the unbelievable but true absurdity of it all.



I understood that. What I meant is if you only stay onsite, you would never have the 7 day limit come up. Is that correct?


----------



## ljmiii (Jan 24, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> I understood that. What I meant is if you only stay onsite, you would never have the 7 day limit come up. Is that correct?


No. If you only stay ONCE onsite the 7 day limit doesn't apply. But you'll be blocked from making fastpasses on any subsequent onsite stays (if the first stay is 7+ days).


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 24, 2019)

ljmiii said:


> No. If you only stay ONCE onsite the 7 day limit doesn't apply. But you'll be blocked from making fastpasses on any subsequent onsite stays (if the first stay is 7+ days).



Wow, that is a surprise. So if you do 2 onsite stays with a break in between, you cannot book Fps? For example, I went to WDW last August and booked 8 days of FP. I will go again in May and want to book 9 days of FP. Will I hit the 7 day limit? I am staying onsite both times and I have an AP.

I think if you are staying onsite for any number of days at any time, Disney should allow you to always book FPs or the benefit of staying onsite has just been eliminated.

I can see this making sense if you are not doing any onsite stays though because otherwise they could not control if people were actually using the FPs or not.

Maybe they think 7 days of FPs is enough for the majority of their guests but that is not true because many people who travel from faraway would tend to stay longer and need more than 7 days.

Another question, if I do not have an AP, would I not be subjected to the 7 day limit under the same scenario?


----------



## ljmiii (Jan 24, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> Wow, that is a surprise. So if you do 2 onsite stays with a break in between, you cannot book Fps? For example, I went to WDW last August and booked 8 days of FP. I will go again in May and want to book 9 days of FP. Will I hit the 7 day limit? I am staying onsite both times and I have an AP.


No, because FPs only exist for at most 60 days + the length of your stay. So August and the next May is OK.

I'm running into a problem because President's week starts 45-ish days after our Xmas/New Years stay. So 60 days out from when I should be booking those Feb FPs I will still have our 9 days of Xmas/New Years FPs 'on the books'.


TravelTime said:


> Another question, if I do not have an AP, would I not be subjected to the 7 day limit under the same scenario?


No (I think). I'm actually about to call about this.  My understanding is that if I buy a 9 day ticket and then a 2-3 day ticket for a month or two later I will be able to book FPs for both - the 7 day limit is for APs only.

I'm also going to ask what happens if I buy an AP...but then also buy a 2 day ticket. In other words, is the system smart enough to let me use the 2 day ticket to book FPs even though I have an AP.  Having the AP benefits like free parking almost makes it worth it...and if I consider getting to buy next year's AP at the renewal price I think it puts buying the AP + a 2 day ticket over the top.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 24, 2019)

That is a bad policy for AP people who stay on site. These are their best customers. You would think they would have a technical workaround. I hope this does not apply to DVC owners.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 24, 2019)

ljmiii said:


> No, because FPs only exist for at most 60 days + the length of your stay. So August and the next May is OK.
> 
> I'm running into a problem because President's week starts 45-ish days after our Xmas/New Years stay. So 60 days out from when I should be booking those Feb FPs I will still have our 9 days of Xmas/New Years FPs 'on the books'.
> No (I think). I'm actually about to call about this.  My understanding is that if I buy a 9 day ticket and then a 2-3 day ticket for a month or two later I will be able to book FPs for both - the 7 day limit is for APs only.
> ...



Why would you want a 2 day pass and an AP at the same time?


----------



## ljmiii (Jan 24, 2019)

Tazzik said:


> Could you book FPs for something like 60 consecutive days to cover multiple vacations?  That seems like a terrible solution, but I'm curious if it would work.


If you were going to WDW for a week, then a DCL cruise for a week, then back to WDW for a week it would solve that problem. Make a 'phantom' hotel reservation to cover the week you would be gone and 60 days out from your first check-in make your FPs for the 1st and 3rd weeks (it *should* look like a three week split stay to the FP system).  Then once the last day of your 3rd week is 29 days away cancel the 'phantom' reservation and all your FPs should remain.

But I'm 45-ish days between stays so the 'phantom' reservation doesn't help - from what others have said FPs more than 30 days out disappear when the underlying stay is cancelled.


----------



## ljmiii (Jan 24, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> That is a bad policy for AP people who stay on site. These are their best customers. You would think they would have a technical workaround. I hope this does not apply to DVC owners.


You bet it does! BCV, BLT, and (oh please oh please ROFR gods) VGC.


----------



## ljmiii (Jan 24, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> Why would you want a 2 day pass and an AP at the same time?


AP Discounts are the primary reason. Assuming buying both works I then have to figure out if it is worth it. How many days will I drive (at $20/day).  TiW doesn't work on Holidays and there are many restaurants that take AP but not DVC. Also shops, events, tours, etc.  And the Passholder line. And Disney Photopass. And AP Merch...though that is more of a financial negative...;-)


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 24, 2019)

ljmiii said:


> You bet it does! BCV, BLT, and (oh please oh please ROFR gods) VGC.



Armed you buying more DVC? I thought you were not happy with DVC.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 24, 2019)

ljmiii said:


> AP Discounts are the primary reason. Assuming buying both works I then have to figure out if it is worth it. How many days will I drive (at $20/day).  TiW doesn't work on Holidays and there are many restaurants that take AP but not DVC. Also shops, events, tours, etc.  And the Passholder line. And Disney Photopass. And AP Merch...though that is more of a financial negative...;-)



In my experience so far, I have not yet has different discounts as an AP vs DVC member. Everything I have purchased has offered the same discounts to both. Maybe I do not purchase much. Don’t you get free parking as a DVC member? What is TiW?


----------



## ljmiii (Jan 24, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> Are you buying more DVC? I thought you were not happy with DVC.


Not me...DVC has been the most rewarding of the three timeshare systems I own. And it seems like every year Disney has made staying on property more and more essential to an enjoyable WDW experience (at least at peak times).


TravelTime said:


> I have not yet has different discounts as an AP vs DVC member....Don’t you get free parking as a DVC member? What is TiW?


Some discounts are the same AP vs DVC...some are different...some only discount AP. As for dining, Allears dining guide is at - http://allears.net/wp-content/uploads/archive/pl/disc_dining.pdf

As a DVC member you get free parking at the resort but not the parks - for that you need an AP. Xmas/New Years we hope to be at BCV/BLT so we'll walk to MK, EPCOT, and HS...but I prefer to drive to AK...so figure 2 days of parking. I don't know yet where we'll be at Pres Week...but I'm guessing AKV, OKW, or SSR. So 2-3 days of driving there.

TiW is Tables in Wonderland which you can buy as a DVC member or AP passholder. It costs $150 and in general gives you a 20% discount instead of 10%...but unlike AP and DVC TiW DOES discount alcohol. But it doesn't work on Holidays.


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 25, 2019)

ljmiii said:


> Not me...DVC has been the most rewarding of the three timeshare systems I own. And it seems like every year Disney has made staying on property more and more essential to an enjoyable WDW experience (at least at peak times).
> Some discounts are the same AP vs DVC...some are different...some only discount AP. As for dining, Allears dining guide is at - http://allears.net/wp-content/uploads/archive/pl/disc_dining.pdf
> 
> As a DVC member you get free parking at the resort but not the parks - for that you need an AP. Xmas/New Years we hope to be at BCV/BLT so we'll walk to MK, EPCOT, and HS...but I prefer to drive to AK...so figure 2 days of parking. I don't know yet where we'll be at Pres Week...but I'm guessing AKV, OKW, or SSR. So 2-3 days of driving there.
> ...



I can’t keep up with all the discounts. I keep trying to remember but sometimes I forget to ask for the discounts. I was happy to get 15% off a bunch of private tours I booked for my May trip. That was a nice perk.

I thought theme park parking was free for DVC members staying onsite. I read this on DVC News:

Theme park parking is currently priced at $22 for standard parking or $44 for preferred.  All Disney hotel guests--including DVC members--and Annual Passholders continue to receive complimentary standard parking at theme parks.​
https://dvcnews.com/index.php/dvc-p...y-world-adds-overnight-parking-fee-dvc-exempt

Has this changed since the summer?

I do not like driving at all in WDW. I do not like to rent a car. I love that Disney provides free transportation from the airport. I find WDW transportation within the parks to be super easy to use. When I go to WDW, I like to do split stays. On my AK park days, I like to stay at AKL. Then I move to another resort on the other days depending on what I want to do.


----------



## frank808 (Jan 25, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> I can’t keep up with all the discounts. I keep trying to remember but sometimes I forget to ask for the discounts. I was happy to get 15% off a bunch of private tours I booked for my May trip. That was a nice perk.
> 
> I thought theme park parking was free for DVC members. I read this on DVC News:
> 
> ...


You get free parking while staying at an on site resort.  You do not get free parking by being a dvc member.  If someone is renting points from you and staying on site, they will have free parking at the parks.

Sent from my SM-T217S using Tapatalk


----------



## TravelTime (Jan 25, 2019)

frank808 said:


> You get free parking while staying at an on site resort.  You do not get free parking by being a dvc member.  If someone is renting points from you and staying on site, they will have free parking at the parks.
> 
> Sent from my SM-T217S using Tapatalk



Yes, that is what I meant. I will fix my post.


----------



## Dean (Jan 25, 2019)

ljmiii said:


> No, because FPs only exist for at most 60 days + the length of your stay. So August and the next May is OK.
> 
> I'm running into a problem because President's week starts 45-ish days after our Xmas/New Years stay. So 60 days out from when I should be booking those Feb FPs I will still have our 9 days of Xmas/New Years FPs 'on the books'.
> No (I think). I'm actually about to call about this.  My understanding is that if I buy a 9 day ticket and then a 2-3 day ticket for a month or two later I will be able to book FPs for both - the 7 day limit is for APs only.
> ...


The system will allow you to make FP that match the number of days of the ticket applicable for the time subject to the LOS listed.  So if you have a 2 day ticket in your account, you can only make 2 days of FP.  If you have an AP (or voucher), you can make FP for the LOS covered.  But it does not link the pass/ticket to the FP so you're not tied to using that ticket only for that FP.


----------



## ljmiii (Jan 25, 2019)

TravelTime said:


> I can’t keep up with all the discounts. I keep trying to remember but sometimes I forget to ask for the discounts. I was happy to get 15% off a bunch of private tours I booked for my May trip. That was a nice perk.
> 
> I thought theme park parking was free for DVC members staying onsite. I read this on DVC News:
> 
> ...


Thanks...learn something new every day... ;-)  That does make it less likely that buying an AP will be worth it.


----------



## ljmiii (Jan 25, 2019)

frank808 said:


> You get free parking while staying at an on site resort.  You do not get free parking by being a dvc member.  If someone is renting points from you and staying on site, they will have free parking at the parks.


Do you give the 'toll collector' at the park gates your magic band to tap? Or tell them name, resort, and room number? Or something completely different?


----------



## Tazzik (Jan 25, 2019)

They tap your magic band.  Sometimes, especially when magic bands first started, we got waved through as soon as they saw the bands (without tapping them at all).  We loved that, since we were doing a split stay and only stayed on-site for the first week.  I think they are more thorough in tapping them all these days, but it's a very fast process.


----------



## frank808 (Jan 25, 2019)

ljmiii said:


> Do you give the 'toll collector' at the park gates your magic band to tap? Or tell them name, resort, and room number? Or something completely different?


At check in you used to get these printed out paper that said you were staying on site. You  let the parking attendant see that and they would let you park at the parks no charge.  This past summer they would scan your magic bands to verify you qualified for parking.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Dean (Jan 25, 2019)

frank808 said:


> At check in you used to get these printed out paper that said you were staying on site. You  let the parking attendant see that and they would let you park at the parks no charge.  This past summer they would scan your magic bands to verify you qualified for parking.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Our last trip you could still get a parking pass but often didn't due to the online check in option.


----------



## frank808 (Jan 25, 2019)

Dean said:


> Our last trip you could still get a parking pass but often didn't due to the online check in option.


Didnt even know that.  I thoug by they did away with it since eve dry thing is on magic bands.  Will ask for it at front desk next time.  Sometimes i have to dig for a band and leaving the parking pass in vehicle is so much easier.

Sent from my SM-T217S using Tapatalk


----------



## nomoretslt (Jan 25, 2019)

frank808 said:


> Didnt even know that.  I thoug by they did away with it since eve dry thing is on magic bands.  Will ask for it at front desk next time.  Sometimes i have to dig for a band and leaving the parking pass in vehicle is so much easier.
> 
> Sent from my SM-T217S using Tapatalk



When staying at Boardwalk Villas during busy times like Food and Wine, we still get the paper pass.  When parking at a theme park (I have an annual pass so always free for me) I always make sure I have my hard card in addition to my magic band.  They have become very strict about checking and sometimes there is a magic band failure.  Also when going offsite for food shopping I always put the paper pass upside down on my seat, as it shows your full name.  Don’t need anyone knowing my house may be unoccupied....so easy to find anyone’s home with google.


----------



## ljmiii (Jan 26, 2019)

nomoretslt said:


> When staying at Boardwalk Villas during busy times like Food and Wine, we still get the paper pass.  When parking at a theme park (I have an annual pass so always free for me) I always make sure I have my hard card...


Showing them the AP card is indeed what I'm used to. I can't remember the last time I've stayed on property, without an AP, with a car...I'm pretty sure it was before I bought into DVC more than a decade ago!


----------



## ljmiii (Feb 1, 2019)

ljmiii said:


> BUT...it turns out that the 7 day AP FP limit applies on property as well!  To be more specific, with an AP you can book FPs at 60 days for your length of stay (including split stays...so long as they are consecutive). But once you miss a day the 7 day limit applies...even if you are staying on property!...When I saw this online I couldn't believe it, but I called the WDW AP 'hotline' and they confirmed it. Bleccch.


FYI...I'm not so sure about this anymore. After asking on other forums and researching further I'm reading from people who both have and have not been blocked from making FPs at 60 days when staying onsite and already having 7 days of FPs booked. There is also a hard 14 day limit on FPs. One poor lady described being on a support call with WDW for 2 hours before clearing her cache and cookies then rebooting and reconnecting allowed her to make the FPs that both she and the WDW support team thought she *should* be able to make.  As near as I can tell the rules for FPs are supposed to be...

There is a hard limit of 14 days of FPs w/an AP off property or on...which do not have to be consecutive.
There is also a limit of 7 days of FPs when not staying 'on property'. 
If staying on property you can book FPs up to 60 days out...subject to the 14 day limit.

...but whether or not the MDX website will let you make them is uncertain and is subject to the complexity of your individual circumstance.

Note that this contradicts what the WDW-PASS guy told me.  But it could be that when WDW changed how tickets worked in October '18 they also rewrote the MDX code.


----------

