DVC to affiliate with RCI! [MERGED]

[luvsvacation22]

Most DVC members will join RCI in case they want to exchange. They will then have access to last calls and extra vacations reducing our supply while bringing little to the table. When they exchange their points, they will probably have one of the highest trading values of any resort in RCI, and they are getting the high trade value by depositing an ORLANDO week. A high quality resort in Orlando is the easiest trade to get in RCI. That is good for DVC members, and not much help to RCI members (we could have stayed at a nice place in Orlando without them).

DVC members revolt! Show RCI and DVC that you won't put up with it. Call your congressmen and complain. File lawsuits over this injustice. And by all means nothing will show your disdain like not joining RCI. The RCI fees are $800 a year, the exchange fee is $1000 a week ($95 extra if you deposit DVC), and all that is available through RCI is 3 converted motels in Orlando.
By all means don't complain and join RCI, make a stand and show everyone how mad you are by not joining RCI. DVC owners, please boycott RCI for the good of all.

I love TUG! Where else can I get a such a great laugh! :hysterical:

 

[Carl D]

If you peruse the first 3 or 4 pages of this thread you will see almost nothing but DVC members complaining about all of the low quality resorts in RCI. They were so mad to be stuck with these low quality exchanges available through RCI.

I think you should reread the first 3 or 4 pages.
I thought I missed something the first time through, so I reread them.
-- I see one or two DVC Members expressing displeasure with the move, which is a legitimate thing to post about.
-- I see several non DVC Members upset because they can no longer trade into DVC.
-- I see several DVC Members making a generic comment about the move, without showing displeasure.

-- I see zero whining.

I may still be missing something, so perhaps you can repost the the whining posts??

 

[Carl D]

As I said previously, for any DVC renter who doesn't think RCI is worth belonging to, please DON"T JOIN! DVC doesn't make you join, they simply give you the option.

This is incorrect.
DVC Members do not join, and do not have the option to join the exchange company. Nor do they have the option to opt out.
DVC has a corporate membership, and any membership fees are paid through annual fees. So, DVC is a corporate Member, and the individual Members are in tow.
DVC Members can not call the exchange company to request an exchange. It's all internal and seamless to the Member. All we do is call DVC Member Services, and they handle all the exchanging stuff.

*I should clarify that I don't know the details yet. I'm assuming it will work the same as when DVC was associated with II*

 

[bnoble]

RCI is crowing about 135K new members, so I'm pretty sure you won't have a choice.

I thought I missed something the first time through, so I reread them....

Over on DIS, the mix is about the same. A few DVC owners are bummed to lose Marriott. Most of the big time complaining is from the folks who'd become accustomed to getting in on the cheap through II. Of course, with just a little effort (and maybe an adjustment of their timeshare portfolio), those folks may well be able to get in on the cheap through RCI instead, depending on the details.

Carl, as a dyed-in-the-wool pixie-dust person, I'm interested in hearing your thoughts about this:

If you read between the lines, it appears that The Powers That Be at DVC have come to the same conclusion that many of us have: that, ultimately, the drawing power of pixie dust is limited, and to continue to grow at their current pace, DVC is going to have to figure out how to market to people who don't plan to come visit "Disney" every year. It's a hard thing to do to change your brand perception---they had to invent a whole new movie studio to market films targeted at teens and adults.

 

[tombo]

QUOTE:I think you should reread the first 3 or 4 pages.
I thought I missed something the first time through, so I reread them.
-- I see one or two DVC Members expressing displeasure with the move, which is a legitimate thing to post about.
-- I see several non DVC Members upset because they can no longer trade into DVC.
-- I see several DVC Members making a generic comment about the move, without showing displeasure.

-- I see zero whining.

I may still be missing something, so perhaps you can repost the the whining posts??

I want the ability to trade into Resorts that are within parity with DVC. I do not know of any on the RCi rosters that meet that criteria. Why would I trade down. What advantage will that be to me????

ANOTHER QUOTE"The amount I paid for DVC, plus the high maintenance fees I pay yearly, makes me unhappy with this arrangement. Now, instead of being one of many fine resorts, as we were in II, we will be the best resorts in RCI. I would rather be a big fish in a small pool rather than a big fish in an gigantic pool. In any case DVC is a big fish. Will I get the trades with DVC I want, I doubt it since there is Nothing in RCI I really want. I own several RCI weekly contracts and there little there to compare to DVC. I traded to the Houses at Summer Bay, and that may be comparable, but other than that, including the Manhattan Club, nothing compares to DVC. No matter how you slice it, dice it, or call it a silk purse, RCi is still a sow's ear to me."



ANOTHER QUOTE (yours): "Please make your voice heard

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For those who wish to COMPLAIN, and I already did, you can do so to Jim Lewis, President DVC, 407-566-3830 AND to Nicole Florio, DVC Customer Satisfaction Manager, 321-939-4498."




Another quote: "I called Nicole Florio, who is the DVC Member Satisfaction Manager. I was furious. There are NO resorts in RCI that can compete with DVC. All of the top resorts are in II. I can only guess that parties in the DVC organization might have benefited from this. Otherwise why would they do this. They are undervaluing Disney by putting DVC in with subpar resorts. None compare in cost of maintenance fees, none in amenities, none in service, none in buy in price, none in value, and none in quality.

I invited Nicole to do a Google Search under Class Action Suit and RCI. I told her about them selling weeks, their lower quality resorts, their non service etc, but she seemed immune to my protestations. She said they, DVC, were going to give RCI a chance, and that RCI would bring more opportunities to members for different types of vacations like, all inclusive resorts, like anyone cares, cruises, and most importantly, daily use of resorts.

I told her I was upset that I would not be able to exchange into DVC with high quality resorts, like Marriotts, that cost the same as DVC and that have similar maintenance fees. I told her the only resort of value in RCI is the Manhattan Club and that is not that valuable either. She said DVC would NOT be Using II in the Future.

She said that they (DVC) had done its homework and had been offered a wonderful contract from RCI. She told me to try it out since this was the way DVC was going in the future. I hung up and felt sick to my stomach."


Above are 4 quotes from 3 different DVC owners. Whether you classify them as whining, RCI bashing, arrogance, or complaining (or all of the above) is up to the person's interpretation who is reading the posts.

However, after re-reading many posts I attributed to DVC owners, I do stand corrected. Many were made by people who don't actually own at DVC.

 

[Carl D]

Carl, as a dyed-in-the-wool pixie-dust person, I'm interested in hearing your thoughts about this:

I'm not sure where that quote came from, but I do believe there is a bit of truth to it.
I don't see where the "changing your brand perception" comes into play, but maybe I'm wrong.

One thing is for certain, not every family in the world will want to vacation exclusively at Disney. There are a limited number who do (we are one of them), and many are probably already DVC Members, or want to be Members.

That said, I don't believe DVC ever had to market to the every year visitor. They have always marketed the point system as being able to bank & borrow in order to make one large trip every third year.
In addition they have really pushed trading in recent years.

I think Disney's boldest move to attract the non theme park, world traveler has been the "Adventures by Disney" program, although that is not exclusive to DVC.

That said, I believe as long as we have population growth, there will always be a growing market for WDW.
Like now, I believe most will be the casual/occasional visitor, but there will always be DVC diehards as long as the product quality holds.
I believe if DVC announced a DVC Resort at the Polynesian you would see people lining up even faster than the Contemporary.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think the movie studio part was your main question, and I'm guessing the quote is referring to Pixar. If so, Disney certainly didn't invent Pixar, they just own it.
The Animation pictures, when done correctly, would still be popular today. In my opinion they opted for quantity, not quality. You can pump out several mediocre failures in a few years (Pocahontas, Mulan, the list goes on...), or you can do it right --> The Lion King etc.. Unfortunately they took the quantity route, which led to failure, which led to Pixar. At least that's how I see it.

 

[Carl D]

QUOTE:I think you should reread the first 3 or 4 pages.
I thought I missed something the first time through, so I reread them.
-- I see one or two DVC Members expressing displeasure with the move, which is a legitimate thing to post about.
-- I see several non DVC Members upset because they can no longer trade into DVC.
-- I see several DVC Members making a generic comment about the move, without showing displeasure.

-- I see zero whining.

I may still be missing something, so perhaps you can repost the the whining posts??




ANOTHER QUOTE"The amount I paid for DVC, plus the high maintenance fees I pay yearly, makes me unhappy with this arrangement. Now, instead of being one of many fine resorts, as we were in II, we will be the best resorts in RCI. I would rather be a big fish in a small pool rather than a big fish in an gigantic pool. In any case DVC is a big fish. Will I get the trades with DVC I want, I doubt it since there is Nothing in RCI I really want. I own several RCI weekly contracts and there little there to compare to DVC. I traded to the Houses at Summer Bay, and that may be comparable, but other than that, including the Manhattan Club, nothing compares to DVC. No matter how you slice it, dice it, or call it a silk purse, RCi is still a sow's ear to me."

Above are 2 quotes from DVC owners. Whether you classify them as whining, RCI bashing, arrogance, or complaining (or all of the above) is up to the person's interpretation who is reading the posts.

However, after re-reading many posts I attributed to DVC owners, I do stand corrected. Most were made by people who don't actually own at DVC.

You pulled out 1 (one) poster?? And as you said, some may not consider that a whine.

You said:

If you peruse the first 3 or 4 pages of this thread you will see almost nothing but DVC members complaining about all of the low quality resorts in RCI.

 

[tombo]

You pulled out 1 (one) poster?? And as you said, some may not consider that a whine.

You said:

Please reread my above post. I kept looking and I now have 4 separate posts from 3 different DVC posters containing what is in my opinion whining, complaining, and RCI bashing. As I said above, after re-reading not all of the complaints were from DVC owners.

To be fair, please list the huge number of positive RCI posts made by DVC owners. Look hard and you might find one or two DVC owners glad to be with RCI and happy with the quality of RCI resorts. I didn't notice any but there might be some.

 

[Carl D]

Please reread my above post. I kept looking and I now have 4 separate posts from 3 different DVC posters containing what is in my opinion whining, complaining, and RCI bashing. As I said above, after re-reading not all of the complaints were from DVC owners. However please list the huge number of positive RCI posts made by DVC owners. Look hard and you might find one or two.[/

I guess we should just let it go at this point.
I do see where you admitted your mistake, and that was good of you to do.

Just to clarify, I never claimed there was a huge number of positive RCI posts from DVC Members. Heck, I never claimed there was even one.

 

[tombo]

Just to clarify, I never claimed there was a huge number of positive RCI posts from DVC Members. Heck, I never claimed there was even one.

And that is the point. DVC owners seem to feel that what they have is gold, what II has is Gold, and what we own and trade for in RCI is crap. If just a couple of DVC owners made positive statements about RCI (and the RCI resorts we own and trade for) it might not appear to be such a slap in the face. After reading the posts from DVC and non DVC posters, it seems that we (RCI members) own and vacation in unacceptable accomodations. Until DVC joined RCI, I mistakenly thought I vacationed in great resorts.

 

[Carl D]

And that is the point. DVC owners seem to feel that what they have is gold, what II has is Gold, and what we own and trade for in RCI is crap. If just a couple of DVC owners made positive statements about RCI (and the RCI resorts we own and trade for) it might not appear to be such a slap in the face. After reading the posts from DVC and non DVC posters, it seems that we (RCI members) own and vacation in unacceptable accomodations. Until DVC joined RCI, I mistakenly thought I vacationed in great resorts.

I said I would leave it alone, but I guess I can't..

DVC publishes their own resort list for trading. When DVC was with II, we had a list of roughly 500 resorts we were allowed to trade into. These were hand picked by DVC as the best, and worthy of DVC. That may sound elitist, but I'm just giving you the facts. The lessor resorts were not available to us for trade.

Now, assuming the same will hold true for the RCI affiliation (for all I know the whole program may change), there will only be a handful of resorts we will be allowed to trade for. I can safely assume they will be the cream of the crop in RCI.

So, it's not necessarily the quality of resorts that DVC Members are concerned about, but rather the specific resorts that Members have grown accustom to. As previously stated in this thread, Members are accustomed to seeing Atlantis on that list... It will no longer be there. Same with some Marriotts. Those resorts may or may not be replaced with equal caliber resorts, that over time Members will get accustomed to.
If the list ends up being incomparable, than I'm sure Members will complain to DVC.

*The first part of my post is fact, but the second part is opinion.

 

[bnoble]

I'm not sure where that quote came from

It was mine from earlier in the thread.

I don't believe DVC ever had to market to the every year visitor. They have always marketed the point system as being able to bank & borrow in order to make one large trip every third year.

Perhaps, but the minimum buy-in is a week in a 2BR in most seasons every other year. It's hard to visit less frequently unless you start using your points outside Disney.

I believe as long as we have population growth, there will always be a growing market for WDW.

Not quite---there was pent-up demand when DVC first opened. At some point, that demand is satiated, and you're in steady state. If you still only sell to the fans, who want to come back frequently and in perpetuity, DVC's growth rate will have to flatten.

And, there's no way that the sharp-pencil boys want that to happen.

I don't think the movie studio part was your main question, and I'm guessing the quote is referring to Pixar. If so, Disney certainly didn't invent Pixar, they just own it.

No, I was referring to Touchstone---the label they use for more "adult" fare. That was a label invented to avoid brand confusion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Touchstone_Pictures

 

[Carl D]

Perhaps, but the minimum buy-in is a week in a 2BR in most seasons every other year. It's hard to visit less frequently unless you start using your points outside Disney.

Actually, the minimum buy-in has been reduced. When they started it was 230 points, and that's when DVC only consisted of the lowest point resort, OKW.

Not quite---there was pent-up demand when DVC first opened. At some point, that demand is satiated, and you're in steady state. If you still only sell to the fans, who want to come back frequently and in perpetuity, DVC's growth rate will have to flatten.

And, there's no way that the sharp-pencil boys want that to happen.

When DVC first started, sales were anything but booming. I don't think there was a lot of pent up demand. It took a few years to catch on.
I think I understand your point though... the market was not yet tapped.

I think like most products, sales will flatten over time. Heck, I waited in line for the iPhone, but now you can just walk in.
So, in short, what non consumable product can sustain booming growth?

No, I was referring to Touchstone---the label they use for more "adult" fare. That was a label invented to avoid brand confusion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Touchstone_Pictures

Yup. I didn't follow your link, but I was always under the impression that Touchstone was Disney's way to make an "R" rated movie, yet keep the Disney name off the screen.

 

[tombo]

I said I would leave it alone, but I guess I can't..

DVC publishes their own resort list for trading. When DVC was with II, we had a list of roughly 500 resorts we were allowed to trade into. These were hand picked by DVC as the best, and worthy of DVC. That may sound elitist, but I'm just giving you the facts. The lessor resorts were not available to us for trade.

Now, assuming the same will hold true for the RCI affiliation (for all I know the whole program may change), there will only be a handful of resorts we will be allowed to trade for. I can safely assume they will be the cream of the crop in RCI.

So, it's not necessarily the quality of resorts that DVC Members are concerned about, but rather the specific resorts that Members have grown accustom to. As previously stated in this thread, Members are accustomed to seeing Atlantis on that list... It will no longer be there. Same with some Marriotts. Those resorts may or may not be replaced with equal caliber resorts, that over time Members will get accustomed to.
If the list ends up being incomparable, than I'm sure Members will complain to DVC.

*The first part of my post is fact, but the second part is opinion.

DVC gives you a list of resorts you are allowed to trade in to? That is another reason I would never be a DVC renter. I would be mad if I was limited from trading for any resort I wanted that other II or RCI members could access. To have the arrogance as a company (or renter )to say that you hand pick the resorts that are worthy of DVC is a joke. You said it might sound elitist, and that lessor resorts aren't available to trade? Arrogance is a better description than elitist. Those type of statements are why so many non DVC owners resent DVC renters.

I personally will never stay in a DVC resort because I don't like Disney and because I refuse to pay $95 more than I would pay to stay at another Orlando location with as many amenities and larger rooms. I guess I too am an elitist since I only want to stay in resorts with large rooms. However, in spite of my personal preferences, I would never say that no one who owns at my resort should be allowed to trade for DVC just because I don't like the resort, and I would be mad if the resort made that decision for it's owners. I guess when you "rent" you expect the landlord (DVC) to make decisions on where you can stay that "owners" can make for themselves at resorts like Marriott (to the best of my knowledge Marriott owners can trade for any II resort that is available, not just those that Marriott deems worthy). Surely if DVC didn't limit the resorts their renters could stay in, the DVC renters (who I assume are grown adults) could somehow manage to pick the resorts they liked for themselves. There are reviews here on TUG you can read to help you choose the resort that is right for you (you can access them if you join TUG).

Yes, you might be used to seeing Atlantis in II, but how often do you want to go to the Bahamas? If you like Atlantis, I think the current special staying in Atlantis is $399 for 3 nights. Why would you waste your DVC points to stay near Atlantis when you can stay in the Atlantis resort cheaper than your annual MF's? And the 2 Four seasons, how often does a DVC owner stay there? Other than Marriott there are few resorts that RCI can't match, and there are a lot more choices through RCI if DVC deems them DVC worthy.

Losing Marriott's I do understand. I don't care if DVC goes back to II this afternoon as I will never stay there, but if Marriott came to RCI I would be very excited. Marriott is IMO the best timeshare system there is, and I would own there except for the ROFR and high MF's (I am still considering buying now since they aren't currently ROFR'ing). The main thing I understand is DVC owners are upset about no longer having access to Marriott. I would feel the same way.

You make the assertion that if the list is incomparable you are sure that many renters will complain. Well actually before the first RCI exchange has been made by a DVC renter, members are already complaining to DVC. In fact another DVC poster previously gave the phone number and address to complain and said that they had already expressed their displeasure. I am going to call the number and complain about DVC being with RCI myself. Hopefully if we all work together and complain loud enough we can get DVC back to II and we will all be happy. Until that happens please don't deposit your DVC weeks with RCI because there isn't a single comparable trade in RCI to a DVC week. All RCI resorts are far superior to what DVC has to offer (oops did that sound elitist?).

 

[Carl D]

You make the assertion that if the list is incomparable you are sure that many renters will complain. Well actually before the first RCI exchange has been made by a DVC renter, members are already complaining to DVC. In fact you previously gave the phone number and address to complain and said that you already had expressed your displeasure. I am going to call the number and complain about DVC being with RCI myself. Hopefully if we all work together and complain loud enough we can get DVC back to II and we will all be happy. Until that happens please don't deposit your DVC weeks with RCI because there isn't a single comparable trade in RCI to a DVC week. All RCI resorts are far superior to what DVC has to offer (oops did that sound elitist?).

I will respond to the rest of the post later when I have time, but for now you had better get your facts straight. I never gave any number and urged people to complain.

 

[tombo]

I will respond to the rest of the post later when I have time, but for now you had better get your facts straight. I never gave any number and urged people to complain.

Double checked, it wasn't your post, so I changed my post. I have no problem admitting when I am wrong. As I get older it seems like I am wrong more often.

 

[calgarygary]

.....
Yes, you might be used to seeing Atlantis in II, but how often do you want to go to the Bahamas? If you like Atlantis, I think the current special staying in Atlantis is $399 for 3 nights. Why would you waste your DVC points to stay near Atlantis when you can stay in the Atlantis resort cheaper than your annual MF's? And the 2 Four seasons, how often does a DVC owner stay there? Other than Marriott there are few resorts that RCI can't match, and there are a lot more choices through RCI if DVC deems them DVC worthy....

Why would you compare staying in one of the cheaper rooms of Atlantis to staying at Harborside? I would not compare staying at the All Stars to staying at AKV. Although DVC may have thought they were cream of the crop for II, there are many, many great resorts that surpassed them, even for location because there is a world outside of WDW.

 

[tombo]

Why would you compare staying in one of the cheaper rooms of Atlantis to staying at Harborside? I would not compare staying at the All Stars to staying at AKV. Although DVC may have thought they were cream of the crop for II, there are many, many great resorts that surpassed them, even for location because there is a world outside of WDW.

I agree with you 100% because when I vacation I want to go anywhere but Disney, so there is a huge world outside of WDW. Now that they are with RCI, DVC seems to feel they are better than anything available through RCI too.

I have never stayed at Harborside, so I was just assuming that it would be better to stay onsite at the Atlantis than to stay next door. From what I understand Harborside is a really nice resort and if it is head an shoulders above staying at Atlantis then I used a bad example.

 

[Eli Mairs]

DVC was originally with RCI

I don't know if any of you were around at the beginning, but when we bought in 1992, DVC was only affiliated with RCI. I have a list of the Gold Crown resorts that were available for exchange in 1992.

I can't remember when they dumped RCI in favor of II, but I believe that it was within the first few years. I guess that they've come full circle.

 

[icydog]

Putting it more crudely, DVC does it for the same reason a dog licks itself -- because it can.

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​

You're right that WAS crude and inappropriate. The last post I made I complimented you. Now I am insulted. I do not need this type of rhetoric. Sounds like a junior high remark!! YUCK!

 

[Eli Mairs]

True, but as I said, we will both have a lifetime of vacation accommodations. From a practical standpoint that is the same thing.

The debate is really about what happens to the ts after we are gone. I would rather not saddle my heirs with a 50 year old decrepit resort they may not want, plus stick them with high fees.
Others may have a different opinion.

Carl:

I couldn't agree with you more.

To date, we have enjoyed 16 years of our 50 year membership. When the time is up, my husband and I will either be in our mid 90's or dead.

I know that my kids, who will probably be grandparents in their 70's by then, will not want to be saddled with our membership, so I am happy that it will end at the designated time.

In the meantime, Disney has a vested interest in maintaining DVC to the highest standard.

It will be interesting to see the condition of other vacation ownership resorts 40 or 50 years from now.

 

[timeos2]

Why pay for perfection if next year it belongs to someone else?

Carl:

I couldn't agree with you more.

To date, we have enjoyed 16 years of our 50 year membership. When the time is up, my husband and I will either be in our mid 90's or dead.

I know that my kids, who will probably be grandparents in their 70's by then, will not want to be saddled with our membership, so I am happy that it will end at the designated time.

In the meantime, Disney has a vested interest in maintaining DVC to the highest standard.

It will be interesting to see the condition of other vacation ownership resorts 40 or 50 years from now.

But Disney won't be paying to maintain it - you will! And then poof - its gone. In perfect shape, ready to be sold or whatever. Easy to say you won't care but what will you do when you're 80 and the $3000+ ( or $4000 0r $2500 - it can be whatever DVC decides they "need") comes in, there is only 10 years left in the "ownership" so the resale value is zero (why pay big bucks for 1<10 years when you can buy forever or at least 50 years "new"?). You can't sell and you owe the fees. What will you do? No different than any other timeshare. Except Disney fees are already one of the highest - where do you think they will be in another 20+ years? Hint - they won't go down.

As for other resorts they will survive or fall into disrepair depending on what the owners decide to do. But at least they have control over what happens and how their money is spent. It will be interesting to see what happens in 20 years if we're lucky enough to be around.

 

[Eli Mairs]

But Disney won't be paying to maintain it - you will! And then poof - its gone. In perfect shape, ready to be sold or whatever. Easy to say you won't care but what will you do when you're 80 and the $3000+ ( or $4000 0r $2500 - it can be whatever DVC decides they "need") comes in, there is only 10 years left in the "ownership" so the resale value is zero (why pay big bucks for 1<10 years when you can buy forever or at least 50 years "new"?). You can't sell and you owe the fees. What will you do? No different than any other timeshare. Except Disney fees are already one of the highest - where do you think they will be in another 20+ years? Hint - they won't go down.

As for other resorts they will survive or fall into disrepair depending on what the owners decide to do. But at least they have control over what happens and how their money is spent. It will be interesting to see what happens in 20 years if we're lucky enough to be around.

Well, as far as I'm concerned, you get what you pay for. I'd rather pay higher fees to keep my resort in perfect shape, than pay less and own a resort in disrepair.

Regardless of what the maintenance fees will be in coming years, DVC rental rates will be higher. Renting out the points, which we do occasionally, is always an option. This not only covers the maintenance fees, but gives us a tidy profit.

 

[Carl D]

But Disney won't be paying to maintain it - you will! And then poof - its gone. In perfect shape, ready to be sold or whatever. Easy to say you won't care but what will you do when you're 80 and the $3000+ ( or $4000 0r $2500 - it can be whatever DVC decides they "need") comes in, ...

If you have any proof whatsoever this will happen, please provide it. Otherwise you should really not be spewing this nonsense.

After all, I believe CP is going to stick the owners with a $1000 assessment every year until eternity.
How would you like it if I were to spread those unfounded falsehoods around the internet??

... there is only 10 years left in the "ownership" so the resale value is zero (why pay big bucks for 1<10 years when you can buy forever or at least 50 years "new"?).

News flash- The value will not be $0 with even 1 year left. At a rental rate of $20/pt (at least) in 2057, a weeks stay will rent for $4000.

You can't sell and you owe the fees. What will you do?

See above.

No different than any other timeshare.

Wrong again.
DVC is totally different since most of the resorts are attached to the Disney Hotels. It makes no sense for one hotel room to rent for $1000/night (2056), but the adjoining 1br villa to be worth $0/night.

Regardless of what you believe about ROFR, what truly keeps the prices of DVC high is the unique distinction of having adjoining Disney accommodations.

Except Disney fees are already one of the highest

You get what you pay for.

 

[Carl D]

DVC gives you a list of resorts you are allowed to trade in to? That is another reason I would never be a DVC renter. I would be mad if I was limited from trading for any resort I wanted that other II or RCI members could access. To have the arrogance as a company (or renter )to say that you hand pick the resorts that are worthy of DVC is a joke.

You can laugh all you want, but the DVC Members are happy with that policy.

I'm not an RCI expert, but I believe RCI in general also has a policy where they don't let you see some lessor resorts if you own a good resort, but perhaps that doesn't apply to you.

You said it might sound elitist,and that lessor resorts aren't available to trade? Those descriptions are why so many can't stand DVC renters. Arrogance is a better description.

First, it's not the DVC Members that make the rules, so to hate the DVC Members doesn't make any sense.

Getting past that silliness, there is nothing wrong with buying an upscale timeshare and expecting similar in return... That is, unless you're some sort of Socialist.

I personally will never stay in a DVC resort because I don't like Disney and because I refuse to pay $95 more than I would pay to stay at another Orlando location with as many amenities and larger rooms. I guess I too am an elitist.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion...
My opinion is that you are not well versed in Walt Disney World.

However, in spite of my personal preferences, I would never say that no one who owns at my resort should be allowed to trade for DVC just because I don't like the resort, and I would be mad if the resort made that decision for it's owners. I guess when you "rent" you expect the landlord (DVC) to make decisions on where you can stay for you that "owners" can make themselves at resorts like Marriott. Surely without DVC choosing the DVC renters (who are grown adults) could pick the resorts they liked for themselves. There are reviews here on TUG you can read to help you choose the resort that is right for you (if you join TUG).

I'm starting to get the feeling this whole "rent/renter" thing is suppose to be some sort of derogatory comment about DVC Members???

Please read my earlier post comparing a RTU ts and an ownership ts.
I honestly feel bad for the "owners" who got stuck with that thing FOREVER!