I don't think you can make a club that has the diversity of travel locations to satisfy everyone. For example, here are some places I'd like to visit in the next few years:
South Africa
Argentina and Chile (patagonia)
Palau
Maldives (again)
South Africa we will do when boys are older. Argentina/chile next jan/feb. Palau, maybe on my own. Maldives whenever.
So you take your average DC member: 1. they have limited interest in international travel (outside of Europe) 2. They travel in packs (more than one family usually in the home) 3. They don't have a big travel budget (lot of cancellations at Q for Canouan home as people can't stomach airfare.)
The next level up would almost require a low home ratio because we would all demand peak availability and not every location would be cheaply, easily accessible so not everyone goes everywhere.
So, the real question is not if the next step up should exist, but what would it be. I don't think more luxurious is the bogey at all--just location. The ideal would be 2-3 regional clubs with true global exchange among them. A Pac Rim club that can exchange with Q for example would go a long way. Then you could have Kyoto, HK, Bali, Thailand, Maldives, India, Vietnam, etc. Q came close with oyster circle and then the two resorts in bali and thailand. I don't sense demand for Asia was all that high though.
Final alternative is to make one global club with china , japan , singapore members. That's seems like a lot of work though.