Concerned about the Future of the DVC resale

[E2ME2]

So here's an interesting question - might warrant it's own thread. If the current direct benefits do not entice you to buy direct over resale, what would be? For me, I think a couple of extra fastpasses per person per night staying on direct points would be very tempting.
How about;
Free unlimited Minnie Vans?
Fully-stocked kitchens?
Daily maid service?
Direct DVC exclusive EMH?
Free Disney Plus for when you get home?

The opportunity to book non-home resorts at 9 Months!

 

[chalee94]

I don't know much about Marriott's model, but I actually had to walk away from a Wyndham Timeshare opportunity recently. We couldn't do it, because the Wyndham restrictions were terrible. It was a fixed week at a less popular destination, and off time of year. To convert it to flexible points, and to get enough to use at a more desired time/location, Wyndham would have required us to buy "Founder" points (I think they were called Founder, or something similar), and the price was astronomical compared to what we saw as equivalent with what we have at DVC.
It made me greatly appreciate the DVC model, by comparison.

This kind of story makes me concerned about what DVC execs are planning for the future of DVC.

 

[kannons610]

The opportunity to book non-home resorts at 9 Months!

That would be terrible for anyone who purchased sleep around points. Can they make that booking distinction between Direct v. Resale owners?

 

[ELMC]

Then there was this gem:

dvcsince93 said:

I singled out resale because the facts in my possession point to differences in point usage between direct and resale purchasers:

1. There are numerous posts on this board where people say they are buying cheap only to use elsewhere-never the home resort.
2. People on this board freely disclose that they own hundreds of points at SSR and also disclose how much they avoid SSR.
3. A number of direct purchasers on this board have pointed out how much the like SSR and don't avoid SSR at all costs.

The issue is not whether there is block of resale points that are never used in their home resort, it is how big is that block- based on resale numbers, that block may be as large as 3-4 million points.

Oof. By making this a direct vs. resale issue this person simultaneously nailed it and completely missed the point. The issue is not that there are 3-4 million SSR resale points out there not being used at their home resort; the issue is that there are 14 million SSR points of any variety that are not being used at their home resort. Hit "Like" now because I hit the bullseye with this one.

 

[skier_pete]

Oof. By making this a direct vs. resale issue this person simultaneously nailed it and completely missed the point. The issue is not that there are 3-4 million SSR resale points out there not being used at their home resort; the issue is that there are 14 million SSR points of any variety that are not being used at their home resort. Hit "Like" now because I hit the bullseye with this one.

You did - there's a reason that the availability at SSR on 1 bedrooms and 2 bedrooms are still available most of the year with a few weeks to go. The 14 million SSR points damages the system worse than anything Disney does - BUT it still only hurts things at the 7-month mark.

The new resale restrictions at Riviera is going to hurt owners at their own resorts. As the number of resale owners goes up over the years, there will be more and more people that can't book elsewhere - and those people will HAVE to book at 11 months to get what they want - meaning that DIRECT OWNERS will have to compete with those owners to get spots at their own resort. It might take 10, 20 years for this really to be a problem, but it will affect direct owners as well as resale owners. That's the reason I say Disney's decision here is bad. Not because resale restrictions devalue the resale value of the property - they do but as a buyer at Riviera you should know this going in and therefore it is your choice to have that facing you if you sell. But because long-term they made a change that hurts direct owners as well as resale owners.

 

[CanadaDisney05]

Oof. By making this a direct vs. resale issue this person simultaneously nailed it and completely missed the point. The issue is not that there are 3-4 million SSR resale points out there not being used at their home resort; the issue is that there are 14 million SSR points of any variety that are not being used at their home resort. Hit "Like" now because I hit the bullseye with this one.

If the skyliner ends up being a success, and they end up connecting SSR, OKW, and AKL to it, this may alleviate the problem.

 

[kboo]

Let's say DVC introduce another restriction: resale can only book at the home resort in the 11 to 7 months window and if you need to cancel within the 7 months window you lose your points.
Would you still buy VGF at the same price?
Because it's what the resale restrictions may mean for DRR owners.

That's why I said it depends on how different people value the option. Again, I go back to the echo chamber here - there are plenty of people I see on other social media DVC groups who bought ages ago and thought that if you didn't use all your points one year, you lost them. (There was also a sad soul several months ago who thought that he had 700 points to use for a huge family vacation this year because he'd gone 7 years without using his 100-point contract...) If the owner is not averse to renting, they may be able to recoup MFs or cover loss of their points that year. Or you might see an uptick in dedicated reservations for rent at David's. If they are flexible travelers, maybe the chances of having to cancel go way down. etc, etc. At worst, you lose the points used for that reservation. That's going to hurt some people more than others; and typically if that happens because of some disaster (death or illness or natural circumstance) losing the points is probably the least of my concerns at that point. Speaking for myself only, the option to use resale points elsewhere is worth something, but we may disagree on how much that option is worth to each of us.

 

[skier_pete]

People buying contracts just to rent out points is something that's also bad for resale and direct. Disney should work harder to reduce THIS problem, but since it doesn't affect direct sales, they don't care.

 

[jerseyduke]

If the skyliner ends up being a success, and they end up connecting SSR, OKW, and AKL to it, this may alleviate the problem.

I am not so sure this will totally alleviate the problem, but I also think its all but a sure thing.
The "bend station" by boardwalk seems like it would have made the route a lot shorter if the put it to the east of Epcot Resorts Blvd by the CM lot. Where is is now makes it an easy shot to Coronado Springs and then to AK. then rooms at CSR go up
And DRR to the springs area is also a clear shot.

Id be more surprised than not if every non MK resort is on the skyliner within maybe 5 years, with the possible exception of the all stars

 

[SL6827]

If I ever jump back onto DVC it would most likely be with a contract of around 35-40 points at the Beach Club. That would get me a studio in May every other year for 4-5 nights. And there is where I would stay. The price for such contracts are high, but I love SAB.

 

[Jason@dvcstore]

Disney could kill the resale market by always taking ROFR (at a price they enforce), only way for new buyers would then be direct.

Disney Vacation Club members are the ones that control the resale market. If all of the Disney Vacation Club members decided to keep their properties until the membership expired there would be no need for resale companies to exist. Once the first Disney Vacation Club member decided to sell their ownership the resale market began. Disney Vacation Club resale companies will exist as long as their are members looking to sell their membership.

 

[SG131]

If the skyliner ends up being a success, and they end up connecting SSR, OKW, and AKL to it, this may alleviate the problem.

I think it could help with AKL. The other two, it depends. If they build one skyliner station for all of SSR, that wouldn't entice me to want to stay there. If they build a few scattered throughout the resort (which I doubt they would do) then that could be a game changer.

 

[RescueRanger]

People buying contracts just to rent out points is something that's also bad for resale and direct. Disney should work harder to reduce THIS problem, but since it doesn't affect direct sales, they don't care.

THIS. I totally agree Pete. This is the definition of commercial renting and Disney should be going after these members. Please don't misinterpret my meaning. I have no problem with people renting out points occasionally when they don't need them or need cash for something else. However like Pete said, this is about members who own contracts with the sole purpose of renting.

 

[skier_pete]

THIS. I totally agree Pete. This is the definition of commercial renting and Disney should be going after these members. Please don't misinterpret my meaning. I have no problem with people renting out points occasionally when they don't need them or need cash for something else. However like Pete said, this is about members who own contracts with the sole purpose of renting.

Right - not suggestion eliminating renting of points completely - but eliminate the ability to regularly rent your points out.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

this is about members who own contracts with the sole purpose of renting.

Which you can't easily discern. It's of more value to members to be able to book other people into a separate room other than those on a contract and having a few that own for income is just the way it goes. Even DVC no longer requires a discounted member cash room to have the member stay in it. Personally I doubt it's a ton of people buying these days to rent. I've seen one poster that used to use their contracts a lot themselves but as they've gotten older they rent it out so what do you do? Force them to sell once they get too old to use it?

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

Right - not suggestion eliminating renting of points completely - but eliminate the ability to regularly rent your points out.

And when it's a member who brings family or friends or just rents to them points they aren't using? How do you propose to decide and police what is an allowable rental and what isn't? Or as I brought up previously sifting out owners who used to go and now don't? There are so many scenarios that IMO lead back to if you allow non-members to stay in the rooms then it doesn't matter if they never use them. I'm ok with the 20 rental aspect that has things looked at but to kick out anyone and everyone who for some reason doesn't always use their membership themselves or has had to stop either for a short time due to circumstances or for a long time because they can't handle the trip or parks? If they don't want to sell that's their perogative IMO. And unless you question everyone who places non-owners into rooms you and get back honest answers you can't know why non-members are in the rooms.

 

[Wakey]

Lots of SSR 'dissing' on here lol.

I agree with the post above.
.
SSR is wonderful, or will be post refurb. Those 1 beds with big and little murphy MUST become more popular.

DVC could significantly solve the problem by connecting SSR, OKW and AKL to the Skyliner as above. I see them putting it into DS at least.

Then revamp the main building and Turf club, and stick a destination bar in.

Then suddenly with the Skyliner connection, SSR desirability shoots up.

The worst thing for me about SSR are the rooms (being sorted, looks like the best refurb yet) and that crappy main building with that Institute brick, hole in the wall with gaudy carpet, and 1980s golf club style main restaurant. It all needs a revamp.

 

[SG131]

But when a member brings family or friends or just rents to them points they aren't using? How do you propose what is an allowable rental and what isn't?

Or if people are taking big family trips and have a studio under their name and a studio under their brothers and one under their mothers. It would be nice if they could cut down commercial rentals, but it is really tough to decide where to draw the line so it will never happen.

 

[skip-seglipse]

So here's an interesting question - might warrant it's own thread. If the current direct benefits do not entice you to buy direct over resale, what would be? For me, I think a couple of extra fastpasses per person per night staying on direct points would be very tempting.
How about;
Free unlimited Minnie Vans?
Fully-stocked kitchens?
Daily maid service?
Direct DVC exclusive EMH?
Free Disney Plus for when you get home?

Most of these things just seem like they'd raise MFs. Not really a benefit to those who don't need them.

We drive, so I don't need mini-vans

We hardly eat in the room, so I don't need a stocked kitchen. Everyone's dietary needs and preferences are also different, so pre-stocking kitchens is something that will simply lead to loads of food waste, esp. since once a container of milk or juice is opened, you can't leave it for the next family. Offer someone something for "free" and they will take it whether they need it or not.

Same with housekeeping. I don't want or need someone in my room every day. We're not making a huge mess in there.

 

[Lumpy1106]

Right - not suggestion eliminating renting of points completely - but eliminate the ability to regularly rent your points out.

What difference does it make who is using the points?

I think Disney should be ENCOURAGING the rental market. Reason being, without it, anyone who is planning every-other-year trips would be more inclined to "flip" the contracts. The difference in price between loaded and stripped contracts is not that great. You could buy the contract, use the points, sell the stripped contract, wait a year, repeat. It would only cost you MF's on the points you use (and closing costs). That strategy makes no sense if you can rent those points out every-other-year though. IOW - be careful what you wish for.