Multi-Site POS Revision Dated 01/19/19

Maybe a dumb question... But why have use years at all?
I’d assume it is somewhat important to try and balance usage of the banking and borrowing of points. If we went to a single yearly allotment when do you let people bank up to? When do they get to start borrowing? When do they expire (calendar year)? With the use years people get to try and select one that works with their intended travel dates.
 
I’d assume it is somewhat important to try and balance usage of the banking and borrowing of points. If we went to a single yearly allotment when do you let people bank up to? When do they get to start borrowing? When do they expire (calendar year)? With the use years people get to try and select one that works with their intended travel dates.

Are points somewhat evenly distributed across UY for the current resorts? If not, how does UY balance usage/banking/borrowing? With all the recent stunts Disney/DVD have pulled, I can't help but think how this potential change might negatively impact members. I guess at least it's not just resale members getting the shaft this time.

LAX
 
Last edited:
I’d assume it is somewhat important to try and balance usage of the banking and borrowing of points. If we went to a single yearly allotment when do you let people bank up to...
I can only speak to the two other systems I know.

In HGVC all points have January use years and the banking deadline is December 31st. There is no fee to borrow but there is one to bank.

When MVCI first introduced Vacation Club Points (aka Destinations Points/DPs) they did have different use years...but then MVCI fairly quickly decided to make all of them January. September 30th is the banking deadline unless you have 10,000 or more in which case it is October 31st. Interestingly, if you have 10,000 points your banked points have an extra 18 months and if you have 15,000 points they have an extra 24 months. Furthermore, any borrowed cancelled points go back into their original year. There is no fee for borrowing or banking.
 
I don't know how DVC will administer this change (heck, I'm not even sure I understand what they are talking about), but this could make things a lot easier for Members wanting to add on points.

Here is how I hope this feature could work:

Currently, a Member's account can have one or more deeds, but all deeds have to have the same Use Year. If a Member adds a deed with a different UY, then a new Member account must be established. If a Member wants to use points from both accounts to fund a reservation, they have to either 1.) transfer points from one account to the other; or 2.) book two consecutive reservations, using points from one account for the first few days and then points from the second account for the remaining days. Both options create more work and have some drawbacks.

Another issue with the current system occurs when a Member wants to buy an add-on deed. The Member may want to add on 100 September UY points, but DVD doesn't have 1000 points available in that UY. Even if DVD might have a lot of points available in the other UYs, it can't give the Member what they want.

With a Flexible Use Year system, the only change DVC would make is allow a Member's account to have deeds with different Use Years; the deeds no longer need to be for the same UY. Since the deeds are all housed in the same account, there would be no need to transfer points in order to make a reservation that uses points from multiple deeds that don't have the same UY. Also, the Member could make a single reservation even though the points have different UYs.

A Flexible Use Year system would be a great benefit for Members who are trying to add on more points and are currently on a wait-list with DVD. The Member who is looking for 100 September UY points might be on a wait-list for weeks or months. But their wait-list might could through a lot sooner if DVD had 100 August or October UY points available.


I do not see this as a way for DVD to ROFR points that are in one Use Year and then repackage them as points belonging to another Use Year. However, this change would lessen the significance of the Use Year concept. A recurring question posted on these boards involves the pros and cons on owning deeds with different UYs. To an extent, some of the drawbacks to owning different UYs are lessened, if not eliminated.

I doubt DVC would start issuing yearly allotments and totally eliminate Use Years. However, there is nothing magical about having eight Use Years. Why not have six UYs, or four, or 12? Old Key West was the only resort where DVD tried to have an equitable balance of points within the each Use Year. Since then, every resort has had an imbalance in the UY point distribution.

I found this, but I can’t find any old versions to see if this is the change. If this is it, it is open ended how DVC would make it happen behind the scenes. For example, they could sell you a use year they don’t currently have, knowing that they would have to fix the deficit in the future.

Page 6 of Home Resort Rules and Regulations.

7. Increasing Annual Home Resort Vacation Point Allotment with Additional Ownership Interests. Club Members may permanently increase their annual allotment of Home Resort Vacation Points by purchasing an Additional Ownership Interest, or “Add-On.”
a. Additional Ownership Interests may have the same Use Year as previously purchased Ownership Interests.
b. Certain minimum purchases of Additional Ownership Interests will be established, but may change from time-to- time. Club Members will be notified of the current minimum purchase requirements at the time that they request to purchase an Add-On.
c. For sales made by DVD, in the year that the Club Member obtains ownership of the Ownership Interest, Annual Dues on Additional Ownership Interests shall be calculated by prorating the Annual Dues from the later of the date of the purchase agreement, the first day of the Club Member’s Use Year or the date on which the Club Member’s Unit is available for occupancy by Club Members to the end of the calendar year.​
 


I don't know how DVC will administer this change (heck, I'm not even sure I understand what they are talking about), but this could make things a lot easier for Members wanting to add on points.

Here is how I hope this feature could work:

Currently, a Member's account can have one or more deeds, but all deeds have to have the same Use Year. If a Member adds a deed with a different UY, then a new Member account must be established. If a Member wants to use points from both accounts to fund a reservation, they have to either 1.) transfer points from one account to the other; or 2.) book two consecutive reservations, using points from one account for the first few days and then points from the second account for the remaining days. Both options create more work and have some drawbacks.

Another issue with the current system occurs when a Member wants to buy an add-on deed. The Member may want to add on 100 September UY points, but DVD doesn't have 1000 points available in that UY. Even if DVD might have a lot of points available in the other UYs, it can't give the Member what they want.

With a Flexible Use Year system, the only change DVC would make is allow a Member's account to have deeds with different Use Years; the deeds no longer need to be for the same UY. Since the deeds are all housed in the same account, there would be no need to transfer points in order to make a reservation that uses points from multiple deeds that don't have the same UY. Also, the Member could make a single reservation even though the points have different UYs.

A Flexible Use Year system would be a great benefit for Members who are trying to add on more points and are currently on a wait-list with DVD. The Member who is looking for 100 September UY points might be on a wait-list for weeks or months. But their wait-list might could through a lot sooner if DVD had 100 August or October UY points available.


I do not see this as a way for DVD to ROFR points that are in one Use Year and then repackage them as points belonging to another Use Year. However, this change would lessen the significance of the Use Year concept. A recurring question posted on these boards involves the pros and cons on owning deeds with different UYs. To an extent, some of the drawbacks to owning different UYs are lessened, if not eliminated.

I doubt DVC would start issuing yearly allotments and totally eliminate Use Years. However, there is nothing magical about having eight Use Years. Why not have six UYs, or four, or 12? Old Key West was the only resort where DVD tried to have an equitable balance of points within the each Use Year. Since then, every resort has had an imbalance in the UY point distribution.

Thank you, @wdrl, for this potential explanation. I read that statement in Disney Files yesterday afternoon and couldn’t figure out what they were talking about. Your explanation makes sense — I hope you’re right!
 
Those of you who reached out to Yvonne's office how long did it take to get a response? I sent me email on Tuesday and haven't heard anything other than the automated response they received the messaged? Any other time I have contacted Disney I got a response within 48 hrs and almost always within 24 hrs.

4 days. Please let us know if you get a reply!
 


Hmm, I wonder if we “unwashed masses” with multiple resale UY’s would be able to combine them under our “master” membership? I’m a thinkin’ no . But one can hope. We have yet to need the ability to combine so no biggie.
 
Hmm, I wonder if we “unwashed masses” with multiple resale UY’s would be able to combine them under our “master” membership? I’m a thinkin’ no . But one can hope. We have yet to need the ability to combine so no biggie.

Sure they will......... for a price, just like you will be able to convert them to "direct" contracts for a price. I think Dean predicted this pretty well.
 
Those of you who reached out to Yvonne's office how long did it take to get a response?
It was less than 24 hours for the automated response, but it was another 7 days before for her assistant Margaret (remarkably pleasant and responsive) to call me for an appointment.
 
Are points somewhat evenly distributed across UY for the current resorts? If not, how does UY balance usage/banking/borrowing? With all the recent stunts Disney/DVD have pulled, I can't help but think how this potential change might negatively impact members. I guess at least it's not just resale members getting the shaft this time.

LAX

Most of the resorts aren't evenly distributed. This page has UY distribution charts for most of the resorts:

https://dvcnews.com/index.php/dvc-p...ear-distribution-charts-updated-february-2018
 
There is a major difference between the prior restrictions placed on resale purchasers and the new one that prohibits post-January 19, 2019 resale purchasers of the existing 14 resorts from reserving Riviera (and future resorts) and precludes Riviera resale purchasers from using the other DVC resorts. All those previously created restrictions on resale purchasers addressed "incidental benefits," e.g., reserving a Disney hotel with points, discounts for AP's, merchandise and restaurants, and Moonlight Magic nights. Incidental benefits are benefits created by the developer that it can provide or take away at any time and nothing in the POS or its contracts creates a right for any purchaser to have and retain incidental benefits.

The difference now is that DVD is, for the first time, taking aim directly at material rights actually covered by the POS, which includes the site POS and Multi-Site POS, all the disclosures and other statements contained therein, the declarations, bylaws, and various agreements including the DVC Membership Agreement and DVC Resort Agreement. Though DVD can make modifications to some things set out in the POS, it cannot, absent the vote of the actual DVC members, do away with material rights of owners created in the POS.

What has happened is that DVD took the CCV POS documents as a draft for Riviera, modified the declarations and disclosure documents somewhat to reflect that resale purchasers can now be restricted from use of the services and benefits of the Disney Vacation Club, including the DVC Reservation Component, the reservation system that applies to Club Members reserving DVC Resorts other than the one they own. DVD and BVTC then, via a new DVC Resort Agreement for Riviera, made substantial changes and deletions in relation to all previously existing DVC Resort Agreements, and added new terms which prohibit post Jan 19, 2019 resale purchasers from ever using the DVC reservation Component to reserve Riviera . The issue is simply whether DVD and BVTC could enter into and enforce such a DVC Resort Agreement. An examination of the terms of the prior POS's and applicable agreements shows it is not a valid agreement. The following uses references to the BWV POS documents but others are the same in relevant respects, although applicable section numbers differ.

Some Key Definitions: the documents in various places (including disclosure documents, declarations, and the DVC Resort Agreemen) define a "Club Member" as the Owner of record of an Ownership Interest in a DVC Resort. An Owner is defined as the owner of any unit in a DVC Resort. Neither definition excludes any resale purchasers. A "DVC Resort" means each resort entitled to access to the DVC Reservation Component. The “DVC Reservation Component” is the exchange reservation component operated by BVTC through which Vacation Homes in any DVC Resort can be reserved with DVC Vacation Points. “DVC Vacation Points” are Home Resort Points that are converted to Disney Vacation Points for the purpose of reserving a DVC Resort other than the one owned by the Club Member.

Club Member: The documents expand on who a Club Member is and the rights of a Club Member. Membership in the Disney Vacation Club is deemed to be an appurtenance to every Ownership Interest. Upon recording of a deed, the Club Member is “automatically entitled to enjoy the services and benefits associated with membership in the Club.” If a member transfers his Ownership Interest to another, the transferee automatically becomes a Club Member. (Declarations §5.2.) if DVD fails to exercise its right of first refusal in a resale and a sale is completed, the transferee automatically becomes a Club Member. In fact, that resale purchaser has no right to turn down or attempt to exclude himself from Club Membership. (Id §13.1.) Thus, by the terms of POS every resale purchaser is an owner and is included as a Club Member, and is entitled to enjoy the services and benefits of the Club. Whenever the POS and agreements use the term “Club Member, “ the term automatically includes resale purchasers.

Use of the DVC Reservation Component: The services provided by the Disney Vacation Club include the use of the DVC Reservation Component. (Definition of Disney Vacation Club in Multi-Site POS.), Every “Owner” (Dec.§12.12b) and “all Club Members” (Multi-Site POS §III.3.b(2)) are entitled to use the DVC Reservation Component to make reservations at any non-owned DVC Resort using Disney Vacation Points. The Member’s use rights are ones applicable on a first come first served basis subject to the limitation that results from the home resort priority period, (Id. §4.)

Adding a New DVC Resort
: The addition of any new DVC Resort “will result in the addition of new Club Members” from that resort [which as noted above is defined to include all resale purchasers] who will have the opportunity to make reservations for the use of Vacation Homes at any DVC Resort. Moreover, the addition “will afford existing Club Members” the opportunity to reserve at the added resort. (Id.§III.3.6(b and DVC resort Agreement §6.4)

BWV DVC Resort Agreement
(which is.substantially the same as others except Riviera): The agreement is entered into by the association on behalf of “all Club Members.” BVTC agrees “to arrange for the assignment and possession and use of Disney’s Boardwalk Villas Vacation Homes by Club Members from other DVC Resorts and the possession and use of Vacation Homes at other DVC Resorts by Club Members from Disney’s Boardwalk Villas through the DVC Reservation Component.” (§§ 2.1, 2.4.) Again, “Club Members” includes all resale purchasers. DVD enters into the agreement to acknowledge its consent and acceptance of all the terms and conditions of the agreement. (§2.2),

DVD and the association represent and warrant that “each Club Member” has the right to use his Ownership Interest in accordance with the Disney Boardwalk Villa Documents (§4.2), which documents, of course, provide that every BWV Owner and Club Member, including all resale purchasers, can use the DVC Reservation Component to reserve other DVC Resorts. A “Club Member” can participate in the DVC Reservation Component by using Home Resort Vacation Points as Disney Vacation Points to make a reservation at other DVC Resorts. (§5.2.)

As to adding new DVC Resorts, BVTC has the right to determine if a resort should be added as a DVC Resort. “In the event BVTC associates one or more additional resorts as DVC Resorts, the DVC Resort Agreement executed to effect such association shall be substantially similar to this Agreement in all material respects.” (§6-1). The “Club Members” of the new resort will have the opportunity to use Vacation Homes through use of the DVC Reservation Component under the same terms and conditions that are applicable to existing Club Members. In making a decision to add a new resort, BVTC must act “in the bests interests of the Club Members taken as a whole with respect to the Club Members’ opportunity to use and enjoy all Vacation homes and related facilities made available through the DVC Reservation Component.” Factors it must consider include the availability for Club Members to use and enjoy the added resort. §6-2.b.)

The Multi-Site POS points out four things DVD can do when it develops a new resort: (a) it can seek to add that resort as a DVC Resort via a DVC Resort Agreement under which “the new Club Members will have the right to make reservations at existing DVC Resorts along with existing Club Members”; (b) it can keep the new resort separate from the existing DVC Resorts and create an independent exchange program for use by the new resort to trade with the DVC resorts, but no members of the new resort will have the right to use the DVC Reservation Component; (c)it can create a separate vacation club and plan. without making accommodations available to the existing DVC, in which case existing Club members will not use the new resort; (d) it can operate the new resort as a hotel, in which case Club members will have no right to use the new resort. (Multi-Site POS §3.6.f.) Noteworthy is that option (a) does not reserve any ability to enter into a DVC Resort Agreement that prohibits resale Club Members from using the DVC Reservation Component.

The combination of terms leads to the conclusion that DVD and BVTC cannot do what they have done, which is to have a new DVC Resort Agreement for Riviera that does not contain the same material terms as prior agreements and is directly contrary to the rights of Club Members, which includes all resale purchasers, to use the DVC Reservation Component. Moreover, Riviera cannot be a DVC Resort unless its Club Members, both new and resale, have the same rights to use the DVC Reservation Component as existing Club members. Both BVTC and DVD appear to have just decided to ignore the rights set out in the prior POS’s and agreements and create a new DVC Resort Agreement that prohibits resale Club Members from using the DVC Reservation Component.

So if you exclude from the definition of "illegality" BVTC's breach of prior agreements and violation of its fiduciary duties, DVD's intentional interference with the POS and contracts applicable to the existing DVC resorts and their associations and members, and DVD's attempt to effectively amend, without an actual member vote, the material terms of prior POS's and agreements applicable to the Club Members of the 14 existing DVC resorts, then yes, maybe you can conclude it is not illegal.

DVD could possibly have accomplished what it is attempting to do by setting up a new DVC separate from the existing one and then creating some kind of exchange program between the new DVC and the old DVC that allowed trading between the different DVC programs with the restrictions it created for Riviera. That is actually contemplated as a possibility in the existing POS's. But doing that would have required more expensive legal work than was devoted to this change which consisted of just taking the prior CCV POS and agreements as a draft and making some language changes to reach the current result.

As to a lawsuit, it is something to consider. There is, of course, the issue that existing members are not immediately affected and will not suffer actual harm unless they buy resales in the future or go to sell what they currently have and resale prices have diminished as a result. You also have the issue that even if you beat DVD, it could possibly fix the problem by starting over again and doing a separate DVC 2. So you need to weigh whether an immediate suit is needed and would be ultimately effective in doing away with the new resale restrictions.

Thank you, Drusba, for making things so clear. Unfortunately, I think Disney is just going to continue to try to run roughshod over the rights of DVC members. And if they do that, then I think a lawsuit is inevitable. I'm not sure that the lawsuit needs to progress immediately, but eventually, it looks like it is going to happen. And I think Disney will lose that lawsuit, high powered lawyers or not. Will Disney then need to pay any punitive damages and make some type of Recompense?
 
This, right here, is what I believe is the crux of the issue. The brain trust at DVC has gotten into their heads that resale hurts direct sales. Obviously every contract that is purchased resale must have been purchased direct at some point. Further, they have the ability to ROFR any resale so there is a never-ending pool of direct points they can sell. They may have gotten some complaints from owners who really are selfish in that they think that it's hard for them to book, so it must be easy for resales to book. This is patently false but it seems to be the meme that has sway right now.

We as a community must disabuse them of this notion and put the correct notion in their head. Namely that they created the current mess by building more and more resorts and telling everyone they can book any of the DVC resorts. Perhaps they didn't recognize that people will book cheap rooms first (duh!).

Thank you to drusba for doing the yeoman's work of putting the pieces together for the rest of us. Lots of calls are in order telling them in no uncertain terms that resales are NOT their problem

Actually, HERE IS THE PROBLEM. Disney, being a greedy, rapacious company, has decided to pursue profits above all. This has led them on a never ending spiral of increasing prices and increasing costs. But they have gone too far. They have really REALLY started to price the middle class out of Disney World. This will now give them an ever shrinking customer base. Meanwhile, many of those middle class people who want to visit Disney World are looking around for a cost effective way to do so. And low and behold, what do they see? DVC. But, wait, being middle class and wanting an economical alternative, they decide to go with Resale, most of the time, if they know about it. But then Disney says, "Why did you not come to me first?" Well, Disney, blame your own prices. It's not the resale market that is having the greatest effect on DVC, it is the fact that Disney just does not know where to stop. They are now in the position of the spoiled, lost person who does things that are bad for them, because there is no one to really tell them no.
 
For sure some resale buyers would have bought direct if there was no resale market, but the opposite is also true, how many direct buyers would not have bought if there wasn't a good resale market.

Clearly, resales DO have an effect on Direct sales. They both hurt it and help it. Hurt Direct sales by taking money that MIGHT otherwise have gone to a direct purchase. But HELP Direct sales by creating good will, giving people a 'safety valve' in case their circumstances change and they need to get out, and by providing 'advertising' when the Resale owners share with their family members, friends, or rent their points out, thus demonstrating the value of the points to people. ALL of those things help, as do many other things about Resales. And how many people included calculations of possible resale value in their original purchase decision? I certainly did. I started out to buy 200 points or so at Poly, and I decided to do it Direct. But, upon consideration of the probable value of Resale of my contracts, I decided to go with 325 points. And then I had them divide that into four contracts of 75 points each, and one contract of 25 points. This was SPECIFICALLY with the idea of resales in mind. (I probably should have done six contracts of 50 points, instead of four of 75 points, but, oh well.) I'm certainly sure I'm not the only person who considered the possibility of Resales causing INCREASED VALUE of my DVC points. If the strong resale market did not exist, I definitely would have gone with less points, and, in fact, probably wouldn't have purchased at all. I would have just continued to vacation in the Value resorts and the Moderate resorts, if not for DVC. And I would have been happy. So Resale value helped me buy Direct.

So, what it comes down to, is HOW MUCH does the healthy Resale market help DVC and how much does it hurt it? I'm convinced the net value of the healthy Resale market and the fact that so many people are able to get into DVC because of it, is actually a big benefit to DVC overall. So, once again, instead of looking at ways to hurt the Resale market, in order to make their own Direct sales look better, they actually should be looking at other ways to just increase the attractiveness of Direct sales, in and of themselves. And quit raising prices! Let inflation catch up a bit.
 
The standard piece of advice that has been given on these boards is that buying direct makes sense for smaller point contracts and when "buy where you want to stay" equals the current resort for sale. There's not a resale market for new resorts at first and the price is typically too close to direct when the first contracts DO show up on the market. And, for now at least, history has shown that a new resort holds its value over time. So, buying in at a new resort direct has been a really good deal over time, despite the increase in pricing.

It's why I bought Poly direct. It's our monorail version of "buy where you want to stay" and so, we bought it direct when it went on sale.

Now? I've heard at least 4 different Disney and DVC podcasts advise against buying Riviera because the resale policy makes it too risky an "investment". The standard notion that a resort will hold its value doesn't apply to Riviera until these changes actually shake out. This is a message that is getting airplay and potential new buyers will hear it. Maybe not every pixie dusted new buyer, but certainly the exact buyer that DVC is trying to influence with these changes.

It's not just that these changes are mean-spirited. They're a mistake; and will be shown to be bad for business. DVC built its reputation on being something different and the price of resales shows that difference: it's not just some timeshare that you'll be lucky to dump off for pennies on the the dollar - it's Disney and worth every penny!

They should be proud of their resale values. If they'd stick their heads up out our their silos, they'd see that every contract churn brings in new owners, happy to spend thousands and thousands of dollars before they out grow it ---- only to sell to new owners coming to spend thousands of thousands of dollars. Talk about a money tree??!! DVC should be happy for the parent company that their resale market is unlike anything else anywhere in the timeshare industry.

The idea that they'd want to tamp that down should be considered a form of business insanity. The resale market might not make money for DVD but it's a printing press for Disney. I know that I've coughed up thousands of dollars over the last 5 years (to both Disney AND DVD). And it all started with a mouse . . . and my first contract, a resale contract.

DVC making decisions to stay "in line with industry standards"? The hell you say.
 
Last edited:
Their assumption is that the further they differentiate from resale, the more direct sales they will get. They are probably right about that.

I'm not at all sure that further 'Differentiation' between Direct from Disney sales and Resales of DVC will lead to MORE Direct sales. Why? Because I think Disney has gone too high in their price. I don't think they CAN differentiate enough to make it worthwhile, as long as the price differential produces so much value on the side of Resales. (In other words, as I've said before, if they want more people to shift from Resales to Direct, then they need to INCREASE the cost of Resales, so there is less value there, in Resales, on a dollar per dollar basis.)

I think saying your value has been diminished because the restrictions is difficult.

I don't think it would be difficult to prove at all, OR to prove that a devaluation of Resale value is exactly what Disney planned on doing. All we need to do is file a legal motion compelling Disney to turn over their emails, meeting notes and documentation, where they clearly discussed those things.
 
Last edited:
I'm not at all sure that further 'Differentiation' between Direct from Disney sales and Resales of DVC will lead to MORE Direct sales. Why? Because I think Disney has gone too high in their price. I don't think they CAN differentiate enough to make it worthwhile, as long as the price differential produces so much value on the side of Resales. (In other words, as I've said before, if they want more people to shift from Resales to Direct, then they need to INCREASE the cost of Resales, so there is less value there, in Resales, on a dollar per dollar basis.)



I don't think it would be difficult to prove at all, OR to prove that a devaluation of Resale value is exactly what Disney planned on doing. All we need to do is file a legal motion compelling Disney to turn over their emails, meeting notes and documentation, where they clearly discussed those things.

Maybe Disney have another approach in mind for the coming resale buyers including Rivera. "If you want to be able to trade out/into of Rivera you need to buy xx number of direct points and we will in return make all of your points qualify" Or pay xx $$ to make your points qualify.

That will somewhat drive down the resale prices of Rivera and any other upcoming resorts and at the same time give Disney the option to ROFR cheap contracts and those that they dont ROFR the new owners will pay to have qualifying points.
 
DVC making decisions to stay "in line with industry standards"?
BTW, only allowing Riviera resale buyers to book at Riviera (never mind an 8 months window or no RCI) goes way, way beyond "timeshare industry standards".

HGVC treats resale buyers the same except for 'Elite privileges'...which consist of the ability to convert HGVC points to Hilton Honors (at a ruinous rate), a few waived fees, and access to 4-11 'partner' resorts depending on level.

MVCI treats weeks bought through resale the same as those bought direct except for the ability to trade for Marriott Rewards Points (excuse me...Bonvoy points). And resale points are treated *exactly* the same except for the initial fees to 'activate' them upon purchase.
 
There will probably be a fee paid to DVD to be able to trade into other resorts at 7 months. Maybe as little as $5pp or as high as $20pp. They want a piece of the resale pie they feel they’re missing. We should all know very soon.
 
There will probably be a fee paid to DVD to be able to trade into other resorts at 7 months. Maybe as little as $5pp or as high as $20pp. They want a piece of the resale pie they feel they’re missing. We should all know very soon.

if they do, you can count on that fee going up YOY.

Have in mind that the fee will be payable by direct buyers too not just resales buyers.
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!













facebook twitter
Top