What happens IF Riviera restriction are lifted?

[Sandisw]

Fascinating. Were you able to get that deal because you were on a cruise? Everything I saw about VGF was that it started at $145 but you could get an owner's discount of $5 per point. I balked because of the price because apparently I am super cheap. But at $125 I probably would have bought. Had I only known.

It could have been a special. It was why I jumped at it. We had just stayed one night before and I fell in love. We did the presentation on the cruise and when they offered that deal, I signed right away!!

 

[rspencer38]

It could have been a special. It was why I jumped at it. We had just stayed one night before and I fell in love. We did the presentation on the cruise and when they offered that deal, I signed right away!!

First I've ever heard of that price point for VGF. Sounds like you nabbed a special price.

 

[Spark65]

Ok, thank you for the responses and no I don't expect everyone to agree with me nor can I quote them all. I will say as far as planning ahead Disney sells you a place for 50 years. If you actually do the math and stay at the resort every year you will save money, that's fact and I believe the reason for buying in the first place.

If you become a blue card member you will get discounts on purchases as well. I don't really see what more else you need . You get a discount on lodging, passes, purchases and don't forget free parking if you have a car, but hey just not enough for me seems to be the same montra.

Then the reselling thing when I buy a car (or anything for that matter) and use it for ten years I don't expect to sell it for more than what I paid but some DVC members think they should.

I could sell my Poly points for more than I paid but that's not why I bought it I bought to be able to visit more often and save some money as a frequent user and I like Poly. There are people who read these threads and I don't think they should be put off because a few feel they don't get enough perks or free things to make it worthwhile even after the savings they get.

 

[Spark65]

Absolutely true. The difference is, when that prospective buyer bought PVB, VGF, they bought into a points system that afforded them a lot of flexibility. If they had to sell, they could sell that same flexibility to the next owner. Many Disney timeshare owners would never have considered ever owning a timeshare save for that flexibility.

That was a very different product than what Disney is selling today.

Absolutely true again. I am not arguing otherwise. In fact, my argument is that the restrictions are in fact DAMAGING the direct proposition which, as owners, we all need to thrive to sustain and support the system. If Disney goes down the path of reducing resale value to industry standard in the short-sighted interest of increasing direct sales, the future of that ecosystem is threatened.

Every owner direct or resale, no matter how long they plan to hold onto their timeshare should be concerned about these restrictions.

You know Bing buying DVC is a luxury item like taking a vacation it's not needed and more important things come first it's called responsibilities. If you are using rainy day money to pay for it well too bad for you..

 

[Bing Showei]

You know Bing buying DVC is a luxury item like taking a vacation it's not needed and more important things come first it's called responsibilities. If you are using rainy day money to pay for it well too bad for you..

Hi, Sparks65. I’m sorry if you were feeling your decision to buy Riviera was being attacked around here, or if you felt there was a need to vociferously defend that choice.

I’ll admit that even as a non-buyer myself, I can see how a lot of the “never Riviera” narrative or the “this makes no financial sense” reasoning can leave buyers like yourself feeling defensive, so I honestly do understand your reaction.

I would suggest that rather than attempting to belittle people with your sympathies for “nickel and diming” their vacations, or your less subtle intimations of personal financial irresponsibility on my part because I don’t share your rosy view of a do-no-wrong-Disney, that you maybe spend a little more time on these boards reading what people have to say and why they’re saying it before lashing out because someone is yucking your yum (my seven-year-old taught me that one).

You are clearly a big Disney fan, and I applaud that given all the reasons Disney has furnished to challenge that under the Chapek regime. I feel like your counterpoint voice would be a welcomed one here, but it’s challenging to take you seriously when it feels like you’re just insulting people for lack of an ability to better articulate your reasoning.

 

[emchen]

<snip>...because someone is yucking your yum (my seven-year-old taught me that one)<snip>

Love that! I'm gonna go teach my 45 year-old wife that!

Seriously though, I'm also new to DVC and bought DRR direct in July. I am with the consensus that the new resale restrictions are, in general, a liability for the DRR owner if/when they need to sell. Through research, and realization of how I would use DVC, I concluded that DRR would be the first contract I would buy and the last contract I would sell. Yup, I knew that and I knew it wouldn't be the only one.

So I bought Aulani first!...originally put a huge write up, but decided to place elsewhere: https://www.disboards.com/threads/exclusive-use-points-the-thread.3763742/page-2#post-61122486

 

[Spark65]

Hi, Sparks65. I’m sorry if you were feeling your decision to buy Riviera was being attacked around here, or if you felt there was a need to vociferously defend that choice.

I’ll admit that even as a non-buyer myself, I can see how a lot of the “never Riviera” narrative or the “this makes no financial sense” reasoning can leave buyers like yourself feeling defensive, so I honestly do understand your reaction.

I would suggest that rather than attempting to belittle people with your sympathies for “nickel and diming” their vacations, or your less subtle intimations of personal financial irresponsibility on my part because I don’t share your rosy view of a do-no-wrong-Disney, that you maybe spend a little more time on these boards reading what people have to say and why they’re saying it before lashing out because someone is yucking your yum (my seven-year-old taught me that one).

You are clearly a big Disney fan, and I applaud that given all the reasons Disney has furnished to challenge that under the Chapek regime. I feel like your counterpoint voice would be a welcomed one here, but it’s challenging to take you seriously when it feels like you’re just insulting people for lack of an ability to better articulate your reasoning.

Sorry Bing never felt I was attacked just felt an opposing view vs the so many negative views was needed and expected responses. I've never felt threatened by a response BTW and I gladly appreciate them.

Also, you were the one bringing up the fact that people may come into misfortunes and need to sell. I can honestly tell you Bing anyone buying a timeshare with money they can't throw away is a recipe for disaster. A timeshare is a luxury and most luxuries are not meant to prop up your portfolio.

So, all told I do find it quite funny how there are those who swear they will never buy at Riviera but when Reflections opens they will be all in. Do they realize that it will probably cost more and will have all the same restrictions they rail against? Boy my head hurts.

 

[Bing Showei]

Also, you were the one bringing up the fact that people may come into misfortunes and need to sell. I can honestly tell you Bing anyone buying a timeshare with money they can't throw away is a recipe for disaster. A timeshare is a luxury and most luxuries are not meant to prop up your portfolio.

OK, honestly, I was struggling to figure out a good counterpoint to this, but I can't in large part because I agree that, as owners buying in, we each have the personal responsibility to understand what we are buying. No arguments there.

But in the same way that we should look at our Disney timeshare as a sunk cost, that austere view of the product should extend to the acceptance that technically, and more important, legally, Disney could tell every last direct Riviera owner, starting today, you will only be able to book at Riviera. And I could rightfully say to you, "I can honestly tell you Spark anyone buying a direct Riviera timeshare with any other expectation besides staying only at Riviera is a recipe for disaster."

Your ability to trade out to another resort by way of the BVTC is not guaranteed. Your four month booking advantage is not guaranteed. Your Skyliner is not guaranteed. Epcot is not guaranteed.

You know what is? 30 day home booking advantage at Riviera. That's all. This of course is not unique to Riviera. It exists in every last Disney timeshare contract sold since 1991.

So accepting that we each have a personal responsibility to fully understand what we are buying when we buy a Disney timeshare, and for the sake of continuing this discourse, maybe we can agree that in practice, neither of these things (sunk cost, nothing but resort rights) have proven to be the product Disney sells, markets, or that we own.

Let's then look at the restrictions that I take issue with, and how I view the Riviera restrictions as being anti-Riviera-owner. More specifically, I see it as anti-direct-Riviera-owner. A direct Riviera owner will buy one product, but will not be able to convey that same product to another owner should they need to sell. In fact the restrictions hurt direct owners far more than Riviera resale owners who will be able to buy and convey the same exact product to another owner when they go to sell.

The underlying justification of these restrictions that I have heard directly from Disney has been some variations of:

"Disney doesn't think it's fair that you pay X, and another person comes in, undercuts that paying only Y for what you own."
"Disney wants to prevent resale owners from buying cheap points, making booking a challenge for owners who buy at their own home resort to stay there."
"Disney doesn't want resale owners abusing the system."

But that's all marketing talk and a cute little way to turn resale owners into a convenient common enemy for direct owners.

Most owners are not looking to buy and flip. Most owners are not looking to buy, hold, use, and sell for a profit. In fact, data posted on these boards suggest most owners haven't sold and that resale owners represent just a small <10% share of ownership.

So why the restrictions, then? My guide in one of our longer conversations said something surprisingly honest and refreshing. She said, "Disney doesn't want people making money off of DVC. It's meant to be purchased and enjoyed. Something you hold onto."

While I can appreciate that sentiment, as an owner, that means nothing to me. You just devalued my ownership. At the end of the day, it's about Disney wanting to be the only entity that makes money from their timeshare which is 100% their absolute right and I can accept that.

But it is not only disingenuous to couch this in "ownership interest," it sets up a whole contingency of owners to be scapegoated and blamed for the ills of the system. And to that end, these restrictions were created to serve only Disney and no owner should be happy about them.

 

[Sandisw]

Sorry Bing never felt I was attacked just felt an opposing view vs the so many negative views was needed and expected responses. I've never felt threatened by a response BTW and I gladly appreciate them.

Also, you were the one bringing up the fact that people may come into misfortunes and need to sell. I can honestly tell you Bing anyone buying a timeshare with money they can't throw away is a recipe for disaster. A timeshare is a luxury and most luxuries are not meant to prop up your portfolio.

So, all told I do find it quite funny how there are those who swear they will never buy at Riviera but when Reflections opens they will be all in. Do they realize that it will probably cost more and will have all the same restrictions they rail against? Boy my head hurts.

I think the reason you have some who say they would buy Reflections and not RIV is due to personal choice. I could be one of those people. Granted, the resale restriction will probably still be there, but as pointed out, the only thing you are ever guaranteed is booking at your home resort so if one buys, they should be very happy with what they own.

I loved the concept and location of Reflections. So, I could see being willing to invest in that. Again, I own 800 points so I have plenty to stay everywhere.

 

[ELMC]

A direct Riviera owner will buy one product, but will not be able to convey that same product to another owner should they need to sell. In fact the restrictions hurt direct owners far more than Riviera resale owners who will be able to buy and convey the same exact product to another owner when they go to sell.

This exactly. Up until this point we have been dancing around the subject, but I think you nailed it with this description. There have been multiple rounds of restrictions and for the most part, we have shaken them off. But this one fundamentally changes the core elements of the product and therefore, deserves to be looked at differently.

Most owners are not looking to buy and flip. Most owners are not looking to buy, hold, use, and sell for a profit. In fact, data posted on these boards suggest most owners haven't sold and that resale owners represent just a small <10% share of ownership.

I'm not sure we have established this. I'm waiting for someone much smarter than me to do a deep dive here and get us something more solid than the "facts" people like me have been throwing around on this topic.

So why the restrictions, then? My guide in one of our longer conversations said something surprisingly honest and refreshing. She said, "Disney doesn't want people making money off of DVC. It's meant to be purchased and enjoyed. Something you hold onto."

I actually agree with this sentiment. I would prefer that it not be a commodity that can be traded, manipulated, and capitalized upon. But it can, and I don't think they can change that other than to make the restrictions so punitive that the product has no value on the resale market. And just think about how that would go over. For what it's worth, it's their greed that has been a large contributing factor to the environment of DVC being something that people could make money on. The inflation and price variances they have put into place have contributed to the explosion of resale activity in recent years. If they didn't jack up the price of VGC to $260 per point then resale may have never hit the $200 mark and I may have never sold. It's disingenuous for them to deny any culpability in all of this.

But it is not only disingenuous to couch this in "ownership interest," it sets up a whole contingency of owners to be scapegoated and blamed for the ills of the system. And to that end, these restrictions were created to serve only Disney and no owner should be happy about them.

Sadly, I agree. While I do think they should be looking out for their owners, I think they are only doing so in ways that looks out for themselves more. There are lots of changes they could make that could benefit owners that they would not benefit from - we don't see those being put into place now do we. The fact of the matter is that Disney came to the timeshare game late, and they are still relatively new at this. They made a lot of mistakes upon inception and they're trying to manage them all out now. The creation of the L14 vs. new resorts is the starting point for the fix of the system, and as resorts fall off it will become much cleaner. If they had to do it all over again, they should have created BWV to be a completely separate entity from OKW. That was the opening of Pandora's box that has us in the mess we are in today.

 

[DougEMG]

This exactly. Up until this point we have been dancing around the subject, but I think you nailed it with this description. There have been multiple rounds of restrictions and for the most part, we have shaken them off. But this one fundamentally changes the core elements of the product and therefore, deserves to be looked at differently.


I'm not sure we have established this. I'm waiting for someone much smarter than me to do a deep dive here and get us something more solid than the "facts" people like me have been throwing around on this topic.


I actually agree with this sentiment. I would prefer that it not be a commodity that can be traded, manipulated, and capitalized upon. But it can, and I don't think they can change that other than to make the restrictions so punitive that the product has no value on the resale market. And just think about how that would go over. For what it's worth, it's their greed that has been a large contributing factor to the environment of DVC being something that people could make money on. The inflation and price variances they have put into place have contributed to the explosion of resale activity in recent years. If they didn't jack up the price of VGC to $260 per point then resale may have never hit the $200 mark and I may have never sold. It's disingenuous for them to deny any culpability in all of this.



Sadly, I agree. While I do think they should be looking out for their owners, I think they are only doing so in ways that looks out for themselves more. There are lots of changes they could make that could benefit owners that they would not benefit from - we don't see those being put into place now do we. The fact of the matter is that Disney came to the timeshare game late, and they are still relatively new at this. They made a lot of mistakes upon inception and they're trying to manage them all out now. The creation of the L14 vs. new resorts is the starting point for the fix of the system, and as resorts fall off it will become much cleaner. If they had to do it all over again, they should have created BWV to be a completely separate entity from OKW. That was the opening of Pandora's box that has us in the mess we are in today.

If Disney's goal is to follow industry standards and become like every other timeshare company, how many people would have bought from them?

Personally I find the standard timeshare industry to be a completely 1 sided deal with all the benefits going to the developer and customers being the goose that is being plucked. I would NEVER buy a timeshare direct when the vast majority of them are worth pennies on the dollar as soon as you walk out the door.

Being close to 60, what I am going to do with a 50 year lease timeshare? I'm certainly not going to live long enough to use it. How many people are really going to go to Disney for 50 years? You really need a resale market for people to sell when they no longer want, need or can afford the product.

With the direction Disney is going, I don't think I would buy in today and I am constantly thinking if I should be getting out now while the getting is still good!