Why Do So Many Hate DVC

[Sir Goofy]

The big difference with passholders and DVC members, is those DL passholders can all walk into guest relations and say fix this or were not renewing our passes, DL will listen. DVC memberships are renewed every 50 years, no one really cares if they're not happy, they already paid for it.

As for staffing resources it's not always about money. Just a few years ago Disney was really having a hard time filling positions, it's better now but when the economy turns around and people start looking for real jobs there will be a problem. They have in the past closed QSR and other smaller things due to staffing shortages.

Simply put, your wrong.. If DVC members arent satisfied, we have the right to sell our membership, which Disney does'nt want. More properties available in the resale market drives down the price, and makes it more and more difficult for DVC to sell their new properties. DVC cannot take ROFR on all properties being sold, so they have no controle over the resale market diluting their sales. I have personally seen things improved with DVC based on feedback from myself and my friends who are members. Disney does listen folks- your feedback, surveys, etc do not simply fall into the abyss (except for DL passholders, apparently?)

One other thought, you seem hung up on the fact that TDO just wants to sell as many memberships as possible, and then is guaranteed 50 years of visits whether we show up or not.. the math doesnt work! Lets ASSUME that each member bought 300 points (a VERY generous estimation I feel) at an average of $110 per point. This would equate to an initial investment of $33,000. Divide thatover the 50 year membership, and that is $660 per year in revenue that WDW could benefit from... now, lets for arguments sake say that there are 400,000 members, that totals $264 million per year... Disney resorts reported $10.7b in revenues for FY2009, so, DVC, if you annualized the initial investment in the purchase contributed %2.47 of the FY2009 revenues... I would say that they are counting on us coming to WDW and spending money beyond our initial investment!!!

 

[ddbowdoin]

Simply put, your wrong.. If DVC members arent satisfied, we have the right to sell our membership, which Disney does'nt want. More properties available in the resale market drives down the price, and makes it more and more difficult for DVC to sell their new properties. DVC cannot take ROFR on all properties being sold, so they have no controle over the resale market diluting their sales. I have personally seen things improved with DVC based on feedback from myself and my friends who are members. Disney does listen folks- your feedback, surveys, etc do not simply fall into the abyss (except for DL passholders, apparently?)

One other thought, you seem hung up on the fact that TDO just wants to sell as many memberships as possible, and then is guaranteed 50 years of visits whether we show up or not.. the math doesnt work! Lets ASSUME that each member bought 300 points (a VERY generous estimation I feel) at an average of $110 per point. This would equate to an initial investment of $33,000. Divide thatover the 50 year membership, and that is $660 per year in revenue that WDW could benefit from... now, lets for arguments sake say that there are 400,000 members, that totals $264 million per year... Disney resorts reported $10.7b in revenues for FY2009, so, DVC, if you annualized the initial investment in the purchase contributed %2.47 of the FY2009 revenues... I would say that they are counting on us coming to WDW and spending money beyond our initial investment!!!

and that is why math doesnt lie, I love it... well, tack in some maintence fees to, correct?

 

[s8film40]

Simply put, your wrong.. If DVC members arent satisfied, we have the right to sell our membership, which Disney does'nt want. More properties available in the resale market drives down the price, and makes it more and more difficult for DVC to sell their new properties. DVC cannot take ROFR on all properties being sold, so they have no controle over the resale market diluting their sales. I have personally seen things improved with DVC based on feedback from myself and my friends who are members. Disney does listen folks- your feedback, surveys, etc do not simply fall into the abyss (except for DL passholders, apparently?)

While yes if you sell your membership it could dilute the market, and Disney doesn't want this to happen on a large scale. However if you decide that your unhappy with Disney and no longer want to be a customer, you cannot do that until you find another customer to replace you. So the marketing and sales resources needed to gain a new customer due to losing one are put out by you. Very few business models have it that easy.

One other thought, you seem hung up on the fact that TDO just wants to sell as many memberships as possible, and then is guaranteed 50 years of visits whether we show up or not.. the math doesnt work! Lets ASSUME that each member bought 300 points (a VERY generous estimation I feel) at an average of $110 per point. This would equate to an initial investment of $33,000. Divide thatover the 50 year membership, and that is $660 per year in revenue that WDW could benefit from... now, lets for arguments sake say that there are 400,000 members, that totals $264 million per year... Disney resorts reported $10.7b in revenues for FY2009, so, DVC, if you annualized the initial investment in the purchase contributed %2.47 of the FY2009 revenues... I would say that they are counting on us coming to WDW and spending money beyond our initial investment!!!

Yeah I don't think they really care about the income from DVC, it's important yes but it is far outweighed by how much will be spent when members return every year to use their points. Now yes you can trade them but all that means is that someone else will coming to WDW in your place, maybe even someone who will spend more since it could be their first time. It's a win win for Disney. Sell it, trade, ultimately it doesn't really matter someone will be occupying that vacation spot guaranteed for 50 years.

 

[dizzney]

While yes if you sell your membership it could dilute the market, and Disney doesn't want this to happen on a large scale. However if you decide that your unhappy with Disney and no longer want to be a customer, you cannot do that until you find another customer to replace you. So the marketing and sales resources needed to gain a new customer due to losing one are put out by you. Very few business models have it that easy.



Yeah I don't think they really care about the income from DVC, it's important yes but it is far outweighed by how much will be spent when members return every year to use their points. Now yes you can trade them but all that means is that someone else will coming to WDW in your place, maybe even someone who will spend more since it could be their first time. It's a win win for Disney. Sell it, trade, ultimately it doesn't really matter someone will be occupying that vacation spot guaranteed for 50 years.

Repeat customers are the basis of WDW, they want us back, we want ot go back, we spend money and probably over time more money than the customers that dont have DVC. And we recommend that friends try out DVC too, we've had a number of friends who tried it, liked it and bought it.

We love our DVC, and so do our children, and WDW loves that we return frequently, spend money and have fun.

 

[Sir Goofy]

and that is why math doesnt lie, I love it... well, tack in some maintence fees to, correct?

Maintenance fees are nominal, when compared to the initial investment, and our maintenance dues go directly back to our home resort, not into the TDO revenue report.

 

[Pioneer Hall]

Maintenance fees are nominal, when compared to the initial investment, and our maintenance dues go directly back to our home resort, not into the TDO revenue report.

I would say they are nominal to the original investment because you will end up spending more in Maintenance Fees over the course of the contract than the original purchase. But like any piece of real estate you own, you have to pay for it's upkeep.

 

[Buried20KLeague]

and that is why math doesnt lie, I love it... well, tack in some maintence fees to, correct?

Math might not lie, but it certainly can be used selectively to prove whatever point you might be trying to make.

And maintenance fees should hardly be considered "tacked in"... You're going to spend more in maintenance than you spend on membership. In his 300 point scenario, you're going to spend well over $50,000 just in maintenance... Maybe MUCH more than that, if the maintenance fees spike over time... Which Disney has the right to do, to a point.

Not to say the maintenance fees add to Disney's bottom line on DVC directly... But it would be awfully naieve to think they don't INdirectly contribute... Members are paying all of Disney's costs to run a property. So that property is basically FREE to Disney. That adds to the bottom line. They're making money off the MF's members pay by not having to spend their own.

But certainly maintenance fees need to be accounted for when deciding if DVC is right for you... I'd even go so far as to say that it needs to be the biggest factor in a decision. I'd guess that the majority of DVC forclosures have been due to peoples' inability to pay their MF's, and not thinking all of that out ahead of time. MF's certainly aren't a focus of the guide's sales pitch when you're in there now, are they??

 

[slappy magoo]

Not to say the maintenance fees add to Disney's bottom line on DVC directly... But it would be awfully naieve to think they don't INdirectly contribute... Members are paying all of Disney's costs to run a property. So that property is basically FREE to Disney. That adds to the bottom line. They're making money off the MF's members pay by not having to spend their own.

Disney maintains a small ownership stake in each of the DVC resorts, not only to rent them out, but also to rotate closed rooms during refurbs, rather than try to shut the whole thing down and refurb all at once. As a result, they are also, technically, paying dues as well, so DVC members are not paying ALL of the costs to run the property.

Where I'd be curious about numbers are the resorts that are not all DVC - Animal Kingdom Villas, Wilderness, Beach Club, Boardwalk, BLT...since they share property with deluxe resorts, I'd guess it more possible that Disney could be sliding more costs associated to upkeep to DVC members than at OKW, SSR, HHI, Vero & soon Aulani. But I'd also assume that, since DVC finances have to be accessible to DVC members, and out of hundreds of thousands of members there are bound to be a few who are good with numbers, familiar with fudging numbers and would love to be the "good guy" protecting everyone else's investment while protecting their own, that would be a risk fraught with all sorts of PR peril.

 

[biggy H]

Yeah I don't think they really care about the income from DVC, it's important yes but it is far outweighed by how much will be spent when members return every year to use their points. Now yes you can trade them but all that means is that someone else will coming to WDW in your place, maybe even someone who will spend more since it could be their first time. It's a win win for Disney. Sell it, trade, ultimately it doesn't really matter someone will be occupying that vacation spot guaranteed for 50 years.

Just because we stay at DVC it doesn't mean we will spend any money at Disney. We could just use it as a base like any other villa/hotel/condo and never put a foot in a Disney park therefore disney loses out but we still get our accomodation paid for in advance.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

I do have to question this idea its only a few rooms used by the resort. The last two years have seen Disney UK heavily discount and market stays in both SSR and OKW. You dont do that level of marketing for a few rooms that would soon fill up.

 

[s8film40]

Just because we stay at DVC it doesn't mean we will spend any money at Disney. We could just use it as a base like any other villa/hotel/condo and never put a foot in a Disney park therefore disney loses out but we still get our accomodation paid for in advance.

Yes but Disney isn't looking at this on an individual basis. Im sure they have some statistic that shows a very high percentage of DVC owners visit WDW. There are always going to be the rare occurrences.

 

[biggy H]

Yes but Disney isn't looking at this on an individual basis. Im sure they have some statistic that shows a very high percentage of DVC owners visit WDW. There are always going to be the rare occurrences.

Yes thats true but I was using it as an example of how a DVC owner could show some displeasure at not updating WDW. Of course the other way is to go to the Condominium Association meetings and try and get the matter raised there.

 

[Pioneer Hall]

I do have to question this idea its only a few rooms used by the resort. The last two years have seen Disney UK heavily discount and market stays in both SSR and OKW. You dont do that level of marketing for a few rooms that would soon fill up.

Disney usually keeps about 2% of a resort in their inventory in order to rent the rooms and rotate as was previously mentioned. Those resorts are larger, so 2% can add up to a decent amount. I also believe that the POS says, that after a certain point before a check in day, Disney can take a room out of the DVC system and rent it to CRO in order for someone to book it for a cash stay. I think that the recession combined with the fact that these are the two biggest and often last booked resorts allowed Disney to move items into their cash inventory.

 

[s8film40]

Yes thats true but I was using it as an example of how a DVC owner could show some displeasure at not updating WDW. Of course the other way is to go to the Condominium Association meetings and try and get the matter raised there.

I think things are going to have to get really bad for any sizable number of DVC owners to use their points to rent out their room and not do anything on their vacation just to protest Disney.

 

[captainkidd]

Although I don't hate DVC, I have no desire to really buy into it. Through the resale market, I could buy 250 points at the Wilderness Lodge Villas for just under $20K. We're spending $9K for 16 nights split up between the Poly and GF this summer. I simply don't like the idea of time share programs. We had a great year in 2010, so we're living it up with this vacation. God forbid something unfortunate happens, I like not being tied into anything, including annual dues.

 

[Buried20KLeague]

Disney maintains a small ownership stake in each of the DVC resorts, not only to rent them out, but also to rotate closed rooms during refurbs, rather than try to shut the whole thing down and refurb all at once. As a result, they are also, technically, paying dues as well, so DVC members are not paying ALL of the costs to run the property.

Where I'd be curious about numbers are the resorts that are not all DVC - Animal Kingdom Villas, Wilderness, Beach Club, Boardwalk, BLT...since they share property with deluxe resorts, I'd guess it more possible that Disney could be sliding more costs associated to upkeep to DVC members than at OKW, SSR, HHI, Vero & soon Aulani. But I'd also assume that, since DVC finances have to be accessible to DVC members, and out of hundreds of thousands of members there are bound to be a few who are good with numbers, familiar with fudging numbers and would love to be the "good guy" protecting everyone else's investment while protecting their own, that would be a risk fraught with all sorts of PR peril.

Well, if we want to talk technically, I'm certain that the DVC resorts are on land "leased" from Disney, and pays TWDC monthly for that, too... And I'm willing to bet it's paid for my maintenance fees. I'm sure the services reedy creek provides, the land the building sits on, etc, all comes out of MF's. My point being... They profit off the MF's, at the very least indirectly.

 

[Buried20KLeague]

I do have to question this idea its only a few rooms used by the resort. The last two years have seen Disney UK heavily discount and market stays in both SSR and OKW. You dont do that level of marketing for a few rooms that would soon fill up.

My guess is they're rooms somehow tied to points that have been ROFR'd and haven't been re-sold yet by DVC, sold to central reservations at some sort of discount to rent out.

:shrug:

Might as well get some income from that inventory while it's sitting there not being sold.

 

[Funfy]

This all also under the assumption that ALL DVC members/park guests are not happy with the state of the parks. This is not the case at all for me and my family and not sure what percentage, but, I would guess a large percentage of guests are first/only/no repeat timers and therefore everything was magical for them and they thought it was the greatest ever.

If you eat steak every day, even if it is the "greatest steak on Earth" afterwhile you will complain, it never changes, or gets upgraded, you would like chicken-your neighbor gets ribs (substitute neighbor for Universal/Harry Potter)--it is all relative and personal. Some times on this site we lose track that the majority of the world does not eat and breathe Disney!:wave:

 

[DVCOwner]

I do have to question this idea its only a few rooms used by the resort. The last two years have seen Disney UK heavily discount and market stays in both SSR and OKW. You dont do that level of marketing for a few rooms that would soon fill up.

There is also all the rooms that need to be rented to pay DVC members that use they points outside of the DVC resorts. This year I am going on a Disney Cruise and DVC will have to rent out some rooms to earn the money to pay Disney Cruise Line for the cost of my Cruise. It is the same for Adventures by Disney, staying at Disney Hotels, etc.

 

[tjkraz]

Well, if we want to talk technically, I'm certain that the DVC resorts are on land "leased" from Disney, and pays TWDC monthly for that, too... And I'm willing to bet it's paid for my maintenance fees.

There is a ground lease agreement between Disney Vacation Development and other Disney entities, but members do not pay anything toward that lease. A developer (Disney Vacation Development) cannot sell ownership rights in something that they have not already secured via purchase or long-term lease agreement.

I'm sure the services reedy creek provides, the land the building sits on, etc, all comes out of MF's. My point being... They profit off the MF's, at the very least indirectly.

Funding for emergency and public services comes from taxes just like any other municipality. Disney may run the government, but those services are still operated as non-profits with DVC members only paying their fair share.

Some services are certainly owned and operated by Disney, but legally they cannot charge arbitrary rates and turn them into profit centers. Disney Vacation Club--the timeshare management arm--has a fiduciary responsibility to secure service contracts which are favorable to membership. The Florida Timeshare Bureau and other governmental oversight agencies exist to protect against such abuse. Budgets and other financial matters are reviewed annually by independent auditors.