RESALE POLICY CHANGE!

[amarberry]

I realize this is probably just a repeat of what other having been asking and saying, but I'm freaking out a bit. We just closed on a contract on 3/26 and it was recorded on 3/28. Based on what I've read here and how I interpret the wording of the policy, it seems like we are still eligible for the Membership Extras, correct? Which day did our ownership technically begin? March 26th when we closed? March 28th when it recorded? Obviously I don't have our membership number yet since it has only been 7 days since the deed was recorded, so I'm nervous, but if we closed and the deed was recorded, I should be okay, right? It's pretty ambiguous.

I just really need some sort of confirmation about this. I know the "extras" were never guaranteed, but it is pretty upsetting to think that they would be taken away a week after purchasing our contract.

 

[dwight16]

wow so they pull out another string....nice try disney your dumb events that .01% of the DVC community can even take advantage of will never make up for the extra cost you charge over resales.....NEVER OH NO I MUST PAY 171 per POINT SO I CAN GET FREE SODA!!! WOW awesome.......uggggg i am running out of words for how DVC has changed over the last 5 years for new direct members....

 

[satman1962]

I guess it's all perspective.. I bought my contracts resale, and I like the free soda. So I'm quite glad it's not retroactive..

 

[ColonialMouse]

It says two things:

1) Resale buyers after March 21, 2011 do not receive access to the Disney Collection, Concierge Collection and Adventurer Collection
2) Resale buyers after April 4, 2016 do not receive access to member perks

Those who bought after 3/21/11 still get the perks. Those who buy after 4/4/16 will be ineligible for all.

As a current owner (as of 2012) I would like to believe that, but it doesn't say that. Unfortunately this text doesn't appear to have been written by lawyers---it contradicts itself.

"Effective April 4 2016 Members who did not buy direct from DVD do not have Membership Extras" (sic)

It doesn't actually say new members or anything about the purchase date, it just says after today, resale buyers don't have access to Extras. If they wanted it to say something else, they would have just worded it like the first half of the sentence. "Members who do not purchase directly from DVD after April 4, 2016 will not have access to Extras...."

But the whole thing is inconsistent. The first paragraph says the word "Member" means someone who purchased direct from DVD. Which means the second paragraph discussing "Members who did not purchase direct from DVD" is nonsense.

I realize MS and the website seem to give an favorable answer to this, but it's disturbing that the official document is literally meaningless.

Bruce

 

[LenInMaine]

I realize this is probably just a repeat of what other having been asking and saying, but I'm freaking out a bit. We just closed on a contract on 3/26 and it was recorded on 3/28. Based on what I've read here and how I interpret the wording of the policy, it seems like we are still eligible for the Membership Extras, correct? Which day did our ownership technically begin? March 26th when we closed? March 28th when it recorded? Obviously I don't have our membership number yet since it has only been 7 days since the deed was recorded, so I'm nervous, but if we closed and the deed was recorded, I should be okay, right? It's pretty ambiguous.

I just really need some sort of confirmation about this. I know the "extras" were never guaranteed, but it is pretty upsetting to think that they would be taken away a week after purchasing our contract.

You are fine. MS has confirmed.

 

[DisDadDVC]

I'm honestly surprised this hasn't happened. Maybe they feel it doesn't have enough of an effect to upset some owners.

There are already rental limits. I'm not really sure what other restrictions they can put other than lowering the limit. I don't see them forbidding owners from making a reservation for their parents, friends, etc. Those are not "rentals" in the normal sense, but there really isn't any difference. Maybe a fee for rooms not reserved in your name? I would think that would have to work the same for direct vs resale.

In short, I don't see "rentals" as a "benefit" that they can take away from only resale buyers unlike discounts, etc.

 

[davper]

I may be in the minority, but...
...I am not all that upset by this and not because I am grandfathered in. When I bought, I bought for the right to stay at a deluxe resort at a reduced rate for years to come. The added perks are a bonus and nice to have. But if this was 12 months ago when I was thinking of buying in for the first time, I really don't think this would have changed my decision to buy in.

I do hope this does drop the resale price because I want to buy into BCV so I can stay there for the F&W Festival.

 

[WebmasterDoc]

I realize this is probably just a repeat of what other having been asking and saying, but I'm freaking out a bit. We just closed on a contract on 3/26 and it was recorded on 3/28. Based on what I've read here and how I interpret the wording of the policy, it seems like we are still eligible for the Membership Extras, correct? Which day did our ownership technically begin? March 26th when we closed? March 28th when it recorded? Obviously I don't have our membership number yet since it has only been 7 days since the deed was recorded, so I'm nervous, but if we closed and the deed was recorded, I should be okay, right? It's pretty ambiguous.

I just really need some sort of confirmation about this. I know the "extras" were never guaranteed, but it is pretty upsetting to think that they would be taken away a week after purchasing our contract.

You are fine. This policy begins with those who close on their purchase today (April 4, 2016) or later. Anyone who closed prior to today will not have these restrictions placed on their account.

Welcome Home!

 

[amarberry]

You are fine. MS has confirmed.

Thanks.

 

[Franzenel]

You are fine. MS has confirmed.

That's good to hear. We leave in 2 weeks for our spring trip and I plan on buy gold AP when we are there. If this was stripped that would cost us another $800. We are still waiting for our membership number too.

 

[amarberry]

You are fine. This policy begins with those who close on their purchase today (April 4, 2016) or later. Anyone who closed prior to today will not have these restrictions placed on their account.

Welcome Home!

Thank you! That's my first "welcome home."

 

[_auroraborealis_]

I guess it's all perspective.. I bought my contracts resale, and I like the free soda. So I'm quite glad it's not retroactive..

Right, but would you pay $18,000 more for "free" soda? I'm guessing not, and if you would... please send me $18k and I will send you 10 years of "free" soda.

 

[ziravan]

That is correct, I just called and was told that!

You just started posting overnight and have posted over 40 comments, all on this subject, all in favor of DVD.

It seems as if you have a bias, and you don't have the history with us to put that bias into perspective.

 

[crazyventures]

I am all closed just wait for my number. From what I am reading I should be all good right?

This is how I'm reading it. Is there any more info about how they're delineating the 4/4 date--purchasing, submitting to ROFR, or closing? I'm in the same boat (closed 3/23 and am just waiting for member number.)

 

[avidadventurer]

You just started posting overnight and have posted over 40 comments, all on this subject, all in favor of DVD.

It seems as if you have a bias, and you don't have the history with us to put that bias into perspective.

I could care less what you think, I have been viewing this forum for last 3 years and decided to join after a friend had a bad experience buying resale, I work for Google and currently on vacation in Orlando at BLT, so if it makes your day to try to guess my intentions then so be it, Have a wonderful day.

 

[LenInMaine]

There are already rental limits. I'm not really sure what other restrictions they can put other than lowering the limit. I don't see them forbidding owners from making a reservation for their parents, friends, etc. Those are not "rentals" in the normal sense, but there really isn't any difference. Maybe a fee for rooms not reserved in your name? I would think that would have to work the same for direct vs resale.

In short, I don't see "rentals" as a "benefit" that they can take away from only resale buyers unlike discounts, etc.

I'm talking more about the rental companies. Technically, the contract states that it's a no-no to except $$ for points reservations. Short of trying to close those companies I'm not sure how they'd handle it. But it has to be some what of a thorn in DVC's side. They would much rather those people buy DVC, or book via cash.

 

[avidadventurer]

I'm talking more about the rental companies. Technically, the contract states that it's a no-no to except $$ for points reservations. Short of trying to close those companies I'm not sure how they'd handle it. But it has to be some what of a thorn in DVC's side. They would much rather those people buy DVC, or book via cash.

This is my biggest issue, all these people that rent out points to pay for membership or even never use membership then dump it while us members that try to make reservations can't be use of short term rentals

 

[DisDadDVC]

I'm talking more about the rental companies. Technically, the contract states that it's a no-no to except $$ for points reservations. Short of trying to close those companies I'm not sure how they'd handle it. But it has to be some what of a thorn in DVC's side. They would much rather those people buy DVC, or book via cash.

I'm sure they would love to stop them as well, but I'm not sure how they can do that either. They are not renting out points. They are just matching renters with owners.

 

[Jfine]

For those discussing resale value, anyone else think the newer, expensive resorts (VGF & Poly) will have a decline in resale value? If I was looking to buy resale, I'd probably be more inclined to pay $20 more a point to get these perks. But if I was already looking at SSR for example, $80 a point is way too steep.

 

[mab2012]

Well, I suppose I'm glad I bought when I did (closed a few months ago). But really, on my recent 9-day trip, I saved maybe $10 in discounts. In fairness, I didn't have ID at the one meal that would have saved me more than a couple of bucks (that was the only time I was asked, of course), so maybe I could have saved $25. Hardly enough to justify the direct buy premium, even extrapolated over many years.

I *might* have considered an AP for this trip, except that the last couple of days of our trip fell into the Gold blackout dates (thanks to an early Easter), and the cost of a Platinum pass was definitely not worth it, even with the DVC discount. Most years an AP wouldn't even be on our radar - we just don't go that often.

So while I'm happy that my benefits will continue, I don't think they would have been enough to make me consider a direct purchase. It's more likely that I would have chosen not to buy at all.

Obviously someone who is a heavy user of the system might come to a different conclusion.

I think debating the 24 point add on is kind of fruitless, as it will be DVC to close the loophole if they choose. But your reply actually brings up a better question. If resale purchasers after today are basically not part of the "club" and all of its perks. Does that mean that any contracts they attempt to buy directly from DVC could also not "count" as add on contracts.

The scenario being played out by people is you go out and buy a 150 point contract on the re sale market, then purchase a 25 point add on to that contract from DVC. But couldn't DVC just as easily tell you no, you must purchase the "minimum" contract that any non owner must purchase first, before you can do an add on. I would think the small contract add on is just as much of a benefit/perk as anything else. Disney does not have to offer it to anyone, so they could theoretically exclude resale purchasers from that as well.

They could, but I doubt it's in their interest. They want to sell points directly. What do they have to gain by turning away buyers? By this time the resale purchase is already done; they're not going to get that buyer to bite on another 200 direct points, unless the buyer had already made up his mind to do so for other reasons. Could they talk the buyer into 50 points instead of 25? Maybe. But again, unless they're already in the market for more points, most will probably still say, "no thanks, benefits aren't worth that much to me". If you're the DVC salesperson, looking for an easy commission, how is that to your advantage? Remember, the guy who's already bought resale is likely more informed than the average bear. The people Disney are looking to convert here are those on the fence - first time buyers who don't really know that much about what they're buying, but maybe someone mentioned resale to them in passing. Or the occasional buyer for whom revocable benefits really are worth THAT much.

Get ready for that to happen.

You're making a lot of assertions as though they were plain fact. Care to cite your source?