Doesn't matter, because you're paying the remaining costs (dues on the contract) whether you buy it retail or resale.
The remaining cost isn't just the dues -- it's the remaining initial points cost.
Again, the savings off the entire cost becomes very relevant in decision making.
This is a different question, namely: What's the value of qualified points and a qualified membership, as compared to unqualified points and a white card membership? And, that's a fine conversation to have. But it doesn't change the fact that saving high-four- to low-five-figures on the purchase is non-trivial.
Never suggested it was trivial. I certainly don't believe a 20% savings was trivial. And this is exactly what we are doing. To determine whether it's worth it to pay more for "qualified points and a qualified membership, as compared to unqualified points and a white card membership," the relative cost is critical to know.
If I told you that a First Class airline ticket was 1% more than a coach ticket, your thinking would be very different than if I told you that a First class airline ticket was 400% more than a coach ticket.
Is it worth it to pay an extra $16,000 for qualified points and white card membership? For me, the relative costs are critical. If you told me it was $1 for unqualified points and $16,001 for qualified points... I'd jump on the unqualified points! If it was $1,000,000 for unqualified points and $1,016,000 for qualified points -- I'd pay the extra difference for the qualified points (assuming I was willing to pay a million for DVC at all).
Maybe not for you -- But my decision is totally affected by the relative cost difference, not just the absolute cost difference.
@havoc315, from where I sit you are conflating at least three different things.
- Resale and developer prices are different.
- The marginal utility of a dollar changes based on one's resources.
- Qualified and unqualified points/accounts are different.
But you are trying to frame all of those as "you aren't saving as much money as you think," and I think that's just wrong. If you are saving $1, you are saving $1. The question is (a) how much do you care about $1, and (b) are the differences worth that $1 to you?
In other words, this is Just Another Version of the resale vs. developer argument, where everyone seems to want to convince everyone else that the decision they made is the right one for everyone. It isn't, and it won't be, because factors (2) and (3) are situational---they are different for different people.
But factor (1) is just straightforward second grade math, and that doesn't change no matter one's circumstances.
You're confusing what I'm saying. I'm not saying any of those things.
All I'm saying is simply, "relatively speaking, this is how much you're actually saving."
That's it. And then, it's for each person to look at those relative savings and determine the value of those savings versus the costs.
You seem to be suggesting that relative dollars are irrelevant, that only absolute dollars matter. With that I disagree --- RELATIVE cost is absolutely critical to my decision making, not just absolute cost. (It's not JUST relative cost -- Both relative and absolute dollars factor in).
Going back to First class airfare example -- Would I pay an extra $300 for a first class ticket as opposed to a coach ticket? The relative cost is absolutely critical to my decision.
If it was a $300 coach airfare, I probably wouldn't pay an extra $300 for the first class ticket. If it was a $2,000 coach ticket, I'd be more likely to pay the extra $300 for the first class upgrade.
Maybe the relative costs mean nothing to you. But for me (and I assume I'm not alone), the relative costs become a major part of the equation.