DVC Club Level and Home Resort Survey

[AnnaKristoff2013]

I wonder what kind of transparency DVC will have about the Trust's ownership inventory. Early on, Trust points might be like 50% CFW, 40% AUL, and then 1% each of a bunch of other resorts...and that could be pretty unappealing.

I think they’ll also own a lot of Riviera, Poly2 & VDH which will make them attractive.

 

[MerlinandtheMouse]

yes, that's right.

not much in my view.

The benefit, I suppose, would be you'd have an advantage for the points in the trust over legacy owners.

I'd imagine Disney would keep prices in line with where they have been. They're not exploring this to make less money I can assure you.

Could go either way.

My guess is some resorts will be hybrid - those that have been developed and have undeclared inventory for example. I doubt for new builds they'd keep deeded interests as a purchase option.

Anything is possible, but I doubt Disney would want to.

I can see why it would be profitable for Disney:
- Undesirable resorts or points they can't sell will be absorbed here. Want the new shiny resort - you've got to pay the dues for the one you couldn't care in the least about.
- Not having to create a new POS every time a new resort is created, but throwing it in the existing organization
- If they can add existing inventory, it might open the door to repricing older resorts higher in the trust system
- I'd imagine they can play around with when contracts expire. They might market this as "pro consumer" because now you can get access for 10 years or 20 years instead of being tied down for 50. Expect Disney to put some sort of positive spin on this, whether it's what I wrote, or something else.
- Many other major companies (Marriott, Hyatt, etc.) have switched to this model, so Disney probably has case studies and history they can point to that show it will make the company more money than the old way.

I think the biggest benefit to a trust based system would be to people who want to buy it resale. This is because a trust-based system necessarily couldn’t have resale restrictions (since they’re not points for a specific resort so you wouldn’t be able to restrict them to only a specific resort). Thus, although they’d likely have high maintenance fees, if a resale buyer bought them as essentially sleep around points, not expecting to be able to use them very well at 11 months for in-demand rooms, then they could be an inexpensive and beneficial product. That’s why I’m excited for this offering.

As to your question about “there’s no going back to the regular way of DVC purchase?” No, I don’t think that’s going to be the case. I think regular contracts tied to a specific resort will still be sold. These things can be sold in parallel. Most resort systems with a trust-based option also have the regular deeded resort option for sale as well. It’s just another way to market/sell points.

Excellent point! My angle on all this is from my DVC usage, and I have 5 home resorts to 'guarantee' that I get the rooms I want. While I don't usually book room categories that are gone right at 11m, most of my room categories don't make it to 7m, either.

I do have some SAP, but even those are for specific rooms that almost always make it to 7m (e.g., CCV Cabins).

And I think your point about a SAP type of owner benefitting from a Trust is also a good answer for @MerlinandtheMouse's question:

To @zavandor's point about SAP, a Trust system will benefit guests who are less picky about their accommodations and could de-stress the planning for an owner that would normally be booking a mid-popularity room category.

For example, a family might know they want to visit WDW every year-ish, but don't want to be tied down to a specific resort (or don't have enough experience with the resorts to even know which they want), plus occasional trips to DL and AUL. No longer would the family be buying the only active WDW resort being sold by DVC and then having potentially stressful 7m booking periods for other WDW resorts and DL/AUL trips, all of those could now be booked at 11m (just might not get the most sought after rooms).

From a marketing perspective, a Trust system will go great as every resort is your home resort.

This is especially good for maybe some more controversial resorts they're going to build. What's been announced for CFW is 350 cabins, no variety at all, and that may be unattractive to lock into for a lot of potential buyers. But if they're buying into CFW+a bunch of other options, suddenly that commitment is 'just' financial and not to a specific room. And who knows what else they might build in the future.

Wow ok this has been super helpful for my understanding, thanks for taking the time to explain it all.

It’s a strange concept for someone who has no knowledge of any other type of timeshare than DVC but I trust you all to know it’s not uncommon elsewhere. And as someone who really loves my home resorts, it doesn’t really appeal to me, especially as the few resorts I don’t have home resort advantage in but would want to try to stay in (looking at you BCV/BWV) I imagine it’s not much better of a chance in this new trust anyway as the inventory would be low and the commotion high. But I can now see why others would like this.

I think I’d be a bit more interested if this type of system was better for a more last minute (3-6 months) planner, but I can’t imagine it’s any better than the current way.

@zavandor and @AnnaKristoff2013 made great points about SAP owners liking this move, but I imagine you’ve already spent a good chunk of money building your SAP points, hypothetically, would you now have to pay more to move those points over to a trust? Would you? Would it be worth giving up your deed for that? Curious how different minds look at this. Or would you rather keep what you have now and buy fresh and in this new phase?

 

[MerlinandtheMouse]

And going back @AnnaKristoff2013 point again, if this is great for a resale buyer, why would that be great for Disney? I completely understand how it’ll be more marketable and appealing to new buyer who knows very little about DVC, but in the long run if you can buy resale and use it everywhere, after your initial purchase what would stop you from ever buying direct again? I thought the recent implementation of resale restrictions was trying to cut down on resale use and slowly force people to buy direct, isn’t this doing the complete opposite?

 

[Genie+]

Thank you for explaining from different POVs. I think I have a better understanding of the concept of Trust system and also the potential benefits and drawbacks to Trust owners.

As a proponent of buy where you want to stay, I have 9 home resorts and generally book right at 11-months. Am I wrong to assume that the Trust really won’t impact me too much, because the Trust owners can ONLY book up to the total number of points the Trust owns AND have sold to Trust members at each resort? Meaning for say VGC, DVD currently doesn’t own that much compared to the total own by deeded owners, so it doesn’t matter that if 90% of Trust owners want VGC, only say a handful will succeed? So the competition is really amongst the Trust owners, not with deeded owners? For resorts with undeclared points like VDH and RIV, deeded owners currently can book from declared inventory only, so adding the undeclared to the Trust, and having Trust owners be able to book up to the limit the Trust owns and have sold should not matter because proportionally it’s the same.

Things can get lopsided depending how it’s set up.

How would a trust deal with Use Years and spreading usage across the calendar. Similarly, what prevents their ownership from booking a very lopsided amount of certain room size, view or season.

I really hope DVD’s answer to the escalation of confirmed reservations is not joining in on the action.

 

[AnnaKristoff2013]

@zavandor and @AnnaKristoff2013 made great points about SAP owners liking this move, but I imagine you’ve already spent a good chunk of money building your SAP points, hypothetically, would you now have to pay more to move those points over to a trust? Would you? Would it be worth giving up your deed for that? Curious how different minds look at this. Or would you rather keep what you have now and buy fresh and in this new phase?

You’d have to see pricing, but if they offer a “trade-in” or “upgrade” process, it’s almost certainly not going to be worth it. In other systems it makes more sense to ditch the contracts you already own on the resale market, and then turn around and buy the trust points resale, versus paying direct prices to upgrade.

And going back @AnnaKristoff2013 point again, if this is great for a resale buyer, why would that be great for Disney? I completely understand how it’ll be more marketable and appealing to new buyer who knows little to know about DVC, but in the long run if you can buy resale and use or everywhere, after your initial purchase what would top you from ever buying direct again? I thought the recent implementation resale restrictions was trying to cut down on resale use and slowly force people to buy direct, isn’t this doing the complete opposite?

I think this would be a situation where it could be great for the resale buyer and great for Disney. Disney get’s a product that is more easily marketable and profitable to sell directly. The side effect of that is that resale purchasers get an unrestricted option. There are plenty of systems out there where resale contracts can be purchased for literally pennies on the dollar (Club Wyndham), that also have no problem selling their trust points on the direct market (Club Wyndham Access). There will always be people who want to buy directly for blue card benefits, or who will buy directly because they aren’t aware resale is an option, or don’t want to bother with the hassle of trying to figure out how to buy resale.

 

[kneely58]

You’d have to see pricing, but if they offer a “trade-in” or “upgrade” process, it’s almost certainly not going to be worth it. In other systems it makes more sense to ditch the contracts you already own on the resale market, and then turn around and buy the trust points resale, versus paying direct prices to upgrade.

How do the other trust systems price the trade-in/upgrades? Do they assign different trade-in values to points from each resort?

 

[MerlinandtheMouse]

You’d have to see pricing, but if they offer a “trade-in” or “upgrade” process, it’s almost certainly not going to be worth it. In other systems it makes more sense to ditch the contracts you already own on the resale market, and then turn around and buy the trust points resale, versus paying direct prices to upgrade.

I think this would be a situation where it could be great for the resale buyer and great for Disney. Disney get’s a product that is more easily marketable and profitable to sell directly. The side effect of that is that resale purchasers get an unrestricted option. There are plenty of systems out there where resale contracts can be purchased for literally pennies on the dollar (Club Wyndham), that also have no problem selling their trust points on the direct market (Club Wyndham Access). There will always be people who want to buy directly for blue card benefits, or who will buy directly because they aren’t aware resale is an option, or don’t want to bother with the hassle of trying to figure out how to buy resale.

Yeah that’s all very true. I forget sometimes most purchasers aren’t getting the endless free advice we have access to here on the Disboards and usually make an emotionally-driven decision with a good DVC sales rep.

 

[JackosinDIS]

I have to admit I am struggling with the concept of a trust system and can’t quite get my head around how it works.

What would be the relevance of the 11/7 month booking windows. Surely, if the trust owns a certain number of points across ALL resorts then the only relevant window is at 11 months, when it will be first come first served for the most popular rooms?

Would the 7 month booking window only be relevant for the resorts at which the trust does not own?

 

[Sandisw]

I think this overcomplicates it. I don’t see why the trust can’t acquire points in fully declared resorts as well. It’s timeshare industry standard, and the language DVC uses seems pretty standard compared to other systems (like Marriott, Wyndham, etc.) that have similar systems and are easily able to add points from “sold out” resorts by acquiring them through deedbacks, ROFR & foreclosures.

Because I think that the current POS is written in a way that gets them in murky water with how the resorts work as a fully declared component site.

I don’t know how the other timeshare set up their component site ownerships in the POs for those resorts. It could have been written in such a way that allowed it.

Even so, they don’t own enough points at any of the sold out resorts to make it even feasible to add, assuming I am wrong about how it can work with the current declared units.

With having so much inventory to use that isn’t in potential conflict with current owners deeded interests, why not just start with the 5 that make it easy.

 

[CarolMN]

For me, the fly in the ointment is how the inventory would be split between the trust and the non-trust resort owners.

For example, if the trust owns 100,000 BWV points, those points represent a certain number of room nights. So which rooms, in which booking categories, on which dates will go to the trust and which to the individual resort owners?

 

[Genie+]

For me, the fly in the ointment is how the inventory would be split between the trust and the non-trust resort owners.

For example, if the trust owns 100,000 BWV points, those points represent a certain number of room nights. So which rooms, in which booking categories, on which dates will go to the trust and which to the individual resort owners?

Right. And how will units play into this when it comes to 11 month home booking? The clearest example is using VDH and its total of 2 Grand Villas. Without fully owning a unit that contains a GV, would they still be able to book it?

Eta- Would they turn to how many days the trust could book it? So 5% trust ownership at VDH means only allowing 5% of the calendar… but if they only own a fraction of the unit it should be a fraction of that 5% of the calendar.

 

[JackosinDIS]

For me, the fly in the ointment is how the inventory would be split between the trust and the non-trust resort owners.

For example, if the trust owns 100,000 BWV points, those points represent a certain number of room nights. So which rooms, in which booking categories, on which dates will go to the trust and which to the individual resort owners?

The way I am interpreting it, and someone correct me if I’m wrong, is that they would not have to specify which rooms are available to the trust. The trust simply has 100k points, and all members of the trust can have a stab at using those points at the 11 month mark.

It doesn’t affect the total number points available to deeded owners, but what it would mean is that there are a few thousand more people all having a go at 8am at the 11 month mark so it is sure to have an adverse impact on individual owners?

 

[Genie+]

The trust simply has 100k points, and all members of the trust can have a stab at using those points at the 11 month mark.

The question I have is how do they decide what specific rooms and dates those 100k points represents? They can’t just let all 100k points start booking boardwalk standard studios asap until their point are depleted.

 

[sndral]

For me, the fly in the ointment is how the inventory would be split between the trust and the non-trust resort owners.

For example, if the trust owns 100,000 BWV points, those points represent a certain number of room nights. So which rooms, in which booking categories, on which dates will go to the trust and which to the individual resort owners?

Bingo - take VGF, there are 4 million points, around half in the original building & half in the new building, say the trust owns 1/4 of the points - 1 million - will anything stop them from using all of their 1 million points in the more popular original building leaving far fewer original building villas for legacy owners to book?
And what about seasonality - early Dec., marathon weekend, Easter break, fall frenzy are all high demand booking times - will anything stop the trust from allocating all of their points to those times leaving only low demand times to legacy owners?
& what about banking & borrowing - will the trust members have that ability & if so, how would that work?

The way I am interpreting it, and someone correct me if I’m wrong, is that they would not have to specify which rooms are available to the trust. The trust simply has 100k points, and all members of the trust can have a stab at using those points at the 11 month mark.

It doesn’t affect the total number points available to deeded owners, but what it would mean is that there are a few thousand more people all having a go at 8am at the 11 month mark so it is sure to have an adverse impact on individual owners?

Scenario - last year in Jan. I was up at 5 a.m. my time to grab my early Dec. reservation. My competition was all the owners at my home resort wanting a stay at my popular resort during that very popular time. Once the trust is up & running my competition is going to be my usual others who own at my resort + every trust member & even if the trust only owns 10% of my home resort, will anything stop them from using all of their 10% for early Dec. bookings?

The question I have is how do they decide what specific rooms and dates those 100k points represents? They can’t just let all 100k points start booking boardwalk standard studios asap until their point are depleted.

Not just all of their 100k points - if they have banking/borrowing why not 300k?
It’ll depend on how they set it up & if the already murky/questionable way they pull DVC‘s 2% & anticipated breakage inventory & the always subpar DVC IT is any indication of how they intend to deal w/ inventory/access for the trust v. legacy owners it may be time to put your lawyer on speed dial.

 

[Sandisw]

For me, the fly in the ointment is how the inventory would be split between the trust and the non-trust resort owners.

For example, if the trust owns 100,000 BWV points, those points represent a certain number of room nights. So which rooms, in which booking categories, on which dates will go to the trust and which to the individual resort owners?

This is why I am having a hard time believing that they would even try to start this with current resorts that are sold out and not just move inventory not yet declared and new resorts in this direction.

As I mentioned, this sytem can start with five resorts right out of the gate without having any impact on current owners. Just seems more logical to me not to make it murky.

 

[AnnaKristoff2013]

How do the other trust systems price the trade-in/upgrades? Do they assign different trade-in values to points from each resort?

The other resort systems are highly variable, even from salesperson to salesperson, because their sales pitches are hard sells and everything is negotiable. With that said, in the other systems, they are priced in such a way that is basically never worth it to trade in a decent resale week to pay developer prices to upgrade.

 

[JackosinDIS]

The question I have is how do they decide what specific rooms and dates those 100k points represents? They can’t just let all 100k points start booking boardwalk standard studios asap until their point are depleted.

But what is to stop them? It’s akin to one person buying a mega contract and letting all their friends log on and make a booking using their pool of points…

It doesn’t affect the number of points owned by the deeded owners, but because of the number of trust owners it would definitely mean the hard-to-get rooms get harder for everyone!

I don’t want it to work like that, so hopefully I’m wrong. But I don’t see how they can allocate specific rooms to the trust. Both groups (e.g the 100k points owned by 1000 individual deeded owners and the 100k points ‘owned’ by the 20000 trust members) would be a free for all at 11 months. The trust will run out of points to use at which ever resort is most popular, but because of the total number of members of the trust being far greater than the number of individual owners at any particular resort it would be much more competitive!

 

[Genie+]

I really hope they know what they’re doing. Nobody answer that

 

[Sandisw]

I have to admit I am struggling with the concept of a trust system and can’t quite get my head around how it works.

What would be the relevance of the 11/7 month booking windows. Surely, if the trust owns a certain number of points across ALL resorts then the only relevant window is at 11 months, when it will be first come first served for the most popular rooms?

Would the 7 month booking window only be relevant for the resorts at which the trust does not own?

Yes. And, in my mind, that is why they won't worry about trying to transfer the handful of points they might own at the existing resorts. Just set it up so those members of the trust have access to them at 7 months as exchanges like we do now.

Right now, we all get 11 month advangtage at one resort. If we want more, we buy more deeds at the other places. The trust idea is one stop shopping...you get advantage at the resorts in the trust....and if they can start it out with several resorts, it still could be much more popular than doing it the way they do know.

Over time, I think all DVC gets done this way and any new resorts into the system will no longer be component sites that you buy into specifically....they are owned by the trust only....eventually, that is how they will deal with the 2042 resorts....they will simply add them at expiration to the trust. Great way to deal with all that expirng inventory at once.

 

[AnnaKristoff2013]

Because I think that the current POS is written in a way that gets them in murky water with how the resorts work as a fully declared component site.

I don’t know how the other timeshare set up their component site ownerships in the POs for those resorts. It could have been written in such a way that allowed it.

Even so, they don’t own enough points at any of the sold out resorts to make it even feasible to add, assuming I am wrong about how it can work with the current declared units.

With having so much inventory to use that isn’t in potential conflict with current owners deeded interests, why not just start with the 5 that make it easy.

I’m certainly not a timeshare “expert,” but I would say that @dioxide45 is, and I believe he indicated he looked at the DVC POS docs, compared them to the docs for other resort systems that have implemented this, and indicated that the language was extremely similar. @dioxide45, feel free to jump in and correct me if I misinterpreted your post.