Riviera Sales by the numbers (vs CCV) for 2019 - (December added 1/16/2020)

[Sandisw]

We have 2 separate issues at stake. One is what is best for an individual and their family, how they spend their money and choose to vacation is their decision. All issues were looked at with eyes wide open, I cannot see where there is any issue on this. The second issue is what is best for all DVC owners with regard to value, resale value. The resale restrictions will likely end up hurting all DVC owners in the long run when it comes to resale. However, if you plan on owning for 50 years, is it really hurting an individual--as many have said and to repeat DVC is at the heart a time share and not an investment. I find this whole issue very draining as I am in my mid 60's and know all too well how life can throw you curves (open Heart surgery last year was a real eye opener). So I maybe in a position in the future of being forced to sell my treasured DVC points. This is why I can clearly see both sides of the argument.

Agree on most points except that I would use the word impact vs. hurt in terms of resale restrictions.

Is Disney changing the product? Absolutely. Will those changes impact resale value and possibly booking down the road? Most likely.

Will those restrictions hurt all owners? No, because it all depends on your individual exceptions for the product. But I absolutely do agree it will impact all owners in some way.

For me personally, right now, i don’t see that impact being a big deal.

 

[AdamsMum]

Two of those have been there for quite while (over a month). The one for $135 had only been there a couple weeks I think.

I think they are priced too high, as I recall there are more costs when purchasing resale as opposed to direct, and for $18-$28 a point I think it would be worth it to go direct for the benefit of using your points anywhere. Is Riviera still $188/point?

 

[Sandisw]

I think they are priced too high, as I recall there are more costs when purchasing resale as opposed to direct, and for $18-$28 a point I think it would be worth it to go direct for the benefit of using your points anywhere. Is Riviera still $188/point?

Yes, it is. The minimum add on for members for RIV is 50 points.

 

[ELMC]

Agree on most points except that I would use the word impact vs. hurt in terms of resale restrictions.

Is Disney changing the product? Absolutely. Will those changes impact resale value and possibly booking down the road? Most likely.

Will those restrictions hurt all owners? No, because it all depends on your individual exceptions for the product. But I absolutely do agree it will impact all owners in some way.

For me personally, right now, i don’t see that impact being a big deal.

If you're going to change the word "hurt" to "impact" then I think it might be fair to describe it as negatively impacting. You have personally been negatively impacted in that the resale value of your contract is less than it would have been without restrictions. However, you will only realize the effects of that change should you go to sell. There's a difference, I agree, but from an accounting standpoint, the value of your asset on the books is worth less than it otherwise could have been.

That said, and once again, this is a timeshare we are talking about. The fact that it has any cash value at all should be shocking to all of us; it is a testament to the strength of the Disney brand and the Disney product. I criticize them a lot, but I think it is fair to applaud them on that.

 

[skier_pete]

We have 2 separate issues at stake. One is what is best for an individual and their family, how they spend their money and choose to vacation is their decision. All issues were looked at with eyes wide open, I cannot see where there is any issue on this. The second issue is what is best for all DVC owners with regard to value, resale value. The resale restrictions will likely end up hurting all DVC owners in the long run when it comes to resale. However, if you plan on owning for 50 years, is it really hurting an individual--as many have said and to repeat DVC is at the heart a time share and not an investment. I find this whole issue very draining as I am in my mid 60's and know all too well how life can throw you curves (open Heart surgery last year was a real eye opener). So I maybe in a position in the future of being forced to sell my treasured DVC points. This is why I can clearly see both sides of the argument.

Really well stated and completely true. I've said many times my comments here are not Anti-Riviera. It's a beautiful looking resort and the fact that someone wants to buy there should not be disparaged, we each have our reasons. But the resale restriction of "resale can only stay at home resort" is going to hurt EVERY SINGLE OWNER across the entire system. I challenge anyone to come up with an angle that it is beneficial to a direct owner or a resale owner. (I guess you can argue the resale owner that only wants to stay at Riviera benefits by a lower resale price....) It hurts us all - whether by creating a set of resorts which will be much harder to get into a 7 months thanks to the resale owners there snatching up all the rooms or reducing the value of our property on the resale market.

 

[ELMC]

Really well stated and completely true. I've said many times my comments here are not Anti-Riviera. It's a beautiful looking resort and the fact that someone wants to buy there should not be disparaged, we each have our reasons. But the resale restriction of "resale can only stay at home resort" is going to hurt EVERY SINGLE OWNER across the entire system. I challenge anyone to come up with an angle that it is beneficial to a direct owner or a resale owner. (I guess you can argue the resale owner that only wants to stay at Riviera benefits by a lower resale price....) It hurts us all - whether by creating a set of resorts which will be much harder to get into a 7 months thanks to the resale owners there snatching up all the rooms or reducing the value of our property on the resale market.

Challenge accepted.

I'll preface this by saying that I can't think of a single benefit to direct owners, so I'll gladly concede that point. But I do think there is a possibility for future resale buyers to benefit, and here's how: remember way back in the day where you could get an SSR contract for about $50 per point and use it to stay anywhere? Well those days of value hunting DVC are long gone. However, if the resale restrictions drive prices down it could lead to a new form of bargain hunting DVC. Specifically, people could buy contracts on the cheap at if they do so at multiple resorts they can have some variety. It won't be the same in terms of use, but the premise is sound. Buy DVC for the lowest price you can and then take what you can get. I'm pretty sure there's a target market for that.

 

[DougEMG]

That said, and once again, this is a timeshare we are talking about. The fact that it has any cash value at all should be shocking to all of us; it is a testament to the strength of the Disney brand and the Disney product. I criticize them a lot, but I think it is fair to applaud them on that.

What I find shocking is the fact that most non-Disney timeshares have practically no resale value. To me that makes them one of the biggest rip-offs out there.

 

[Sandisw]

If you're going to change the word "hurt" to "impact" then I think it might be fair to describe it as negatively impacting. You have personally been negatively impacted in that the resale value of your contract is less than it would have been without restrictions. However, you will only realize the effects of that change should you go to sell. There's a difference, I agree, but from an accounting standpoint, the value of your asset on the books is worth less than it otherwise could have been.

That said, and once again, this is a timeshare we are talking about. The fact that it has any cash value at all should be shocking to all of us; it is a testament to the strength of the Disney brand and the Disney product. I criticize them a lot, but I think it is fair to applaud them on that.

Yes, and maybe it is just my way of defining things because i do see them as different.

I think where I seem to be different than others is that I am not bothered by what it could have been worth without restrictions. That to me is immaterial because I bought it with them. Now, had I bought it without and Disney changes after the fact, then yes, the loss of value would be real, even on paper.

There are a ton of things in life that could be this or could be that if X, Y or Z was different. I just got a brand new truck and it lost value as soon as I took it home, I see DVC no differently. I expect it to be worth less than I paid so the fact that it I could sell it for anything is a positive, not a negative. Of course, people who feel DVC should have value disagree.

People keep saying this isn’t anti Rivera and I get it’s not because of the resort, but it is anti RIV in the sense that one should not be supporting Disney by purchasing or at the very least be upset and agree that every single owner out there will be hurt. I just don’t agree...sorry.

 

[ELMC]

Yes, and maybe it is just my way of defining things because i do see them as different.

I think where I seem to be different than others is that I am not bothered by what it could have been worth without restrictions. That to me is immaterial because I bought it with them. Now, had I bought it without and Disney changes after the fact, then yes, the loss of value would be real, even on paper.

There are a ton of things in life that could be this or could be that if X, Y or Z was different. I just got a brand new truck and it lost value as soon as I took it home, I see DVC no differently. I expect it to be worth less than I paid so the fact that it I could sell it for anything is a positive, not a negative. Of course, people who feel DVC should have value disagree.

People keep saying this isn’t anti Rivera and I get it’s not because of the resort, but it is anti RIV in the sense that one should not be supporting Disney by purchasing or at the very least be upset and agree that every single owner out there will be hurt. I just don’t agree...sorry.

I agree with you on the second part. I don't think people who buy RIV are rewarding Disney's alleged bad behavior and I don't think they're sticking it to Disney by refusing to buy.

On the first part, I wish I could think like you do...I'd get more enjoyment out of my DVC. I bought BWV for $50 a point and every time I use it, instead of thinking about the insane value I got, I think about how I'm an idiot for not selling it today for $125 a point. I can almost guarantee that it's more fun being you.

 

[ELMC]

What I find shocking is the fact that most non-Disney timeshares have practically no resale value. To me that makes them one of the biggest rip-offs out there.

I go back and forth on this. We've all heard the horror stories and a lot of timeshares out there are indeed a bad deal. But we paid $15,000 for a MVC timeshare 20 years ago and have been able to stay in a one or two BR Villa all around the world for a week every year since for $1,000 in maintenance fees a year. I'm fairly certain that's a pretty good deal...so did I get ripped off or not? I'm still not sure.

 

[Soap_1984]

Dvc has also gotten pretty expensive compared to other timeshares too. The resale value didn't matter much 25 years ago because there was a clear path to actually saving money in 10-15 years. Buying direct now it's not nearly as easy a sale.

 

[Brianstl]

Dvc has also gotten pretty expensive compared to other timeshares too. The resale value didn't matter much 25 years ago because there was a clear path to actually saving money in 10-15 years. Buying direct now it's not nearly as easy a sale.

There are a few resorts where it is questionable the savings you will get buying resale.

 

[Brian Noble]

What I find shocking is the fact that most non-Disney timeshares have practically no resale value. To me that makes them one of the biggest rip-offs out there.

Timeshares developed by the major hotel brands (e.g. Marriott, Hilton) generally also hold some value. The brand awareness in these cases helps create enough of a residual market.

On the other hand, it is possible to get some spectacular deals in "non-brand" resorts. We just acquired two annual 1-52 float weeks that are oceanfront/oceanview in Kauai. We paid $375 per week (just the cost of the deed preparation), and otherwise pay only the annual maintenance. We also got the 2019 usage for free. My wife is coming back today from a trip with her dad. We've already booked Christmas and New Years for 2020. The view below is from the least-desirable building--not too shabby.

 

[Wakey]

Just what is DVC's long term plan? The resale value undoubtedly sells DVC- it did with me. So destroy that, you lose people like me as a customer immediately.

They are already selling new resorts (at WDW) quicker than they can make them- Copper Creek sold out quicker than they expected, thus requiring Riviera going up for sale very early in its construction really.

The resale restrictions can only be for one of three things, or possibly a combination:

1) Control and take more of the resale market- I am not convinced they are interested at the moment, the margin is much lower than selling new points which is extraordinarily profitable. But see below.
2) Be able to raise the price of the direct resorts without being undermined as much by resale price- I am not convinced about this one either. Suppressing the price of the current resort resale puts people off buying it, which is then reflected in the average price someone is willing to pay. Many of us will not buy Riviera because we would be hit in the pocket if we sell. But imagine it was $100 a point direct- I would be buying like a shot. If it had no restriction, I would have considered buying at current prices. So if this is the intention it does not work- someone who is educated about the resale market will likely know of the restrictions, and all they do is hammer the cost/ benefit analysis for a direct purchase and lower the average price someone who is educated enough to buy resale anyway, is willing to pay for direct.
3) Sell more and build more DVC to meet demand. They are going to have to have an accelerated building programme if this is their intention because they are already sell them out on or ahead of time. But I am still wondering how these restrictions help them sell more, because as I say above, the person educated enough to even consider resale, knows the restrictions will hit them in the pocket if they buy direct.

Of course, it may be that they envisage a day when the resort building dries up, and thus they will then be much more reliant on controlling resale. But that is no replacement for the multi-billion dollar business they have now.

I am also not convinced this is all about the 'long game'. The DVC execs will be out on their ear I suspect if sales degrade substantially. Disney seems pretty ruthless in this regard generally. I think it is possibly more about bean counters, believing this will make direct look much better than resale, and failing to properly consider what the product really is (about trust, built on great efficacy) or how the market would react, or consider logically. Possibly the same people who thought lockoff premium may be a good idea without first standing back and listening to Bob, the office junior in the corner desk who said 'I am not sure we can do this, because here is one of our old sales videos on Youtube which said overall, points can never go up"!

 

[ELMC]

There are a few resorts where it is questionable the savings you will get buying resale.

It's no longer all about savings. It's about Magic, and the system, and long term value. Value, not savings. The whole paradigm has changed and it's leaving people like me in the dust.

Just what is DVC's long term plan? The resale value undoubtedly sells DVC- it did with me. So destroy that, you lose people like me as a customer immediately.

[snip]

Many of us will not buy Riviera because we would be hit in the pocket if we sell.

[snip]

But I am still wondering how these restrictions help them sell more, because as I say above, the person educated enough to even consider resale, knows the restrictions will hit them in the pocket if they buy direct.

You and I are in the same boat on all these points. But let me say...it is a very small boat. While a large percentage of people here on the DIS feel this way, many don't. And that's just on here. I would venture a guess that out there in the real world people who share our mindset make up maybe 5-10% of the potential customer base. If I could jack up prices close to 100% and only alienate 10% of my customer base I would do it every day and twice on Sunday.

 

[The Jackal]

Yes, it is. The minimum add on for members for RIV is 50 points.

The biggest problem with 50 point contract is, it will get you 2-3 nights in a studio or 2-4 nights in a non family friendly tower studio, excluding premier season. That’s a lot of money for not many days. With sky high MF’s and resale contracts not selling unless they are listed for less than CCV resale. DVD needs to do something fast. Reflections will be open before you know it.

 

[Sandisw]

The biggest problem with 50 point contract is, it will get you 2-3 nights in a studio or 2-4 nights in a non family friendly tower studio, excluding premier season. That’s a lot of money for not many days. With sky high MF’s and resale contracts not selling unless they are listed for less than CCV resale. DVD needs to do something fast. Reflections will be open before you know it.

Very true but it is possible that this person added on more points, but had them broken up? I could see someone adding on with 50 to use every other year for a specific trip. Whoever bought this already had points. I just don’t get the situation as to why one would buy and then sell so fast..unless, as suggested, they are selling other contracts.

 

[ELMC]

The biggest problem with 50 point contract is, it will get you 2-3 nights in a studio or 2-4 nights in a non family friendly tower studio, excluding premier season. That’s a lot of money for not many days.

This part I totally agree with. Juxtapose it to BWV where as recently as five years ago you could get a 50 point contract for $80 per point with lower maintenance fees, and stay in a standard studio for 4-5 nights a year. It's not Riviera I have a problem with. It's the structure of the resort. Highest initial cost per point; close to highest point requirements; and close to highest maintenance fees. It's a triple whammy of expensive.

With sky high MF’s and resale contracts not selling unless they are listed for less than CCV resale. DVD needs to do something fast. Reflections will be open before you know it.

I think you may need to slow down on this one. Riviera is a beautiful, albeit expensive, resort and people are buying. There should be a pretty decent sell-through by the time Reflections opens; I don't think anyone is panicking.

 

[ELMC]

Very true but it is possible that this person added on more points, but had them broken up? I could see someone adding on with 50 to use every other year for a specific trip. Whoever bought this already had points. I just don’t get the situation as to why one would buy and then sell so fast..unless, as suggested, they are selling other contracts.

Oh, I can think of a million reasons. Buyer's remorse. Job loss. Health crisis. Divorce. Simple regret. Ok, maybe not a million, but you know what I mean.

 

[Sandisw]

Oh, I can think of a million reasons. Buyer's remorse. Job loss. Health crisis. Divorce. Simple regret. Ok, maybe not a million, but you know what I mean.

True, but they are still going on a trip in March..I think thar Stumps me