DVC Direct Price Increase

[TravelTime]

For most of the time one can count on discounts inc Easter at 15-20%. Premier times with DVC tend to be some of the worst $$$ values comparatively speaking. The rental price, which can be better than owning since there are no home resort restrictions if you can find an owner, would be in the range of $7500 for 466 points and no tax. Even if you go yearly and assume you'd use that money for the trip, the break even is much longer since the opportunity costs/TVM are real even if one doesn't want to think about them. I ran the numbers. Comparing to renting at the current price of $16 per point adjusting for inflation on dues and rental costs at 4.5% and assuming a 5% ROR on the money (averaging out the first few years in a MM and the rest at market rates), I get a 14 year break even at $100 per point and a 24 yr break even at $176 PP. If you use cash it'll be a little quicker comparing to DVC but basically almost no one would consistently do DVC on cash.

I think both of our assumptions have flaws. Most people would not actually fit my hypothetical example. But if they did, renting 466 points for AK Club House would not be all that easy. If I used that assumption instead, then of course BE is longer. But even if we assume 14 years for BE, that is not all that long if you plan to hold for 38 years, 45 years or 50 years. And if you decide to sell, you will get some money back. So both of our assumptions and analyses are pure hypothesis.

However, my point was this is why DVC seems like it makes sense for many people. This is why DVC can keep raising prices.

If we all calculated TVM and opportunity costs in making any purchase decisions, we would vacation in our backyard in flyover country. There is no way I would live the life I have or taken the risks I have in my life if I considered TVM and opportunity costs for every decision.

I think what many people here miss is that there are semi-rationale explanations as to why DVC can raise prices and why people still buy.

On a side note, I stay in 1 BR units with views whenever that is an option, even when traveling by myself and always when traveling with DH. I pay a premium for that. If I considered TVM and opportunity costs, why not stay in a studio or hotel room with no view?

 

[Dean]

I think both of our assumptions have flaws. Most people would not actually fit my hypothetical example. But if they did, renting 466 points for AK Club House would not be all that easy. If I used that assumption instead, then of course BE is longer. But even if we assume 14 years for BE, that is not all that long if you plan to hold for 38 years, 45 years or 50 years. And if you decide to sell, you will get some money back. So both of our assumptions and analyses are pure hypothesis.

However, my point was this is why DVC seems like it makes sense for many people. This is why DVC can keep raising prices.

If we all calculated TVM and opportunity costs in making any purchase decisions, we would vacation in our backyard in flyover country. There is no way I would live the life I have or taken the risks I have in my life if I considered TVM and opportunity costs for every decision.

I think what many people here miss is that there are semi-rationale explanations as to why DVC can raise prices and why people still buy.

On a side note, I stay in 1 BR units with views whenever that is an option, even when traveling by myself and always when traveling with DH. I pay a premium for that. If I considered TVM and opportunity costs, why not stay in a studio or hotel room with no view?

I didn't compare to the charts, did you use the new costs for the 1 BR for that time looking at 2020 & beyond? Obviously every variable you change changes the outcome specifics but not the principles. I strongly disagree that it's all or nothing on the TMV. If you're investing $50K up front for vacation, those that can do so like it's a cup of coffee don't buy timeshares and don't worry about the costs of retail. I draw a line at 5 years and anything before 5 years I consider short term at MM rates and anything over I consider long term and would assume an 8% yield yearly over time (yes after taxes). I average it out to 5% for simplicity but if I break it out in this scenario it will lengthen the break even modestly I suspect. Certainly there are perks that might or might not add value and are not guaranteed and having control can be good but there's also risk and commitment, for example dues went up this year more than double the assumptions I used. Rental costs have also lagged the up front costs historically so there's a good chance the numbers I used of $16 a point compared to the other assumptions won't keep up and would reduce the cost of renting compared to owning over the assumptions. I believe that even a discounted rack rate comparison for DVC a fools comparison unless one consistently does so pre DVC anyway or stays in suites consistently. I think I've only seen one person post they always did suites on cash and thus for them, anything is going to be a savings no matter how poor it compares otherwise. And I don't ever recall anyone say they stay at DVC 1 BR or larger consistently on cash. Remember that a timeshare stay at Disney is different than a cash stay even in the same unit. On one hand you have parking fees but get daily housekeeping, on the other you don't have the tax and you have more control. But who's to say in 20 years the dues won't be more than the cash price would be, historically 30-35% discounts for deluxe resorts have been common for one group or another and 10% almost guaranteed.

The bottom line is DVD keeps raising prices because enough people will buy in. Basically they do so because they can, whether it makes sense for a given person or not. I've seen MANY, MANY examples historically of people that it would cost them more than OOP but they got emotionally tied to the idea of owning and conned themselves into it being a savings. Of course it's not just a savings issues, there's a value issue but for the current example it's a DVC say in the same unit so the value of a given stay in terms of amenities is the same.

 

[TravelTime]

I didn't compare to the charts, did you use the new costs for the 1 BR for that time looking at 2020 & beyond? Obviously every variable you change changes the outcome specifics but not the principles. I strongly disagree that it's all or nothing on the TMV. If you're investing $50K up front for vacation, those that can do so like it's a cup of coffee don't buy timeshares and don't worry about the costs of retail. I draw a line at 5 years and anything before 5 years I consider short term at MM rates and anything over I consider long term and would assume an 8% yield yearly over time (yes after taxes). I average it out to 5% for simplicity but if I break it out in this scenario it will lengthen the break even modestly I suspect. Certainly there are perks that might or might not add value and are not guaranteed and having control can be good but there's also risk and commitment, for example dues went up this year more than double the assumptions I used. Rental costs have also lagged the up front costs historically so there's a good chance the numbers I used of $16 a point compared to the other assumptions won't keep up and would reduce the cost of renting compared to owning over the assumptions. I believe that even a discounted rack rate comparison for DVC a fools comparison unless one consistently does so pre DVC anyway or stays in suites consistently. I think I've only seen one person post they always did suites on cash and thus for them, anything is going to be a savings no matter how poor it compares otherwise. And I don't ever recall anyone say they stay at DVC 1 BR or larger consistently on cash. Remember that a timeshare stay at Disney is different than a cash stay even in the same unit. On one hand you have parking fees but get daily housekeeping, on the other you don't have the tax and you have more control. But who's to say in 20 years the dues won't be more than the cash price would be, historically 30-35% discounts for deluxe resorts have been common for one group or another and 10% almost guaranteed.

The bottom line is DVD keeps raising prices because enough people will buy in. Basically they do so because they can, whether it makes sense for a given person or not. I've seen MANY, MANY examples historically of people that it would cost them more than OOP but they got emotionally tied to the idea of owning and conned themselves into it being a savings. Of course it's not just a savings issues, there's a value issue but for the current example it's a DVC say in the same unit so the value of a given stay in terms of amenities is the same.

Most people, even very wealthy people, do not think like this when it comes to vacations. A timeshare is not an investment or a stock. Many Tuggers tend to call timeshares their "portfolio" and do endless financial analysis on it. To me, that is foolish.

I disagree wholeheartedly that wealthy people would not join a vacation club. Who buys all the fractionals? Disney may not be Four Seasons or Ritz Carlton but I think people of all economic levels can relate to it.

TUG is a different market and group of people. Of course, no one in TUG would be renting 1 BR suites at cash prices consistently year after year. Frankly, I never even knew hotels and resorts had 1 BR suites until I discovered timesharing.

I think Disney understands people and what the market can bear. In my business, I charge the highest prices in my field. And the more I raise my prices above the competition, the more demand I seem to get. However, I know my limits and I tend to price 20-50% above average. I do not go way beyond that or then I would have no business.

 

[Dean]

Most people, even very wealthy people, do not think like this when it comes to vacations. A timeshare is not an investment or a stock. Many Tuggers tend to call timeshares their "portfolio" and do endless financial analysis on it. To me, that is foolish.

I disagree wholeheartedly that wealthy people would not join a vacation club. Who buys all the fractionals? Disney may not be Four Seasons or Ritz Carlton but I think people of all economic levels can relate to it.

TUG is a different market and group of people. Of course, no one in TUG would be renting 1 BR suites at cash prices consistently year after year. Frankly, I never even knew hotels and resorts had 1 BR suites until I discovered timesharing.

I think Disney understands people and what the market can bear. In my business, I charge the highest prices in my field. And the more I raise my prices above the competition, the more demand I seem to get. However, I know my limits and I tend to price 20-50% above average. I do not go way beyond that or then I would have no business.

We'll have to agree to disagree on who buys DVC and Marriott timeshare. Ritz and Four Seasons is a different market but I doubt Bill Gates or similar owns one.

 

[TravelTime]

We'll have to agree to disagree on who buys DVC and Marriott timeshare. Ritz and Four Seasons is a different market but I doubt Bill Gates or similar owns one.

Bill Gates is not in the wealthy population. He is in the stratosphere of a market of his own. Many times, people seem to confuse the "wealthy" with the 0.0001%. Very different. The top 1% of our country is the working rich. I read that anyone earning over $400K a year is considered to be in the top 1%. Very different than the uber rich.

Bill Gates owns Four Seasons, though. Not a fractional but an entire chunk of it. But for Bill Gates, owning one or a few hotels would be a fractional, I guess.

Similarly, many uber rich people enjoy buying luxury hotels.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/two-vi...-run-luxury-hotels-its-been-a-slog-1500226911

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Seasons_Hotels_and_Resorts

Four Seasons Hotels Limited, trading as Four Seasons Hotels and Resorts, is an international luxury hospitality company[3]headquartered in Toronto, Ontario.[4] Four Seasons operates more than 100 hotels worldwide.[5] Since 2007, Bill Gates (through Cascade Investment) and Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal have been majority owners of the company.[6

 

[Dean]

Bill Gates is not in the wealthy population. He is in the stratosphere of a market of his own. Many times, people seem to confuse the "wealthy" with the 0.0001%. Very different. The top 1% of our country is the working rich. I read that anyone earning over $400K a year is considered to be in the top 1%. Very different than the uber rich.

Bill Gates owns Four Seasons, though. Not a fractional but an entire chunk of it. But for Bill Gates, owning one or a few hotels would be a fractional, I guess.

Similarly, many uber rich people enjoy buying luxury hotels.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/two-vi...-run-luxury-hotels-its-been-a-slog-1500226911

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Seasons_Hotels_and_Resorts

Four Seasons Hotels Limited, trading as Four Seasons Hotels and Resorts, is an international luxury hospitality company[3]headquartered in Toronto, Ontario.[4] Four Seasons operates more than 100 hotels worldwide.[5] Since 2007, Bill Gates (through Cascade Investment) and Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal have been majority owners of the company.[6

Timeshares are a risk and aggravation, there's no reason to fool with them if there's no benefit and for most, if there's not a true savings and or real added value without much or any additional cost. Timeshare have real and significant cost (some more than others) and potential real value (for some anyway, esp DVC). To not at least consider the costs up front and ongoing is foolish, IMO and those where it's so insignificant in their world that it'd be unreasonable to think about it don't buy timeshares. Obviously the best time to consider the costs & risks is going in but one should at least be aware. It'd like getting an inheritance and blowing the money because it was "found money", one can do so and many do, but not responsible.

 

[TravelTime]

Timeshares are a risk and aggravation, there's no reason to fool with them if there's no benefit and for most, if there's not a true savings and or real added value without much or any additional cost. Timeshare have real and significant cost (some more than others) and potential real value (for some anyway, esp DVC). To not at least consider the costs up front and ongoing is foolish, IMO and those where it's so insignificant in their world that it'd be unreasonable to think about it don't buy timeshares. Obviously the best time to consider the costs & risks is going in but one should at least be aware. It'd like getting an inheritance and blowing the money because it was "found money", one can do so and many do, but not responsible.

Yes I know that you have said this many times on TUG. Most people should not buy timeshares at all and should just put all their money in the bank and save. I was just trying to explain why some people may not always see it as foolish. No different than purchasing an expensive Hawaii week. Many people buy them resale and the BE point is long, if ever, and many times there is no residual value. Or buying a new car. Or paying for an expensive gym. Or any other discretionary purchase where there are cheaper and nearly identical alternatives. It is all foolish.

 

[elaine]

DVC has an intangible premium for us even though we are bargain "mid-luxury" shoppers. We have DVC (resale AKV) and love it. We are staying over Easter for 5 nights in 2 studios for annual fees of about $1300. A 1 BR when we took our kids over Christmas was about the same for 5 nights. We feel like we are on a land-cruise when staying at DVC. We can charge everything, or get the dining plan, kids can come and go, beautiful pools (DH and I sometimes only go into WDW 1X).
2 years ago we stayed in a 3BR at HGVC SW. Beautiful unit, pools, etc. But it felt like a nice condo stay and DH had to drive back and forth with teens 2X/day. We're going to try BC next year to see if that is a compromise alternative. But, for now, I'm very happy at our $80 PP price, esp. as I can likely sell in 5-7 years and recoup most capital outlay. No way is it worth it at $150+ IMHO.
I agree with Dean, otherwise, TS are getting to be a big hassle. We were thinking of buying a HGVC or Marriott--but too many issues reading on TUG even about these TS.

 

[Dean]

Yes I know that you have said this many times on TUG. Most people should not buy timeshares at all and should just put all their money in the bank and save. I was just trying to explain why some people may not always see it as foolish. No different than purchasing an expensive Hawaii week. Many people buy them resale and the BE point is long, if ever, and many times there is no residual value. Or buying a new car. Or paying for an expensive gym. Or any other discretionary purchase where there are cheaper and nearly identical alternatives. It is all foolish.

I agree with you, most should not buy timeshares. Many can't afford it (even those that buy) and many don't understand what they're getting into. Sales staff are good at their job as a rule and often get people to buy that shouldnt'. My statements were to extreme situations, not trying to draw a line in the sand you or I might be on opposites ends of, basically principles to use to evaluate the big picture. If you don't want to think or care what you're spending or what value you're getting, that's your decision but for most it is a foolish approach IMO. But then when most people have a net worth of zero or less and most get to retirement without anything substantial, I personally think it's an important area to pay attention to. My basic point is to think about what you're doing, to basically pay attention. If you do and you decide to spend $100K on a European river cruise, I'm OK with that as long as it doesn't hurt you or your family. I'm not telling people what to do but I reserve the right to have an opinion on the principles involved.

 

[TravelTime]

I do not think people are broke due to timeshares. I doubt very many people actually own them, especially with the terrible reputation they have. Most people laugh at timeshare owners and think we are foolish for buying into a scam.

 

[chalee94]

It also doesn't factor in the residual value of the contract in 2042-ish. Which *could* be $0...or could be a number substantially higher than that. Roughly speaking there are four camps of belief as to what DVC will do for the WDW resorts as 2042 approaches. Nothing, offer a better executed OKW-style extension, offer a option to 're-buy' before opening sales to the general public, and offer an option to 'pre-buy' at a discount off the general public prices. Only in the first of those four cases is the value of existing contracts $0.

IIRC, in a couple of cases, prices went down after presales to current members so there is a risk in jumping in early, which makes pre-offers very similar to "nothing." DVC is unlikely to be offering deep discounts unless things change considerably.

So I still think "nothing" is the heavy favorite - the new resale rules will discourage any thought of extensions for the time being as Disney rolls old resorts into the DVC2 club. And many current owners are either 1) too old to have any interest in owning after expiration or 2) too skittish about what additional changes DVC will make that damage their ownership. We'll see but I'd bet very heavily on "nothing."

(BTW, I say "WDW resorts" as it is unclear if DVC will keep Vero and HHI. There is also a school of thought that DVC will blow up the resorts in 2042 and start fresh...but I don't see them spending that kind of money if they don't have to - the buildings will only be 50ish years old at that point. It isn't as if we see similar speculation that Disney will blow up the Contemporary or Grand Floridian or any other of their resorts that are of a similar age or older.

ever stayed at the Spicebush in Hilton Head? used to be a Marriott but now it isn't. I suspect that Disney will sell off VB and possibly HHI after 2042 expiration of the DVC leases. it's not like demolition is the only option...

 

[ljmiii]

I do not think people are broke due to timeshares. I doubt very many people actually own them, especially with the terrible reputation they have. Most people laugh at timeshare owners and think we are foolish for buying into a scam.

I hate to disagree with you TravelTime, but those who know of TUG's existence much less those who post on its forums are an insignificant portion of the timeshare market. And even here we do get the occasional newbie with a sad story about how their financial life is falling apart and wondering how to best get out from timeshare ownership.

In the wider world of FB ignorance and stupidity is rampant and at times painful to watch. Their stories are horrible. Even worse...it does require a certain awareness to find the better FB DVC and MVCI groups. I know there is a sea of people further distant from TUG's shores that know even less.

I don't know if I'd say they are broke *because* of timeshares. But the ability of someone with basically no money to go into debt for tens of thousands of dollars who then has to try to pay off the purchase at 20% interest plus MFs has not been helpful.

 

[geist1223]

I do not think people are broke due to timeshares. I doubt very many people actually own them, especially with the terrible reputation they have. Most people laugh at timeshare owners and think we are foolish for buying into a scam.

We bought our first timeshare together before we were married. I put my share on a no interest Credit Card and every 12-18 months I would roll it over to a new No Interest credit card. Patti pulled her half out of Investments. Her financial advisor was horrified. But a couple years later after we had traveled all over the USA, Canada, Mexico, Hawaii, Europe, Australia, etc she changed her mind saying that we got a lot out of it and we were among the very few she knew that used their timeshare fully and had a great time. This was also after she joined us for a trip to the BI and 2 weeks in Australia.

 

[ljmiii]

ever stayed at the Spicebush in Hilton Head? used to be a Marriott but now it isn't. I suspect that Disney will sell off VB and possibly HHI after 2042 expiration of the DVC leases. it's not like demolition is the only option...

Sorry, I should have been clearer. The comment about some people believing that DVC will demo the resorts referred to the WDW resorts, not Vero or HHI. I would assume that if DVC wished to divest itself of its Atlantic Coast resorts it would sell them as you suggested.

Not that I think any of them will be demo'd. It just seems to be an argument of the 'nothing' crowd that the day each resort's contracts runs out DVD will then demo that resort to build a new one.

Which seems to me to be absurd. As I said, it isn't as if they are THAT old - the MK Disney resorts are twenty plus years older and no one talks about ripping down the Grand Floridian hotel in 23 years. Also, Disney wouldn't allow DVD to impact it's revenue stream - thus I don't see them giving DVD permission to 'blow up' BCV if the changes would impact the Yacht and Beach Club's hotel and convention business.

 

[ljmiii]

So I still think "nothing" is the heavy favorite - the new resale rules will discourage any thought of extensions for the time being as Disney rolls old resorts into the DVC2 club. And many current owners are either 1) too old to have any interest in owning after expiration or 2) too skittish about what additional changes DVC will make that damage their ownership. We'll see but I'd bet very heavily on "nothing."

Anything could change, but thus far DVC has been careful to not directly impact their existing customers. Which is part of why I think 'nothing' is by far the least likely of the four options.

As for extensions I think the primary lesson DVC learned (aside from don't try to sell something that DVC arguably just gave away for free) is to wait until the end date is much closer. Would any extension limit resale use in those extra years? Of course. Would any extension price be based on then current direct prices at new resorts? Of course...and many owners wouldn't/couldn't buy for that reason.

Also, there is no reason to expect 'now current owners' to be 'then current owners' when the average length of ownership of a DVC contract is around 10 years.

 

[Dean]

I do not think people are broke due to timeshares. I doubt very many people actually own them, especially with the terrible reputation they have. Most people laugh at timeshare owners and think we are foolish for buying into a scam.

I've seen quite a few over the years that created quite a mess in part due to timeshares including a path to bankruptcy. But there are always always multiple factors, not just the timeshare by itself. One big problem is that those that don't pay attention do so in multiple areas, not just with a timeshare. Not paying attention is a symptom of a larger problem for many, not simply a choice to ignore the costs/risks in a single area. Personally I think the risk avoidance is more important than the cost and it's the area people pay the least attention to. For DVC specifically they tend to assume around the best case scenario and ignore the risks. Not that we can anticipate everything or live in fear, but at least consider what happens with divorce, loss of loved one, loss of job, disability, medical issues, etc.

 

[Steve Fatula]

And even here we do get the occasional newbie with a sad story about how their financial life is falling apart and wondering how to best get out from timeshare ownership.

I don't know if I'd say they are broke *because* of timeshares. But the ability of someone with basically no money to go into debt for tens of thousands of dollars who then has to try to pay off the purchase at 20% interest plus MFs has not been helpful.

And much more for me, but it's just my opinion just like Dean can have his opinion about how other should behave, it's not timeshares for the average person that makes them broke, as TravelTime noted, the new car things, ridiculous cell phone plans, horrible cable bills, house they cannot afford, etc. I see all that waste and timeshares pale in comparison. The way I see things at least. But it's my view. I have no right to say others should deal with those details, and I don't accept anyone saying how I should treat financial issues.

If you have enough money for a TS including future fees, and, they provide value and enjoyment to you, go for it. I did, and it's the greatest thing I ever did. Should one consider the costs? Of course, just like they should for anything else in life. Sure, cars don't have endless fees right, or do they? People I see continually buy that expensive new SUV (or here pickup trucks for 40G), so, while not identical, it's the same problem to me except worse. But if it brings them joy, I have no quarrel, as long as it doesn't drive them broke.

You can consider is it a worthwhile "investment" if you wish, that's your way. Not everyone sees it that way. It is neither wise or unwise, it's just we are all different and have different needs.

 

[TravelTime]

And much more for me, but it's just my opinion just like Dean can have his opinion about how other should behave, it's not timeshares for the average person that makes them broke, as TravelTime noted, the new car things, ridiculous cell phone plans, horrible cable bills, house they cannot afford, etc. I see all that waste and timeshares pale in comparison. The way I see things at least. But it's my view. I have no right to say others should deal with those details, and I don't accept anyone saying how I should treat financial issues.

If you have enough money for a TS including future fees, and, they provide value and enjoyment to you, go for it. I did, and it's the greatest thing I ever did. Should one consider the costs? Of course, just like they should for anything else in life. Sure, cars don't have endless fees right, or do they? People I see continually buy that expensive new SUV (or here pickup trucks for 40G), so, while not identical, it's the same problem to me except worse. But if it brings them joy, I have no quarrel, as long as it doesn't drive them broke.

You can consider is it a worthwhile "investment" if you wish, that's your way. Not everyone sees it that way. It is neither wise or unwise, it's just we are all different and have different needs.

Steve, you said this better than I ever could. I think people who are financially devastated by timeshares might have been living on the edge before the purchase. They probably make many financial mistakes. I still look back on the housing bust as an example. Most people who lost their homes could not afford the payments. Some just stopped paying because they saw the decline in value and just wanted out. But the vast majority of people survived the housing bust and the Great Recession intact (or even better off). If you do not have the money and a timeshare could bankrupt you or negatively affect your lifestyle by going into debt, then it is most certainly a terrible thing. However, even if one makes a foolish decision by purchasing a timeshare, it they can afford it, even if they do not get max value out of it by knowing all the TS hacks, they will not go bankrupt from the purchase.

 

[TravelTime]

I asked my super duper financially conservative friend who has been a senior financial manager at major Fortune 500 companies and consulting firms and graduated from University of Chicago’s school of business with an MBA as to how she makes purchase decisions. She said:

To answer your question on the evaluating stuff. Both. However with investments the long term horizon is most important. Time value of money and NPV. However, product features are important and available funds. It really depends on the objective of the purchase.
​

I agree with her. I think with investments, everyone should take TVM and opportunity costs into account. With discretionary purchases where I have available funds, I am more likely to use other factors to make the decision including enjoyment and other intangible benefits.

 

[Dean]

I asked my super duper financially conservative friend who has been a senior financial manager at major Fortune 500 companies and consulting firms and graduated from University of Chicago’s school of business with an MBA as to how she makes purchase decisions. She said:

To answer your question on the evaluating stuff. Both. However with investments the long term horizon is most important. Time value of money and NPV. However, product features are important and available funds. It really depends on the objective of the purchase.
​

I agree with her. I think with investments, everyone should take TVM and opportunity costs into account. With discretionary purchases where I have available funds, I am more likely to use other factors to make the decision including enjoyment and other intangible benefits.

But that's just it, people tend not to make good decisions in most areas and bad decisions in one area over time, they tend to make bad decisions in general or good decisions in general (nothing is perfect). It's theory vs practicality.

 

[TravelTime]

But that's just it, people tend not to make good decisions in most areas and bad decisions in one area over time, they tend to make bad decisions in general or good decisions in general (nothing is perfect). It's theory vs practicality.

I agree people are irrational. But I do not see that most people are stupid and foolish for making some bad decisions. Most people I know are fine money managers and make decent decisions based on their needs and budget and live within their means. I guess I have many responsible friends and family. None own timeshares as they all think timeshares are a scam. In fact, I do not tell anyone I have timeshares because they will criticize. I told some folks once and I was beat up for buying into the scam. But then when I tell them about my trips, they are jealous. People are definitely irrational and it is hard to change people’s minds once they have a firm opinion based on strongly held beliefs.

 

[Dean]

I agree people are irrational. But I do not see that most people are stupid and foolish for making some bad decisions. Most people I know are fine money managers and make decent decisions based on their needs and budget and live within their means. I guess I have many responsible friends and family. None own timeshares as they all think timeshares are a scam. In fact, I do not tell anyone I have timeshares because they will criticize. I told some folks once and I was beat up for buying into the scam. But then when I tell them about my trips, they are jealous. People are definitely irrational and it is hard to change people’s minds once they have a firm opinion based on strongly held beliefs.

I believe that to be unclear is to be unkind. It sounds like we mostly agree, it's just the specific wording where we're separated.

 

[Lisa P]

For most of the time one can count on discounts inc Easter at 15-20%. ... Comparing to renting at the current price of $16 per point ... a 24 yr break even at $176 PP. If you use cash it'll be a little quicker comparing to DVC but basically almost no one would consistently do DVC on cash.

Totally agree. Given that this thread is about the higher prices of buying in now from DVC, and most people don't normally rent DVC rooms for cash, the comparison that seems to make the most sense here, would be between the costs for a new DVC purchaser vs. the costs for those people of staying in comparable rooms on property by using alternate means... renting points, seeking AP discounts on deluxe rooms, etc.

...my point was this is why DVC seems like it makes sense for many people.

I guess it has always seemed to make sense to me for many new purchasers within certain demographics but these rising prices are resulting in it making sense for fewer new purchasers. For me, this thread is not reflecting on the wisdom of past decisions under the circumstances at the time. IMO, it's about how we, as TUG members, consider or advise others who are considering the current/future terms of DVC purchases. Yes, there are intangibles which do matter, but the monetary value is asked about regularly whenever people post, "Is it worth it?"

I doubt very many people actually own [timeshares], especially with the terrible reputation they have.

ARDA reports that there are "over 9.6 million" households owning one or more timeshares. "Timeshare ownership generally increases with household income peaking among owners with $100k or more (11.0%)." http://www.arda.org/aif-foundation/research/timesharedatashare/overview.aspx

 

[Lisa P]

...some people believing that DVC will demo the resorts referred to the WDW resorts... Not that I think any of them will be demo'd. ... it isn't as if they are THAT old...

The reason I've wondered if DVC may want to demo OKW is because of what they did in the past with the property now known as Saratoga Springs Resort. When it was first developed, it was the Walt Disney World Conference Center, then the Village Resort, then the Disney Village Resort, then the Disney Institute, and finally, SSR. Along the way, there were sections called Vacation Villas, Fairway Villas (townhomes), Treehouse Villas, Club Lake Villas, and Grand Vista Suites. All of these condos and houses (except the Treehouses) were demolished and the higher density Saratoga Springs condo buildings were added around the central spa facilities. When demo'd, those buildings were not "THAT old" either.

 

[TravelTime]

The reason I've wondered if DVC may want to demo OKW is because of what they did in the past with the property now known as Saratoga Springs Resort. When it was first developed, it was the Walt Disney World Conference Center, then the Village Resort, then the Disney Village Resort, then the Disney Institute, and finally, SSR. Along the way, there were sections called Vacation Villas, Fairway Villas (townhomes), Treehouse Villas, Club Lake Villas, and Grand Vista Suites. All of these condos and houses (except the Treehouses) were demolished and the higher density Saratoga Springs condo buildings were added around the central spa facilities. When demo'd, those buildings were not "THAT old" either.

Interesting history on SSR.