100 pt Direct Blue Card Minimum September 17,2019

[CarolMN]

Just trying to read the tea leaves here.
...........(snip).........I don't see why they would care if they sold 100 75-point contracts or 75 100-point ones. This then indicates that this new requirement is meant to drive more sales to Riviera, which must be struggling bad enough that they have to do more to drive sales there......................

A small contract costs just as much to set up and administer as a larger one. DVCMC has a set percentage of member dues to cover all the expenses of running the Club. My guess is that they'd prefer to have a smaller number of contracts for the same amount of sales revenue for DVD if possible.

 

[Ben E N]

A small contract costs just as much to set up and administer as a larger one. DVCMC has a set percentage of member dues to cover all the expenses of running the Club. My guess is that they'd prefer to have a smaller number of contracts for the same amount of sales revenue for DVD if possible.

Perhaps, but then why would they have lowered the minimum buy in to just 50 points only a few years ago? And if they noticed that the cost to process those contracts was prohibitive, why wouldn't they just jump up to 100 right then? If this change is actually happening, I have a feeling it's to prevent more people from buying partially resale, partially direct at now sold out resorts.

 

[kboo]

But it's going the wrong way, isn't it?. Requiring a higher minimum for the benefits makes the difference between resale/direct or a hybrid seem worse. At least with 75 you have more of a chance of people going thru the hybrid points hoops. 100 points? That's another 25 points worth of value you need to achieve to make it worthwhile. As always there will be those who don't care about the money but they likely are already buying 100 pts+ direct and never considering resale. The resale buyer who looks at the difference and was on the fence would now have an even tougher time justifying the upcharge. It's the ones on the fence they would have to be hoping to get and essentially raising the price for benefits wouldn't seem to be apt to make them jump on the direct wagon.

Ok, I see your point. Viewed another way, I wonder if this is intended to discourage the hybrid approach, which clearly they were intending to do when they raised the minimum for benefits from 25 to 75. It does put a much higher price on FOMO.

 

[Yinn]

Ok, I see your point. Viewed another way, I wonder if this is intended to discourage the hybrid approach, which clearly they were intending to do when they raised the minimum for benefits from 25 to 75. It does put a much higher price on FOMO.

I could see that being the case. A 75 direct could be a standalone or an add on. 100 points is quite a bit to add on. I’m sure it’s done, but probably for larger holders. You wouldn’t necessarily buy 50 resale and then buy 100 direct. Partly because it’s a hassle, but also because smaller contracts are more expensive per point, which reduces the benefit of going resale.

But the question still remains since it forces one or the other. If you’re one of those, why not just go all resale? On a AKV @ 175 points total, it’s basically a $12,000 difference. That’s still a lot.

 

[ChimneyJim]

Interestingly we had already decided to add direct prior to his statement but he didn’t know that. Either way we’ll be in with 75.

 

[kboo]

But the question still remains since it forces one or the other. If you’re one of those, why not just go all resale? On a AKV @ 175 points total, it’s basically a $12,000 difference. That’s still a lot.

Maybe it not only discourages a hybrid approach but also discourages direct purchases for anything except RIV and OKW-E?

So if I really wanted AKV or any L14 resort, for that matter, the price differential is so big that you should just go all resale. OKW-E is hard enough to find resale that I could see them willing to sell that direct (and possibly ROFR some cheaper 2042 OKW contracts so they can resell them with the 2057 end date).

 

[Tony McQ]

Just got off the phone with my DVC guide, Gib McCain. (As an aside, he received a positive review on the DVC show this week from @WebmasterPete. I can confirm a similar experience. Highly recommended!)

Anyway, I was already in the market for a 75-point direct contract. Spoke with Gib last week. But, reached out again to Gib today after reading this thread. He indicated that there was a (guide) meeting ~1:00PM ET today during which the 100-point direct contract minimum was confirmed with an effective date of 9/17. But, if you get in before that date you will be “grandfathered” in to the current 75-point requirement.

So...the rumor appears to be true. I trust his word as when I originally discussed a direct contract with him he wasn’t pushy and, in fact, suggested for me to wait until my resale contract (in the final stages of closing) is fully complete to consider moving forward.

 

[Ben E N]

Maybe it not only discourages a hybrid approach but also discourages direct purchases for anything except RIV and OKW-E?

So if I really wanted AKV or any L14 resort, for that matter, the price differential is so big that you should just go all resale. OKW-E is hard enough to find resale that I could see them willing to sell that direct (and possibly ROFR some cheaper 2042 OKW contracts so they can resell them with the 2057 end date).

That's the thinking I have as well. It's also why they raised the prices of their currently sold out resorts so high last round of price changes.
This is why I think Riviera isn't doing so well. They have to keep tweaking the rules to help it sell, when they did not have to do so for other resorts nearly as much.

 

[ELMC]

Ok, I see your point. Viewed another way, I wonder if this is intended to discourage the hybrid approach, which clearly they were intending to do when they raised the minimum for benefits from 25 to 75. It does put a much higher price on FOMO.

I think they're trying to discourage one-half of the hybrid approach.

Seriously, though, Disney does not want people buying resale. Period. They're doing everything they can to incentivize direct membership, but they're seeing that they're still not getting the full purchase. By upping the minimum they still capture those who buy for the blue card and perhaps make them buy enough points that they don't have the money or need to do the second half, which is add-on via resale. It's a balancing act, though, because if they set the floor too high people will balk and either not buy or buy 100% resale. I'm sure they're tracking the data on these point minimum hikes like crazy.

 

[Fred M]

If you go to the DVC Member web site, and look up the "total cost of membership," it reads that DVC starts at "$18,800 for 100 vacation points." And they have a sliding scale for what your points can get you and the minimum on the sliding scale is 100 points.

https://disneyvacationclub.disney.go.com/membership/costs/

 

[HolyMolyHolly]

\

My guide just let me know that September 17 the minimum for benefits is going to 100 pts.

Confirmed. Mine too

 

[dropd]

I also just confirmed via telephone the 9/17 date and the 100 point cutoff.

This hurts me specifically because our plan was to add on 75 direct points w/October use year, but DVC only has waitlist for October use year right now.

So my choices basically are:

1) Buy RIV (or Aulani, which is not in the cards) w/October use year. We like RIV except for the resale risk, which is substantial. CCV direct prices are too high to consider IMO.

2) Wait to come off the waitlist, which is likely to happen after the 9/17 deadline, and buy 100 points instead of 75 which changes the math for us. We were looking to "break even" on the direct purchase via AP discounts after ~5 years which won't happen @100 points direct instead of 75.

3) Buy 75 direct now, but with a different use year than our resale points (probably a September use year). Opinion on the boards seems split on whether this is a manageable situation or a giant headache.

3) Ditch the plan to buy direct and ultimately pursue the additional 75 points resale whenever the right contract comes up, and live w/o the discounts - which would likely have only made a meaningful difference after a number of years anyway.

None of these are ideal for me. Oh well.

 

[TexasChick123]

Thank you to those of you who reached out to their guides from those of us sitting on the sidelines this time. To me, this isn't the least bit surprising. DVD is a business. They are always looking for ways to make more money and/or cut costs. When they started to require a minimum direct purchase for benefits, the minimum started out at 25 points and sold like crazy. They increased the minimum to 75 points, and people are still adding on 75 points left and right. As a business, they are going to make the minimum as high as the market will bear. If the direct sales numbers are hurt because of the increase, they can reduce the amount needed to qualify for direct benefits. If they see little to no decrease, or even better an increase in sales dollars, in the number of direct sales, then they made a good decision because they want to sell more points in a single transaction for more money and sell out a resort faster. In the next year or two, we will all be talking about the 125-150 point minimum for benefits or something like that. It's just going to keep going up as long as the market will bear it. While I don't like it, I accept it. DVC/DVD isn't in the business of looking out for me; they are in the business of making money.

 

[dropd]

DVC/DVD isn't in the business of looking out for me; they are in the business of making money.

Yeah, I don't have any outrage over the overall decision - they're going to optimize for profit - I just don't like the lack of goodwill with the extreme short notice for the change.

 

[TexasChick123]

Yeah, I don't have any outrage over the overall decision - they're going to optimize for profit - I just don't like the lack of goodwill with the extreme short notice for the change.

I get that. I think I just have a very cynical outlook when it comes to the new management. I find if my expectations are low, I’m rarely disappointed. I know that’s sad.

 

[CanadaDisney05]

What's the recommendation? Planning on buying 150 points direct. If I get in before 9/17, should I go 75 x 2? Or 100 + 50?

 

[Great3]

Well, I was discussing with my wife whether or not to buy the 75 points direct several weeks ago, and we decided against it at the time, to be revisited later in a year or two. Now for sure, there's no need to revisit a direct purchase. Thanks for making our decision easy for us DVC . Now I know I will be going resales all the way, and because I don't have direct benefits, I won't be buying Annual Passes, therefore saving money (by not going to Disney as often and spending money there). Granted, I will still be spending vacation dollars, it was just be at someone else. Although sad at first, somehow I am glad DVC made the decision much easier for my family and I.

 

[Brett Wyman]

And the financial justification for direct gets more difficult for many resorts.

Right? Its like Disney wants to prevent people from buying direct.

 

[Great3]

What's the recommendation? Planning on buying 150 points direct. If I get in before 9/17, should I go 75 x 2? Or 100 + 50?

What's the recommendation? Planning on buying 150 points direct. If I get in before 9/17, should I go 75 x 2? Or 100 + 50?

I would got 3 x 50 points if possible. Even if it same UY / resort. Since it's direct, it's just more closing costs only, but the 50 points contract seems to sell fast and for a premium comes resale time. And I know you been thinking about your exit strategy as well, even before purchasing.

Great3

 

[BrerRabbit1119]

Well, I was discussing with my wife whether or not to buy the 75 points direct several weeks ago, and we decided against it at the time, to be revisited later in a year or two. Now for sure, there's no need to revisit a direct purchase. Thanks for making our decision easy for us DVC . Now I know I will be going resales all the way, and because I don't have direct benefits, I won't be buying Annual Passes, therefore saving money (by not going to Disney as often and spending money there). Granted, I will still be spending vacation dollars, it was just be at someone else. Although sad at first, somehow I am glad DVC made the decision much easier for my family and I.

Same here - this really solidifies whether or not I will buy direct in the future. The differential between resale and direct is now just too vast to legitimize the few benefits. Disney basically made the decision for us. We will almost certainly be adding more points on in the future, but they will also be resale.