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

[Spark65]

Madame

"In both cases no lies were told. Information was not volunteered so that a salesperson could profit."

You made that statement above. You are disappointed DVC is making money off others but not about anyone doing the same selling resale in that instance it's OK for you.

I am not on about anything just you with it's OK for one but not the other attitude. I wish I could make money off everything and I don't feel Disney should not be allowed to share in the same freedoms.

 

[Jenniebee]

It's too bad what happened though, to give up that BCV contract... yikes.

 

[Madame]

Madame

"In both cases no lies were told. Information was not volunteered so that a salesperson could profit."

You made that statement above. You are disappointed DVC is making money off others but not about anyone doing the same selling resale in that instance it's OK for you.

I am not on about anything just you with it's OK for one but not the other attitude. I wish I could make money off everything and I don't feel Disney should not be allowed to share in the same freedoms.

Are you yanking my chain? Go argue with yourself. I have no hidden agenda. SMH.

 

[ELMC]

You most definitely are not in sales because if you were you'd be un-employed! Margins mean everything in sales.

It is safe to infer from the poster's comment suggesting that Disney offer to buy the contract back at the price of the last ROFRd contract that margins have been accounted for. If they were willing to do it once at a specific price it would suggest that the margins were acceptable. It stands to reason that the margins would be acceptable again at the same price.

I am not trying to single you out but if you decide to sell your DVC stake will you be honest and upfront and sell for what you paid for it or is selling it for twice as much per point than your original buy in ethical? Just curious.

Madame

"In both cases no lies were told. Information was not volunteered so that a salesperson could profit."

You made that statement above. You are disappointed DVC is making money off others but not about anyone doing the same selling resale in that instance it's OK for you.

I am not on about anything just you with it's OK for one but not the other attitude. I wish I could make money off everything and I don't feel Disney should not be allowed to share in the same freedoms.

This is a classic straw man argument and I have a hard time believing that you think these are the same thing. But maybe you do. Regardless, in the first case, selling something for twice what you paid for it is irrelevant if it is an appreciating asset being sold at fair market value. Values of assets rise and fall all the time, and cost basis plays no part in determining a fair price, only current market forces are at work. In the second case, Disney is buying at less than half of an established and reasonably accepted fair market value. As I said earlier, I don't have a problem with what the Disney salesperson did, I felt it was fair and reasonable. They gave the customer exactly what they asked for and they adhered to past practice, namely to offer to buy back contracts at a price much lower than the secondary market. But to equate two very different situations to try to discredit someone's argument is a logical fallacy. Furthermore, your implication is that if @Madame sold her contract for more than she paid for it that it would be dishonest and not upfront. That is well, questionable at best.

 

[Spark65]

Are you yanking my chain? Go argue with yourself. I have no hidden agenda. SMH.

Yanking your chain hardly nor did I mention a hidden agenda. You made a point about DVC or a salesman trying to profit and how offensive it was to have DVC act this way. I merely tried to point out your hypocrisy so no argument really.
Hopefully when you decide to sell your DVC at some point you do so in the spirit of the forum and sell for what your initial outlay per point was and not for profit.

 

[Spark65]

It is safe to infer from the poster's comment suggesting that Disney offer to buy the contract back at the price of the last ROFRd contract that margins have been accounted for. If they were willing to do it once at a specific price it would suggest that the margins were acceptable. It stands to reason that the margins would be acceptable again at the same price.



This is a classic straw man argument and I have a hard time believing that you think these are the same thing. But maybe you do. Regardless, in the first case, selling something for twice what you paid for it is irrelevant if it is an appreciating asset being sold at fair market value. Values of assets rise and fall all the time, and cost basis plays no part in determining a fair price, only current market forces are at work. In the second case, Disney is buying at less than half of an established and reasonably accepted fair market value. As I said earlier, I don't have a problem with what the Disney salesperson did, I felt it was fair and reasonable. They gave the customer exactly what they asked for and they adhered to past practice, namely to offer to buy back contracts at a price much lower than the secondary market. But to equate two very different situations to try to discredit someone's argument is a logical fallacy. Furthermore, your implication is that if @Madame sold her contract for more than she paid for it that it would be dishonest and not upfront. That is well, questionable at best.

ELMC I am glad you did not put me on global ignore shows that you have character after all. I have only been trying to show Madame her dissatisfaction for profit by DVC is wrong doesn't mean it's right either.

I have really noticed in the last couple of days your RIV posts have changed from negative to neutral so things are happening here at Disboards and I am glad you are starting to post in a neutral light with perspective.

 

[Madame]

Yanking your chain hardly nor did I mention a hidden agenda. You made a point about DVC or a salesman trying to profit and how offensive it was to have DVC act this way. I merely tried to point out your hypocrisy so no argument really.
Hopefully when you decide to sell your DVC at some point you do so in the spirit of the forum and sell for what your initial outlay per point was and not for profit.

Before I hit the DIS version of « block » I will lay this out for you, yes?

1. I thought ELMC’s Marriott guide had in essence done the equivalent of the FB story I posted (not exact, but similar). I was confused as to why one was viewed as underhanded and the other not.

2. ELMC corrected me. The Marriott guide had lied, so, different than not simply adding additional information not required as part of the guide’s role.

3. I agreed that that was indeed a different situation. I agreed with you that both a seller and DVC can profit off a sale.

4. You accused me of some sort of profiteering (on at least 1 contract that is half exhausted I overpaid for, this would be extremely unlikely).

5. Then you began speaking of « enemies » and « neutrality » like we are in some conflict... And I decided that this was too weird...

 

[ELMC]

ELMC I am glad you did not put me on global ignore shows that you have character after all. I have only been trying to show Madame her dissatisfaction for profit by DVC is wrong doesn't mean it's right either.

I have really noticed in the last couple of days your RIV posts have changed from negative to neutral so things are happening here at Disboards and I am glad you are starting to post in a neutral light with perspective.

I will thank you to confine your comments to the discussion topics at hand and not my character, lack thereof, perspective, or lack thereof.

You are very clearly missing the point that @Madame tried to make - her issue is with the salesperson's actions and how it was more in line with behavior found in representatives of other timeshare systems, and that if Disney wishes to be held to a higher standard then they cannot act in such ways. This is part of a broader conversation about Disney's apparent moves to become more like other timeshare systems and how people feel about that. Her position has nothing to do with whether or not Disney was entitled to make a profit.

Regarding my posts pertaining to Riviera, they are neither negative nor neutral. Nor positive for that matter. I have fundamental issues with the structure and pricing of the resort and I share that in a way that appropriately moves the conversation forward. But I am also sensitive to the fact that others feel differently and I do not wish for my negative feelings about the resort to be misperceived as an attack on those who feel otherwise.

Running the risk of throwing my experience around and being insulting towards new members, I would like to point out that this particular forum here on the DIS has always been a home for honest and forthright disagreement. It saddens me when people come on here and engage in logical fallacies in order to shake things up or make "things happen here at DISboards". Your comments strike me as nonsensical at times while at other times I question whether or not there is an ulterior motive. Maybe I'm right, and maybe I am seeing things that are not there. That said, the majority of my posts here are for the general audience and not necessarily the person I am quoting at the time. Such is the case in this thread.

 

[TexasChick123]

Disney is a for-profit corporation. I don’t trust them or any other company really as far as I can throw them. I just bought at the resorts I own because I want to stay there for less than the cash rates both now and more so in the future. While I don’t like the resale restrictions, they don’t surprise me in the least. I have a business degree, and when I learned about how things work in the corporate world, it made me distrustful of all companies whether they have a happy mouse as their symbol or not.

They’re all in it for the money. If you know this and truly accept it, you won’t care as much how any company is “acting” despite their perceived reputation. I know this makes me look like a cynic, and I probably am. I don’t trust any company, especially a multi-billion dollar one, to look out for me or to be “different” than all the others.

 

[eMoneyBug]

Wanted to point out the brand new RIV resale contract on Fidelity. 325 points listed at $135 pp... See if anybody drops $44k with resale restrictions. This may answer the supply and demand question.

...My first thought, offer $80 and see what happens. Anyone else itching to make an offer for the fun of it?

 

[Mumof4mice]

Disney is charging what the market will bear for a finite resource. We may not like it, I know that I don't, but I won't bash them for it either. I have a feeling that I might be in the minority there and would love to hear thoughts on why people think I'm wrong. It will make for some interesting reading and I'll be sure to keep an open mind.

Another minority here. I don't like the Riviera restrictions. I'm disappointed that Disney has adopted "industry standards", instead of continuing to fleece guests in a magical way. But it's just business; magnifying the adversary and perceived injury isn't helpful.

All businesses routinely vary strategies, increase prices, add or remove discounts and incentives. When a new pizza restaurants opens, it might offer free drinks and tastings. Once it gets busier - so busy that doubling prices doesn't hurt numbers in a meaningful way - no more extras. Those that are already sitting down are grandfathered. But if they decide to resale their cold pizza, then no, the restaurant no longer offers the new patrons free drinks or swap slices of fresh pie for their cold pizza. All this was spelt out in the menu that the patrons originally ordered from. The choice to assume the risk and the responsibility was theirs.

Successful companies are profit driven; people make financial decisions that we don't agree with all the time. If both parties are willing to proceed with their transaction - well, have at it.

Why are we especially disappointed in this DVD-Owners situation? Is it the sting of betrayed trust? Why do we feel that a demographic that vacations at Disney and buys timeshares (finance or not, they are the top 1% on a global scale and comfortable by First World standards) needs or deserves advocacy?

 

[zavandor]

Your comments strike me as nonsensical at times while at other times I question whether or not there is an ulterior motive. Maybe I'm right, and maybe I am seeing things that are not there.

So I'm not the only one to have noticed an influx of people "earning their ears" posting in defense of Disney and DVC lately?
I'm probably being paranoic.

 

[kboo]

instead of continuing to fleece guests in a magical way.

Your whole post was so well-put, but I especially had to comment on this turn of phrase.

 

[Madame]

Why are we especially disappointed in this DVD-Owners situation? Is it the sting of betrayed trust? Why do we feel that a demographic that vacations at Disney and buys timeshares (finance or not, they are the top 1% on a global scale and comfortable by First World standards) needs or deserves advocacy?

This touches on part of the misunderstanding between members in this thread and elsewhere. Pete touched on it too. I think there is a massive disparity in terms of disposable income amongst members. Are we all, as you said, part of the First World? Yes. Even the poorer citizens of Western society are more comfortable than much of the world.

I did not conclude that the member in the social media post was so comfortable that even several thousand dollars was inconsequential, because I tend to view through my own lens (it’s hard to view things otherwise). My lens is that of upper middle class with 3 children (read expensive ), and so I automatically view that loss of several thousand as consequential.

I think this is also a major source of the rift between those for whom the restrictions are of no consequence and those for whom it is of great consequence. This is in no way a condemnation or judgement and I hope I have not presented it that way; more of an observation. Definitely something I need to keep in mind more often.

 

[skier_pete]

Away from the side arguments - another Riviera contract for sale? I've only really been involved with DVC for the last 6 years, but I don't even remember so many contracts going up for sale so soon after purchase. There's been at least half a dozen so far, and I can't remember seeing that many CCV ones in the first year - though admittedly I wasn't watching closely. I am not saying this to say it's a Riviera issue - but it makes me wonder if we're seeing the first evidence of a slowing economy. Because in a financial crunch, the first thing to go will be a DVC contract.

 

[Sandisw]

Away from the side arguments - another Riviera contract for sale? I've only really been involved with DVC for the last 6 years, but I don't even remember so many contracts going up for sale so soon after purchase. There's been at least half a dozen so far, and I can't remember seeing that many CCV ones in the first year - though admittedly I wasn't watching closely. I am not saying this to say it's a Riviera issue - but it makes me wonder if we're seeing the first evidence of a slowing economy. Because in a financial crunch, the first thing to go will be a DVC contract.

I also don’t remember seeing this many prior to opening. I just feel bad that people have been in the situation that they have to put it up for sale without even using it. I mean, at least if you one trip out of it, it could make the loss one will take less painful, but it’s clear that all of these people are losing money having to sell.

 

[Brianstl]

l

Why are we especially disappointed in this DVD-Owners situation? Is it the sting of betrayed trust? Why do we feel that a demographic that vacations at Disney and buys timeshares (finance or not, they are the top 1% on a global scale and comfortable by First World standards) needs or deserves advocacy?

I don’t think this person really got screwed in this deal. That said, just because someone is relatively well off doesn’t mean it is OK to screw them over on a deal or that they don’t deserve to have people take up their cause when that happens. We should expect everyone to be treated fairly regardless of their financial situation.

 

[StitchesGr8Fan]

I don’t have anything of value to add to the discussion. The only reason we didn’t buy is the resale restriction as we love the look of the hotel and don’t care about the location. If they lifted the resale restriction we would buy 100 points direct in a heartbeat.

 

[Bing Showei]

Another minority here. I don't like the Riviera restrictions. I'm disappointed that Disney has adopted "industry standards", instead of continuing to fleece guests in a magical way. But it's just business; magnifying the adversary and perceived injury isn't helpful.

Isn’t helpful to what exactly? The suspension of disbelief that we own a timeshare? The ability to enjoy the magic without a reminder about the transactional relationship that is reality?

I envy the pragmatic and sensible position you stake on this, a full embrace of this perspective would make for a much more pleasant experience with my timeshare ownership.

But what you’ve outlined above suggests complete acquiescence, and surrendering of voice in all matters that relate to how your timeshare is being managed by the ownership by virtue of of “that’s what it says in the contract.”

It matters nothing that you don’t like the restrictions. You could love the restrictions and effectively, your decision to not vocalize your sentiments to the company is the same. In most instances, no news is good news and that consumers not saying anything is business as usual. These restrictions are not business as usual. It is a complete departure that could have long term effects of the health of the product.

Disney is well within its right to try to squeeze every last dollar out of its timeshare product. But as an owner I am well within my right to express displeasure about it.

The DISboards is a major platform and resource for those investigating ownership. I, for one, feel it’s important that those coming here for information sees that it’s not all magic and memories. A lot of it is corporate executives making piss poor shortsighted choices as well, and I will voice that to Disney, and more importantly, I will voice that here, despite any inconvenience that may cause for those just looking for carefree enjoyment of their timeshare.

 

[CarolMN]

This thread seems to have drifted off topic and into a debate (which is not allowed on the DIS).

Here's a link to the first post for those of you that need a reminder of the topic:

https://www.disboards.com/threads/r...-sept-data-added-10-10.3771338/#post-61107615
I'd rather not close the thread