NO MORE free valet parking for DVC members.

[Chuck S]

But at some point, as you said yourself, free valet WAS funded by the contractor. So then why did the contractor choose to do so initially, I wonder? And so why did the contractor abruptly (or maybe it was DVC that abruptly notified us) stop? Did he somehow feel he needed to "hook" the DVC members in (is this how, as you said, the contractor felt he would be making money in the long run?) This is what I don't understand-the why of starting the free valet and then the why of stopping.

One possible explanation is that the contractor initally offered it to secure the first contract. Then as employee costs increased (insurance, benefits, taxes, etc.) it became impossible to continue the perk. Again, the contractor can certainly offer a discount to DVCers, it he believes it would help his botom line. Or, when the contract comes up for renewal, if the contractor still isn't making enough for it to be worthwile, they could simply discontinue valet services all together, increase the cost again, or let Disney take it back. I doubt Disney wants it back, so the price would likely increase or service be discontinued.

 

[Tara]

One possible explanation is that the contractor initally offered it to secure the first contract. Then as employee costs increased (insurance, benefits, taxes, etc.) it became impossible to continue the perk. Again, the contractor can certainly offer a discount to DVCers, it he believes it would help his botom line. Or, when the contract comes up for renewal, if the contractor still isn't making enough for it to be worthwile, they could simply discontinue valet services all together, increase the cost again, or let Disney take it back. I doubt Disney wants it back, so the price would likely increase or service be discontinued.

It's also possible that there was a clearly defined sunset period right up front that stipulated how long the contractor would continue the free valet for DVC members. This could have been one way they won the contract - by making the transition from Disney-operated valet to outsourced valet a little smoother in that too many changes wouldn't happen at the same time.

 

[Simba's Mom]

Thanks! I really wondered why and these explanations make sense.

 

[Dean]

No it doesn't. If the issue is total cost, ME can certainly be evaluated compared to the valet parking. I brought it up in response to the people who fly saying "who cares about valet parking."

The point is it is pretty easy to nonchalantly not care about OTHER people losing benefits YOU don't use. But then it is a whole different issue if YOUR favorite benefit is threatened.

That's why I raised the issue of ME. People who fly use ME. People who drive use valet parking. One group of people got screwed. The other group of people still get their freebie.

That isn't fair at all.

Each needs to be looked at independently. If so done, it's possible that both might go away. I sometimes use valet parking but IMO, from a decision standpoint, it doesn't matter who uses it and who doesn't, when you bought, what you were promised, etc. It does matter that the inherent issues are including cost and as such, the only rational decision was to eliminate the option. As I noted, I would have done it differently but it did have to go given the zero to $12 day/car change. As for ME, I don't know enough about it to say. My understanding is most of the charge is taken on by components other than DVC. Otherwise you just have to look at the inherent costs and other specifics of that system. Assume for a second that it was being paid for totally by entities other than DVC and that upcoming the charges were transferred completely to DVC. If so, it's likely the only rational choice would be to either eliminate the option or charge pay to play.

It is definitely Disney getting away with something. They are giving us less for our money. It is that simple. Dues are extremely high. They should be adding benefits, not removing them.

Dues are high compared to other timeshares but that's because of the way the system is set up. I, for one, wish they would reign in the dues. I think it's possible they could reduce them by 20-25% or a little more if they made changes in the system but I suspect most members wouldn't like those changes.

Sure there is: don't raise dues and don't remove benefits. If they want to make money, stop giving away free meal plans that screw paying customers out of a chance at reservations.

There are economics 101 issues here. More costs means either you charge more or you cut elsewhere. There's only so much elsewhere you can cut until you start affecting other services. I'm all for working smarter not harder but something had to give.

If it is such a small percentage, then the cost was minimal and thus didn't need to be removed. If it was a large enough number of people for the cost to be noticeable, then that means it was a benefit that people used and deserved to retain. Either way, it should not have been removed.

It's a small percent of people comparatively but it's a fairly large ticket item. IMO, the bottom line is that owners should not expect others to pay for their options. That is an absolute statement of expectation, however, I realize that there is a balance that must be achieved in running a resort in providing expected services and value added services with many factors. Other than you want it and expect it, what reason would you give for asking someone else to pay for your valet parking? I get that this is an emotional issue for you, however, emotions should not play a role in DVC's decisions in this or other areas.

 

[Glamis]

Funny, we see a lot of posts about how DVC is treated poorly compared to cash guests, but then we they do treat us exactly the same (cash guests, not even concierge guests, get free valet) then there are still complaints.

Huh? It is perfectly logical to expect to be treated better than cash guests, and to be particularly incensed when we get treated WORSE than them. Being treated equally should be an absolute bare minimum.

So of course there are complaints when we are "treated the same" by having one of our perks removed. We shouldn't be treated the same as cash guests. We are owners. We paid a lot of money to "own a piece of the magic."

Also, the occasional nitpicky "this is paid by dues, that is paid by marketing expenses" is a bunch of minutiae that has absolutely no end of the day relevance. Disney's complex accounting is their business and is done for whatever tax and accounting purposes they prefer. All I care about is the benefits I receive and that I feel like I continually get what I paid for. When benefits like this are removed, it makes me feel like I am paying MORE for less each year. That doesn't sit well.

 

[Glamis]

Dues are high compared to other timeshares but that's because of the way the system is set up. I, for one, wish they would reign in the dues. I think it's possible they could reduce them by 20-25% or a little more if they made changes in the system but I suspect most members wouldn't like those changes.

This I agree with. Dues are ridiculously high - especially when you consider the fact that almost every DVC member who uses a Disney resort is probably dumping another $1,000 / week (often more) into Disney's coffers through tickets, restaurants, merchandise, etc.

Other than you want it and expect it, what reason would you give for asking someone else to pay for your valet parking? I get that this is an emotional issue for you, however, emotions should not play a role in DVC's decisions in this or other areas.

Actually, it isn't an emotional issue for me. My homebase is Saratoga were valet parking is a non issue. My favorite place to stay is OKW, where again valet parking is a non issue. But some places I'd like to stay have TERRIBLE parking, and paying another $12 a day for valet basically makes staying there a non-issue. That's a shame. I've lost overall value to my DVC membership because of all the places I cannot stay now as a result of this asinine change.

Imagine if tomorrow they announced you could ONLY stay at your home base and 1 or 2 other places. You'd feel like you lost a lot of value, no?

I don't expect other members to pay for my valet parking. I expect Disney to pay for it since they designed these terrible parking setups at some of the resorts. I expect them to give some actual PERKS to DVC members since we hand over enormous money to them, consistently spend thousands of dollars a year in their theme parks, and are generally very loyal free marketing year 'round as we tell others how much we love Disney World. The discount on annual passes is a real and actual perk. Things we have to pay for as a group via dues is not really a "perk" to me and I somewhat resent it being marketed as such.

 

[Chuck S]

Huh? It is perfectly logical to expect to be treated better than cash guests, and to be particularly incensed when we get treated WORSE than them. Being treated equally should be an absolute bare minimum.

So of course there are complaints when we are "treated the same" by having one of our perks removed. We shouldn't be treated the same as cash guests. We are owners. We paid a lot of money to "own a piece of the magic."
Also, the occasional nitpicky "this is paid by dues, that is paid by marketing expenses" is a bunch of minutiae that has absolutely no end of the day relevance. Disney's complex accounting is their business and is done for whatever tax and accounting purposes they prefer. All I care about is the benefits I receive and that I feel like I continually get what I paid for. When benefits like this are removed, it makes me feel like I am paying MORE for less each year. That doesn't sit well.

But when is enough, enough? There are those complaining because cash guests get free DDP, cash guests can buy the Platinum plan, cash guests this and cash guests that.

When does Disney finally throw up their hands and figure there is no satisfying some DVCers? All we are legally entitled to is what is paid for by dues, nothing more. And what can be paid by dues is regulated by timeshare law. Every discount, every little freebie is a courtesy extended to DVCers by another entity, not an entitlement.

You really think an outside service contractor should provide free services just because you purchased a timeshare from Disney?

Is it any wonder DVCers often have a bad demanding reputation among CMs?

 

[Dean]

Actually, it isn't an emotional issue for me. My homebase is Saratoga were valet parking is a non issue. My favorite place to stay is OKW, where again valet parking is a non issue. But some places I'd like to stay have TERRIBLE parking, and paying another $12 a day for valet basically makes staying there a non-issue. That's a shame. I've lost overall value to my DVC membership because of all the places I cannot stay now as a result of this asinine change.

Imagine if tomorrow they announced you could ONLY stay at your home base and 1 or 2 other places. You'd feel like you lost a lot of value, no?

I don't expect other members to pay for my valet parking. I expect Disney to pay for it since they designed these terrible parking setups at some of the resorts. I expect them to give some actual PERKS to DVC members since we hand over enormous money to them, consistently spend thousands of dollars a year in their theme parks, and are generally very loyal free marketing year 'round as we tell others how much we love Disney World. The discount on annual passes is a real and actual perk. Things we have to pay for as a group via dues is not really a "perk" to me and I somewhat resent it being marketed as such.

It isn't Disney paying for anything but the members paying for it, plain and simple. As I've posted before, there are many changes that could be catastrophic and really could happen. IMO, it's irrelevant whether one feels this detracts from their value other than they must decide whether to cont to be a member or not. And if that change were enough to make DVC not a good value for them, they likely should never have bought in to start with. It's entirely possible for a given resort to cease being a member of DVC and it is a real risk though a low % one. If that happens, nothing to do but grin and bear it and decide whether to sell or not. Given that those perks were value added and not part of our contract with DVD or DVC, I don't think we've lost anything of substance. I realize some people have lost an option (free valet) that they used. There will likely be more and "worse" changes before all is said and done. What we paid really has no bearing on this argument. What we have the right to expect is what is legally required, a room at our home resort that is well maintained, no more, the rest is gravy. Obviously we all hope for more and I think most of use would be disappointed if all we got were the legal requirements but it's really all we can expect.

I really don't buy the entitlement mentality or the idea that Disney needs to continue to compete for our affection. If they provide what we contracted for and do it well, they should have our respect, if they don't, they should have our complaints accordingly. I know some have concerns on the former with upkeep and the like and those are things which we really should hold their feet to the fire. To complain about perks in a way that "how dare they" is just petty IMO. OTOH, I'll be the first to say that DVC should try to get us the best perks possible and they need more of a backbone in going after them however, I also realize that most members don't have the stomach for what it takes to secure good discounts. They'd have to be willing to not offer certain perks if they didn't get the benefit they felt they could. Could you imagine if DVC said they weren't going to offer DCL or the DC due to this issue. IMO, unless you're willing to have something go away if you don't get it, it's not reasonable to expect a discount at all.

This is exactly the type of issues that caused DVC to stop putting a system effort into requests. It was easier to give up than to do it right.

 

[Glamis]

But when is enough, enough? There are those complaining because cash guests get free DDP, cash guests can buy the Platinum plan, cash guests this and cash guests that.

I'm not sure what your point is here. Are you saying DVC members, who pay tens of thousands of dollars on top of hundreds/thousands of dollars per year SHOULDN'T expect to get more than people who pop in and plop down a few bucks in response to some kind of promotion Disney puts out?

We've all made a pretty significant financial and emotional investment here. We are entitled to expect a little better treatment than random people blowing in.

The free marketing alone they get from DVC people fanatically spreading the good word about Disney is worth more than the value of any perk crumbs they throw our way.

When does Disney finally throw up their hands and figure there is no satisfying some DVCers?

When they want to give us all back our money I guess. No need to cry them a river when they are making a tidy profit from us.

My family has spent over $100,000 to the Disney corporation over the last 30 years. Its not like they aren't making a crapton of money off me already.

Every discount, every little freebie is a courtesy extended to DVCers by another entity, not an entitlement.

Perks and benefits that were STRONGLY hyped during the sales phase. You don't hype something strongly to get someone to buy something, and then slowly and systematically take it away.

You really think an outside service contractor should provide free services just because you purchased a timeshare from Disney?

If they don't want to, they can let someone else have the contract. It isn't like they don't make money off tips and non DVC drivers. Further, Disney should be kicking in a few dollars per car since free valet was a pretty significant perk hyped up big time during the sales phase.

Is it any wonder DVCers often have a bad demanding reputation among CMs?

I'd say the problem there is the overall quality of CMs, which has fallen drastically in the last 10+ years (with some exceptions of specific individuals, and certain resorts like HHI).

 

[Glamis]

It isn't Disney paying for anything but the members paying for it, plain and simple.

That is not how the product was marketed and sold.

It's entirely possible for a given resort to cease being a member of DVC and it is a real risk though a low % one.

I don't think that is legally possible.

There will likely be more and "worse" changes before all is said and done.

Especially if we roll over like sheep and say "oh well." Disney is going to keep doing as much as they can get away with. The people who run the company are not Walt Disney types. They are pure bean counting accounting types looking to move up the ranks. They'll do everything they can to make their superiors think they are good and wringing out more profits. If we just take it on the chin with a shrug, they will keep bleeding us.

What we have the right to expect is what is legally required, a room at our home resort that is well maintained, no more, the rest is gravy.

Wrong. This is Disney, not Motel 6. If I simply wanted a roof over my head, Disney is the last company I would have bought anything from.

I really don't buy the entitlement mentality or the idea that Disney needs to continue to compete for our affection.

Considering they provide a 100% luxury service, they darn well better think they have to continually compete for our affection.

I know some have concerns on the former with upkeep and the like and those are things which we really should hold their feet to the fire. To complain about perks in a way that "how dare they" is just petty IMO.

That's all part of the same mentality. The people running the show are trying to get away with the bare minimum. There is no significant distinction between cutting corners on maintenance, quality/attitude of staff, and perks.

OTOH, I'll be the first to say that DVC should try to get us the best perks possible and they need more of a backbone in going after them

Absolutely. It is a joke that 99% of the DVC "perks" are the same or worse than the annual pass perks. Get rid of all those and give me something else. At least I can already get the others via the annual pass.

Could you imagine if DVC said they weren't going to offer DCL or the DC due to this issue.

DCL = Disney Cruise Line? Huh?

 

[Dean]

That is not how the product was marketed and sold.

Irrelevant as verbal promises or discussions have no legal basis.

I don't think that is legally possible.

Absolutely it is, unlikely but possible.

Especially if we roll over like sheep and say "oh well." Disney is going to keep doing as much as they can get away with. The people who run the company are not Walt Disney types. They are pure bean counting accounting types looking to move up the ranks. They'll do everything they can to make their superiors think they are good and wringing out more profits. If we just take it on the chin with a shrug, they will keep bleeding us.

There's a difference in standing up for what's right and should be provided and whining over things that were never contractual and were always value added. IMO, the later applies to the topic at hand.

Wrong. This is Disney, not Motel 6. If I simply wanted a roof over my head, Disney is the last company I would have bought anything from.

We'll have to disagree. What you signed up for is no more than I stated. Obviously we all made certain assumptions and being removed from the system the worst case scenario but it is the legal situation. If you signed up for free valet parking, $100 pass discounts, restaurant discounts, free internet, etc; you signed up for the wrong reasons not understanding what you were buying.

Considering they provide a 100% luxury service, they darn well better think they have to continually compete for our affection.

Again, we'll have to disagree. This statement likely speaks to the fundamental difference between the 2 sides on this and other similar topics. It boils down to the entitlement mentality, IMO. DVC is not really a luxury item in the full definition of the word. It is a timeshare and in many ways, below some other timeshares in certain aspects.

That's all part of the same mentality. The people running the show are trying to get away with the bare minimum. There is no significant distinction between cutting corners on maintenance, quality/attitude of staff, and perks.

Obviously we again disagree.

Absolutely. It is a joke that 99% of the DVC "perks" are the same or worse than the annual pass perks. Get rid of all those and give me something else. At least I can already get the others via the annual pass.




DCL = Disney Cruise Line? Huh?

DCL is Disney Cruise lines. IMO your position reflects a lack of understand for the perks for both groups and in general. Perks are normally provided with one of two expectations. Either that the overall volume of business will make up for the lower per person profit and/or that it will be a break even for the entity providing the perk and a value added for the party getting the perk. It seems you feel you pay for the perks and that is simply incorrect. DVC and the AP are separate divisions of Disney and in general, separate from the entity giving the perk of discount. It's generally easier to get the same perk that someone else is getting. There are a few discounts and perks that are different but one would expect them to be similar. Getting rid of the AP discounts would likely result in a reduction of DVC discounts, not an increase.

IMO perks have come and gone over the years. Ignoring the free OKW passes, the perks package is about as strong overall as it's been long term mostly due to the AP pass discount which I don't use personally.

 

[crisi]

If they don't want to, they can let someone else have the contract. It isn't like they don't make money off tips and non DVC drivers. Further, Disney should be kicking in a few dollars per car since free valet was a pretty significant perk hyped up big time during the sales phase.

And if no one wants the contract under those parameters? Because I wouldn't be surprised if no one does. A valet business is not a cheap one to run...and in a down economy, they probably aren't parking as many cars as they used to.

 

[mjlass11]

Interesting reading this thread. As someone who doesn't rent a car when going to Disney, I won't miss the free valet. I do understand those who are upset about losing it, however. When I first decided to buy, these perks were relayed to me as even more reason to buy, not something that would slowly be taken away. Also, when DVC is marketed as Disney's best kept secret, this made me think that I would always be treated the same or better than cash pay customers because we're buying a piece of Disney, not just DVC. I realize that this is not the case, and we need to be thankful for what we get and not take any perk for granted. I've done the math and figured that if I'd have been cash pay for my DVC stays (my 4th is coming in May), I have now equaled my purchase price in these 4 stays.

 

[Chuck S]

I'm not sure what your point is here. Are you saying DVC members, who pay tens of thousands of dollars on top of hundreds/thousands of dollars per year SHOULDN'T expect to get more than people who pop in and plop down a few bucks in response to some kind of promotion Disney puts out?

As individuals, DVCers spend more than the average cash visitor. However, on a per room night basis, I would bet the one time cash guest spends a great deal more. If that weren't the case, there would have been no incentive/need to buy DVC for the savings on accommodations over cash rooms, right? DVCers over the course of their membership, receive a 50% to 70% discount over paying cash for the same room. I don't feel entitled to more than that. So we disagree.

We've all made a pretty significant financial and emotional investment here. We are entitled to expect a little better treatment than random people blowing in.

We DVCers made an investment in a pre-paid vacation ownership program, not the Walt Disney Company. Those investors are stockholders, and should legally expect a reasonable return on that investment.

The free marketing alone they get from DVC people fanatically spreading the good word about Disney is worth more than the value of any perk crumbs they throw our way.

Again, different divisions, each division is responsible for their own profitability on the balance sheet. DVC (the condo association) does NOT finance the perks, DVC Marketing does not finance the perks, Disney Vacation Development does not finance the perk. Perks come from other divisions and providers as a courtesy, with an expected return on that investment through increased sales of that division's product.

When they want to give us all back our money I guess. No need to cry them a river when they are making a tidy profit from us.

My family has spent over $100,000 to the Disney corporation over the last 30 years. Its not like they aren't making a crapton of money off me already.

Or, an average of $3,333.34 per year. Peanuts compared many cash guests at $400+ per night for a room at a deluxe. And never mind what the Weddings at Disney divisoin brings in per guest, it really makes $3,333 per year look paltry.

Perks and benefits that were STRONGLY hyped during the sales phase. You don't hype something strongly to get someone to buy something, and then slowly and systematically take it away.

If you bought for those perks, you purchased for the wrong reasons, and should likely liquidate your membership, as it will never meet your expectations.

If they don't want to, they can let someone else have the contract. It isn't like they don't make money off tips and non DVC drivers. Further, Disney should be kicking in a few dollars per car since free valet was a pretty significant perk hyped up big time during the sales phase.

Would you bid on the contract? I sure wouldn't if I had to provide service for an average of $3 or $4 a car. Tips are of no profit or consequence whatsoever to the contractor. They have overhead including employee costs, insurance, taxes, accounting, and a reasonable profit to pay. Tips play no part in that.

I'd say the problem there is the overall quality of CMs, which has fallen drastically in the last 10+ years (with some exceptions of specific individuals, and certain resorts like HHI).

I disagree, I think the problem is with society and having an entitlement mentality.

 

[ReneeQ]

Our last DVC stay was 11/09 at BWV. I won't go into the nightmare we had with self-parking on that trip again. Now I have a new question.

We will be staying at VWL in 6/10. I just had some leg surgery, and have a temporary handicapped parking permit hang-tag thing. I understand there is free valet parking for handicapped permits. Would I just show them this tag when we pull up, and would everything work the same way it did back when valet was free? Or is there some other process for using the handicapped permit?

Thanks!

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

Our last DVC stay was 11/09 at BWV. I won't go into the nightmare we had with self-parking on that trip again. Now I have a new question.

We will be staying at VWL in 6/10. I just had some leg surgery, and have a temporary handicapped parking permit hang-tag thing. I understand there is free valet parking for handicapped permits. Would I just show them this tag when we pull up, and would everything work the same way it did back when valet was free? Or is there some other process for using the handicapped permit?

Thanks!

For Handicap tags it does work the same as it used to for all DVC Valet. You may have to point out the hang tag to them but that's it.

 

[Glamis]

Irrelevant as verbal promises or discussions have no legal basis.

This isn't a discussion of what they can legally do. There are a whole lot of crappy things they can do that are perfectly legal. That doesn't mean they wouldn't make me very unhappy as a customer.

Absolutely it is, unlikely but possible.

I don't see how they can just invalidate my points and declare that I am no longer able to stay at the resort I am part owner of.

There's a difference in standing up for what's right and should be provided and whining over things that were never contractual and were always value added.

So the fact that I disagree with you means I am whining?

Is that how discussions are handled here?

If you signed up for free valet parking, $100 pass discounts, restaurant discounts, free internet, etc; you signed up for the wrong reasons not understanding what you were buying.

If the only issue here was free valet I'd agree. But I have seen a systematic eroding of benefits, a consistent and significant decline in the quality of staff, overcrowding at former off-peak times, overselling of special events, a transportation system that has nearly collapsed under its own weight, an inability to reasonably make restaurant reservations, and a variety of other similar serious problems. The free valet parking is part of an overall very ugly problem.

Look at how long it took to get them to stop pillaging us financially for internet access. They were making an obscene profit off that and it nearly took an act of Congress to put a stop to that.

It boils down to the entitlement mentality, IMO. DVC is not really a luxury item in the full definition of the word. It is a timeshare and in many ways, below some other timeshares in certain aspects.

How is DVC not a luxury item? Do you need it to live? Of course not. It is not a necessity. It is a total luxury to own any sort of vacation property.

If I wanted to match your rudeness I could say yours is a selfish mentality. I could say you don't care about things that impact others and only care about the ones that impact yourself. But I prefer to discuss things in a far more polite manner than to blow off people's opinions by pejoratively labeling them things like "entitlement mentality."

 

[Glamis]

A valet business is not a cheap one to run...and in a down economy, they probably aren't parking as many cars as they used to.

How is it not a cheap one to run? It has virtually no overhead. No buildings or facilities to maintain. No machinery to buy, lease, repair, or replace. Insurance is about the only cost of any significance. I'm sorry but a valet business is about as cheap and simple as it gets.

 

[Glamis]

DVCers over the course of their membership, receive a 50% to 70% discount over paying cash for the same room. I don't feel entitled to more than that.

Then you are basically saying their marketing is all lies, because that isn't how they sell the product.

Again, different divisions,

Who cares? I sure as heck don't. I don't care how Disney chooses to do their corporate organization. All I care about is the final result. All the babbling about this division does this, and that cost is part of that division's budget is just an irrelevant smokescreen.

As the customer, I only care about the final result. The final result has been steadily declining over the last 10 years.

Tips are of no profit or consequence whatsoever to the contractor.

Yes they are, because tips are how your employees get paid. It is the same as wait-staff at a restaurant. You get to pay your employees a lot less because the customers pay them via tips.

They have overhead including employee costs, insurance, taxes, accounting, and a reasonable profit to pay. Tips play no part in that.

How do tips have no part to play in "employee costs" - the thing you list first?

I disagree, I think the problem is with society and having an entitlement mentality.

No, the problem is with businesses not taking pride in their work and instead trying to bleed their customers dry - especially when the customer already paid for something in advance.

 

[Dean]

This isn't a discussion of what they can legally do. There are a whole lot of crappy things they can do that are perfectly legal. That doesn't mean they wouldn't make me very unhappy as a customer.

I think what would make an individual happy is irrelevant to the discussion. There are some you just can't make happy and DVC seems to have more than it's share of those. Even what makes the membership as a whole happy is only peripherally applicable. No rational discussion can take place on this or any other similar topic without the legal and contractual requirements being the core and really the majority of the guiding issues.

I don't see how they can just invalidate my points and declare that I am no longer able to stay at the resort I am part owner of.

There are situations where each and every resort could cease to exist or cont to exist but cease to be a member of the club. As I said, unlikely but possible.

If the only issue here was free valet I'd agree. But I have seen a systematic eroding of benefits, a consistent and significant decline in the quality of staff, overcrowding at former off-peak times, overselling of special events, a transportation system that has nearly collapsed under its own weight, an inability to reasonably make restaurant reservations, and a variety of other similar serious problems. The free valet parking is part of an overall very ugly problem.

Look at how long it took to get them to stop pillaging us financially for internet access. They were making an obscene profit off that and it nearly took an act of Congress to put a stop to that.

Unfortunately I suspect this speaks to a fundamental difference in the way we look at life. First, you can really only discuss what's directly associated with DVC in this context. Many of the issues you mentioned or alluded to are not DVC related. I don't see where that times that were previously easier to get and are now harder to get is a problem, it's certainly not a problem that DVC can take blame for. However, they can fix it by increasing the points during that time and they likely should. Transportation isn't as bad as you suggest nor is the staff. DVC benefits come and go, I haven't seen any systematic dismantling, however, if all the discounts, etc went away tomorrow I don't see that as a real problem since there were never any guarantees. If I felt the same as you I would personally sell. I may sell most of my points anyway but for entirely different reasons. I come at this with the idea that DVC is a timeshare, better than most, but not perfect. That there will be changes over time and that I won't like many of them. And I separate the sales process from the management process other than the legal requirements but even most of those can change as well where DVC is concerned

How is it not a cheap one to run? It has virtually no overhead. No buildings or facilities to maintain. No machinery to buy, lease, repair, or replace. Insurance is about the only cost of any significance. I'm sorry but a valet business is about as cheap and simple as it gets.

Personnel costs are the big issue because you have to have it covered 24/7. You've got several components, proceeds from the paid parking, base salary to the employees and tips to the employees. I don't think any of us can speak to the finances of the contractor in this matter other than they were able to convince Disney that a major increase was in order for them to cont the contract. One of the issues seems to be that tips were not covering the salaries and the company was having to supplement salaries.

Then you are basically saying their marketing is all lies, because that isn't how they sell the product.

I equate timeshare salespeople with used car sales. Certainly DVC is a cut above but they're still selling timeshares. If one buys without understanding what's sales speak and what's legally included, shame on them.

Who cares? I sure as heck don't. I don't care how Disney chooses to do their corporate organization. All I care about is the final result. All the babbling about this division does this, and that cost is part of that division's budget is just an irrelevant smokescreen.

As the customer, I only care about the final result. The final result has been steadily declining over the last 10 years.

I think we figured that one out already. I think most of us can see both sides of the issues but realize without a legal framework that there is no structure at all.

How is DVC not a luxury item? Do you need it to live? Of course not. It is not a necessity. It is a total luxury to own any sort of vacation property.

If I wanted to match your rudeness I could say yours is a selfish mentality. I could say you don't care about things that impact others and only care about the ones that impact yourself. But I prefer to discuss things in a far more polite manner than to blow off people's opinions by pejoratively labeling them things like "entitlement mentality."

What I was saying is DVC is a timeshare, not an all inclusive top of the line luxury item. It is a prepaid vacation plan. It is not the Ritz or event he Four Seasons. I'm not trying to be rude but I also can't ignore the differences in how we look at it either. And I do care about the impact of others but to me, that is a totally separate and different discussion of what DVC should provide. I did use valet parking some but I don't feel others should pay for my usage unless we can demonstrate a valid reason such as a MAJOR economy of scale in spreading the costs to all. As you note, you don't own at a valet resort so all you're really saying is that others should pay more for the benefit of a minority since the fact is that the cost is now $12/car/day that someone has to pay.