# NO MORE free valet parking for DVC members.



## Spacemonkaay

I just got off the phone with MS. I called to add a name to a reservation. At the end of the call, he told me (as a heads up) that we will no longer be receiving the valet parking perk. We have to pay the full price from now on. 

I know they give us the warning when we buy that perks can be taken away, but COME ON!!! Sheesh. Ridiculous.


----------



## Tara

Spacemonkaay said:


> I just got off the phone with MS. I called to add a name to a reservation. At the end of the call, he told me (as a heads up) that we will no longer be receiving the valet parking perk. We have to pay the full price from now on.
> 
> I know they give us the warning when we buy that perks can be taken away, but COME ON!!! Sheesh. Ridiculous.



I seriously doubt this is true. When exactly is "from now on"?


----------



## Simba's Mom

I'll be in WDW next week.  I'm going to stop at several kiosks and ask about it.  Yes, I know that sales guides at those kiosks don't always know, but if I ask several, it'll be interesting to see what everyone tells me.


----------



## JimMIA

Simba's Mom said:


> I'll be in WDW next week.  I'm going to stop at several kiosks and ask about it.  Yes, I know that sales guides at those kiosks don't always know, but if I ask several, it'll be interesting to see what everyone tells me.


The people who would *KNOW* are the valet dudes and dudettes.  They're the ones actually dealing with parking and charging.


----------



## JimMIA

I hope this single comment by one MS rep is not accurate, but I can see some logic for it if it is true.  

A year or so ago, Disney outsourced the valet function.  Prior to that, the valets would have been Disney employees and would have been on the clock whether they were actually moving cars or not, so there would not have been much actual cost for them parking one of our cars.

Now, however, the resorts are paying another company for that service, and if they are paying them by car parked (which seems likely), there is a direct cost to the resort if one of us gets our car parked.  That's a different cost equation, and one the resorts may not be willing to eat.  It's possible they've given DVC the option of either paying for our valets or eliminating the freebie, and DVC chose elimination.

We'll see.  If it turns out to be just rumor, it wouldn't be the first time!


----------



## CarolMN

Part of the "logic" for the free valet perk for DVC members at the DVC resorts was that our dues helped to pay for the valet wages.  Members shared the cost of the service with the BWI.

If members now have to pay for valet at the DVC resorts, then member dues shouldn't have to pay for any portion of the "outsourcing contract".   At a minimum, members should pay a reduced fee.

I can't believe that the valet company only gets paid if a car is parked.  Don't their employees at least get minimum wage?  I know the employees rely on tips for a portion of their pay.   I can believe that there is a flat fee plus something per car parked, though.


----------



## Spacemonkaay

The guy from MS said they just found out about the change. I'm interested to see the backlash on this one . . . especially if there are any valet fees buried in the annual dues.


----------



## Spacemonkaay

Side note: I said nothing about even having a car on property. He fully pushed this information on me. Maybe one of you fine folks should call MS and ask about it, just to confirm that I'm not crazy.  ;o)


----------



## mommyoftwo08

I too called this morning to modify our reservation for January and was given the same information. No more valet...


----------



## TLSnell1981

Just spoke to MS. Effective October 11th, DVC members will be charged $12,per day, for valet parking!! The reason? The service is now outsourced. I asked the CM about this being covered in our dues. She said this is no longer the case. Guests with disabilities will still receive the service free of charge.


----------



## Chuck S

TLSnell1981 said:


> Just spoke to MS. Effective October 11th, DVC members will be charged $12,per day, for valet parking!! The reason? The service is now outsourced. I asked the CM about this being covered in our dues. She said this is no longer the case. Guests with disabilities will still receive the service free of charge.



I wonder if this is also true for DDE/TiW?

I also wonder how many complaints the outsourced sompany will receive from the valets at the DVC resorts, as their tips will no doubt plummet?  Or if maybe DVCers were really a "problem" for the valet system, as I've witnessed a few member meltdowns at resort front desks? 

At least they are still doing free valet for folks with disabilities, so when traveling with Mom, it won't be a problem.


----------



## Spacemonkaay

Thanks. I began to think I was hearing phantom voices  in my head or something.


----------



## GoofItUp

Just my luck -- I'm just booked my first trip "home" for May and plan to have a car since we're at AKV.  Looks like DH will be dropping us off and parking the car.  Anyone know how far it is from the parking area to AKV (Jambo)?  I'm guessing it's not a $12/day walk.  

While we're on the subject of cars, parking, etc.....don't DVC members get free parking at the theme parks or did I dream that up?


----------



## Chuck S

GoofItUp said:


> While we're on the subject of cars, parking, etc.....don't DVC members get free parking at the theme parks or did I dream that up?



All onsite guests get free parking at the theme parks, including DVC resorts.  If you stay offsite, DVCers do not get free theme park parking.


----------



## Spacemonkaay

They'll probably "outsource that service" too.     JK.


----------



## chalee94

GoofItUp said:


> While we're on the subject of cars, parking, etc.....don't DVC members get free parking at the theme parks or did I dream that up?



DVC members do NOT get free parking at the theme parks because they are DVC members.

ALL of those staying onsite get free parking at the theme parks (which includes DVC members staying onsite.)

but if you stay offsite, you are on your own.


----------



## GoofItUp

Chuck S said:


> All onsite guests get free parking at the theme parks, including DVC resorts.  If you stay offsite, DVCers do not get free theme park parking.



Can you tell it's my first time on-site with a car?!


----------



## Chuck S

GoofItUp said:


> Can you tell it's my first time on-site with a car?!



When you check-in you'll receive a paper tag to place on your dashboard identifying you as an onsite guest.  This will give you the free parking.


----------



## Chuck S

It will be interesting to see how long it takes DVC to inform members of this valet policy change..either via email or a mailing.


----------



## kristenrice

In regards to the free valet for those with a disability, does that mean that those with a "handicapped" license plate or hang-tag are eligible?  My mom has a medical condition that qualifies her for "handicapped" status.  Her vehicle has a handicapped plate, but she also has the hang tag for when she travels with others.  Will that make us eligible for the free valet?


----------



## JimMIA

Chuck S said:


> It will be interesting to see how long it takes DVC to inform members of this valet policy change..either via email or a mailing.


That will be interesting.  They have had a pattern of implementing stealth member-perk removals for a while!   Some of the perks are no big deal, but this is an important one to members who stay at the hotel-connected resorts.


----------



## TLSnell1981

kristenrice said:


> Will that make us eligible for the free valet?



Yes and you will need the hang tag.


----------



## n2mm

Wow, this is news...thanks for the warning.  At least we were warned by the disboard members, even though it would've been nice to get a warning from DVC first...heck, they have our email addresses--what's up with that?

I'll be curious to hear if we lose this perk with the TiW card too!  Guess we'll be self parking at the GF next week.


----------



## Paging Tom Morrow

Don't know about anyone else, but I would much rather keep the valet perk than be able to "Follow Deevy's comedic vacation adventures"......


----------



## going/again

Chuck S said:


> It will be interesting to see how long it takes DVC to inform members of this valet policy change..either via email or a mailing.



yeah and it will be to enhance our membership


----------



## Chuck S

going/again said:


> yeah and it will be to enhance our membership



In response to member requests to provide more healthy activities at the resorts, like walking.


----------



## toocherie

I am not surprised.  when the DCV opened at Disneyland just a few weeks ago there was no "free" valet.  A few of us complained, but most posters on the GCV thread thought it was no big deal.  

What's that old saying--first they came for _____ and I said nothing . . .. . 

ending with finally "and then they came for me and there was no one left to say anything."

I have only been a member since 2008 and am seriously depressed by the perks that seem to be disappearing.  I predict the Florida discount on APs will be next.


----------



## tedisney

We don't like this change at all.   We don't always use valet, but we are car-driving park hoppers, so we never use the bus system.  We self-park most of the time, but the valet was a great benefit to being a DVC member.

The valet service is great when we first arrive, and we also like to use it in situations where we get back to the hotel (usually AKV) with a tired toddler.  

Like the previous poster, I wonder how long free valet will remain a benefit for TIW members.

/grumble


----------



## Brian Noble

> What's that old saying--first they came for _____ and I said nothing . . .. .


You aren't seriously comparing the removal of the valet perk to the holocaust, are you?

This has to be one of the fastest instances of Godwin's Law I've ever seen.

(For those who don't know the original, there is some good background here:
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Martin_Niemöller)

The change does stink, no question about it, but I don't think it's quite as bad as that.


----------



## Simba's Mom

n2mm said:


> I'll be curious to hear if we lose this perk with the TiW card too!  Guess we'll be self parking at the GF next week.



I'm buying a TIW card on Wednesday.  Even though I won't have a car, I'll ask about free valet parking.


----------



## DVC Mike

Spacemonkaay said:


> I just got off the phone with MS. I called to add a name to a reservation. At the end of the call, he told me (as a heads up) that we will no longer be receiving the valet parking perk. We have to pay the full price from now on.


 
If true, this is bad news.


----------



## jarestel

It was a nice perk while it was available. Sounds like it's gone soon. As the wizened members of our DIS community always tell the "newbies": Don't fall in love with any of the perks, because they can be gone at a moment's notice.

I guess the wizened members of our DIS community are absolutely correct!


----------



## Pirate Jack

I have a reservation beginning Oct 12. So foar no email or phone call regarding this news! I wonder if they will simply tell me when I arrive?


----------



## JimMIA

toocherie said:


> I predict the Florida discount on APs will be next.


 *GO WASH YOUR MOUTH OUT WITH SOAP!!!*

The Florida-resident rates and discounts have been around for a very long time and will probably continue -- as will AP rates and benefits, I suspect.  Both groups are ones which respond very positively to those discounts...as DVCers have to the DVC AP discount.

As attractive as Disney's Florida-resident discounts are, they pale in comparison with other competitors, so I don't see them completely abandoning the 4th largest state in the country and their biggest market.


----------



## Tara

Specific information like "beginning October 11th" makes a big difference in the believability of these reports. 

This stinks - that has been a terrific perk and I'm sad to see it go! That said, I didn't buy in for the perks, and I just posted last night on the Transportation board that I've always considered WDW valet parking to be an incredible deal. I paid it before -- I'll pay it going forward. 

The thing that annoys me is when discounts or perks quickly go away with pretty much no notice whatsoever.


----------



## toocherie

JimMIA said:


> *GO WASH YOUR MOUTH OUT WITH SOAP!!!*
> 
> The Florida-resident rates and discounts have been around for a very long time and will probably continue -- as will AP rates and benefits, I suspect.  Both groups are ones which respond very positively to those discounts...as DVCers have to the DVC AP discount.
> 
> As attractive as Disney's Florida-resident discounts are, they pale in comparison with other competitors, so I don't see them completely abandoning the 4th largest state in the country and their biggest market.



Let me clarify--I meant the DVC Florida discount of $100 off an AP.  As opposed to the DVC California discount of $20 which is a pittance compared to Florida.  Whether Florida "resident" discounts will be affected--who knows?

And Brian Noble--please don't think that I am so crass as to compare losing valet parking to the Holocaust.  My point was that people weren't so upset about not having the perk in California but now that it's affecting Florida . . . . it's typical that people don't miss something until it's gone and/or it directly affects them.


----------



## JimMIA

toocherie said:


> Let me clarify--I meant the DVC Florida discount of $100 off an AP.  As opposed to the DVC California discount of $20 which is a pittance compared to Florida.  Whether Florida "resident" discounts will be affected--who knows?


There is no such thing as a DVC Florida discount.  There is a $100 DVC discount on WDW Annual Passes, if that's what you're talking about, but that saves Floridians a grand total of about $5.  

The* real *deal for Flordians -- if it meets their needs -- is the Florida-resident Seasonal AP, which saves us an additional $100 beyond the DVC price.  But that pass comes with significant blackout periods which don't work for many people.  Works for us and we love it!


----------



## Anjelica

Disappointed to hear this is going away.  Not cool....


----------



## bangzoom6877

Our first trip home is in July 2010.  While it would have been nice to have the free valet parking, it's not the hardest thing for me to see them take away.  We bought a DVC membership so we can afford to stay in a large accommodation every other year at WDW, on a nice long 10-night trip. 

 How does that song go....."No, no, they can't take that away from me."


----------



## Deb & Bill

Actually, the money spent by DVC members on valet parking will go to Jim Lewis' new organization - the ARDA-ROC PAC - since he didn't get a very good response from the DVC members in his mailout in the last Disney Files.


----------



## going/again

[QUOTE=TLSnell1981;33899925 I asked the CM about this being covered in our dues. She said this is no longer the case. 

so if is this no longer the case from 11th october.  if our dues did cover part of this do we get a refund from dues we have already paid?


----------



## kidsister

I really enjoyed this perk, esp at my home resort BWV.  
And I'm po'd that they'd cancel it without any notice.
I hope that the valets complain loudly that they are losing big tips...although that will happen ONLY if all DVCers tipped well ...and that its reinstated.

Otherwise, I hope someone will complain about our dues and the high amount BWV owners pay for transportation costs which I bet includes some overhead even on 'outsourcing'.

I'm arriving Oct 26 . Call me bummed


----------



## Sammie

I guess this was DVC's way to deal with renters getting the perk too, and the response to the abuse by some using it to go to the parks.

I knew when they raised the parking lot rates they would have to raise valet rates and yes we all know perks can be taken away at anytime but this stinks. 

But have to wonder what is next. 

Well this makes me glad to be at SSR where I can park close to my room.

Since decisions are member feedback based, I say let them hear from all of us, I know I will be emailing.


----------



## Dean

This was predictable IMO, it was doomed when they out-sourced the system.


----------



## rcchello

going/again said:


> I asked the CM about this being covered in our dues. She said this is no longer the case.
> 
> so if is this no longer the case from 11th october.  if our dues did cover part of this do we get a refund from dues we have already paid?



Even if there was a savings you would not get the money refunded. Any savings would be reflected in your dues for the following year.


----------



## DebbieB

If this is true, there darn well better be a space for me in the self park at BWV when I stay there.  There have been times I've gone round and round and just gave up and valet parked.


----------



## punkin712

So...is the information in the "Dis Site Updates" link incorrect?  The information there states the following:

Starting 10/11/2009 Valet Parking will now cost $12.00.  If your car was parked before the change you will be charged the old price. Valet Parking is free for guests with Disabilities.  You must have the proper vehicle permit.

*Valet Parking is FREE for the following:

Disney Vacation Club (DVC) Members parking at a DVC resort which offers valet parking. Either the DVC Member card or Resort ID indicating that the guest is a DVC Member is required as proof *

Disney Dining Experience cardholders with an Advance Dining Reservation at the resort where they are valet parking 

All guests who a current handicap license plate/tag 

Here's the link: http://www.wdwinfo.com/wdwinfo/Parking.htm


----------



## tjkraz

toocherie said:


> My point was that people weren't so upset about not having the perk in California but now that it's affecting Florida . . . . it's typical that people don't miss something until it's gone and/or it directly affects them.



Well, I think it's important to discern between one group of "people" and another.  Your comment is only relevant if the same poster(s) were involved in both the DL and WDW valet parking discussions.  

No matter the topic there will be varying opinions...but I'm not sure I see any comments here from those who were commenting on the DL parking situation.




going/again said:


> so if is this no longer the case from 11th october.  if our dues did cover part of this do we get a refund from dues we have already paid?



Any overages billed via annual dues are applied to the reserve fund for future use.  

If dues were subsidizing valet parking, that charge should be eliminated in the 2010 budgets.  But any remaining monies billed for 2009 will go into the reserve.


----------



## Simba's Mom

As is often the case, it's not so much WHAT was done (taking away free valet parking) but HOW it was done (not even telling people, let alone apologize to the DVC members for the necessity of it) that really agravates me.  Very poor customer relations, IMO.


----------



## KAT4DISNEY

This stinks.  We used the perk once and now it's gone.   Outsourcing isn't a great answer either.  It's about how the contract is written b/c I would think Disney retains quite a bit of oversite on any vendors- so what has been decided is that the vendor wanted to compensate less if the service continued and Disney wanted more return and didn't feel they should negotiate for the perk to continue.

Most likely though it's that members requested it.  Shall we start a pool on what the information release is going to say?

What I'm wondering now is what happens when we travel with my mother who has the handicap tag.  She doesn't always go out with us but it's likely that if she's not with us one day or one morning she will be the next.


----------



## DaveO

DebbieB said:


> If this is true, there darn well better be a space for me in the self park at BWV when I stay there.  There have been times I've gone round and round and just gave up and valet parked.



No issues if this is not a perk any more ... but ... At GC in Disnelyland they have gated self park for guests so that the DTD visitors can not use those spaces.  BWV better start thinking about the same set-up.  If I can not find a space due to the Boardwalk guests parking after returning from the park I will be using the Valet and Disney will be refunding that charge.  This will be put to the test when I go Thanksgiving week.

Dave


----------



## Sammie

Simba's Mom said:


> As is often the case, it's not so much WHAT was done (taking away free valet parking) but HOW it was done (not even telling people, let alone apologize to the DVC members for the necessity of it) that really agravates me.  Very poor customer relations, IMO.



I am sure we will get a canned statement that says something to the effect that due to member feedback this perk was not being utilized by enough of the membership to warrant the cost of it.

And I agree with DebbieB, especially at the BWV and BCV, they need to enforce the parking situation and stop allowing nonDVC to park there to access parks. Same with BLT.


----------



## tjkraz

Sammie said:


> I am sure we will get a canned statement that says something to the effect that due to member feedback this perk was not being utilized by enough of the membership to warrant the cost of it.



Are you taking bets on that?  

Disney may be pretty liberal with their attempts to put a positive spin on things, but I doubt they'll go to that well this time.


----------



## Sammie

tjkraz said:


> Are you taking bets on that?
> 
> Disney may be pretty liberal with their attempts to put a positive spin on things, but I doubt they'll go to that well this time.



 more than likely we won't even get an official statement, unless they are flooded with complaints. 

As Dean stated I am sure it will be put on the outsourcing.


----------



## perdidobay

I'm very upset to see this perk gone. My home resorts are VWL and BWV, both have self parking that is a good distance away. It was nice to have a choice, and we did use valet fairly often. And we tipped well, when dropping off AND picking up.


----------



## Mr. Disney 652

As one DIS expert said recently:

"We are paying more for less"

This is the new Disney way I am beginning to see.


----------



## DVCBELLE

DebbieB said:


> If this is true, there darn well better be a space for me in the self park at BWV when I stay there.  There have been times I've gone round and round and just gave up and valet parked.


Usually - the loss of perks isn't overly upsetting to me but this makes me mad for this exact reason.  At most resorts - self park is close enough and not full so parking myself isn't a huge deal.  BUT at BWV - this is HUGE!!!

I just called and confirmed with BWV that this is the case and valet will cost $12 for DVC members.  There will also not be any dedicated spots for those staying at the resort.

I would think this could hurt the valets - after all - I valet everyday of my trip and tip well b/c the service is free and by the end of the week - the valets know us.  It is one of the things we LOVE about BWV.  But if at the end of the day - we have to drive around hoping we get a spot, then walk to the lobby - then possibly to a room far away from the elevators - the appeal of BWV drops greatly for me!!!  

I have never once complained to DVC about anything but they will be hearing from me on this one!


----------



## Dean

Sammie said:


> I am sure we will get a canned statement that says something to the effect that due to member feedback this perk was not being utilized by enough of the membership to warrant the cost of it.


The reality is that it likely isn't worth the cost.  It also means that if true, valet parking may go away at certain resorts like Kidani especially and possibly BWV.  There probably won't be enough traffic to keep it going in every situation.


----------



## Dean

DebbieB said:


> If this is true, there darn well better be a space for me in the self park at BWV when I stay there.  There have been times I've gone round and round and just gave up and valet parked.


There's always parking at the overflow lot and it'll be needed more than ever now unless they close down the valet area entirely or move it across the street.


----------



## Dean

DVCBELLE said:


> Usually - the loss of perks isn't overly upsetting to me but this makes me mad for this exact reason.  At most resorts - self park is close enough and not full so parking myself isn't a huge deal.  BUT at BWV - this is HUGE!!!
> 
> I just called and confirmed with BWV that this is the case and valet will cost $12 for DVC members.  There will also not be any dedicated spots for those staying at the resort.
> 
> I would think this could hurt the valets - after all - I valet everyday of my trip and tip well b/c the service is free and by the end of the week - the valets know us.  It is one of the things we LOVE about BWV.  But if at the end of the day - we have to drive around hoping we get a spot, then walk to the lobby - then possibly to a room far away from the elevators - the appeal of BWV drops greatly for me!!!
> 
> I have never once complained to DVC about anything but they will be hearing from me on this one!


I wonder if this will affect those that insisted on overpaying for the valet tipping, will they still tip in and out plus the $12 a day?


----------



## jlewisinsyr

Just sent my complaint, yet another change that effects a huge population of the DVC members, with little upfront and professional communication.  Make's you wonder what other "best kept secrets" Disney is hiding in its closet.


----------



## DVCBELLE

Dean said:


> The reality is that it likely isn't worth the cost.  It also means that if true, valet parking may go away at certain resorts like Kidani especially and possibly BWV.  There probably won't be enough traffic to keep it going in every situation.


I would think the valet from the night clubs and inn would be enough at BWV but I would guess the valets are not going to be happy with this. 

I sent my note to MS - I hope they get enough response to take notice.

On the other side - this might increase the popularity of resorts where you park at your room...


----------



## Maistre Gracey

Yup... It stinks. 
Many of the little things that made WDW (not just DVC) so great are slowly disappearing. It really is sad when looked at in totality. 

That said, we have been driving less as of late in favor of cabbing around WDW. 

MG


----------



## jlewisinsyr

One other thing, for what we pay in dues, which subsequently pays for Member Services, they sure could do a better job in communicating changes, its funny when third party sites like DIS do a better job then DVC.


----------



## nunzia

See..I'm more upset with the trend toward outsourcing. Isn't housekeeping outsourced? I can't believe Disney would want to give up direct control of such front line people. Bad move.


----------



## izzy

Dang, I use this perk extensively, so I am not happy to hear about this.  I'm even less happy about the way MS did not communicate this change to their members.

Like many of you, I've also written an e-mail to DVC to express my dissatisfaction with this most current change.


----------



## tjkraz

Assuming valet parking is subsidized by dues, this may not be a case where DVC is to blame.  

Valet parking is outsouced and has been for about 3 years now.  There would have to be an agreement in place between DVC and the outsourced vendor to accept some rate (certainly less than $10-12 per day) for parking DVC member vehicles.  Think of it as a volume discount--DVC guarantees a certain level of traffic and they get a price cut.  

Sounds to me like the vendor may have tried to raise the rate to the point where it doesn't make sense for DVC to continue the agreement.  After all, is it really fair to have all members paying for a service that only some utilize?  Yes, if the agreement allows them to obtain a *very *attractive favored rate...but the benefit dwindles as the rate rises.  

As with many negotiations, this could be a big game of chicken between the valet parking co and Disney.  After failing to secure higher rates, they are now left to make a go of it with far less traffic at most resorts.  Perhaps time will (and a substantial loss of business) will alter that outlook.


----------



## toocherie

JimMIA said:


> There is no such thing as a DVC Florida discount.  There is a $100 DVC discount on WDW Annual Passes, if that's what you're talking about, but that saves Floridians a grand total of about $5.



Sigh--yes, I mean the DVC WDW Discount!  There is a different discount for DVC between the Florida APs and the California APs for the different theme parks.

ETA:  So, my prediction is that the WDW DVC discount will be reduced commensurate with the discount on annual passes for Disneyland.


----------



## jlewisinsyr

tjkraz said:


> After all, is it really fair to have all members paying for a service that only some utilize?  Yes, if the agreement allows them to obtain a *very *attractive favored rate...but the benefit dwindles as the rate rises.



Considering any cost for valet would only be reflected in dues for resorts in which valet applied, the service would be available for any member staying at one of those resorts.  

Some people never use the gym at a DVC resort, the pool, some the room amenities or internet, but they pay for these items in their dues, valet is no different.


----------



## DebbieB

jlewisinsyr said:


> Just sent my complaint, yet another change that effects a huge population of the DVC members, with little upfront and professional communication.  Make's you wonder what other "best kept secrets" Disney is hiding in its closet.



The question is why do member services cm's open their mouths before an official announcement?    This seems to happen with CRO cm's too.   In my job, when there is advance notice of an announcement, we will be told when we can talk about it outside the company.    I know better than to tell a customer something before the company announces it.


----------



## perdidobay

Dean said:


> I wonder if this will affect those that insisted on overpaying for the valet tipping, will they still tip in and out plus the $12 a day?



I don't know about anyone else, but in the case I did valet and had to pay $12, I would not tip on the belief that the fee would cover any tip.


----------



## jlewisinsyr

perdidobay said:


> I don't know about anyone else, but in the case I did valet and had to pay $12, I would not tip on the belief that the fee would cover any tip.



Are you serious, I would never look at it like that?  When I pay $60 a day in NYC to valet park with limited in/out priveledges I make no assumption that tips are included.

Fees are exclusive of tips and that is customary through out the US.



DebbieB said:


> The question is why do member services cm's open their mouths before an official announcement?    This seems to happen with CRO cm's too.   In my job, when there is advance notice of an announcement, we will be told when we can talk about it outside the company.    I know better than to tell a customer something before the company announces it.



But maybe the announcement is official and this is just an example of bad planning on Disney's perspective, maybe an announcement was released to the CMs and their scripts adjusted to ensure they told all members calling effective immediately.


----------



## DVCBELLE

perdidobay said:


> I don't know about anyone else, but in the case I did valet and had to pay $12, I would not tip on the belief that the fee would cover any tip.



No - I would know that this is not included in the charge.  Why would you assume that?  DO you assume when you pay more for a meal that you don't have to tip?

But I will not valet at those prices...b/c it would easily go to $15 a day for me - assuming I am only in and out one time a day -


----------



## jlewisinsyr

DVCBELLE said:


> But I will not valet at those prices...b/c it would easily go to $15 a day for me - assuming I am only in and out one time a day -



I'm definately annoyed about the change and really cannot wait to see what MS has to say about my complaint.  But in the end, I'll probably still pay it because in the scheme of things its a small amount of money and still an amazing deal in terms of cost.


----------



## DebbieB

jlewisinsyr said:


> But maybe the announcement is official and this is just an example of bad planning on Disney's perspective, maybe an announcement was released to the CMs and their scripts adjusted to ensure they told all members calling effective immediately.



Then that would be bad planning on DVC's part.   Especially if it's effective immediately and you would have people pulling up to valet who don't know about the change.   That will be a bad scene.


----------



## Mickey'sApprentice

So how far are the self-parking lots from each of the DVC resorts? 

How about at AKL - Jambo. We are staying there in January and thought about driving to the parks some of the time.

I agree that WDW will have to re-designate some of the valet spaces to be self-park.

Also: What is the email and snail mail addresses to member complaints?


----------



## jlewisinsyr

DebbieB said:


> Then that would be bad planning on DVC's part.   Especially if it's effective immediately and you would have people pulling up to valet who don't know about the change.   That will be a bad scene.



And Disney never does things that represent poor planning?


----------



## Tara

perdidobay said:


> I don't know about anyone else, but in the case I did valet and had to pay $12, I would not tip on the belief that the fee would cover any tip.



What on earth would give you the idea that the fee includes tip?


----------



## Tara

DebbieB said:


> The question is why do member services cm's open their mouths before an official announcement?    This seems to happen with CRO cm's too.   In my job, when there is advance notice of an announcement, we will be told when we can talk about it outside the company.    I know better than to tell a customer something before the company announces it.



Well, the change goes into effect tomorrow - why wouldn't MS tell people about it? Isn't it better that they told some people today than not say anything and truly spring it on people? (Not that telling some people means virtually all near-term guests won't be caught off guard by this change...) When is the official announcement going to come?


----------



## n2mm

Great, and I arrived at the BWV next weekend.  Anyone who has stayed there during food and wine knows what the parking at BWV is like.  I sure hope they police it at least on the weekends, because we will be at the desk complaining if we can't find parking when we return from the parks or dining.  Generally on the weekends during the F&W festival only resort guest can enter the parking lot.


----------



## maciec

Mickey'sApprentice said:


> So how far are the self-parking lots from each of the DVC resorts?
> 
> How about at AKL - Jambo. We are staying there in January and thought about driving to the parks some of the time.
> 
> I agree that WDW will have to re-designate some of the valet spaces to be self-park.
> 
> Also: What is the email and snail mail addresses to member complaints?


 

IMHO it's not that far.  Not nearly as far as BWV.  I guess it all depends on where you get your parking spot.  Drop off everything or everyone at the front door and then go park.


----------



## JimMIA

toocherie said:


> Sigh--yes, I mean the DVC WDW Discount!  There is a different discount for DVC between the Florida APs and the California APs for the different theme parks.
> 
> ETA:  So, my prediction is that the WDW DVC discount will be reduced commensurate with the discount on annual passes for Disneyland.


I hope you're wrong.  We don't use the DVC AP discount, for reasons already explained, but it's a great perk for the vast majority of DVC owners.

I think DVC better be careful with their treatment of DVC owners or pretty soon they are going to have a LOT of people responding to the "Shoudl I buy DVC" threads with emphatic negatives.  I've been avoiding those threads, because I don't really think I would recommend DVC to most people who post those threads, but a lot of negative responses on the DIS could hurt them.


----------



## toocherie

tjkraz said:


> After all, is it really fair to have all members paying for a service that only some utilize?  Yes, if the agreement allows them to obtain a *very *attractive favored rate...but the benefit dwindles as the rate rises.


  Tim--as someone else pointed out, there are lots of services that DVC offers that not all members utilize--for example, I never go in the game arcade and (cough cough) will likely not use the fitness facilities.  To single out valet parking as something that could be eliminated makes just as much sense as singling out the play areas--I don't have kids, I don't use them--why do I have to pay for them?  Another alternative--which apparently is too complicated for DVC to consider--is to offer valet parking to members who do want to use it at a greatly discounted rate--maybe $5 a day--or $25 for the stay.  That would subsidize the outsourcing without gouging DVC members.  But to impose the same valet parking charge that CRO reservations pays seems unfair to me and just one more indication of how DVC fails to appreciate DVC members.



DVCBELLE said:


> But I will not valet at those prices...b/c it would easily go to $15 a day for me - assuming I am only in and out one time a day -



Or more.  Valet parking at the Grand Californian hotel/DVC is $17 a day currently.  (Unless it's gone up in the past week and no one has bothered to tell us.)  



JimMIA said:


> I hope you're wrong.  We don't use the DVC AP discount, for reasons already explained, but it's a great perk for the vast majority of DVC owners.
> 
> I think DVC better be careful with their treatment of DVC owners or pretty soon they are going to have a LOT of people responding to the "Shoudl I buy DVC" threads with emphatic negatives.  I've been avoiding those threads, because I don't really think I would recommend DVC to most people who post those threads, but a lot of negative responses on the DIS could hurt them.



Well, all I can do is relate a conversation I had with a DVC person.  This person said that after the attacks of 9/11, when the parks were empty, Disney did a survey to see who was still coming to the parks--the answer?  Annual passholders and DVC members.  It was at that point that Disney apparently decided to grow the DVC membership since it knew that was the way to keep its parks filled--since those people were a captive audience and would keep coming back year after year.   Similarly, what incentive would Disney have to continue the AP discount for DVC members since it knows that those people are going to be at its resorts anyway--how many really won't visit the parks for at least part of their trip?  (I know there are some--but probably not a great percentage.)  I could see the annual passholder discount for Florida residents continuing because there's no guarantee that those people will come back if the price increases greatly--but I can see some bean-counter at DVC/Disney deciding that DVC members and guests will keep coming even without the DVC annual pass discount.

And Jim--I agree with you.  When I first bought/used my membership in 2008 I had a much higher opinion of DVC than I do now and cannot whole-heartedly suggest that people buy.  I can't imagine being a long-term owner and the amount of disappointment I would feel at some of the changes.


----------



## Dean

jlewisinsyr said:


> Considering any cost for valet would only be reflected in dues for resorts in which valet applied, the service would be available for any member staying at one of those resorts.
> 
> Some people never use the gym at a DVC resort, the pool, some the room amenities or internet, but they pay for these items in their dues, valet is no different.


Maybe, maybe not.  Every resort system struggles with which costs to share among all owners and which costs to do as pay to play.  Same could be said for the pool, play areas, etc.  While I understand at being upset about a loss of benefits, valet parking is one that is reasonable to have pay to play.  I'm sure some see it as a symptom of a problem rather than a problem itself and I could see that point of view.



DebbieB said:


> The question is why do member services cm's open their mouths before an official announcement?    This seems to happen with CRO cm's too.   In my job, when there is advance notice of an announcement, we will be told when we can talk about it outside the company.    I know better than to tell a customer something before the company announces it.


It sounds like they told the CM to start to communicate this issue and not a case of passing on random info.  One could quibble with the method, timing or short notice but in effect this sounds like it is the official announcement.  I suspect you'll see it change on the website soon but it does seem to be very short notice.


----------



## jlewisinsyr

Dean said:


> Maybe, maybe not.  Every resort system struggles with which costs to share among all owners and which costs to do as pay to play.  Same could be said for the pool, play areas, etc.  While I understand at being upset about a loss of benefits, valet parking is one that is reasonable to have pay to play.  I'm sure some see it as a symptom of a problem rather than a problem itself and I could see that point of view.



Internet access per day is close to the valet rate in terms of CRO, that's no different.  I'm sure if you look at percentages, usage is not that much different for DVC guests using this feature daily and valet.


----------



## DVCBELLE

Mickey'sApprentice said:


> So how far are the self-parking lots from each of the DVC resorts?
> 
> How about at AKL - Jambo. We are staying there in January and thought about driving to the parks some of the time.
> 
> I agree that WDW will have to re-designate some of the valet spaces to be self-park.
> 
> Also: What is the email and snail mail addresses to member complaints?


I haven't been to AKV to answer that resort specifically BUT

OKW and SSR - you park at your building...
BCV, VWL are pretty close - close enough that there were days I just parked.

Haven't been to BLT yet....

BWV is the only resort that makes me really mad...the parking situation is a mess and enough for me to pick another resort...

I think that is all of them


----------



## Dean

JimMIA said:


> I hope you're wrong.  We don't use the DVC AP discount, for reasons already explained, but it's a great perk for the vast majority of DVC owners.
> 
> I think DVC better be careful with their treatment of DVC owners or pretty soon they are going to have a LOT of people responding to the "Shoudl I buy DVC" threads with emphatic negatives.  I've been avoiding those threads, because I don't really think I would recommend DVC to most people who post those threads, but a lot of negative responses on the DIS could hurt them.


I think there's a big difference in that the AP discount has no cost to the members.  IF Disney decides to stop it, it stops, if not it simply continues just like any restaurant discount.  The valet parking is different in that there are real costs and contracts involved and real $$$.  This is not simply a no brainer, no cost perk like most of them are.  It's like that one of two things have happened.  Either a clause currently in the contract has kicked in raising costs or they have been negotiating a new contract, either way DVC likely either had to front $$$ or institute pay to play.


----------



## Dean

jlewisinsyr said:


> Internet access per day is close to the valet rate in terms of CRO, that's no different.  I'm sure if you look at percentages, usage is not that much different for DVC guests using this feature daily and valet.


I doubt it but if you look in terms of dollars instead of number the internet shared costs is likely a small percentage of the valet costs.  Just look at the valet lots compared to the self parking lots.


----------



## DebbieB

Tara said:


> Well, the change goes into effect tomorrow - why wouldn't MS tell people about it? Isn't it better that they told some people today than not say anything and truly spring it on people? (Not that telling some people means virtually all near-term guests won't be caught off guard by this change...) When is the official announcement going to come?



They should have sent an e-mail out.    We got that goofy Deevy last week.


----------



## tjkraz

jlewisinsyr said:


> Internet access per day is close to the valet rate in terms of CRO, that's no different.  I'm sure if you look at percentages, usage is not that much different for DVC guests using this feature daily and valet.



I disagree.  Internet service is almost universally used by resort guests these days.  Between laptop computers, iPhones and the like, a high percentage of resort guests are using the Internet service.  

The same cannot be said for valet parking.  Many people use DME.  Others choose to use the self-park lots (we're BWV owners and are still about 50/50 on valet vs. self park).  

If DVC obtained a favored rate of, say, $3-5 dollars per member vehicle parked, that is a sizable discount which may warrant running the costs thru member dues.  

But if the valet parking organization is demanding $10-12 per vehicle, there's really no reason to do it as a dues pass-through.  Let those who use the service actually pay for it.


----------



## jlewisinsyr

tjkraz said:


> I disagree.  Internet service is almost universally used by resort guests these days.  Between laptop computers, iPhones and the like, a high percentage of resort guests are using the Internet service.



I still doubt as many people outside of DIS use internet as much as one thinks at the resort.  I barely used it myself, I have a Blackberry and can do pretty much everything I'd want from that, only twice did I need to actually connect to the internet and it didn't work the first time I tried to connect due to a bad outlet.  The bad outlet reinforces the idea that it's not used as much as people think, otherwise, the problem would be less prevelant because the issues would be caught more frequently (it is common that many people report connection issues on DIS that need to be fixed by a tech in the room).


----------



## minster22

For me this is another "little thing/perk" that just leaves that sick feeling in the pit of your stomach, wondering what other things will/could be taken away. When I really think about it, yes, the convenience of the valet parking is worth it, especially at my home resort, BWV.But the way we find out about this is just plain bad communication.....most of us have email addresses, how easy is that. I am checking into the BWV on Oct 15, if I hadn't been here on the DIS and found out about the charge, I would have been very ticked off to find out when I got my bill!!


----------



## quirty30

minster22 said:


> For me this is another "little thing/perk" that just leaves that sick feeling in the pit of your stomach, wondering what other things will/could be taken away. When I really think about it, yes, the convenience of the valet parking is worth it, especially at my home resort, BWV.But the way we find out about this is just plain bad communication.....most of us have email addresses, how easy is that. I am checking into the BWV on Oct 15, if I hadn't been here on the DIS and found out about the charge, I would have been very ticked off to find out when I got my bill!!



And if I were you, or anyone checking in sometime in the near future, and had yet to recieve any official communication from DVC, I would plead ignorance when I checked in.


----------



## Deb & Bill

Just waiting for the first non-member who rented a reservation from a member to come back and complain that they didn't get free valet parking and they had DVC Member on their room ID.


----------



## Dean

jlewisinsyr said:


> I still doubt as many people outside of DIS use internet as much as one thinks at the resort.  I barely used it myself, I have a Blackberry and can do pretty much everything I'd want from that, only twice did I need to actually connect to the internet and it didn't work the first time I tried to connect due to a bad outlet.  The bad outlet reinforces the idea that it's not used as much as people think, otherwise, the problem would be less prevelant because the issues would be caught more frequently (it is common that many people report connection issues on DIS that need to be fixed by a tech in the room).


The exact numbers don't matter, suffices to say it's used by a significant portion of the guests.  The main reason hotels and resorts do it for free is it's dirt cheap to do so.  OTOH, valet parking is not cheap to offer.  And that is the crux of the matter IMO.  It's not a question of if there's a cost but rather who is going to pay for it.  It is one that's reasonable to pass on to those that use it rather than adding it to the cost for everyone.  That doesn't necessarily mean the reverse decision is unreasonable, we simply don't have the information to make an informed decision, only a philosophical or emotional one.


----------



## Dean

Deb & Bill said:


> Just waiting for the first non-member who rented a reservation from a member to come back and complain that they didn't get free valet parking and they had DVC Member on their room ID.


Given the specifics of the decisions and communications it would not be a reasonable complaint unless included in a rental agreement.  People can complain if they want, they do it all the time often for little or no reason, we see it hear all the time.


----------



## tjkraz

toocherie said:


> Tim--as someone else pointed out, there are lots of services that DVC offers that not all members utilize--for example, I never go in the game arcade and (cough cough) will likely not use the fitness facilities.  To single out valet parking as something that could be eliminated makes just as much sense as singling out the play areas--I don't have kids, I don't use them--why do I have to pay for them?



But one of the two things you mention (video arcade) IS pay-for-play.  And there are other resort services which are not complimentary.  There are fees for renting surrey bikes and watercraft at resorts which offer them.  There are fees for childcare centers.  There are fees for many of the Community Hall activities and things special tours like the AKV safaris.  You have to pay for golf despite the fact that the LBV course winds through SSR and OKW.  

All of those resort amenities COULD be subsidized by annual dues and freely-available to members.  But I shutter to think how much each of us may end up paying for services we never use.  

Really the only resort amenity that I feel is guaranteed to be included is access to resort pools.  

Some hotels/timeshares charge for fitness club access.  Going back about 3-4 years, even Disney resorts charged guests to use the workout rooms while DVC members were given free access as a member perk.  

Free Internet is becoming more and more commonplace in the hospitality industry, but I was among those who was very surprised when DVC members received "free" access.  I say "free" because there's no chance that the service is actually free--instead we are paying for it in our dues and the negotiated rate is certainly less than $9.95 per room, per day.  

I'm curious to see what sort of statement DVC will make regarding the change.  Given Disney's reluctance to release details, I doubt we will get much info.  

If this really was a contract issue with the parking vendor, then I suspect they acted responsibly.  Free parking is still available at each resort and it doesn't make sense to keep piling fees into the member dues when the greater good is not served.


----------



## minster22

Just logged into the "always up-to-date" DVC website, valet parking at BWV is still listed under Member Perks!!


----------



## Sammie

DebbieB said:


> They should have sent an e-mail out.    We got that goofy Deevy last week.



Exactly, it is by far one of my pet peeves with them. They flood me with crap, like that, mailings for referrals, addons, etc. but let it be about a significant change to the membership and we get the info here, never from them. 

There is no way they did not know this was coming and could have easily emailed the membership and put up a notice on the website letting us know the change was coming.

Someone earlier asked for the email for member satisfaction:

dvcmembersatisfactionteam@disneyvacationclub.com


----------



## toocherie

tjkraz said:


> Let those who use the service actually pay for it.





tjkraz said:


> But one of the two things you mention (video arcade) IS pay-for-play.  And there are other resort services which are not complimentary.  There are fees for renting surrey bikes and watercraft at resorts which offer them.  There are fees for childcare centers.  There are fees for many of the Community Hall activities and things special tours like the AKV safaris.  You have to pay for golf despite the fact that the LBV course winds through SSR and OKW.




I totally agree--let's let those who use it pay for it.  I'll have to go back and look at the member docs to see if the pools are "guaranteed."  If not--let's charge a day use for those who use them.  the video arcade--having never used them I didn't know there was a fee--but I'm sure the cost per game doesn't justify the use of space that could be used for something else.  Let's do away with the aforementioned play areas--or keep them and impose a per child fee.  

Now keep in mind I don't really think it is appropriate or expected to have a fee for usage of all these amenities.  But I also don't think it's fair that the valet parking perk is going away--but the other things remain.  

What's next?  Yes, a lot of people use DME and the busses to the parks but are we really guaranteed that those are going to be provided at a "free" cost?  I don't think DVC has given us this right.  What is going to happen when they start imposing a fee to ride the busses to the parks?   With CRO reservations they can just raise the cost per room and say it's included--if our dues go up too much there will be screams--so impose a daily per person fee.  I don't believe that DVC didn't have alternatives with respect to valet parking.  That's what I take issue with--they can send out emails about silly things like "name the premium club" but they can't send out a survey really asking members what is important to them as members?  Like valet parking.   Or real glasses in studios.  No, they pretend that they care by asking us about stupid things and just go off and make decisions that impact our membership on the important things.

And, just so everyone knows--I have a handicapped tag so I will continue to get "free" valet parking irregardless of the changes.   My issue isn't with this particular change--it's with the fact that DVC keeps eating away at the perks --and yes, I know we can't depend on them.  But Disney also has a responsibliity to DVC members who help sustain it during the hard times and like Jim mentioned above, if they keep making changes like this--and communicating them so poorly--many members will stop being the DVC advocates they have been in the past.


----------



## TiggerAllie

We are checking in at VWL on Friday, so I will be calling MS tomorrow to ask about this change. Currently dvcmember.com still lists:
"Valet parking is complimentary at Disney's BoardWalk Resort, Disney's Wilderness Lodge, and Disney's Beach Club Resort. Just show your Disney Vacation Club Member ID Card. Complimentary valet parking is not available at other valet parking operations or for Theme Park access."
However, it also says:
"All offers are subject to availability and may change without notice. The Disney Vacation Club Member discounts cannot be used in conjunction with any other discounts or promotions. Please refer to the Member Benefits Guide for important information with regard to the above benefits."
I'll post back what I hear from the MS CM tomorrow. We use this service a lot (along with via the TiW card) as we rent a car and tend to eat at different resorts for dinner each night. I find it particularly useful at BW. I will be calling TiW on Monday to ask them about the free valet privilege.
I notice that CR/BLT and AKL have never been added to the comp valet list.


----------



## disneynutz

Sammie said:


> Exactly, it is by far one of my pet peeves with them. They flood me with crap, like that, mailings for referrals, addons, etc. but let it be about a significant change to the membership and we get the info here, never from them.
> 
> There is no way they did not know this was coming and could have easily emailed the membership and put up a notice on the website letting us know the change was coming.
> 
> Someone earlier asked for the email for member satisfaction:
> 
> dvcmembersatisfactionteam@disneyvacationclub.com



This is just another example of Disney focusing on sales and ignoring the members. The marketing folks don't seem to have trouble sending sales information and emails, but membership issues are never communicated. Even MS doesn't get current info. I spoke to Membership Satisfaction today and the Valet issue wasn't mentioned but they did say that no one in the company has talked to them about the Merry Mixers for this year. All of these types of events are paid for by the marketing department and the two departments don't share information.

I'm getting pretty tired of Disney wanting more money for less service. Not communicating with the Membership shows a lack of caring and disrespect towards the members.


----------



## TLSnell1981

DebbieB said:


> The question is why do member services cm's open their mouths before an official announcement?    This seems to happen with CRO cm's too.   In my job, when there is advance notice of an announcement, we will be told when we can talk about it outside the company.    I know better than to tell a customer something before the company announces it .



We will be at BWV next week. I would not have known about this change if it weren't for this thread. I picked up the phone, called MS and they confirmed the change *EFFECTIVE TOMMORROW*!! 

I'm not happy about this change. We normally rent a car and an extra $150, for valet parking and tip, would not have set well with me. Limo service, roundtrip, is less than a week of parking. We can take a taxi, for anything else, if the need arises.

This is one perk I will really miss.


----------



## DVCBELLE

TiggerAllie said:


> We are checking in at VWL on Friday, so I will be calling MS tomorrow to ask about this change. Currently dvcmember.com still lists:
> "Valet parking is complimentary at Disney's BoardWalk Resort, Disney's Wilderness Lodge, and Disney's Beach Club Resort. Just show your Disney Vacation Club Member ID Card. Complimentary valet parking is not available at other valet parking operations or for Theme Park access."
> However, it also says:
> "All offers are subject to availability and may change without notice. The Disney Vacation Club Member discounts cannot be used in conjunction with any other discounts or promotions. Please refer to the Member Benefits Guide for important information with regard to the above benefits."
> I'll post back what I hear from the MS CM tomorrow. We use this service a lot (along with via the TiW card) as we rent a car and tend to eat at different resorts for dinner each night. I find it particularly useful at BW. I will be calling TiW on Monday to ask them about the free valet privilege.
> I notice that CR/BLT and AKL have never been added to the comp valet list.


I laready called BWV directly and they confirmed the change.  It goes into effect tomorrow.  She had to check with the valets and seemed sympathetic - particularly when I told her I would most likely not book with BWV anymore despite it being our favorite resort b/c their parking was not sufficient.  

I told her I knew it wasn't her issue and that I would be sure to take it up with member services.  She seemed very surprised that there was a change in the policy and that there wasn't even a discount for members.

They could have charged us the difference - say it is currently $5 for DVC - and the company now wants $7 - they could charge us $2 - shoot I would probably even be okay at $5!

This could be a game of chicken.  The outsourced company may think that DVC members will continue to pay the fee....DVC thinks they won't - so DVC told them to go for it.


----------



## Chuck S

jlewisinsyr said:


> Internet access per day is close to the valet rate in terms of CRO, that's no different.  I'm sure if you look at percentages, usage is not that much different for DVC guests using this feature daily and valet.



Yes, but internet services were not free for several years.  The initial cost of infrastructure had to be recouped first...the wiring, modems, billing system, etc.  When a service position is outsourced like the valets, those costs never really are "recouped" they are an ongoing expense...the expense is whatever the parties agree to in the contract.  And remember that DVC is not the primary contractor here, Disney is, Disney operates the cash resorts, Disney contracts with the valet vendor.  The resorts that are truly a freestanding DVC resort (SSR and OKW) do not offer valet services at all.

It could also be that the valet company is in a bit of a financial bind, between the current economy and a wage increase.   Remember, the company has to pay the valets a wage, even if it is considered a tipped position.  It they aren't making enough in fees to do that, they can not operate.  There may be additonal problems, maybe they need to refinance or extend a business loan, and the lender is telling them "No."  So they look at the logs and see lots of cars being parked with no income from them at all, or at a cheaper negotiated bulk rate from DVC (however the contract works?)    We really don't know what is prompting this change, but I'll bet DVC Management has had very little input into the decision.


----------



## Mickey'sApprentice

Thanks to the previous posters that answered my questions about the convenience of self-parking lots at DVC resorts. I had considered driving from AKV to most parks, but will now stick with the busses. (Dh likes forgetting about cars.)

Thanks Sammie for the Member DIS-Satisfaction email address.


----------



## LarryM

If these changes really take effect then the question I have is does the DVC membership own a percentage of the parking lot according to our pwnership of the resort.(I always figured this was the reason that DVC was put at the resorts so that common area fees could be split up and lower Disney's cost by passing it on to us.)If this is the case does the valet lot sit on the hotels portion or DVC portion.  If we don't own a portion then will our dues be reduced to reflect the change in this service.


----------



## Chuck S

LarryM said:


> If these changes really take effect then the question I have is does the DVC membership own a percentage of the parking lot according to our pwnership of the resort.(I always figured this was the reason that DVC was put at the resorts so that common area fees could be split up and lower Disney's cost by passing it on to us.)If this is the case does the valet lot sit on the hotels portion or DVC portion.  If we don't own a portion then will our dues be reduced to reflect the change in this service.



We, as individual members, do not own any portion of the parking lots.  They are a common area expense, but we have no physical control over the lots. No right to say, "This spot is DVC, that spot is cash guest, this spot is valet."


----------



## Tara

LarryM said:


> If these changes really take effect then the question I have is does the DVC membership own a percentage of the parking lot according to our pwnership of the resort.(I always figured this was the reason that DVC was put at the resorts so that common area fees could be split up and lower Disney's cost by passing it on to us.)If this is the case does the valet lot sit on the hotels portion or DVC portion.  If we don't own a portion then will our dues be reduced to reflect the change in this service.



I don't see how this would make a difference - the dues would be to cover the cost of operating the valet, not the land the lot sits on.


----------



## Longhairbear

Just my 2 cents. 
 We fly in to WDW, and have never rented a car. While quite a few say that the last thing they want to do on vacation is cook in the villa, the last thing we want to do is drive anywhere. I love cooking in our villa. We enjoy the transportation from parks to resorts etc., and have never used the valet parking, and it was only available at 3 resorts. One of them was our home base at VWL, and we never used it.
 However, in CA at DLR, we drove in, and will always drive in to that resort. The parking for non valet was, maybe, a few minutes walk back to the VGC. Just for the sake of expediency, it would take as much time, or less for me to walk to my car, then to wait for the valet to bring it to me at VGC, and I am sure of the same for VWL. 
 My only reason for wanting my car during a stay at my DVC, would be to get groceries, to cook dinner in my villa, something everyone else claims to hate.
I'll take better food over valet anytime.


----------



## drusba

LarryM said:


> If these changes really take effect then the question I have is does the DVC membership own a percentage of the parking lot according to our pwnership of the resort.(I always figured this was the reason that DVC was put at the resorts so that common area fees could be split up and lower Disney's cost by passing it on to us.)If this is the case does the valet lot sit on the hotels portion or DVC portion.  If we don't own a portion then will our dues be reduced to reflect the change in this service.



No, the reason is because your dues go to pay all the expenses of the resort (shared with the hotel portion of the resort) and those expenses include paying for valet services (managers, employees who park the cars, etc.). Thus, if they charge us for valet it would be the same as charging us twice and making a profit for something we have already paid for in our dues. If in fact those expenses will now not be charged to us in dues then they can fairly do this. If otherwise, then they are cheating us unless the $12 charge goes to offset dues.


----------



## Dean

Mickey'sApprentice said:


> Thanks to the previous posters that answered my questions about the convenience of self-parking lots at DVC resorts. I had considered driving from AKV to most parks, but will now stick with the busses. (Dh likes forgetting about cars.)
> 
> Thanks Sammie for the Member DIS-Satisfaction email address.


We find driving much better except 2 situations.  One is when going to MK, the other when the driver is moving from one park during the other without return to the room.  Of course that would change if they removed the free parking while staying on site benefit.


----------



## Dean

LarryM said:


> If these changes really take effect then the question I have is does the DVC membership own a percentage of the parking lot according to our pwnership of the resort.(I always figured this was the reason that DVC was put at the resorts so that common area fees could be split up and lower Disney's cost by passing it on to us.)If this is the case does the valet lot sit on the hotels portion or DVC portion.  If we don't own a portion then will our dues be reduced to reflect the change in this service.


If there were a profit to the resort, a prorated portion of the income should go to offset dues.  I'd guess there isn't an excess coming in and the choices Disney had to make was whether to pay more, take it back over (pay more), do away with the service, increase the charges to those who were paying or spread the costs out among a larger group (us).


----------



## DVC Mike

My DW loves to valet, while I like to self-park.

She won't like this change at all, since it gives me a reason to self-park ("honey, it's free while valet is $12 plus tip!").

I should still get free valet while dining using the TIW card.


----------



## Dean

DVC Mike said:


> I should still get free valet while dining using the TIW card.


I would expect that perk to go away soon as well if it doesn't in this round.


----------



## n2mm

DVC Mike said:


> I should still get free valet while dining using the TIW card.



I'm holding my breath on this perk too.  I plan to call tomorrow and check.  We really enjoy this perk when dining at the GF mostly.


----------



## going/again

toocherie said:


> and like Jim mentioned above, if they keep making changes like this--and communicating them so poorly--many members will stop being the DVC advocates they have been in the past.



most of our friends were jealous we got to go every year, we told them to buy DVC, but how can we justify that now, contrary to what most DVC lovers say ( discounts wont be around for ever) yet again for next year they are selling holidays with 42% off and free dining, what with this and all the perks gradually being eroded and MS telling us nothing, DVC is something we cant in all honesty recommend to friends, never thought we would say that when we first bought in, we think being a captive audience is not working in our best interests.


----------



## going/again

Chuck S said:


> The resorts that are truly a freestanding DVC resort (SSR and OKW) do not offer valet services at all.
> 
> no need to, you park outside your room  block


----------



## chrisw127

going/again said:


> most of our friends were jealous we got to go every year, we told them to buy DVC, but how can we justify that now, contrary to what most DVC lovers say ( discounts wont be around for ever) yet again for next year they are selling holidays with 42% off and free dining, what with this and all the perks gradually being eroded and MS telling us nothing, DVC is something we cant in all honesty recommend to friends, never thought we would say that when we first bought in, we think being a captive audience is not working in our best interests.



As someone who has been saving to buy DVC and has researched it pretty fully, this scares me.  Free valet parking is not a huge issue for me, having never gotten used to it, but if this is part of a bigger trend, it definitely worries me.


----------



## CarolMN

DebbieB said:


> If this is true, there darn well better be a space for me in the self park at BWV when I stay there.  There have been times I've gone round and round and just gave up and valet parked.





Dean said:


> There's always parking at the overflow lot and it'll be needed more than ever now unless they close down the valet area entirely or move it across the street.



When I complained to BWV managers about the parking situation for guests staying at the resort, I was told DVC members received free valet so it wasn't an issue.  

If self parking is not available in the resort lot for guests of the resort, I will be complaining.   Those actually staying at the BWI or BWV should not have to park in the lot across the street so that others can go to the parks.  

IMO, the resort lot should be reserved for BWI/BWV guests and those with a handicapped sticker.  Everyone else should be directed across the street, even if they have a WDW parking pass from another on-site resort.  

In all fairness, they do seem to be much more proactive in policing the BW parking during Food & Wine Festival, at least on the weekends.

Truth be told, the Boardwalk needs more parking, period.  My guess is that this change will mean the size of the valet lot can be significantly reduced.

P.S.  I am having a very hard time believing that the BWI is paying the entire amount of the valet contract.   It's a common expense.  Until someone with the authority to speak for DVC says otherwise, I will continue to believe members are paying a prorated share, just as we pay a prorated share of housekeeping and front desk operations.


----------



## RDP

Is the Valet $12 per day or length of stay?


----------



## Dean

CarolMN said:


> When I complained to BWV managers about the parking situation for guests staying at the resort, I was told DVC members received free valet so it wasn't an issue.
> 
> If self parking is not available in the resort lot for guests of the resort, I will be complaining.   Those actually staying at the BWI or BWV should not have to park in the lot across the street so that others can go to the parks.
> 
> IMO, the resort lot should be reserved for BWI/BWV guests and those with a handicapped sticker.  Everyone else should be directed across the street, even if they have a WDW parking pass from another on-site resort.
> 
> In all fairness, they do seem to be much more proactive in policing the BW parking during Food & Wine Festival, at least on the weekends.
> 
> Truth be told, the Boardwalk needs more parking, period.  My guess is that this change will mean the size of the valet lot can be significantly reduced.
> 
> P.S.  I am having a very hard time believing that the BWI is paying the entire amount of the valet contract.   It's a common expense.  Until someone with the authority to speak for DVC says otherwise, I will continue to believe members are paying a prorated share, just as we pay a prorated share of housekeeping and front desk operations.


As I noted above, I have never seen the free parking location behind the valet totally full even when a significant portion is just blocked off and not being used.  It's a little further than the lot on the right and in some portions, likely further than the lot across the street except you're not having to cross the street.  However, if it's not blocked off, it does snake all the way to the tennis courts and the canal and can be a great place to park if you're in a villa on that end.

As for paying, I doubt either the BWI or BWV have been paying anything for the valet parking, it's even possible they are getting paid to allow it.  However, the BWI guests were likely paying a higher percentage due to members getting free parking.  As I speculated earlier, it's likely that either a contract clause kicked in that is requiring money from the resort OR they are renegotiating the contract the the company is demanding a subsidy of some type or at least a guarantee.  Regardless, the end result is the same.  If you see an ambulance at one of the resorts this week it's likely because one or more valet attendant was attacked due to this change.  I wouldn't want to be them right now dealing with this with no pre-warning of the guests arriving and knowing the entitlement mentality many have, esp DVC members as a group.



RDP said:


> Is the Valet $12 per day or length of stay?


per day.


----------



## Alexander

RDP said:


> Is the Valet $12 per day or length of stay?



Per Day

We only use valet when the weather or kids require it--for example, we had dinner at the Contemporary twice last visit and it was monsooning both nights.  Valet was a no-brainer for those visits.  Another night we were eating at the Poly and DS (3) had fallen asleep in the car.  It was worth paying for it (non DVC resort) than carrying him across the parking lot.

If it goes away, it goes away.  We don't use it that often and if we need it, we'll pay for it.  Otherwise, we'll just walk.


----------



## Tara

RDP said:


> Is the Valet $12 per day or length of stay?



Per day. Once you pay for a day, you can valet at any resort that offers valet as many times a day as you like. 

Even if I do have to pay for it again, it's still a great deal IMO.


----------



## TiggerAllie

I just got off the phone with MS, and I asked about the valet parking change. His response was, "Oh, you heard?" and proceeded to inform me that yes, that was correct, and the change goes into effect today. Supposedly they will be correcting/updating the website "right away". 

I then asked if our dues would be lower or pro-rated because of the change in service. His response to this was that the reason that they decided to end the complimentary valet parking was so that they wouldn't have to raise the dues [as much--as I'm sure they will go up some]. I asked why the rate change went into effect today and not January 1 when the dues period ends, and he didn't really have an answer for that.

I then asked where I could file a formal complaint with my dissatisfaction and this change, and he told me to use the "contact us" form on DVCmember.com.

I think the more people that call in and the more people that write, the better chance there is that they might reconsider this or actually attempt to renegotiate something in the next contract period. It also gives us a chance to express our displeasure that we weren't notified ahead of time. What happens to the people pulling up to the valet today, expecting to get complimentary parking? As a member who has a vacation that starts on Friday, at a resort where this change goes into effect (VWL), I feel like I should have been notified by phone or email at least.

I seem to remember that the valet parking area at WL/VWL is actually the rows that are on the villas-side of the parking lot. Too bad it's probably too much effort to move them towards the middle. 

I will be calling TiW tomorrow to ask as well. Again, the more concern they get from guests, the more they will see that it is a service that people actually use.


----------



## SCFIREMAN

I just spoke w/ DVC M/S, he advised me to write to wdw.guest.communications@disneyworld.com and let them know my thoughts about the removal of the valet. I told him I was disappointed that Disney is quick to advertise additional services but seems to forget to mention deletion of them. When I asked why it was removed he read me the script he was given about the rising cost of doing business and not wanting to raise our dues. Although he did say Disney is very big into guest feedback and that writing with your concerns could effect change in the policy.


----------



## snappy

Will this change prompt more members to skip the rental car and just use DME and busses/boat transportation?

It sounds to me like another way to influence more members to spend all their $$ onsite.

I believe I will just stay fewer days in larger or higher point requirement DVC units,  combined with more offsite days.

We'll get to try some of the new offsite resorts, and just save our $$ rather than buy more DVC points.

Thanks, DVC!


----------



## Chuck S

going/again said:


> Chuck S said:
> 
> 
> 
> The resorts that are truly a freestanding DVC resort (SSR and OKW) do not offer valet services at all.
> 
> no need to, you park outside your room  block
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have you ever tried to park in the OKW HH area during a semi-busy DVC season?  There are many times no parking spots are available at all.
Click to expand...


----------



## Deb & Bill

Chuck S said:


> Have you ever tried to park in the OKW HH area during a semi-busy DVC season?  There are many times no parking spots are available at all.



That's why the HH location is a poor choice.


----------



## CarolMN

Dean said:


> As I noted above, I have never seen the free parking location behind the valet totally full even when a significant portion is just blocked off and not being used.  It's a little further than the lot on the right and in some portions, likely further than the lot across the street except you're not having to cross the street.  However, if it's not blocked off, it does snake all the way to the tennis courts and the canal and can be a great place to park if you're in a villa on that end.


I have seen that area full.  I have also been told I could NOT self park there.  Both situations on a F&W weekend and both times a registered guest of the BWV.  Guard knew we were staying there.  Polite, but not sympathetic.   And FWIW, both times there were plenty of spaces available after IllumiNations.  We were in SV and could easily see the cars leaving around 9:30pm.  



Dean said:


> As for paying, I doubt either the BWI or BWV have been paying anything for the valet parking, it's even possible they are getting paid to allow it.  However, the BWI guests were likely paying a higher percentage due to members getting free parking.  As I speculated earlier, it's likely that either a contract clause kicked in that is requiring money from the resort OR they are renegotiating the contract the the company is demanding a subsidy of some type or at least a guarantee.  Regardless, the end result is the same.


Perhaps. I do agree something to do with the valet contract precipitated the change, but do not agree that BWV/BWI were getting paid to allow the valet company to provide the service.



Dean said:


> If you see an ambulance at one of the resorts this week it's likely because one or more valet attendant was attacked due to this change.  I wouldn't want to be them right now dealing with this with no pre-warning of the guests arriving and knowing the entitlement mentality many have, esp DVC members as a group.


 I certainly hope that the change doesn't result in violence!   I agree that many DVC members have a bad case of entitlement, but unless someone is mentally unbalanced, I can't see members resorting to violence over this.  I think you are exaggerating.

That said, I would not want to be a valet right now, either.  There will be arguments and unhappy members as a result.  I am very willing to believe some members will take out their frustration on the valet employees by not tipping.  DVC should be ashamed of themselves for not doing a proper job of communicating the change and the reasons behind it.


----------



## Chuck S

Deb & Bill said:


> That's why the HH location is a poor choice.



Agreed, I prefer the outlying areas.  But it is also a problem when parking to check-in or visiting the store and Olivia's.  Especially if you travel with someone in a manual wheelchair.  You either have to walk up pushing the chair from your outlying room, or load/unload the chair from a bus.  Often we've driven through the HH area looking to park, and have wound up dining off-site because of no parking.


----------



## DebbieB

SCFIREMAN said:


> I just spoke w/ DVC M/S, he advised me to write to wdw.guest.communications@disneyworld.com and let them know my thoughts about the removal of the valet. I told him I was disappointed that Disney is quick to advertise additional services but seems to forget to mention deletion of them. When I asked why it was removed he read me the script he was given about the rising cost of doing business and not wanting to raise our dues. Although he did say Disney is very big into guest feedback and that writing with your concerns could effect change in the policy.



I don't see the point in e-mailing the wdw address rather than the DVC.   Valet has not been removed from WDW resorts, the service is still there,  they are just charging more for it (from $10 to $12?).  It's DVC where it's gone from free to $12.  I think the member satisfaction-email address is the way to go.

dvcmembersatisfactionteam@disneyvacationclub.com


----------



## Tara

snappy said:


> Will this change prompt more members to skip the rental car and just use DME and busses/boat transportation?
> 
> It sounds to me like another way to influence more members to spend all their $$ onsite.



I don't think so - most people rent a car for the convenience, so I don't see many giving that up over $12 per day.


----------



## jade1

Don't you usually make the decision to "outsource" something because they can do it cheaper? And if more people are using ME, how can there be more valet parking going on than in previous years? Wouldn't it have to be getting a smaller and smaller cost every year? 

What else can still be outsourced and the savings...I mean, added expense be passed on to the user?


----------



## DanenRox

The concept of "Welcome Home" lends itself to a few assumptions.  I understand it's just a marketing ploy, but if DVC continues to promote themselves as our "home", they should acknowledge that most of us don't pay to park in our driveway.


----------



## Chuck S

jade1 said:


> Don't you usually make the decision to "outsource" something because they can do it cheaper? And if more people are using ME, how can there be more valet parking going on than in previous years? Wouldn't it have to be getting a smaller and smaller cost every year?
> 
> What else can still be outsourced and the savings...I mean, added expense be passed on to the user?



While the outsourcing may save Disney $$ by removing those employees from their payroll, the valet contractor may be demanding these changes to insure profitability.  So while the cost to Disney is cheaper, the DVC perk may disappear as part of the contract agreement with the valet company.  While the short notification of the change is truly bad form (and unfortunately on par) for DVC, it may truly not be in DVC's power to insist that the perk continue without giving increased monetary support to the contractor.

Remember under labor laws, the contractor still has to pay the valet a wage, even though they are tipped positions.  If the hourly income to the contractor from operations is less than that mandated hourly employee expense, what would you have them do?


----------



## jade1

Chuck S said:


> While the outsourcing may save Disney $$ by removing those employees from their payroll, the valet contractor may be demanding these changes to insure profitability.  So while the cost to Disney is cheaper, the DVC perk may disappear as part of the contract agreement with the valet company.  While the short notification of the change is truly bad form (and unfortunately on par) for DVC, it may truly not be in DVC's power to insist that the perk continue without giving increased monetary support to the contractor.
> 
> Remember under labor laws, the contractor still has to pay the valet a wage, even though they are tipped positions.  If the hourly income to the contractor from operations is less than that mandated hourly employee expense, what would you have them do?



If it still is saving Disney money, than I would let the resorts know that any DVC member that checks in and wants valet-they are still covered.

Again, what else can be outsourced and the savings, I mean added expense be passed on to the user? That's more my point than the situation Disney created with this "money saving" decision.


----------



## harra

jade1 said:


> Don't you usually make the decision to "outsource" something because they can do it cheaper? And if more people are using ME, how can there be more valet parking going on than in previous years? Wouldn't it have to be getting a smaller and smaller cost every year?
> 
> What else can still be outsourced and the savings...I mean, added expense be passed on to the user?



Outsourcing doesn't always result in cheaper expense.  In fact, from my experience in the corporate world, it's often the opposite.  The difference is that the expense of using Disney CMs as opposed to outsourced contractors is where the expense falls on the profit & loss statement.  Often times the powers that be will bring down an edict that they must reduce payroll.  So what do they do, fire people and hire contractors because contractor expense falls in a different expense line item.  Payroll is reduced but the cost of contractors is higher than the employees ever were.  But the powers that be are happy because payroll expense is down


----------



## Chuck S

jade1 said:


> If it still is saving Disney money, than I would let the resorts know that any DVC member that checks in and wants valet-they are still covered.
> 
> Again, what else can be outsourced and the savings, I mean added expense be passed on to the user? That's more my point than the situation Disney created with this "money saving" decision.



Why should Disney, because they have outsourced the service, pay a subsidy to the contractor to give DVCers the service for free?  That subsidy would be passed on to DVCers as dues increases.


----------



## jade1

Chuck, if your saying "Disney" is deciding to make decisions that will cost "DVC members" more money (or less perks) and too bad for them-then yes, we have no argument and should expect more bad situations to come.


----------



## edk35

I called today to make a request for a ressie and happened to ask about the valet parking. He said it went started as of today. Self parking is still free.


----------



## Chuck S

jade1 said:


> Chuck, if your saying "Disney" is deciding to make decisions that will cost "DVC members" more money (or less perks) and too bad for them-then yes, we have no argument and should expect more bad situations to come.



Remember that Disney and DVC are separate operating entities.  "Disney" does not pick-up any expenses for DVC...and DVC resort operating expenses are passed along to our dues.  If "DVC" picks up the expense of a subsidy to the valet contractor to give us a perk, DVC owners have to pay for it.  That is the difference between a timeshare and a hotel.  If Disney wanted to give cash hotel guests "free" valet, they'd increase the cost of the cash rooms per night to offset the expense.  Similarly, DVC would increase the dues to offset the expense.


----------



## jade1

Chuck S said:


> Remember that Disney and DVC are separate operating entities.  "Disney" does not pick-up any expenses for DVC...and DVC resort operating expenses are passed along to our dues.  If "DVC" picks up the expense of a subsidy to the valet contractor to give us a perk, DVC owners have to pay for it.  That is the difference between a timeshare and a hotel.  If Disney wanted to give cash hotel guests "free" valet, they'd increase the cost of the cash rooms per night to offset the expense.  Similarly, DVC would increase the dues to offset the expense.



Sorry Chuck, I posted that last one before I read yours. I am getting closer to seeing what you are saying-but not quite there yet. So up until now, free DVC valet at say BWV was paid by DVC dues? And now since Disney outsourced it, BWV will lower the dues by that amount, and have the member that uses it pay for it? And likewise, any DVC member that buys an AP and gets $100 off-that $100 is covered by that members DVC dues?


----------



## DVCBELLE

Longhairbear said:


> Just my 2 cents.
> We fly in to WDW, and have never rented a car. While quite a few say that the last thing they want to do on vacation is cook in the villa, the last thing we want to do is drive anywhere. I love cooking in our villa. We enjoy the transportation from parks to resorts etc., and have never used the valet parking, and it was only available at 3 resorts. One of them was our home base at VWL, and we never used it.
> However, in CA at DLR, we drove in, and will always drive in to that resort. The parking for non valet was, maybe, a few minutes walk back to the VGC. Just for the sake of expediency, it would take as much time, or less for me to walk to my car, then to wait for the valet to bring it to me at VGC, and I am sure of the same for VWL.
> My only reason for wanting my car during a stay at my DVC, would be to get groceries, to cook dinner in my villa, something everyone else claims to hate.
> I'll take better food over valet anytime.


IF you ever choose to use Valet even with the charge...you can call the valet desk from your room and by the time you reach the front desk - they will have your car waiting for you.  This was my favorite thing about valet - we never waited for our car - we walked out the door and into our waiting car!


----------



## Dean

TiggerAllie said:


> I think the more people that call in and the more people that write, the better chance there is that they might reconsider this or actually attempt to renegotiate something in the next contract period. It also gives us a chance to express our displeasure that we weren't notified ahead of time. What happens to the people pulling up to the valet today, expecting to get complimentary parking? As a member who has a vacation that starts on Friday, at a resort where this change goes into effect (VWL), I feel like I should have been notified by phone or email at least.


Knowing how these type of decisions are made, I'm sure it's far too late to have any affect on this issue though it never hurts to try.



snappy said:


> Will this change prompt more members to skip the rental car and just use DME and busses/boat transportation?


Maybe a few but I doubt it'll have much affect on that decision.



> I have seen that area full. I have also been told I could NOT self park there. Both situations on a F&W weekend and both times a registered guest of the BWV. Guard knew we were staying there. Polite, but not sympathetic. And FWIW, both times there were plenty of spaces available after IllumiNations. We were in SV and could easily see the cars leaving around 9:30pm.


I have never seen it full and have never seen it completely open.  Did you see it full or were you just told it was?  Often they will direct guests of other resorts across the street by telling them the lots are full even when they are not.  


> Perhaps. I do agree something to do with the valet contract precipitated the change, but do not agree that BWV/BWI were getting paid to allow the valet company to provide the service.


It could go either way, it certainly wouldn't surprise me if there were some type of direct financial benefit to the resort or system.  You can bet one or more people within Disney are getting something out of it one way or another besides just providing the service for free.



> I certainly hope that the change doesn't result in violence! I agree that many DVC members have a bad case of entitlement, but unless someone is mentally unbalanced, I can't see members resorting to violence over this. I think you are exaggerating.


Not exaggerating, more joking to make the point that it is likely to not be very pretty.



jade1 said:


> Don't you usually make the decision to "outsource" something because they can do it cheaper?


There are other potential benefits over cost alone.  These include limiting risk and liability and riding oneself of many of the management headaches.  For example, we use a personnel agency for most of our new entry level positions.  That way if things don't work out very well with that person, you simply tell them bye as long as it's done within 6 months.  No documentation requirements, no risk, no hassles.  We keep the top performers and avoid many of those "project" type employees that generally don't pan out and drag any system down that they are a member of.



> Remember under labor laws, the contractor still has to pay the valet a wage, even though they are tipped positions. If the hourly income to the contractor from operations is less than that mandated hourly employee expense, what would you have them do?


That tipped wage for FL just went to over $4 an hour earlier this year.


----------



## Paging Tom Morrow

At least now the website now says:

"Valet parking available for a nominal fee"

Nominal to me means "insignificant".  Not sure I agree with $12 a day being insignificant.

Main Entry: 1nom·i·nal
Pronunciation: \ˈnä-mə-nəl, ˈnäm-nəl\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English nominalle, from Medieval Latin nominalis, from Latin, of a name, from nomin-, nomen name  more at name
Date: 15th century

1 : of, relating to, or being a noun or a word or expression taking a noun construction
2 a : of, relating to, or constituting a name b : bearing the name of a person
3 a : existing or being something in name or form only <nominal head of his party> b : of, being, or relating to a designated or theoretical size that may vary from the actual : approximate <the pipe's nominal size>* c : trifling, insignificant <his involvement was nominal> <charged only nominal rent>*
4 of a rate of interest a : equal to the annual rate of simple interest that would obtain if interest were not compounded when in fact it is compounded and paid for periods of less than a year b : equal to the percentage by which a repaid loan exceeds the principal borrowed with no adjustment made for inflation
5 : being according to plan : satisfactory <everything was nominal during the launch>


----------



## Chuck S

jade1 said:


> Sorry Chuck, I posted that last one before I read yours. I am getting closer to seeing what you are saying-but not quite there yet. So up until now, free DVC valet at say BWV was paid by DVC dues? And now since Disney outsourced it, BWV will lower the dues by that amount, and have the member that uses it pay for it? And likewise, any DVC member that buys an AP and gets $100 off-that $100 is covered by that members DVC dues?



Dues formerly paid part of the valet contract under the area of common area expenses.  We can probably assume the contract was renegotiated between Disney Resorts and the valet company.  Part of that negotiation drops the free parking perk.  The contractor may now be having to pay the employee expense from their share of the $12 fee.  If that is true, then there is no longer an expense to pass along to DVC as part of the common area fees.


As far as _discounts_ they are normally granted at the discretion of what ever entity is granting the discount.  For instance, WDW may be seeing an increase in AP sales, and also an increase in non-DVC room sales to DVC members as a result of the AP discount... I know we sometimes bookend out DVC trips with AP stays for a night or two at POP Century.  

Discounts should not be paid for by dues.

If I owned a store, and granted a discount to members of a group, I would count upon the discount increasing sales to members of the group enough to offset the discount without the group as an organization paying a fee for the discount.  This is also the case with DVC dining and merchandise discount.  It is unlikely that DVC pays a fee, for instance, to Landry's to grant us a discount at Rainforest Cafe or T-Rex, Landry's hopes that the discount will drive increased sales.

The same with the AP discount, Disney is banking that the discount will drive more park days, TiW purchases, and AP room discounts to offset the cost to them of the discount.

By the same token, the valet contractor, if they see a drop in demand for valet parking, could grant a discounted rate to DVC Members to encourage more people to valet park, thus increasing their "sales" if they need to do so without it costing DVC anything. 

Apparently, the valet contractor currently feels that the drop in the number of DVCers using valet, and the associated drop in the number of required employees, will save more $ than increasing sales via a discount of any kind. 

Perks are a balancing act for businesses.  Will the good will and hoped increase in sales offset the overall cost of providong the discount?  That needs to be decided by the business.  If 30% of DVCers that currently valet park for free are willing to pay the $12 valet fee,  and they can save one employee per shift, it may be better for the contractor than to have 50% of DVCers that currently have free service pay $7, and need another employee per shift.


----------



## eliza61

Chuck S said:


> In response to member requests to provide more healthy activities at the resorts, like walking.





Sadly Chuck, I just lost my pension benefits at my job and we recieved an explanantion in a mailing it said... 

"in response to employees wanting to manage their own retirement, we are discontinuing your pension".  I had no idea my having a pension prevented employees from managing their retirement. 

I guess you have to laugh to keep from crying...

Personally for me the issue isn't valet parking.  The issue is the overall "trend" of cut backs, cut backs, cut backs that I see occuring at the world.  The valet parking is just one more issue.
Cuts in Fantasmic
Cuts in "live" performers (ex  pre show entertainment like 4 for a dollar)
cuts in menu offering.

Any one of these things I could probably shrug my shoulders but start adding them up and my overall experience is starting to feel more like a "amusement park " and less like "a magical disneyworld"   ***sighs***


----------



## jade1

Chuck S said:


> If that is true, then there is no longer an expense to pass along to DVC as part of the common area fees.



If it indeed drops this cost from dues-that's good. Not sure I believe the savings will be passed on though. 




Chuck S said:


> Discounts should not be paid for by dues.



I basically agree with this (such as AP), so the valet discount was being paid by dues-and now has been corrected, the DVC free internet discount is not paid by dues either then?


----------



## mopee3

Ah another subject that management has chosen to change without asking the natives, that would be us.  Now that they have done the dirty deed does anyone know if the TIW card was affected the same way? I noticed there was some mention earlier in the thread but haven't seen if anyone checked.

It has been interesting to observe the people who got in early, 90's, and watched their perks slowly disappear.   For many of us who bought later we don't miss something we never had.  Never the less I can sympathize with those would have watched the perks disappear.

moe


----------



## DisFamily2006

Well, one of many more perk modifications (removals) to come....

I'm still waiting for modification of the 7 month booking window for non-home resorts.  It'll eventually be 3 months IMHO.


----------



## Chuck S

jade1 said:


> I basically agree with this (such as AP), so the valet discount was being paid by dues-and now has been corrected, the DVC free internet discount is not paid by dues either then?



No, not exactly.  The valet, before being a contractor, was paid for through dues as a common area service provided by Disney resorts.  When the valet service was contracted out by Disney, the contract may have included a clause that the valet service remain free for DVC, TiW (DDE) and disabled guests for X number of years.  And Disney resorts may have been obligated under the contract to subsidize part of the employee cost of the valet company during that time, meaning that that subsidy would have to be paid by DVC as part of the common area management agreement.

Upon renewal/renegotiation of the contract, Disney dropped the subsidy, meaning that DVC Common area costs would be slightly lower, but probably will see an increase because of wage increases to other common area staff.  There was no DVC Dues line item for a "valet discount/free service", it was a common area cost.

The internet wasn't free until the bulk of the cost of providing that service was paid by the $10 per day fee.  It took several years for DVC to get free internet services.  The infrastructure costs (modems, wiring, and billing system) likely reached the point of cost offset before the internet service was offered free to DVCers.  The actual cost of providing internet service is very low, once the infrastructure items were paid for, and is likely covered by dues as a common area utility expense.  It is also possible that overall, the number of cash guests paying for the service offsets the cost of the service enough that the internet provider agreed to provide DVCers with the service for free when the service contract was renewed, if DVC pushed for it as a member perk.


----------



## Chuck S

mopee3 said:


> Ah another subject that management has chosen to change without asking the natives, that would be us.  Now that they have done the dirty deed does anyone know if the TIW card was affected the same way? I noticed there was some mention earlier in the thread but haven't seen if anyone checked.
> 
> It has been interesting to observe the people who got in early, 90's, and watched their perks slowly disappear.   For many of us who bought later we don't miss something we never had.  Never the less I can sympathize with those would have watched the perks disappear.
> 
> moe



I bought in the early 1990s.  I have no qualms with the perk changes.  It was made clear when we perchased that perks can come and go, and that all we wee really buying was the ability to use our point at our home resort based upon availability.  Do I miss the freepark passes, sure I do, but that was always a limited time offer with a scheduled end date.  Dining discounts and perks change all the time...and in fact in the very early years, there really weren't any at all.


----------



## carolina_yankee

snappy said:


> Will this change prompt more members to skip the rental car and just use DME and busses/boat transportation?
> 
> Thanks, DVC!



It will influence me.  We usually stay 7- 10 days.  That ups the cost of a rental by $12 a day, or up to $120 for length of stay for us.  That's not worth it, especially since a non-Priceline 10 day rental will run me about $200 - $250 as it is.  $300+ buys a heck of a lot of taxis for resort to resort travel (even with a towncar, bypassing DME).

In actuality, self-parking is only a pain to us at the Epcot resorts, so I'd be more likely to stay at VWL, AKL, BLT or SSR to avoid the desire for valet.

All DVC has to do now is end the free internet perk, and they'd get $22 a day back from owners who bought points for 'free' stays.


----------



## Deb & Bill

Paging Tom Morrow said:


> At least now the website now says:
> 
> "Valet parking available for a nominal fee"...



Here is what I found on the member website:


> Valet Parking at the Walt Disney World Resort
> Valet parking is *complimentary* at Disney's BoardWalk Resort, Disney's Wilderness Lodge, and Disney's Beach Club Resort. Just show your Disney Vacation Club Member ID Card. Complimentary valet parking is not available at other valet parking operations or for Theme Park access.
> 
> You'll be charged the daily fee of $10.00 for this service at any other valet parking operation at the Walt Disney World Resort. Once you've paid for the valet service, you'll receive unlimited valet parking for the remainder of the day. Whether or not you are charged to valet park, gratuities are still appropriate. There will be no charge for Guests with disabilities who have the proper permits.



Still says complimentary.


----------



## Chuck S

carolina_yankee said:


> It will influence me.  We usually stay 7- 10 days.  That ups the cost of a rental by $12 a day, or up to $120 for length of stay for us.  That's not worth it, especially since a non-Priceline 10 day rental will run me about $200 - $250 as it is.  $300+ buys a heck of a lot of taxis for resort to resort travel (even with a towncar, bypassing DME).
> 
> In actuality, self-parking is only a pain to us at the Epcot resorts, so I'd be more likely to stay at VWL, AKL, BLT or SSR to avoid the desire for valet.
> 
> All DVC has to do now is end the free internet perk, and they'd get $22 a day back from owners who bought points for 'free' stays.



DVC isn't getting $12 "back" from owners that are valet parking. In fact, I doubt DVC gets anything from the $12.  The bulk would go to the service contractor, with maybe a small percentage going to Disney resorts for allowing the provider to conduct their business on Disney property.


----------



## Dean

mopee3 said:


> Ah another subject that management has chosen to change without asking the natives, that would be us.  Now that they have done the dirty deed does anyone know if the TIW card was affected the same way? I noticed there was some mention earlier in the thread but haven't seen if anyone checked.
> 
> It has been interesting to observe the people who got in early, 90's, and watched their perks slowly disappear.   For many of us who bought later we don't miss something we never had.  Never the less I can sympathize with those would have watched the perks disappear.
> 
> moe


There is the rub.  While there have been changes and perks that have come and gone, there have been no significant changes to the contractual elements of the plan.  And those few elements that have changed, have changed back in some cases (number of transfers) and some are better now than they were (reserve a week at a time).  I was trying to remember if valet parking was free initially at BWV and I can't, I'm thinking it was not free initially but maybe someone remembers for certain.


----------



## mopee3

Dean said:


> There is the rub.  While there have been changes and perks that have come and gone, there have been no significant changes to the contractual elements of the plan.  And those few elements that have changed, have changed back in some cases (number of transfers) and some are better now than they were (reserve a week at a time).  I was trying to remember if valet parking was free initially at BWV and I can't, I'm thinking it was not free initially but maybe someone remembers for certain.



When we were considering DVC I had to decide whether or not we would be happy to just stay at DVC villas.  I came to the conclusion that yes I would be happy just staying DVC and not using the points else where.  So for us the perks are just that, a sort of freebie and if they go... well we really didn't loose anything.
My vacation starts when the nonstop flight lifts off the tarmac at Seattle or Portland and just gets better when the plane lands in Orlando.

Moe


----------



## JimC

DVC could have emailed members and posted a notice of the change on its web-site.  It could have been noticed on the MS phone system instead of the "Have you visited..." spiel.  It could have been printed on every confirmation as a "special notice".  They could have piggy backed on a DVD sales communication to us.

The valet parkers are probably going to get a fair amount of flak over this and they had nothing to do with it.


----------



## Deb & Bill

Chuck S said:


> ...When the valet service was contracted out by Disney, the contract may have included a clause that the valet service remain free for DVC, TiW (DDE) and disabled guests for X number of years.  ....



If that was the case, DVC could have notified members in a timely manner.  I think that's the biggest gripe of all.  We get notifications all the time of the points are going to increase in two weeks, in five days, next week, etc.  But not when one of the operations of DVC changes - like point reallocations, no free valet, etc. 

They could have gotten rid of Deevey Cee and used that money to fund valet parking for members.


----------



## cutakenta

I just got home today. Friday night there was no and I mean no parking at Beach Club. Valet is a must at Beach Club and a MUST MUST at Boardwalk.


On a side note, parking at BLT is Great!! Each time I can park within 50 yards from the front door!!!!!


----------



## Brian Noble

> We get notifications all the time of the points are going to increase in two weeks, in five days, next week, etc. But not when one of the operations of DVC changes - like point reallocations, no free valet, etc.


Well, sure.  Those point-price notifications are marketing, in homes of getting you to buy more points, and they are a Sales expense.


----------



## Deb & Bill

Brian Noble said:


> Well, sure.  Those point-price notifications are marketing, in homes of getting you to buy more points, and they are a Sales expense.



So are you agreeing with me or trying to educate me on the fact that the right hand of DVC isn't talking to the left hand???


----------



## tjkraz

JimC said:


> The valet parkers are probably going to get a fair amount of flak over this and they had nothing to do with it.



The employees themselves may not have anything to do with it but their employer certainly does.  Hopefully they are taking steps to train their people on how best to handle inquiries.  



Deb & Bill said:


> If that was the case, DVC could have notified members in a timely manner.  I think that's the biggest gripe of all.



Again, that's how Disney corporate has operated for as long a I can remember.  Can't even pass that one off on Iger...Eisner was the same way.  

Negative changes are never directly addressed in most cases.  They don't go out of their way to highlight price increases, service decreases or any negative changes to the quality or quantity of service.  Those jobs are left to Disney fan websites, message boards and other outlets.  

This is the modus operandi for any large company these days.  McDonald's doesn't tell you they are reducing the number of pickles on your favorite hamburger.  Kleenex doesn't announce that their packages are being reduced from 100 tissues to 90.  BMW doesn't put a notice on their website indicating that the base price of a vehicle is going from $55,000 to $57,000.  

I guess I can understand why there are higher expectations for DVC, but I think that expectation is unrealistic.  They DID have Member Services reps begin communicating the change to callers yesterday.  The website has been updated.  And I suspect we'll get some sort of statement from DVC, too.  That alone is more than 99% of companies would have done.


----------



## Chuck S

Brian Noble said:


> Well, sure.  Those point-price notifications are marketing, in homes of getting you to buy more points, and they are a Sales expense.



That's the difference.  Advertising & sales expenses are treated differently than if marketing funds were used for free valet.  One would likely be a direct write-off, and treated much differently under tax laws by the IRS.



Deb & Bill said:


> So are you agreeing with me or trying to educate me on the fact that the right hand of DVC isn't talking to the left hand???



They may be talking fine.  The bean counters and attorneys, on the other hand, are looking out for tax loopholes and what would constitute a direct marketing write-off vs. an ongoing employee expense and tax liability.


----------



## Deb & Bill

tjkraz said:


> ... The website has been updated...



Not from what I just posted a few posts above.  Still shows it as complimentary.


----------



## Hazzard101

GoofItUp said:


> Just my luck -- I'm just booked my first trip "home" for May and plan to have a car since we're at AKV.  Looks like DH will be dropping us off and parking the car.  Anyone know how far it is from the parking area to AKV (Jambo)?  I'm guessing it's not a $12/day walk.
> 
> While we're on the subject of cars, parking, etc.....don't DVC members get free parking at the theme parks or did I dream that up?



If you are staying at kadni the parking is better. You can park under the building near an elevator close to your room. So it is actually more of a pain to have your car parked instead of driving to the under-building parking and riding the elevator to your room. If you use you car a few times while you are there it gets expensive to tip them every time you need your car. Parking at Jambo is pretty close to the lobby. Where I will miss Valet parking is when we go to Beach Club for dinner at Cape May and Welcome Home Wednesday. That is if they don't stop doing that, oh they won't because that makes them money. 

I guess we will have to see what happens.


----------



## Hazzard101

Paging Tom Morrow said:


> Don't know about anyone else, but I would much rather keep the valet perk than be able to "Follow Deevy's comedic vacation adventures"......



This makes them money so they will keep doing that. I bet she gets free valet parking at the resorts.


----------



## Brian Noble

> So are you agreeing with me or trying to educate me on the fact that the right hand of DVC isn't talking to the left hand???


It depends on what you are trying to say. 

My point is that the "notices" you are sent about price points are not notices at all, they are _nvestments_ in future sales.  The Sales/Marketing budget is charged for them, and is expected to show a return on those investments.  That may be your point too---I'm not sure.  If so, then yes we agree.

If there were a way to tell you that valet parking is no longer free, and somehow convince you to buy more points in the process, I'm sure they'd do it.


----------



## DVCBELLE

I might not understand this but wouldn't it be free to send an email to all members announcing the change in policy?

Seems to me they could easily send out an email and let everyone know there is a new policy in place.  I guess then people without email would be mad so then they would have to mail to people who did not have email.  Then there would still be people mad that they never got the notices and insist on free parking so they probably figure with no notice they can say they didn't tell anyone.  Thus ticking off the masses rather than a few complainers.


----------



## Brian Noble

Not quite free, but darn close in terms of time and material costs.  Somewhat less free in terms of goodwill.  As Tim points out, TWDC has been Orwellian from the very beginning when it comes to controlling information.  If Disney doesn't tell you something, it's not because "they forgot" or "it was expensive."  It's simply because they thought they'd be better off by not bringing it to your attention.

Disney's modus operandi from the begining of "the Florida project" (and well before) has been aloof and paternalistic, to put it mildly.


----------



## ak1024

I am not happy to learn of this change.  We have used the free valet alot and we are arriving to WDW this Saturday and checking into Bay Lake on Sunday.  I feel that there should have been more(any) advanced notice before the change took place.  An official announcement through an email would have been appropriate.  I know that some members don't use it but I hope that many will at least issue a complaint on behalf of those of us who do.  I will be sending mine ASAP.  I never complain about anything at WDW but this really disappoints me.


----------



## Crystal_27

Maybe it's just me, but this news doesn't at all upset me.  We've never valeted our car at Disney (or ever...really), so this perk I won't even miss.    It does stink for those who routinely use the service, though.


----------



## photobob

If I want to park at BW while staying elsewhere may I still park there by showing my DVC card? Is the only change the valet is no longer free for DVC members? 

I like staying at BWV and have enjoyed the free valet parking so this is a bit of a kick in the shin, following the punch in the stomach of the point reallocation. I know the point change didn't negatively affect everyone, but it did me. I'm not looking forward to the next "membership enhancement". 

The valet parking employees will soon be missing a great deal of tip money, a lot less people will be using the service. I really don't think valet parking is worth $12 per day plus tip, that may be chump change for some but it isn't to me.


----------



## Hazzard101

tjkraz said:


> Assuming valet parking is subsidized by dues, this may not be a case where DVC is to blame.
> 
> Valet parking is outsouced and has been for about 3 years now.  There would have to be an agreement in place between DVC and the outsourced vendor to accept some rate (certainly less than $10-12 per day) for parking DVC member vehicles.  Think of it as a volume discount--DVC guarantees a certain level of traffic and they get a price cut.
> 
> Sounds to me like the vendor may have tried to raise the rate to the point where it doesn't make sense for DVC to continue the agreement.  After all, is it really fair to have all members paying for a service that only some utilize?  Yes, if the agreement allows them to obtain a *very *attractive favored rate...but the benefit dwindles as the rate rises.
> 
> As with many negotiations, this could be a big game of chicken between the valet parking co and Disney.  After failing to secure higher rates, they are now left to make a go of it with far less traffic at most resorts.  Perhaps time will (and a substantial loss of business) will alter that outlook.



If that is true, there is a contract and this must be the end of it. it must have been re negotiated. I am sure if it went out to bid another company would have been more than happy to negotiate for free parking for DVC members. it is the bottom line DVC and Disney and the Valet parking contractor is looking out for. I am noticing Disney has been counting on the Disney Magic fans paying anything and not complaining. We just got back last night and when we went to cash in our last snack credits at Goofy's they have taken all the create your own station items off the plan. DVC members pay full price for the DP and now that is being downgraded and the price being jacked up.


----------



## Deb & Bill

photobob said:


> If I want to park at BW while staying elsewhere may I still park there by showing my DVC card? Is the only change the valet is no longer free for DVC members?
> 
> I like staying at BWV and have enjoyed the free valet parking so this is a bit of a kick in the shin, following the punch in the stomach of the point reallocation. I know the point change didn't negatively affect everyone, but it did me. I'm not looking forward to the next "membership enhancement".
> 
> The valet parking employees will soon be missing a great deal of tip money, a lot less people will be using the service. I really don't think valet parking is worth $12 per day plus tip, that may be chump change for some but it isn't to me.



Technically, no.  Your parking pass for staying at a WDW resort is only good at that resort and for theme park parking.  Your  DVC member card isn't good for any parking at all.  You are supposed to be a guest at that resort to park there.  Unless the guard at the parking lot entrance allows you entrance into the parking lot. 

DVC has never endorsed using the free valet parking (when we had it) to park at a resort with the intent to visit the theme park adjacent to that resort.


----------



## poggs

Just checked into BCV today.  I was not aware of this policy and pulled up to the valet bay.  I said I wanted to bell the bags and valet the car and was told it was $12 to valet now.  I was surprised and definately not willing to pay $12 so drove off to self park myself once the bags were unloaded and halved the tip.

On the way past, I noticed that the valet lot was almost empty!  Whilst at the same time, the self park outside the villas was busier than I've ever seen it.  Had to park a fair bit away from the villas pool entrance. normally you can get to about 5 or 6 cars from it.

Ho hum, will save me about $50 a stay in tips though!


----------



## Chuck S

Hazzard101 said:


> If that is true, there is a contract and this must be the end of it. it must have been re negotiated. I am sure if it went out to bid another company would have been more than happy to negotiate for free parking for DVC members. it is the bottom line DVC and Disney and the Valet parking contractor is looking out for. I am noticing Disney has been counting on the Disney Magic fans paying anything and not complaining. We just got back last night and when we went to cash in our last snack credits at Goofy's they have taken all the create your own station items off the plan. DVC members pay full price for the DP and now that is being downgraded and the price being jacked up.



I'm not so sure a new contractor would happily give DVCers free valet now.  Given that minumum wage has gone up, even for tipped positions, they'd have to make $$ to pay those mandated wages, and if their only source of income to pay those wages is the valet parking fees, I sure wouldn't want a significant portion (probably at least 50% or more) of my employee time going to a non-compensated service.  I really think that is the biggest reason we've lost the free valet perk.  If the contractor wasn't making $, they can't remain in business, and Disney Resorts doesn't want the valets back on their payroll.


----------



## harra

Crystal_27 said:


> Maybe it's just me, but this news doesn't at all upset me.  We've never valeted our car at Disney (or ever...really), so this perk I won't even miss.    It does stink for those who routinely use the service, though.



Crystal,

I think for most people they aren't necessarily upset about this specific perk being removed but about how they went about notifying us (they didn't) and that this is a growing trend with WDW in perk removal AND perk denial.

It's a growing dissatisfaction with the way things are being operated that you are hearing.  This may, for some, be the straw they breaks the camel's back


----------



## Chuck S

photobob said:


> If I want to park at BW while staying elsewhere may I still park there by showing my DVC card? Is the only change the valet is no longer free for DVC members?
> 
> I like staying at BWV and have enjoyed the free valet parking so this is a bit of a kick in the shin, following the punch in the stomach of the point reallocation. I know the point change didn't negatively affect everyone, but it did me. I'm not looking forward to the next "membership enhancement".
> 
> The valet parking employees will soon be missing a great deal of tip money, a lot less people will be using the service. I really don't think valet parking is worth $12 per day plus tip, that may be chump change for some but it isn't to me.



You may park at the Boardwalk while visiting Boardwalk shops and restaurants, you may not park at a resort for theme park access.


----------



## Crystal_27

harra said:


> Crystal,
> 
> I think for most people they aren't necessarily upset about this specific perk being removed but about how they went about notifying us (they didn't) and that this is a growing trend with WDW in perk removal AND perk denial.
> 
> It's a growing dissatisfaction with the way things are being operated that you are hearing.  This may, for some, be the straw they breaks the camel's back



I can totally understand your point.  As a new DVC member, I'm still seeing things through rose-colored glasses, and I don't have the history of the "good old days" of DVC membership or park going.  For those who do, I'm sure that the constant removal of established perks does get quite annoying.


----------



## Hazzard101

jlewisinsyr said:


> Internet access per day is close to the valet rate in terms of CRO, that's no different.  I'm sure if you look at percentages, usage is not that much different for DVC guests using this feature daily and valet.



I agree with you on that. I would take it a bit further. I drive to DW at least two times a year. On on my way I see hotels and resorts and on the signs for them almost every one says " Free High Speed Internet" I am surprised that Disney deluxe resorts still charge for internet access. I also can,t believe that most still have cabled and not wireless in all the rooms. The prices they charge for the rooms should have Wi-Fi included.


----------



## Sammie

poggs said:


> Just checked into BCV today.  I was not aware of this policy and pulled up to the valet bay.  I said I wanted to bell the bags and valet the car and was told it was $12 to valet now.  I was surprised and definately not willing to pay $12 so drove off to self park myself once the bags were unloaded and halved the tip.
> 
> On the way past, I noticed that the valet lot was almost empty!  Whilst at the same time, the self park outside the villas was busier than I've ever seen it.  Had to park a fair bit away from the villas pool entrance. normally you can get to about 5 or 6 cars from it.
> 
> Ho hum, will save me about $50 a stay in tips though!



I would guess that if you stroll through the parking lot and glance at the parking passes on the dash most are  not staying there. This change is going to crowd the parking lots for certain DVC properties.


----------



## quirty30

tjkraz said:


> This is the modus operandi for any large company these days.  McDonald's doesn't tell you they are reducing the number of pickles on your favorite hamburger.  Kleenex doesn't announce that their packages are being reduced from 100 tissues to 90.  BMW doesn't put a notice on their website indicating that the base price of a vehicle is going from $55,000 to $57,000.



But I don't pay yearly maintenance fees to such companies as a "member."  There's a big difference.  DVC knows who all their members are and how to contact them.  

On the first page of the DVC member site, there is a "Latest News" section.  It tells us all about the latest adventures of Deevy Cee, but stays nothing about their decision to take away a very popular member perk.


----------



## TiggerAllie

I just sent emails to DVC expressing my displeasure at both the change in the valet policy as well as the lack of communication of said change.
I sent it to 3 places:
the member satisfaction email
the wdw guest email
using the "contact MS" form on the dvcmember.com website

I'll be calling TiW when they open tomorrow morning to see what they have to say.

FYI, the website still has the comp. valet listed under "member privileges/more disney magic". 
Additionally, I was told by MS on the phone this morning that the valet perk was removed to keep the annual dues from increasing. Theoretically, we should see a decrease in 2010 dues based on a pro-rated removal of that fee for the last 3 months of 2009 as well as the removal of it for 2010. I strongly suspect that the dues will go up again this year, as they always do.

Looking forward to hearing the responses we all get!


----------



## DVCBELLE

Chuck S said:


> I'm not so sure a new contractor would happily give DVCers free valet now.  Given that minumum wage has gone up, even for tipped positions, they'd have to make $$ to pay those mandated wages, and if their only source of income to pay those wages is the valet parking fees, I sure wouldn't want a significant portion (probably at least 50% or more) of my employee time going to a non-compensated service.  I really think that is the biggest reason we've lost the free valet perk.  If the contractor wasn't making $, they can't remain in business, and Disney Resorts doesn't want the valets back on their payroll.


They have valets on staff and they have to reach a minimum throught tips...I would guess that the tips from DVC members would be substantial and in fact help offset any additional salary that would need to be paid to raise the tip level.  I would think someone paying $12 to valet tips a lot less than I do.  So while they are getting the extra money per car - the valets are making less money from tips and then they have to make up the money that the valets will not be getting through tips.  There will be less volume in the lots and I would venture to guess they will eventually have to let valets go.  Service from the valets will go down b/c they will not be able to keep them on staff b/c a quality valet isn't going to stay where they aren't making money.


----------



## Brian Noble

> On on my way I see hotels and resorts and on the signs for them almost every one says " Free High Speed Internet" I am surprised that Disney deluxe resorts still charge for internet access.


Perhaps ironically, the higher your room rate at any hotel, the more likely you are to be paying for high-speed internet service, and the more expensive that service is likely to be.  Most business-class properties (Marriott, Hyatt, Hilton, etc.) charge in the $10-$15/day range, while many tourist-class places include it in the rate.


----------



## CarolMN

cutakenta said:


> I just got home today. Friday night there was no and I mean no parking at Beach Club. Valet is a must at Beach Club and a MUST MUST at Boardwalk.
> 
> 
> On a side note, parking at BLT is Great!! Each time I can park within 50 yards from the front door!!!!!





Sammie said:


> I would guess that if you stroll through the parking lot and glance at the parking passes on the dash most are not staying there. This change is going to crowd the parking lots for certain DVC properties.


It's a weekend during the height of EPCOT's Food & Wine Festival.  Sounds like the parking problem is now also seriously impacting the huge lots at the BC/YC/BCV  - probably because of increased enforcement at the BW.   

If enough guests complain, Disney will start enforcing parking "rules" at the BC/YC/BCV resorts during F&W Festival weekends just like they do at BW lots.

Personally, I think they should charge for parking at all of the EPCOT and MK resort lots unless you are a registered guest of that particular resort. Those that pay can use their parking receipt as a partial payment for goods and services purchased within 3 hours of receipt issue time.


----------



## DisneyWalker44

Crystal_27 said:


> Maybe it's just me, but this news doesn't at all upset me.  We've never valeted our car at Disney (or ever...really), so this perk I won't even miss.    It does stink for those who routinely use the service, though.


 Who knows - it may even be to your advantage, as your MF could go down (or, more likely, increase less).


----------



## rsimon

Brian Noble said:


> Perhaps ironically, the higher your room rate at any hotel, the more likely you are to be paying for high-speed internet service, and the more expensive that service is likely to be.  Most business-class properties (Marriott, Hyatt, Hilton, etc.) charge in the $10-$15/day range, while many tourist-class places include it in the rate.



This is changing.. A lot of the places that used to charge, no longer charge in order stay competitive. Is is becoming an expectation that you have internet in your room and is also becoming expected that this is included. 

In any case, the internet is a FIXED cost. You have to provide it, and it is there even if it is never used. Giving it to members as a perk is not costing them anything extra on their total monthly expenses. We use it extensively everywhere we go and will not stay at a hotel (business or pleasure) if it is not available and not good quality.


----------



## disneynutz

TiggerAllie said:


> Additionally, I was told by MS on the phone this morning that the valet perk was removed to keep the annual dues from increasing. Theoretically, we should see a decrease in 2010 dues based on a pro-rated removal of that fee for the last 3 months of 2009 as well as the removal of it for 2010. I strongly suspect that the dues will go up again this year, as they always do.



Isn't it amazing how Disney continues to take perks away or change policies and they word the info in such a way that it makes you fell good about getting screwed!

This is just another of many actions that affirms that after the purchase, Jim Lewis and Disney could care less about the members.


----------



## photobob

Deb & Bill said:


> Technically, no.  Your parking pass for staying at a WDW resort is only good at that resort and for theme park parking.  Your  DVC member card isn't good for any parking at all.  You are supposed to be a guest at that resort to park there.  Unless the guard at the parking lot entrance allows you entrance into the parking lot.
> 
> DVC has never endorsed using the free valet parking (when we had it) to park at a resort with the intent to visit the theme park adjacent to that resort.



I was talking about parking there to have dinner on the Boardwalk, we've done that in the past but used valet.


----------



## TLSnell1981

It's hard to believe the valets didn't make enough to meet minimum pay requirements. I would suspect the problem may have been with valets not reporting their income.  We tipped $5 for drop-off and $5 for pick-up. Surely, that amount is pretty standard. They seemed appreciative and very attentive during our stays.  ????


----------



## Sammie

CarolMN said:


> It's a weekend during the height of EPCOT's Food & Wine Festival.  Sounds like the parking problem is now also seriously impacting the huge lots at the BC/YC/BCV  - probably because of increased enforcement at the BW.
> 
> If enough guests complain, Disney will start enforcing parking "rules" at the BC/YC/BCV resorts during F&W Festival weekends just like they do at BW lots.
> 
> Personally, I think they should charge for parking at all of the EPCOT and MK resort lots unless you are a registered guest of that particular resort. Those that pay can use their parking receipt as a partial payment for goods and services purchased within 3 hours of receipt issue time.



Actually I have no problem with them charging the guests that visit to shop and dine. But an easier method would be to simply close off sections of the parking for guests of the resort; accessed with the resort ID card. It would be a similiar setup to the valet lots and it could be placed closer to the resort. Over flow lots further out would be for guests shopping or dining. This would also keep CMs from parking where they are not suppose to.

I definitely think the MK and Epcot resorts need some type of reserved parking for guests staying at the resort versus those dining or shopping or even worse pretending to.


----------



## Deb & Bill

Sammie said:


> Actually I have no problem with them charging the guests that visit to shop and dine. But an easier method would be to simply close off sections of the parking for guests of the resort; accessed with the resort ID card. It would be a similiar setup to the valet lots and it could be placed closer to the resort. Over flow lots further out would be for guests shopping or dining. This would also keep CMs from parking where they are not suppose to.
> 
> I definitely think the MK and Epcot resorts need some type of reserved parking for guests staying at the resort versus those dining or shopping or even worse pretending to.



They could even choose to validate parking for persons who actually purchased something from the BW area - dining or shopping.


----------



## Brian Noble

> This is changing.. A lot of the places that used to charge, no longer charge in order stay competitive. Is is becoming an expectation that you have internet in your room and is also becoming expected that this is included.


I travel on business about once every six weeks.  The "main brands" of each hotel chain never include internet without some fee above and beyond the room rate.  The "subsidiary brands" (i.e. Hilton Garden Inn vs. Hilton Hotels; Courtyard by Marriott vs. Marriott Hotels) are more likely to include it.  And, the subsidiary brands are also typically less expensive than the "main brand" versions.

If anything, the "main brand" places have been charging more.  $10 used to be common, now I'm surprised when I see less than $12.

Your experience may differ, but that's certainly been mine.


----------



## Deb & Bill

Brian Noble said:


> I travel on business about once every six weeks.  The "main brands" of each hotel chain never include internet without some fee above and beyond the room rate.  The "subsidiary brands" (i.e. Hilton Garden Inn vs. Hilton Hotels; Courtyard by Marriott vs. Marriott Hotels) are more likely to include it.  And, the subsidiary brands are also typically less expensive than the "main brand" versions.
> 
> If anything, the "main brand" places have been charging more.  $10 used to be common, now I'm surprised when I see less than $12.
> 
> Your experience may differ, but that's certainly been mine.



I think I've had $15 a day on my business trips.   And no free parking.  Even self parking wasn't free.


----------



## jlewisinsyr

Brian Noble said:


> I travel on business about once every six weeks.  The "main brands" of each hotel chain never include internet without some fee above and beyond the room rate.  The "subsidiary brands" (i.e. Hilton Garden Inn vs. Hilton Hotels; Courtyard by Marriott vs. Marriott Hotels) are more likely to include it.  And, the subsidiary brands are also typically less expensive than the "main brand" versions.



I agree, I was going to say the same, I've seen very little movement.  Also most internet is a "fixed cost" for consumers and business providing the service, but not to commercial firms that pay a per user charge to the providing business, this is the case with the Disney resorts.


----------



## Chuck S

DVCBELLE said:


> They have valets on staff and they have to reach a minimum throught tips...I would guess that the tips from DVC members would be substantial and in fact help offset any additional salary that would need to be paid to raise the tip level.  I would think someone paying $12 to valet tips a lot less than I do.  So while they are getting the extra money per car - the valets are making less money from tips and then they have to make up the money that the valets will not be getting through tips.  There will be less volume in the lots and I would venture to guess they will eventually have to let valets go.  Service from the valets will go down b/c they will not be able to keep them on staff b/c a quality valet isn't going to stay where they aren't making money.



But a business isn't really concerned about whether the individual valet is making $ through tips, they are concerned about the amount of overhead that they are required to pay, including $4+ per hour that they have to pay to that valet employee regardless of the amount of tips they may have.  If the valet is making $100 per hour in tips, it still has no bearing on the business having to pay them a set amount.  Plus, no doubt, they have to provide health insurance, liability insurance for car damage, Workmen's Comp,  a set fee to Disney for using their property, pay their accounting staff, lease on a location for a business office, payroll taxes (incl. medicare, income tax and unemployment insurance) and a salary to the business owner.


----------



## Simba's Mom

mopee3 said:


> Now that they have done the dirty deed does anyone know if the TIW card was affected the same way? I noticed there was some mention earlier in the thread but haven't seen if anyone checked.
> 
> 
> 
> moe



I'm planning to buy a TIW card on Wednesday-I'm going to check then on free valet parking.


----------



## disneynutz

Crystal_27 said:


> Maybe it's just me, but this news doesn't at all upset me.  We've never valeted our car at Disney (or ever...really), so this perk I won't even miss.    It does stink for those who routinely use the service, though.



It should upset you. Disney continues to take perks and benefits away without notice. You may not use valet, but at this rate, wait another month and they will take away something away that you do care about. 

It's the trend and lack of caring about the Members/Guests that has me concerned.

I expect the Osborne lights to become a hard ticket event next.


----------



## Deb & Bill

disneynutz said:


> ...I expect the Osborne lights to become a hard ticket event next.



Don't give them any ideas.  We'll be going back to E-tickets and you'll still have to pay an entrance fee.


----------



## DVCBELLE

Chuck S said:


> But a business isn't really concerned about whether the individual valet is making $ through tips, they are concerned about the amount of overhead that they are required to pay, including $4+ per hour that they have to pay to that valet employee regardless of the amount of tips they may have.  If the valet is making $100 per hour in tips, it still has no bearing on the business having to pay them a set amount.  Plus, no doubt, they have to provide health insurance, liability insurance for car damage, Workmen's Comp,  a set fee to Disney for using their property, pay their accounting staff, lease on a location for a business office, payroll taxes (incl. medicare, income tax and unemployment insurance) and a salary to the business owner.


I understand that but since they are tipped employees they are able to pay them lower than minimum wage and then rely on tips to make sure they meet those requirements.  If they do not make up the salary in tips - then the company has to make up the amount to make sure they are making minimum wage.   So it is important to the company that they make tips. That is what I thought your were talking about.


----------



## tjkraz

quirty30 said:


> But I don't pay yearly maintenance fees to such companies as a "member."  There's a big difference.  DVC knows who all their members are and how to contact them.



I don't see it as being any different.  No matter what tag you put on it, we're still just customers.  Disney doesn't contact Passholders or people who have ordered free vacation DVDs to tell them about negative changes.  

If you do any amount of business on the Internet there are dozens of companies who have your email address.  Unless it impacts a recurring charge where they are required to tell you about changes, no company will regularly contact you to draw attention to price increases or quality decreases in their products.  



> On the first page of the DVC member site, there is a "Latest News" section.  It tells us all about the latest adventures of Deevy Cee, but stays nothing about their decision to take away a very popular member perk.



Not surprising that the member website isn't updated yet.  Given the magnitude of the change I assume there will be some sort of statement made, but it also wouldn't surprise me if they simply edited the resort pages to remove mention of complimentary valet.


----------



## Dean

TLSnell1981 said:


> It's hard to believe the valets didn't make enough to meet minimum pay requirements. I would suspect the problem may have been with valets not reporting their income.  We tipped $5 for drop-off and $5 for pick-up. Surely, that amount is pretty standard. They seemed appreciative and very attentive during our stays.  ????


The min hourly pay for tipped positions in FL is over $4 ($4.19 I think) an hour and the employer would not be able to recoup that from the tips taken in legally is my understanding  unlike the Federal standards.  This amount was increased early in 2009.  I'm sure they're factoring in all of these issues and will likely need a smaller valet force to deal with this change.


----------



## MinnieGi

I am soooo bummed to hear about this.  We used this perk ALL the time.  We stay at BWV aot.  It is probably the one perk we really did use!!!  With the kids and strollers it was just so nice to valet the car after a park day and not have to deal with a parking lot walk in addition to the walk to the room.


----------



## Chuck S

MinnieGi said:


> I am soooo bummed to hear about this.  We used this perk ALL the time.  We stay at BWV aot.  It is probably the one perk we really did use!!!  With the kids and strollers it was just so nice to valet the car after a park day and not have to deal with a parking lot walk in addition to the walk to the room.



Assuming that there are two or more adults in your party, if it is convenient, you can still drop the kids and strollers off, then the other person can can go park the car.  It might be better than having to heard the little ones through the parking lot.


----------



## MinnieGi

Chuck S said:


> Assuming that there are two or more adults in your party, if it is convenient, you can still drop the kids and strollers off, then the other person can can go park the car.  It might be better than having to heard the little ones through the parking lot.



Yes, thank you Chuck for that suggestion.    We will probably be doing that alot now with the valet perk gone.


----------



## jlewisinsyr

Why did this thread get moved, it should be in Planning as it is directly related to perks?


----------



## Chuck S

jlewisinsyr said:


> Why did this thread get moved, it should be in Planning as it is directly related to perks?



I moved it because it is also a discussion about DVC's response to change, member notifications, etc.  Which really isn't "planning."  Plus there were 3 other valet threads here on mouse, so it seemed folks were looking here rather than on planning.


----------



## toocherie

harra said:


> Crystal,
> 
> I think for most people they aren't necessarily upset about this specific perk being removed but about how they went about notifying us (they didn't) and that this is a growing trend with WDW in perk removal AND perk denial.
> 
> It's a growing dissatisfaction with the way things are being operated that you are hearing.  This may, for some, be the straw they breaks the camel's back



Actually, I think some people ARE concerned about this particular perk being removed.



disneynutz said:


> It should upset you. Disney continues to take perks and benefits away without notice. You may not use valet, but at this rate, *wait another month and they will take away something away that you do care about.*




Exactly!  That was a point I tried to make earlier--this particular change may not directly impact you, but eventually something will.  It's the gradual diminishing of the membership since apparently DVC doesn't feel it needs to keep "perks" to keep people buying.  It's clear they don't really care about existing members.


----------



## tjkraz

toocherie said:


> Actually, I think some people ARE concerned about this particular perk being removed.



I agree with that.  I'll even go so far as to say that the communications issue seems like it's being used as a lightning rod for this discussion.  Rather than focus on the change itself, it seems more convenient criticize the timing/manner in which the information was disseminated.  

IMO, this is no different than people finding out about ticket price increases from wdwinfo.com or Allears or MouseSavers.  This is the role that fan websites and message boards fill.  I don't think I've ever heard anyone criticize Disney over the fact that they read about a parking fee increase on the DIS rather than in an email or press release from Disney.  

Anybody who expects Disney to communicate effectively regarding reductions in service...doesn't know Disney very well.  This isn't simply a DVC shortcoming.  



> Exactly!  That was a point I tried to make earlier--this particular change may not directly impact you, but eventually something will.  It's the gradual diminishing of the membership since apparently DVC doesn't feel it needs to keep "perks" to keep people buying.  It's clear they don't really care about existing members.



Here I'm forced to disagree.  In order for it to be a "diminishing" of the membership, we would have to see things consistently taken away with no replacement to speak of.  

2-3 years ago we didn't have any member perks at Disneyland.  Two years ago we didn't have free Internet access.  Six months ago we didn't have sleeper chairs at Vero.  

There was a time when members didn't get access to new attraction previews or discounted tickets for MNSSHP / MVMCP.  It wasn't all that long ago (about 4 years) that we didn't have an Annual Pass discount and DVC members could not buy the Disney Dining Plan.  

Over the last 4-5 years DVC has added a host of new features to the website (with more reportedly to come) and Member Services hours expanded to 7 days / week within the last year.  

All of the resorts are being retrofitted with amenities like new style sofabeds, new mattresses, new patio furniture, DVD players and iHome clock radios.  We're starting to see older properties updated with new appliances and flat panel TVs.  We're getting rooftop lounges, concierge accommodations and resort keycard entry systems.  We have access to new destinations and accommodations which are larger and better furnished in the past--certainly a benefit since these rooms are available even to members who have owned at OKW since 1991.  

You're right that eventually we all will lose something that we like.  But the hope is that a new perk or benefit will emerge to fill the void.  Perks come and perks go.  The more things change, the more they stay the same.


----------



## anna08

We normally do not have a car so I am not familiar with WDW valet usage - are you expected to pay the $12 to the valet or does this get added to your itemized bill from the resort? 

A medical office building valet service here switched from free to only a $3 charge and the valets' tips plummeted. 

I think it is crummy of the administration to leave it to MS and the valet attendants to spread the news.


----------



## Deb & Bill

tjkraz said:


> ...2-3 years ago we didn't have any member perks at Disneyland.  Two years ago we didn't have free Internet access.  Six months ago we didn't have sleeper chairs at Vero. ...



We had member perks in DL as far back as 2005 when we were there because we got Portable Perks from the GC desk.  I wasn't there before that, so I can't say further back or not.  I don't really see the sleeper chair as a perk, but as a negative - crowding rooms that shouldn't be crowded with extra guests.

What about banking rules?  Those were manageable in the past, but they reduced the amount of time you could bank those points.  Sure, you had to bank 100% sooner, but you could still bank them 9 months out.  That was for the convenience of MS, not the member.  

I'd just like DVC to enforce the rules they already have on the books before they start adding new ones or changing the ones they have.


----------



## Tara

anna08 said:


> We normally do not have a car so I am not familiar with WDW valet usage - are you expected to pay the $12 to the valet or does this get added to your itemized bill from the resort?
> 
> A medical office building valet service here switched from free to only a $3 charge and the valets' tips plummeted.
> 
> I think it is crummy of the administration to leave it to MS and the valet attendants to spread the news.



You can pay it directly, but it can also be put on your room bill.


----------



## DVC Mike

If the cost for valet service was going up, why didn't DVC just change from "free" valet to a discount on valet? Why eliminate the valet perk completely?

Why go from free to $12 a day? Why not give us a reduced rate as a perk, say $5 a day for valet? Why eliminate the perk completely?


----------



## Chuck S

DVC Mike said:


> If the cost for valet service was going up, why didn't DVC just change from "free" valet to a discount on valet? Why eliminate the valet perk completely?
> 
> Why go from free to $12 a day? Why not give us a reduced rate as a perk, say $5 a day for valet? Why eliminate the perk completely?



How would DVC have any control over it, if the valet services are contracted out by Disney to a third party?


----------



## Tara

DVC Mike said:


> If the cost for valet service was going up, why didn't DVC just change from "free" valet to a discount on valet? Why eliminate the valet perk completely?
> 
> Why go from free to $12 a day? Why not give us a reduced rate as a perk, say $5 a day for valet? Why eliminate the perk completely?



This is my thought exactly. Does the valet contractor really believe they'll keep enough customers at $12 per day to make as much or more than more customers at some reduced rate?

ETA - as I've said already I believe  I will still definitely pay the $12 per day because it's worth it to me. I have appreciated the 100% discount and certainly wouldn't look sideways at a smaller discount, but at 0% discount I still think it's a great deal.


----------



## Mickey'sApprentice

I've been thinking about this for a day or two and have come to this conclusion about the valet parking.

I'm one of those no-nonsense girls that don't get spa treatments, don't go to concierge suites in hotels, and don't pay for valet parking.

DVC has allowed my husband and I to take wonderfully extravagent trips to Walt Disney World. We get to stay at wonderful resorts, and be more free wheeling with restaurants and souvenirs. The free valet parking was part of that package. 

I won't pay $12 plus tip for valet parking, so DVC won't feel quite as special to me.


----------



## photobob

DVC Mike said:


> If the cost for valet service was going up, why didn't DVC just change from "free" valet to a discount on valet? Why eliminate the valet perk completely?
> 
> Why go from free to $12 a day? Why not give us a reduced rate as a perk, say $5 a day for valet? Why eliminate the perk completely?



I agree. I might have been more inclined to continue to use it at a discounted rate, but to go from free to full price, no thank you. 

I bet the valets are going to miss our business. If you cut the amount of tips a valet is making significantly (and I definitely think that is going to happen) he'll find something better paying to do, so you'll probably end up with the quality of employees dropping as well. It may not affect the amount of money the company makes but their employees are going to take a hit, and when they do they'll be leaving in droves.


----------



## Doctor P

Hate to be an "I told you so" but I predicted that soon after BLT opened the valet parking perk would be history.  LOL, and this Xmas we are finally spending a full vacation at one of the DVC resorts that has valet parking.


----------



## zalansky

I sent my email to DVC member satisfaction just now.

As for those who are not bothered by the removal of this perk because its not a perk that they use, well i'd like to see your reaction when they remove a perk you do use. For instance, I am a Fl resident so I don't need the DVC annual passholder discount...but if they removed it I would be upset for those who do use it. I guess I just don't get that mentality.


----------



## Dean

DVC Mike said:


> If the cost for valet service was going up, why didn't DVC just change from "free" valet to a discount on valet? Why eliminate the valet perk completely?
> 
> Why go from free to $12 a day? Why not give us a reduced rate as a perk, say $5 a day for valet? Why eliminate the perk completely?


We obviously don't have access to the contracts and numbers to truly make rational decisions in this situation other than on impressions, philosophy and personal impact.  I'm sure they discussed various options and made the decision that it was best to make everyone the same.  I would bet that contractually it would have been much harder to have different fees for different people and that free was actually much easier than a discounted rate.  Of course one could argue to make everyone the same but at a lower rate and I'm sure that is not possible without lowering the rate at all Disney resorts.  I'm sure one option was to keep the perk in place and raise the rate to more like $15 per day.

One interesting thought would be to have pay valet and move all self parking to a less convenient option such as across the street at BWV.  Another would be to charge for self parking but at a lower rate than valet, say $5 per day.  Another would be to do away with free park parking if staying on property but I'm guessing that's not likely since they want you in the parks.


----------



## LIFERBABE

Just found this out the hard way!!!!!  Checked in BLT yesterday no mention of the loss of valet.  Today we used valet for dinner and they made us pay after dinner!  No notice to guests at all!


----------



## Ciciwoowoo

I just sent in an email expressing my family's dissastisfaction with this new policy and how it was implemented in such secrecy.

Our home resort is BWV.  As others here have stated, it really is a nightmare to park there.  The valet parking is not just a perk, its a neccesity!  Far too many people stay at the World enjoy using the Boardwalk parking lot and walking to use the less crowded International entrance.  Those parking spots are all taken up, and those of us who have no where else to park HAVE to use valet.

I mentioned this in my email, and stated that the loss of free valet would mandate the requirement of additional security at the BW parking lot, to ensure the patrons of this hotel were the ones who were using the parking spaces.

I also wrote to let them know how unhappy we were not to be notified of these changes.  It is not very costly to update a website or send out an email.  Why haven't they done this?


----------



## mgilmer

eliza61 said:


> Personally for me the issue isn't valet parking.  The issue is the overall "trend" of cut backs, cut backs, cut backs that I see occuring at the world.  The valet parking is just one more issue.
> Cuts in Fantasmic
> Cuts in "live" performers (ex  pre show entertainment like 4 for a dollar)
> cuts in menu offering.
> 
> Any one of these things I could probably shrug my shoulders but start adding them up and my overall experience is starting to feel more like a "amusement park " and less like "a magical disneyworld"   ***sighs***



I agree


----------



## WDWorld2003

I just read about this - my husband's favorite perk when we rented a car.  I'm sure the valet staff will be cut way back - saves on wages and benefits.  I feel sorry for them and for the loss of this perk.

I'm still not over the change in the banking deadlines.  I'm going to transfer a quarter of our points to another member as we still don't know if we will be going in January and I don't want to risk losing them.  We'll either borrow the points or go somewhere else if we decide on a vacation.

I also agree with Eliza61 and really noticed the cutbacks during our last trip in January.  I think the economy has taken its' toll on WDW and they're doing cutbacks just like everyone else to stay afloat. 

I hope if the economy turns around we will see things become better and they don't follow in the airlines footsteps of charging for luggage because of the extra fuel and then instead of eliminating the charge when fuel costs went down they raised it if you don't pay for it online - isn't that a kicker!


----------



## twinklebug

The removal of valet from the DVC perks isn't a loss from my point of view. I never used valet & only had a car when staying off site. It was, however, a bad approach for them to suddenly remove it without warning.

This is yet another sign that DVC needs "a slap upside the head" as grandma would have said, to sort out their priorities & timing. Other examples just within the past year would be the annual membership information books in JUNE! We should have had that info no later than Jan 1st.  (I suspect this coming year will be just as bad as it's probably the same project manager on that) and the point reconfigurations were a shock to many. Again, more advance notice could have helped. I've only been a member for a year now, I can't imagine all the other stuff they've put you folk through.

OK, a Question... Do we really need those welcome home Wednesdays? UGH. I have never been to one, nor do I ever intend to go. And the videos they keep producing with Dee V Cee are just nasty. They're not meant to entice new buyers -- they're for existing owners! Are we _really_ that cheesy of a bunch? I consider them insulting to our intelligence as a group. I have a pretty good idea of how much it takes to produce just a basic video like what they been creating and it's not cheap, I don't care if you're Disney and own tons of video production equipment and have staff on hand. Like any business, every use of equipment and labor has to be billed to someone. I'm sorry if the lady who plays Dee V is a nice one (I'm sure she is) but let her go - it's time to free up the resources and allocate them in a way that would make a difference to the owners.


----------



## WDWorld2003

I forgot about the change in points required for stays.  That one hurt too!

Absolutely agree on the Welcome Home Wednesdays - went to one and I'll never go again.  I've never even opened an email with Dee V Cee which in my opinion really cheapens DVC - you'd never see Hilton or Marriott do that.


----------



## nuttylawprofessor

Deb & Bill said:


> We had member perks in DL as far back as 2005 when we were there because we got Portable Perks from the GC desk.  I wasn't there before that, so I can't say further back or not.  I don't really see the sleeper chair as a perk, but as a negative - crowding rooms that shouldn't be crowded with extra guests.



One of the earlier DL perks?  FREE tickets.  We used to get park tickets when using points to stay at Disneyland Hotel.


----------



## KAT4DISNEY

DVC Mike said:


> If the cost for valet service was going up, why didn't DVC just change from "free" valet to a discount on valet? Why eliminate the valet perk completely?
> 
> Why go from free to $12 a day? Why not give us a reduced rate as a perk, say $5 a day for valet? Why eliminate the perk completely?



I have thought the same thing.  Resort guests saw an increase of $2.00.  DVC - $12.00.


----------



## TheRustyScupper

1) OK, stupid question time.
2) Why didn't people complain when the outsourcing started?
3) Instead of complaining only when it affected them?
4) Several WDW employees were "transferred" and WDW jobs eliminated.
5) Guests/Members had to think there were going to be changes coming.
6) I am sure if we voted to raise dues, we could get free valet parking back.
7) We bought in 1992, and have seen a lot of perks come-and-go.

_NOTE: By the way, we all bought a timeshare, that's all. We did not buy a discount program. So adding/changing/eliminating perks should not be a biggie._


----------



## skyshelder

TheRustyScupper said:


> 1) OK, stupid question time.
> 2) Why didn't people complain when the outsourcing started?
> 3) Instead of complaining only when it affected them?
> 4) Several WDW employees were "transferred" and WDW jobs eliminated.
> 5) Guests/Members had to think there were going to be changes coming.
> 6) I am sure if we voted to raise dues, we could get free valet parking back.
> 
> _NOTE: By the way, we all bought a timeshare, that's all. We did not buy a discount program. So adding/changing/eliminating perks should not be a biggie._



Haha touche


----------



## Chuck S

What do you think it costs to provide valet services at a resort?  I doubt it is inexpensive, figuring payroll (even the state minimum for tipped positons), payroll taxes, health insurance, workmen's comp, car damage liability, accounting, office lease, reasonable profit for the contractor...I'll bet were looking at $250K per resort per year minimum, if you figure 2 runners and a desk person for 1 busy shift, and 1 runner and 1 desk person for 2 slower shifts per day.  That's about 65 to 70 paid cars per day, every day, per resort, to break even.


----------



## Longhairbear

If I could not find a parking space at BWV, or BCV, and was forced to use valet parking, I certainly would go right to the front desk. I would explain that I could not get a parking space in self parking, and would like to be reimbursed for having to pay for valet.


----------



## rsimon

Simba's Mom said:


> I'm planning to buy a TIW card on Wednesday-I'm going to check then on free valet parking.



We used our TIW card last night to get free valet at AKV while eating at Jiko. So, for the time being, it hasn't been changed.


----------



## n2mm

rsimon said:


> We used our TIW card last night to get free valet at AKV while eating at Jiko. So, for the time being, it hasn't been changed.



Thanks, I hope that at least stays.


----------



## nunzia

harra said:


> Outsourcing doesn't always result in cheaper expense.  In fact, from my experience in the corporate world, it's often the opposite.  The difference is that the expense of using Disney CMs as opposed to outsourced contractors is where the expense falls on the profit & loss statement.  Often times the powers that be will bring down an edict that they must reduce payroll.  So what do they do, fire people and hire contractors because contractor expense falls in a different expense line item.  Payroll is reduced but the cost of contractors is higher than the employees ever were.  But the powers that be are happy because payroll expense is down



Now there's some smart thinking (I say this with great sarcasm because it sounds like something the MGM Grand would pull when I was there)


----------



## OKW Lover

As a "bean counter" I can tell you that the change in the policy about valet parking has *nothing* to do with the outsourcing of the jobs.  If anything, outsourcing was done to *reduce* costs so that would have made it less expensive to give us that perk.  It makes no sense to try to blame this change on outsourcing.


----------



## eliza61

TheRustyScupper said:


> 1) OK, stupid question time.
> 2) Why didn't people complain when the outsourcing started?
> 3) Instead of complaining only when it affected them?
> 4) Several WDW employees were "transferred" and WDW jobs eliminated.
> 5) Guests/Members had to think there were going to be changes coming.
> 6) I am sure if we voted to raise dues, we could get free valet parking back.
> 7) We bought in 1992, and have seen a lot of perks come-and-go.
> 
> _NOTE: By the way, we all bought a timeshare, that's all. We did not buy a discount program. So adding/changing/eliminating perks should not be a biggie._



Not stupid at all.

2) I did complain or let's say I wrote a letter voicing my displeasure.  I write each and every time I lose a perk.  Why?  I don't like losing perks.
5) Sure I know changes come. The issue with me is the over all trend seems to be lose more, lose more lose more.
6)  Dues are going to be raised regardless so  it makes the insult even bigger.  If you're going to raise my rates at least gimme some thing for it.
And if as you say, jobs have been eliminated, services are going down and perks are being discontinued.  What the sam hill are you raising my dues for?

Note:  Yes we did by a timeshare but we purchased a timeshare with a certain amount of  intrinsic value associated with it.  When that "intrinsic" value starts to decline where the product (timeshare) is no longer worth what I orginally thought it was worth better believe I'm complaining.


----------



## tjkraz

eliza61 said:


> 5) Sure I know changes come. The issue with me is the over all trend seems to be lose more, lose more lose more.



Really?  Care to share your add/loss list?  

Losing valued perks is never fun but I can think of quite a few new perks / features / program additions from recent years.


----------



## Ducky4Disney

twinklebug said:


> And the videos they keep producing with Dee V Cee are just nasty. They're not meant to entice new buyers -- they're for existing owners! Are we really that cheesy of a bunch? I consider them insulting to our intelligence as a group.



Seriously!

This just makes me very happy to be an SSR owner and lover - I can park right next to my room most times.  Even the "far" spots are close!  We stayed at VWL once and while the resort is gorgeous the parking was less than stellar.  DH doesn't do valet (don't know why) so we drove around and around looking for a spot then lugging everything/one back to the room.  That is a royal pain.  Looks like we'll be staying at SSR a lot more and exploring other resorts a little less for the time being.


----------



## eliza61

tjkraz said:


> Really?  Care to share your add/loss list?
> 
> Losing valued perks is never fun but I can think of quite a few new perks / features / program additions from recent years.



Sure, and these are more overall Disney related than specifically DVC.

1) Poor food quality and selection.  Sorry IMO the restaurants are mediocre at best and the selection is down right bad.

2) Cut backs in attractions like Fantasmic and Adventurers club.  Fantasmic has a dominoe (sp) effect.  Since it's only playing 2X's a week, H.S. is ridiculously packed on those day

3) cut backs in other "entertainment".  Any body remember when live shows all had "pre show" warm up acts.  "Rosie the cleaning lady" at Indiana Jones and "four for a dollar" at Beauty and the Beast.

I've adjust to all of them (I eat off site more and since I've seen fantasmic I don't have to sweat it if I miss it) but I do see them as things that use to "enhance" my trips and distinguish them from other vacations.  

So now I will make another adjustment but my enjoyment level does drop another notch because I did use the valet and after a long, hot day at the park, I enjoyed not having to walk back from the general parking lot.


I'm predicting by the end of 2010 free access to the health clubs will be eliminated.  Is it a perk I use a lot nope, but does it give me an overall impression of quality and value.  You bet it does.
So for me it's just small chips that are craking through the pixie dust and making wdw "average"


----------



## disneynutz

WDWorld2003 said:


> I also agree with Eliza61 and really noticed the cutbacks during our last trip in January.  I think the economy has taken its' toll on WDW and they're doing cutbacks just like everyone else to stay afloat.
> 
> I hope if the economy turns around we will see things become better and they don't follow in the airlines footsteps of charging for luggage because of the extra fuel and then instead of eliminating the charge when fuel costs went down they raised it if you don't pay for it online - isn't that a kicker!



It isn't the economy. Just like all of the other big businesses in the news, Disney is just using it as an excuse to get greedier. They posted a profit of almost $800 million dollars last quarter, I guess it wasn't enough because they continue to make cut backs that affect the Guest experience.


----------



## ADP

This is pretty disappointing.  The December 9th DVC Annual meeting should be interesting.


----------



## tjkraz

eliza61 said:


> Sure, and these are more overall Disney related than specifically DVC.
> 
> 1) Poor food quality and selection.  Sorry IMO the restaurants are mediocre at best and the selection is down right bad.
> 
> 2) Cut backs in attractions like Fantasmic and Adventurers club.  Fantasmic has a dominoe (sp) effect.  Since it's only playing 2X's a week, H.S. is ridiculously packed on those day
> 
> 3) cut backs in other "entertainment".  Any body remember when live shows all had "pre show" warm up acts.  "Rosie the cleaning lady" at Indiana Jones and "four for a dollar" at Beauty and the Beast.
> 
> I've adjust to all of them (I eat off site more and since I've seen fantasmic I don't have to sweat it if I miss it) but I do see them as things that use to "enhance" my trips and distinguish them from other vacations.
> 
> So now I will make another adjustment but my enjoyment level does drop another notch because I did use the valet and after a long, hot day at the park, I enjoyed not having to walk back from the general parking lot.
> 
> So for me it's just small chips that are craking through the pixie dust and making wdw "average"



So where are the pros?  

No mention of the free Internet?  The new booking rules didn't save you any day-by-day phone calls?  Not a fan of the Top of the World Lounge or any of the new resorts we now have available?  

No savings from the AP discount or other programs?

Getting more general, I've always found that the in-park entertainment offerings ebb and flow over time.  Yes, some of the old pre-show performers are gone.  But over our last several trips we've found more streetmosphere performers out than ever before.  The Jedi Training Academy is new within the last couple of years.  There are many different performance groups appearing particularly at DAK and Epcot.  

I agree that many are disappointed with the Fantasmic reductions.  However it's at least worth noting that the reductions came on the heels of Toy Story Mania and American Idol being added to the park in the last year or so.  It's not like Disney made cuts just for the sake of cutting.  (And the Fantasmic schedules may be slowly returning to their previous level--there are 8 shows per week scheduled for the next 3 weeks.)  

Free events like the Food & Wine fest, Osborne lights and Star Wars Weekends seem to be constantly expanding their schedules.  

I'm with you on the food  but then again there never really was a point where I thought WDW food was particularly good.  

The worst thing that can happen to the Disney parks is for them to remain static.  Some old favorites will inevitably be lost to try and make room for new ones.  DVC member perks come and perks go.  Overall, I still think members are better off today than they were 5-6 years ago.


----------



## DVCBELLE

disneynutz said:


> It isn't the economy. Just like all of the other big businesses in the news, Disney is just using it as an excuse to get greedier. They posted a profit of almost $800 million dollars last quarter, I guess it wasn't enough because they continue to make cut backs that affect the Guest experience.


I agree.  Our trip in February was very disappointing.  Had that been my first trip to WDW, I would have been very unimpressed.  

While the general public is offered numerous deals to come to WDW - we are a captive audience and are not given any deals above and beyond our perks.  So I continue to pay full price for a product that is losing its value.  I have heard a lot of people say that they see the effects of the economy and deals Disney has running on the parks but that's okay with them b/c they got a great deal to go.  Well - I didn't get a great deal - I paid what I have always paid to go and so those cuts aren't acceptable to me.  Food quality is declining b /c they offer free dining so often yet I still have to pay full price for dining.  Entertainment options and quality is declining but people are okay with that b/c they got a great deal on their rooms.  Well - I still paid full price for my room.  So yes- these things tick me off b/c I am still paying full price and not getting the full product.  

So while Disney continues to offer deals to the  general public - I continue to pay full price AND lose perks and quality.  And I shouldn't be upset about this?


----------



## Tony-NJ

disneynutz said:


> It isn't the economy. Just like all of the other big businesses in the news, Disney is just using it as an excuse to get greedier. They posted a profit of almost $800 million dollars last quarter, I guess it wasn't enough because they continue to make cut backs that affect the Guest experience.



FYI I'm in no way in favor of the new VP policy... But your statement does not mean that their business is growing - there was a profit, which is what Disney is supposed to do a s a public company. being profitable and growing your business are two different things. 

If I were going to WDW for the first time now, I do not think I would be enticed to buy DVC as I was 10 years ago.


----------



## Maistre Gracey

TheRustyScupper said:


> 1) OK, stupid question time.
> 2) Why didn't people complain when the outsourcing started?
> 3) Instead of complaining only when it affected them?
> 4) Several WDW employees were "transferred" and WDW jobs eliminated.
> 5) Guests/Members had to think there were going to be changes coming.
> 6) I am sure if we voted to raise dues, we could get free valet parking back.
> 7) We bought in 1992, and have seen a lot of perks come-and-go.
> 
> _NOTE: By the way, we all bought a timeshare, that's all. We did not buy a discount program. So adding/changing/eliminating perks should not be a biggie._


1) It's also stupid answer time.
2) I wrote several letters when they outsourced valet.
3) I complained at the time.
4) Yup, I talked to several transfered.
5) I figured there would be, but nothing I could do about it except write.
6) I have always screamed not to skimp on services at the expense of dues.
7) We have visited WDW since 1972, and have seen too many things go.

_NOTE: Even though we bought a timeshare, we (rightly or wrongly) expect a certain level of services. DVC could adhere to the letter of the contract and eliminate banking/borrowing, exchanging (even among DVC resorts), and even close the theme parks. Would that qualify as a biggie?_

MG


----------



## punkin712

I may have missed something in an earlier post, but the DVC member website still shows that valet parking is complimentary at a few resorts and a $10/day charge at any other location:

*Valet Parking at the Walt Disney World Resort
Valet parking is complimentary at Disney's BoardWalk Resort, Disney's Wilderness Lodge, and Disney's Beach Club Resort. Just show your Disney Vacation Club Member ID Card. Complimentary valet parking is not available at other valet parking operations or for Theme Park access.

You'll be charged the daily fee of $10.00 for this service at any other valet parking operation at the Walt Disney World Resort. Once you've paid for the valet service, you'll receive unlimited valet parking for the remainder of the day. Whether or not you are charged to valet park, gratuities are still appropriate. There will be no charge for Guests with disabilities who have the proper permits. *

So...is the information just old and not yet updated or is this the real deal?


----------



## d1gitman

Spot on...



Tony-NJ said:


> ... But your statement does not mean that their business is growing - there was a profit, which is what Disney is supposed to do a s a public company. being profitable and growing your business are two different things...




I think it is bad they are cutting perks for DVC members out and that DVC members are not privy to the specials that non-members are constantly offered.  I always felt that DVC membership should have at least included expiring - non hopper passes.  It could have been set up based on number of points and to differentiate from resale DVC, it could be offered only to membership via DVC only.


On a different note, i think a few years from now we will see benefits from what Disney is currently doing to maintain profit.  Being involved in the construction industry, i am privy to some of what the mouse is looking at and it seems to me that Disney is in more of a retooling mode for the future rather than just a straight up cost cutting mode.  They are being aggressive in several things not publicly known that IMHO will set the stage for the next gen Disney experience.


----------



## eliza61

tjkraz said:


> So where are the pros?
> 
> No mention of the free Internet?  *The new booking rules didn't save you any day-by-day phone calls?  Not a fan of the Top of the World Lounge or any of the new resorts we now have available?  *
> *No savings from the AP discount or other programs?*Getting more general, I've always found that the in-park entertainment offerings ebb and flow over time.  Yes, some of the old pre-show performers are gone.  But over our last several trips we've found more streetmosphere performers out than ever before.  The Jedi Training Academy is new within the last couple of years.  There are many different performance groups appearing particularly at DAK and Epcot.
> 
> I agree that many are disappointed with the Fantasmic reductions.  However it's at least worth noting that the reductions came on the heels of Toy Story Mania and American Idol being added to the park in the last year or so.  It's not like Disney made cuts just for the sake of cutting.  (And the Fantasmic schedules may be slowly returning to their previous level--there are 8 shows per week scheduled for the next 3 weeks.)
> 
> .  Overall, I still think members are better off today than they were 5-6 years ago.



Respectfully disagree.   I do enjoy the free internet but the new booking rules suck.  
While I don't go to any vacation place solely for the food, restaurants do enhance my visits.  No one likes bad food on vacation and the quality is becoming consistenly bad.
Also when I first brought in you got a discount on length of stay passes not just AP's.  

So for me it's not one thing exclusively that will make me have a bad trip but it's enough for me to start skipping a year or two and spending less and less money.

So now couple that with rising fees and great discount offers to the general public and I've reached a point where maybe I sell some of my smaller contracts.

Right now I'm accepting the "bad economy" excuse.  We're going to play else where for 2 years, and take mini vacations using some of the great deals.

I haven't had any "bad" vacations at the world, I don't think for my family that's possible but I do notice the changes.
Valet is just one more straw on the camels back.  Like I said, I'm predicting we'll lose free gym services next.


----------



## Chuck S

eliza61 said:


> Not stupid at all.
> 
> 2) I did complain or let's say I wrote a letter voicing my displeasure.  I write each and every time I lose a perk.  Why?  I don't like losing perks.



Actually, I think Rusty Scupper was asking specifically if people complaining now wrote to voice their displeasure 2 to 3 years ago when the valets were first outsourced?  

And there are several types of outsourcing.  The valets could:

a) be "leased" from an outside service provider who handles the payroll, workmens comp, tax filing etc. and charges Disney a fee.  This seems an unlikely method for Disney to use.

b) be an outside vendor who Disney allowed to take over the valet services.  Much like renting a store-front to an outside vendor.  Disney likely provides training and sets uniform/conduct requirements...but the outside vendor is the party providing the service to guest.  They make their profit from the service fees, like a store owner makes profit by selling goods. They are no longer on Disney's payroll in any way. 

This seems the most likely scenario.  And unless subsidized, they are unwilling to continue the "free" valet perk.  For instance, providing valet services to meet demand may require 2 runners and 1 desk person for one shift, and 1 runner 1 desk person on two shifts per day per resort.  It could easily require that 60 to 70 paid cars a day to support the operating costs.  If 50% to 60% of your customers (use your services for free, but it requires additional employees to provide that free service, there is no way to remain profitable.

And truthfully, the actual percentage of "free" parkers is likely higher, if cash guests follow DVCers thoughts on paying for the service.  Cash guests likely rarely use valet compared to the free DVCers.

For all of you that think DVC Members should be entitled to free valet, re you willing to have your dues upped, easily to the tune of $100K+ annually per resort, to continue the perk?  More in the case of Kidani, as it would be a separate, dedicated, almost 100% free service, especially if you include renters and not require an actual DVC Membership card.  At Kidani it would almost have to be a fully DVC funded service added to resort operating costs, easily adding $250K or more to that budget.

Remember, under FL employment law, tipped employees have to be paid $4.19 per hour by their employer, without an offset for the tips.  Add to that they are likely unionized and require a health insurance benefit, liability insurance for the cars parked, taxes, workmens comp, etc., and it likely just i,possible for the vendor to continue to absorb that perk without a compensation/subsidy agreement from DVC that members would have to pay for.


----------



## DVCBELLE

I just got off the phone with a very nice woman from DVC Guest Satisfaction.  We discusssed 
1. that this would greatly change my vacation habits, that BWV does not have sufficient parking (she said they are really going to step up and patrol the lot better).  

2. the lack of communication - she said it should have been on the website and they just found out about the change as well.  I let her know that people on vacation were getting charged after the fact without prior notice - she seemed very disturbed about that. I let her know that it would have been better to send out an email that this would be effective Jan. 1 to give proper notice and that I felt that since it was to keep dues down that I had paid my 2009 dues and the change should therefore not affect 2009.

3. I told her that while I understand the economy that it is upsetting to see deals for the general public that are diluting the Disney product and quality while I continue to pay full price for an inferior product.  She said that DVC and Disney are seperate which I understand but I countered that they are still ultimately part of the same package and part of DVC ownership is the park experience and that there needs to be some sort of accountability between the two.  

4. I let her know that I felt that I was being taken advantage of for being a loyal guest.  That the general public gets deals and I lose perks.  That it was upsetting that the price went up $2 for the general public and $12 for me.

She said she was going to be on the phone pretty much all day calling upset members and said it is important that we express our concerns so she can pass them onto the higher ups!!


----------



## hakepb

ADP said:


> This is pretty disappointing.  The December 9th DVC Annual meeting should be interesting.



Not really, No one will be there because the free parking lot will already be full


----------



## DebbieB

DVCBELLE said:


> I agree.  Our trip in February was very disappointing.  Had that been my first trip to WDW, I would have been very unimpressed.
> 
> While the general public is offered numerous deals to come to WDW - we are a captive audience and are not given any deals above and beyond our perks.  So I continue to pay full price for a product that is losing its value.  I have heard a lot of people say that they see the effects of the economy and deals Disney has running on the parks but that's okay with them b/c they got a great deal to go.  Well - I didn't get a great deal - I paid what I have always paid to go and so those cuts aren't acceptable to me.  Food quality is declining b /c they offer free dining so often yet I still have to pay full price for dining.  Entertainment options and quality is declining but people are okay with that b/c they got a great deal on their rooms.  *Well - I still paid full price for my room. * So yes- these things tick me off b/c I am still paying full price and not getting the full product.
> 
> So while Disney continues to offer deals to the  general public - I continue to pay full price AND lose perks and quality.  And I shouldn't be upset about this?



Do you consider DVC a full price room?   Over the term of the contract, it's about 75% off.

My DVC is paid off, I'm paying about $1300 in dues this year.  I got 6 nights in an AKV studio & 6 nights in a BWV 1 bedroom.


----------



## Chuck S

DVCBELLE said:


> 3. I told her that while I understand the economy that it is upsetting to see deals for the general public that are diluting the Disney product and quality while I continue to pay full price for an inferior product.



Uhh...what "inferior product" are you paying full price for?


----------



## DVCBELLE

DebbieB said:


> Do you consider DVC a full price room?   Over the term of the contract, it's about 75% off.
> 
> My DVC is paid off, I'm paying about $1300 in dues this year.  I got 6 nights in an AKV studio & 6 nights in a BWV 1 bedroom.



Yes, I am paying full DVC price for a room.  I am charged the same even if Disney is offering free dining, etc. and in fact my dues increase each year.  So while the general population continues to pay less right now to go to Disney than in years past, I am paying the same number of points AND higher dues.  




Chuck S said:


> Uhh...what "inferior product" are you paying full price for?



By infererior - I mean in comparison to the quality of WDW prior to all the cutbacks and changes - from an earlier post where I expressed my thoughts on this



> While the general public is offered numerous deals to come to WDW - we are a captive audience and are not given any deals above and beyond our perks. So I continue to pay full price for a product that is losing its value. I have heard a lot of people say that they see the effects of the economy and deals Disney has running on the parks but that's okay with them b/c they got a great deal to go. Well - I didn't get a great deal - I paid what I have always paid to go and so those cuts aren't acceptable to me. Food quality is declining b /c they offer free dining so often yet I still have to pay full price for dining. Entertainment options and quality is declining but people are okay with that b/c they got a great deal on their rooms. Well - I still paid full price for my room. So yes- these things tick me off b/c I am still paying full price and not getting the full product.




Dining:  the quality of food is slipping.  I pay full price for the dining plan.

The parks: there are attractions that aren't open, the parks aren't as clean, there are less entertainment options, there are less cast members - all of this affects my vacation enjoyment.  In addition - the removal of Fantasmic every night greatly changes the enjoyment of the show and park.  I had a woman scream at me for saving a seat for my DH and DS when they went to the bathroom for 5 out of the 45 minutes we had been sitting there (and I had paid for a dinner package - she had not)

The resorts:  less staff, things took longer - nothing major but there are little things that add up; minor repairs aren't being done (painting, etc. - at least they had not been done last time I was there)


----------



## disneynutz

punkin712 said:


> I may have missed something in an earlier post, but the DVC member website still shows that valet parking is complimentary at a few resorts and a $10/day charge at any other location:
> 
> *Valet Parking at the Walt Disney World Resort
> Valet parking is complimentary at Disney's BoardWalk Resort, Disney's Wilderness Lodge, and Disney's Beach Club Resort. Just show your Disney Vacation Club Member ID Card. Complimentary valet parking is not available at other valet parking operations or for Theme Park access.
> 
> You'll be charged the daily fee of $10.00 for this service at any other valet parking operation at the Walt Disney World Resort. Once you've paid for the valet service, you'll receive unlimited valet parking for the remainder of the day. Whether or not you are charged to valet park, gratuities are still appropriate. There will be no charge for Guests with disabilities who have the proper permits. *
> 
> So...is the information just old and not yet updated or is this the real deal?



The member website is just about worthless and some if their posted info is a year out of date. Everybody at Disney knows this and they choose to do nothing about it.


----------



## puntagordabob

Paging Tom Morrow said:


> Don't know about anyone else, but I would much rather keep the valet perk than be able to "Follow Deevy's comedic vacation adventures"......



Id like to see Deevy's comedic adventure of walking from the extreme parking lot of BWV back to the lobby.... in August  ROFL


----------



## disneynutz

We can debate these issues all day long but nothing will change.

Bottom line is, it's a Disney problem, not just a DVC problem. The old Disney is gone and I don't really care for the new Disney. I don't see an end to their new business model and things will never go back to the way they were.


----------



## Chuck S

DVCBELLE said:


> Yes, I am paying full DVC price for a room.  I am charged the same even if Disney is offering free dining, etc. and in fact my dues increase each year.  So while the general population continues to pay less right now to go to Disney than in years past, I am paying the same number of points AND higher dues.


  Compare the actual price of your DVC stay to what the same room would cost with "free dining" or a buy 4 get 3 free plan.  Your still coming out ahead.  Free dining isn't all it's cracked up to be if you pay rack rate for a DVC room to get it.





> By infererior - I mean in comparison to the quality of WDW prior to all the cutbacks and changes - from an earlier post where I expressed my thoughts on this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dining:  the quality of food is slipping.  I pay full price for the dining plan.
> 
> The parks: there are attractions that aren't open, the parks aren't as clean, there are less entertainment options, there are less cast members - all of this affects my vacation enjoyment.  In addition - the removal of Fantasmic every night greatly changes the enjoyment of the show and park.  I had a woman scream at me for saving a seat for my DH and DS when they went to the bathroom for 5 out of the 45 minutes we had been sitting there (and I had paid for a dinner package - she had not)


 How are park operations any responsibility of DVC?  As she said, they are separate.  Even in 1992 when we purchased, it was clearly explained that the parks could be sold or closed, and we would still have the resort obligation.  You know it was rumored before Eisner departed that Comcast and other non-Disney entities were looking at purchasing the parks.  You may not like it, but I don;t think it is something where you can hold DVC accountable.  Nor can you necessarily hold Disney accountable fo DVC.  They are separate entities.



> The resorts:  less staff, things took longer - nothing major but there are little things that add up; minor repairs aren't being done (painting, etc. - at least they had not been done last time I was there)



I don't know which resort you may be specifically referring to here, but we often hear this complaint for OKW...yet it seems there is aways a building at OKW closed off for full rehab.  It is an ongoing cycle.  Everyone can get a room near the end of the cycle from time to time.  It is one of the difference between a timeshare operation and a regular hotel...and Ive occasionally had a room in a regular, major brand hotel that is in lots worse shape than anything I've experienced in all my nearly 40 DVC visits.


----------



## n2mm

LIFERBABE said:


> Just found this out the hard way!!!!!  Checked in BLT yesterday no mention of the loss of valet.  Today we used valet for dinner and they made us pay after dinner!  No notice to guests at all!



That bites -- this is my fear too.  We are DVC and Tiw (AP) members and we check in next weekend (BWV ).  I know I lost my DVC valet parking, but wrote to the TiW folks this morning, because I didn't want to find out the hard way that it's gone there too!  They did write back saying it's still one of their perks (at least for now--my words, not theirs).


----------



## lugnut33

toocherie said:


> Let me clarify--I meant the DVC Florida discount of $100 off an AP.  As opposed to the DVC California discount of $20 which is a pittance compared to Florida.  Whether Florida "resident" discounts will be affected--who knows?
> 
> And Brian Noble--please don't think that I am so crass as to compare losing valet parking to the Holocaust.  My point was that people weren't so upset about not having the perk in California but now that it's affecting Florida . . . . it's typical that people don't miss something until it's gone and/or it directly affects them.



Yup, I remember many people posting in this thread who were fine when DVC messed with the points charts because it didn't effect them (though many members got screwed on the whole deal).  Take away the free valet and now  they are mad because it directly affected them.


----------



## Chuck S

disneynutz said:


> We can debate these issues all day long but nothing will change.
> 
> Bottom line is, it's a Disney problem, not just a DVC problem. The old Disney is gone and I don't really care for the new Disney. I don't see an end to their new business model and things will never go back to the way they were.



And it isn't necessarily a "Disney" problem.  If they were the only company being driven by investment market forces, then I'd agree it is a problem unique to Disney, but it isn't.

Remember that Eisner received a "no confidence" type vote NOT because he "lost the magic and pixie dust", regardless of what the avarage person was led to believe, but because the investment houses and fund managers wanted a better P&L statement.  As long as profit is the deemed the sole force of investment value, it will not change for any company.


----------



## disneynutz

Chuck S said:


> And it isn't necessarily a "Disney" problem.  If they were the only company being driven by investment market forces, then I'd agree it is a problem unique to Disney, but it isn't.
> 
> Remember that Eisner received a "no confidence" type vote NOT because he "lost the magic and pixie dust", regardless of what the avarage person was led to believe, but because the investment houses and fund managers wanted a better P&L statement.  As long as profit is the deemed the sole force of investment value, it will not change for any company.



You can call it market forces and make excuses for the industries that have had a major role in the collapse of our country, I call it greed.

The problem isn't unique to Disney but they chose which path to take. Sometimes you need to do things because they are right, not because everybody else is doing it.

Walt may not have been much of a finance guy and Disney did have financial problems in their history, but if Disney had been built based upon their P&L statement, all you would have is another Six Flags.


----------



## DVCBELLE

Chuck S said:


> Compare the actual price of your DVC stay to what the same room would cost with "free dining" or a buy 4 get 3 free plan.  Your still coming out ahead.  Free dining isn't all it's cracked up to be if you pay rack rate for a DVC room to get it.
> 
> 
> 
> How are park operations any responsibility of DVC?  As she said, they are separate.  Even in 1992 when we purchased, it was clearly explained that the parks could be sold or closed, and we would still have the resort obligation.  You know it was rumored before Eisner departed that Comcast and other non-Disney entities were looking at purchasing the parks.  You may not like it, but I don;t think it is something where you can hold DVC accountable.  Nor can you necessarily hold Disney accountable fo DVC.  They are separate entities.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know which resort you may be specifically referring to here, but we often hear this complaint for OKW...yet it seems there is aways a building at OKW closed off for full rehab.  It is an ongoing cycle.  Everyone can get a room near the end of the cycle from time to time.  It is one of the difference between a timeshare operation and a regular hotel...and Ive occasionally had a room in a regular, major brand hotel that is in lots worse shape than anything I've experienced in all my nearly 40 DVC visits.


I have never before complained to DVC and I get that I am getting a great deal with DVC and I still love it.  

It is just frustrating to see the quality declining and I get that it is the economy - I just think that they will not restore these things when the economy improves as then it will just be the norm for everyone.   

I expressed this concern to DVC and it is a concern that I have heard many DVC owners (not just on this board) echo - and she even told me that she often has this conversation with owners.  They need to know there is a frustration.

BTW - last time we were there for a week - no one said Welcome Home to us...even my 5 year old said something about it....its little things that disappear slowly....


----------



## Deb & Bill

DVCBELLE said:


> ...BTW - last time we were there for a week - no one said Welcome Home to us...even my 5 year old said something about it....its little things that disappear slowly....



No, they give a generic "Welcome Home" when you come back to the resort on the theme park bus. And they do it a POR/POFQ, Pop Century, etc.


----------



## mopee3

For all you complainers and moaners there is an easy answer.  Sell your points and let someone who loves DVC and Disney use them.  Then you can get that free stuff you sooooo think you are due.


----------



## KingOMiami

JimMIA said:


> The* real *deal for Flordians -- if it meets their needs -- is the Florida-resident Seasonal AP, which saves us an additional $100 beyond the DVC price.  But that pass comes with significant blackout periods which don't work for many people.  Works for us and we love it!



As Jim mentioned, Floridians do get the seasonal pass which as for his family, works DW and I as well.  Personally, I have no desire to go to WDW in the middle of summer when it is packed and too doggone hot as well.  We usually plan a trip for either Memorial Day or Labor Day weekends and the temps then are uncomfortable enough.

I prefer to stay in the AC at those times.

Back to the original post about valet, I have yet to use it myself.  Outside of those with disabilities, the distance from parking lot to resort is not a big deal.  I tend to drop off the Mrs at the entrance, go park and bring the suitcase up myself (it has wheels)

There are very perks that I can think of that we have taken advantage of since becoming DVC members.  Only one I can think of was this past January using the free high speed internet access.  Otherwise, the dining discounts are negligible as we don't typically eat in the table service restaurants in the DVC resort.  The pass discounts don't apply to us as well

As some others have mentioned, the perks is not the reason we joined.  We joined to be able to have at least one vacation per year to stay at a deluxe resort and live it up at the place that we both love and enjoy


----------



## PamOKW

Was there a survey done that indicated it was a member preference to pay for valet parking?


----------



## Maistre Gracey

mopee3 said:


> For all you complainers and moaners there is an easy answer.  Sell your points and let someone who loves DVC and Disney use them.  Then you can get those free stuff you sooooo think you are due.


Nothing against you personally, but I really hate these kind of responses.

So... Are we suppose to just sit and accept whatever we are told? Are we ever allowed to question anything, or suggest better ways to do things?
Should we post a dancing banana at every decision DVC makes regardless if we like the decision? Better yet, are we allowed to disagree with anything DVC decides?

Just curious because I need to know if I should sell..

MG


----------



## KingOMiami

lugnut33 said:


> Yup, I remember many people posting in this thread who were fine when DVC messed with the points charts because it didn't effect them (though many members got screwed on the whole deal).  Take away the free valet and now  they are mad because it directly affected them.



I will say I was not happy with DVC changing the points since we just have a lil 50 point contract.  What used to be was that we could get a 4 night stay in adventure or choice season for 48 points during the week, banking the couple that were left over.  Now with the new point requirements that go into effect next year, we will only get 3 nights.  The flip side is we will have more points to bank and after a few years we will end up with enough to stay for another night.

Of course the ideal thing which I am hoping we will be able to do inthe next couple of years is to buy more points so it would be as much of a factor for us


----------



## pearlieq

DVCBELLE said:


> it is important that we express our concerns so she can pass them onto the higher ups!!



That really is the key.  Pick up a phone or type out an email--I can think of cases where they did respond to overwhelming member complaints and this could be one of them!


----------



## Chuck S

disneynutz said:


> You can call it market forces and make excuses for the industries that have had a major role in the collapse of our country, I call it greed.
> 
> The problem isn't unique to Disney but they chose which path to take. Sometimes you need to do things because they are right, not because everybody else is doing it.
> 
> Walt may not have been much of a finance guy and Disney did have financial problems in their history, but if Disney had been built based upon their P&L statement, all you would have is another Six Flags.



Even with Six Flags in bankruptcy, they haven't been publically attacked by Wall Street, and even a "Disney" family member like the WDW company was when profits were down,were they?  What good it taking the high road when it leaves the company vulnerable to a hostile takeover because the stock prices are too low?


----------



## TLSnell1981

Chuck S said:


> Remember that Eisner...


I wish we could forget. I had hope things would, once again, become "Walt's Disneyworld". So much for hope.


----------



## Deb & Bill

Maistre Gracey said:


> Nothing against you personally, but I really hate these kind of responses.
> 
> So... Are we suppose to just sit and accept whatever we are told? Are we ever allowed to question anything, or suggest better ways to do things?
> Should we post a dancing banana at every decision DVC makes regardless if we like the decision? Better yet, are we allowed to disagree with anything DVC decides?
> 
> Just curious because I need to know if I should sell..
> 
> MG



Totally agree, MG.   We did sell off two of our contracts about two or three years ago when we started seeing things going downhill.  And we had two more on the market, but took them off when the price also started going downhill and we were getting ridiculous offers.  

I think it's a lot better for the longer time members to let the newer members know it's not so rosy out there in DVC land.  And if we don't let DVC know that we are upset about what they do from time to time, they'll start to do lots of things that will make us all quit.  Then they'll have members going out of their way to not recommend purchasing DVC.  DVC-HI and DVC-DC will become retirement villages or sold off to Four Seasons.


----------



## Chuck S

TLSnell1981 said:


> I wish we could forget. I had hope things would, once again, become "Walt's Disneyworld". So much for hope.



It was never "Walt's" Disney World, no matter what you may think.  It was almost never built after he died.  Roy continued the project, but remember that Roy also threatened to sue his brother on behalf of stockholders when Walt wanted WED Enterprises wanted to become a totally separate company from Walt Dsney Productions.  Roy also made cuts and changes to Walt's original plans for the Florida project, based on finances. 

It takes both vision AND financial security.  And in todays investment markets, the financial aspects have become more important than any vision, unfortunately.


----------



## mopee3

Maistre Gracey said:


> Nothing against you personally, but I really hate these kind of responses.
> 
> So... Are we suppose to just sit and accept whatever we are told? Are we ever allowed to question anything, or suggest better ways to do things?
> Should we post a dancing banana at every decision DVC makes regardless if we like the decision? Better yet, are we allowed to disagree with anything DVC decides?
> 
> Just curious because I need to know if I should sell..
> 
> MG



I didn't take it personally, and I think people who want to gripe about stuff should do so.  Sometimes it gets things done.  But after awhile it gets old.  I would think if we have complaints there is a meeting coming up in a couple of months and it would be great if those that can attend the meeting do so.  


As for the banana,  well I just like to use the thing it makes me smile.

I kind of wonder if there shouldn't be sticky titled "Complaints".

Moe


----------



## BEASLYBOO

I seldomly use valet parking, preferring much to the dismay of my family, parking my own car, no matter the distance.  Still, even though Disney needs no ones approval to make this change it's still a perk taken away.  Does this change make me want to sell my points and move on, no! DVC still works for me.  I didn't like the 2010 point restructure, I didn't like it when they began the $95 transfer fee, I don't like housekeeping going down hill and now no more lotion.  We have a right to express our displeasure at having things taken away even if it's in their right to do so and even if nothing will be done about it.

One thing in and of itself doesn't convince me to sell and get out of DVC but cummulatively the trend lately of going into my pocket to take back the things that were used to help lure me in originally, I find offensive.  It's most probably good business for Disney but just like the DDP and Free dining, I don't have to like it or go along with it.  Imagine how the original DVC'rs felt when the free passes were taken away!

When these types of situations become more of a constant concern, I may have to reconsider the worth of my membership, for right now I'm still in!  I guess the old saying is true, "Nothing Good Lasts Forever!"  Just as in my recent pay cuts, I've found that typically when somethings taken away, it's seldomly given back!


----------



## TLSnell1981

Chuck S said:


> It was never "Walt's" Disney World, no matter what you may think.  It was almost never built after he died.  Roy continued the project, but remember that Roy also threatened to sue his brother on behalf of stockholders when Walt wanted WED Enterprises wanted to become a totally separate company from Walt Dsney Productions.  Roy also made cuts and changes to Walt's original plans for the Florida project, based on finances.
> 
> It takes both vision AND financial security.  And in todays investment markets, the financial aspects have become more important than any vision, unfortunately.



I should have said Walt's _Disney_. Things have changed so much and the bottom line appears to be the ONLY focus.


----------



## Deb & Bill

mopee3 said:


> I didn't take it personally, and I think people who want to gripe about stuff should do so.  Sometimes it gets things done.  But after awhile it gets old.  I would think if we have complaints there is a meeting coming up in a couple of months and it would be great if those that can attend the meeting do so.
> 
> 
> As for the banana,  well I just like to use the thing it makes me smile.
> 
> I kind of wonder if there shouldn't be sticky titled "Complaints".
> 
> Moe



Members don't really get much of a chance to speak up at the annual meeting.  It's more of a listen to us talk about how great DVC is and will continue to be.  Plus Deevy Cee will probably be there. 

As for complaints, I like it when members find out stuff about changes and let the rest of the membership know.  Otherwise how would we find out?  Not from DVC unless they decide to put a small blurb in the Disney Files.  Plus, I think it also educates possible new members, so they know that they are not really buying pixie dust and fairy tales.


----------



## whitfamily

Is there an e-mail address we can send our opinion on this matter?


----------



## mopee3

Deb & Bill said:


> I think it's a lot better for the longer time members to let the newer members know it's not so rosy out there in DVC land.  And if we don't let DVC know that we are upset about what they do from time to time, they'll start to do lots of things that will make us all quit.  Then they'll have members going out of their way to not recommend purchasing DVC.



I understand the DVC you bought years ago is no longer or at least it's not the same for you all.  In the last year we have helped 2 other couples/families join DVC.  We have also visited the world with three other families using our points. For them and us it is still a bargain.  The couple that just joined wanted to visit WDW in Feb 2010 and it would cost them $11-14,000, I told them to rent points, buy points from someone else, but no they had no problem buying from Disney.  The point is a lot of people still find DVC a bargain and will join.  The parks haven't lost their magic, the dining plan is still a good deal, and they love to leave the frozen north in winter.

Moe


----------



## Chuck S

TLSnell1981 said:


> I should have said Walt's _Disney_. Things have changed so much and the bottom line appears to be the ONLY focus.



Walt's _Disney_ wasn't what most people want to believe it was, any more than "the good old days" were always "good."


----------



## Deb & Bill

Chuck S said:


> Walt's _Disney_ wasn't what most people want to believe it was, any more than "the good old days" were always "good."



Come on, Chuck, haven't you ridden on Carousel of Progress lately? Or has that been shut down, too?


----------



## puntagordabob

tjkraz said:


> So where are the pros?
> 
> Not a fan of the Top of the World Lounge?



I love the Top of the World Lounge! Question is though, will it be removed from us afer BLT is sold out?!?!?!!? Chances are that it indeed may! How CRAPTACLULAR would that be..... 



DVCBELLE said:


> So while Disney continues to offer deals to the  general public - I continue to pay full price AND lose perks and quality.  And I shouldn't be upset about this?



Disney set "The Bar" as far as expectations are concerned.... so this poster's statement is valid.



hakepb said:


> Not really, No one will be there because the free parking lot will already be full



 



disneynutz said:


> The member website is just about worthless and some if their posted info is a year out of date. Everybody at Disney knows this and they choose to do nothing about it.



Yes, that is annoying too... Update the DVCMEMBER site!



mopee3 said:


> For all you complainers and moaners there is an easy answer.  Sell your points and let someone who loves DVC and Disney use them.  Then you can get that free stuff you sooooo think you are due.



I hope that was typed in humor, otherwise IMHO that rings with some unpleasant connotations. Let's remember that everyone is entitled to an opinion...whether you agree or disagree is irrelevant so long as you are respectful.

For the record I am considered handicapped so this "perk" removal does not effect me personally.... BUT I agree that this perk should NOT have been removed, and that the "suddenly its Gone tomorrow" approach by members services was POOR POOR POOR!!!! As DVC members we deserve better treatment which in this case would have at least been like a month or two notice. 

Legally we bought "just" a timeshare, but Disney packaged DVC as much more of a "family relationship" between us and The Mouse... this is what partly keeps us all coming "back home" to Disney.... so while legally Disney can do what they wish, they do have a danger of destroying the "family" which can and will result in them losing many of our dollars....

For example, out in the real world given the choice between a $1.00 bottle of water and a $3.00 bottle of water (same size, same quality, same brand even!) which would you as a conscious comsumer pick? Most of you would be wise and pick the $1.00.... BUT at WDW we usually buy the $3.00 item and think little of it...in our case it is because we WANT to support Disney when we can even if a cheaper alternative is there. Ruin that relationship and see which bottle you will buy....

IMHO the Valet perk has been a nice gesture...an a lot of the people I see parking are older folks or folks with a herd of little ones... giving DVC members a little break (free that is) at their resorts is a good thing....worth far more than the couple bucks Disney may lose per parked car. Disney needs to PROTECT its Family....and that in most cases are people like you and me...

Just my 1/2 penny's worth....some of you may flame me into the ground if you wish, but my opinion will remain as such!  Those of you that know me and my love for Walt Disney's Enchanted Tiki Room and wanting the Disneyland show to come to WDW (love me or hate me!) know that I only post what I believe in my heart to be right...


----------



## Deb & Bill

mopee3 said:


> I understand the DVC you bought years ago is no longer or at least it's not the same for you all.  In the last year we have helped 2 other couples/families join DVC.  We have also visited the world with three other families using our points. For them and us it is still a bargain.  The couple that just joined wanted to visit WDW in Feb 2010 and it would cost them $11-14,000, I told them to rent points, buy points from someone else, but no they had no problem buying from Disney.  The point is a lot of people still find DVC a bargain and will join.  The parks haven't lost their magic, the dining plan is still a good deal, and they love to leave the frozen north in winter.
> 
> Moe



Not a problem with you believing in Disney Magic. Just some of us have seen through it and think others should be aware of it, too.


----------



## jlewisinsyr

Chuck S said:


> And it isn't necessarily a "Disney" problem.  If they were the only company being driven by investment market forces, then I'd agree it is a problem unique to Disney, but it isn't.
> 
> Remember that Eisner received a "no confidence" type vote NOT because he "lost the magic and pixie dust", regardless of what the avarage person was led to believe, but because the investment houses and fund managers wanted a better P&L statement.  As long as profit is the deemed the sole force of investment value, it will not change for any company.



Some companies actually have guts and stand up against their shareholders and fight for their employees and customers.  Its rare, but it does happen.  As for a hostile takeover, if you always retain a controlling interest, its hard for that to happen.


----------



## Chuck S

puntagordabob said:


> For the record I am considered handicapped so this "perk" removal does not effect me personally.... BUT I agree that this perk should NOT have been removed, and that the "suddenly its Gone tomorrow" approach by members services was POOR POOR POOR!!!! As DVC members we deserve better treatment which in this case would have at least been like a month or two notice.
> ....
> IMHO the Valet perk has been a nice gesture...an a lot of the people I see parking are older folks or folks with a herd of little ones... giving DVC members a little break (free that is) at their resorts is a good thing....worth far more than the couple bucks Disney may lose per parked car. Disney needs to PROTECT its Family....and that in most cases are people like you and me...



_Disney_ isn't losing any $ on the free perk.  Valet services are contracted out.   The company that supplies the valets, on the other hand, can lose a bundle, given the increases in operating expenses, including a higher mandatory hourly wage.  Would you support DVC dues giving a substantial subsidy to the contractor to continue the free parking?

Would you want to run a company that is expected to give 50% to 60% (or more) of their product away?


----------



## TLSnell1981

Chuck S said:


> Walt's _Disney_ wasn't what most people want to believe it was, any more than "the good old days" were always "good."



So, why the dramatic changes? I have another idea, but that's for another thread.


----------



## Chuck S

jlewisinsyr said:


> Some companies actually have guts and stand up against their shareholders and fight for their employees and customers.  Its rare, but it does happen.  As for a hostile takeover, if you always retain a controlling interest, its hard for that to happen.



The cost of fighting the hostile takeover could be their demise, too.  Controlling interest doesn't always help. It has happened to more than a few companies.


----------



## carolina_yankee

DVCBELLE said:


> Yes, I am paying full DVC price for a room.  I am charged the same even if Disney is offering free dining, etc. and in fact my dues increase each year.  So while the general population continues to pay less right now to go to Disney than in years past, I am paying the same number of points AND higher dues.


But you knew this when you made your purchase.  You are locking in your vacation as a fixed price, and Disney is locking you in as a return guest.  

Those 4/3 and free dining promotions are to get people to come on property who wouldn't otherwise come during an economic downturn.  The is no reason for DVC to offer a similar deal to someone who has committed to spending 150 points (or whatever) per year for lodging at WDW for 50 years.

The ancillary things to a DVC membership (exchanges, perks, website functionality) all have their ebbs and flows.  What you purchased has remained the same, and that's what DVC is supposed to be.

Yeah, I wish the perk stayed or the change had been announced for a future start date, but anyone who purchased DVC knew this could happen going in.

Dirk


----------



## mopee3

Deb & Bill said:


> Not a problem with you believing in Disney Magic. Just some of us have seen through it and think others should be aware of it, too.




We/our family has visited the west coast of Washington for 50+ years because we own a small piece of beach there.  You can still dig clams, fish for salmon, sturgeon, and walk on the beach.  The magic for my wife who does none of those things left years ago.  She like many women like to go somewhere she doesn't have to cook, clean, wash clothes, can set on their porch and eat chocolate cake  remember your post Deb, etc.  This timeshare offers that and the ability to have fun at amusement parks.  Will we grow tired of Disney? Maybe but for now!

Oh and by way I love valet service, we always rent a car, but when I found out the DDE card offered this service for even the non DVC resorts well....got to love that card.  In fact will be using it in lets see, 9 days-13 hours-14 minutes and 30 no 29 no 28 oh you get the idea seconds.

Deb and the rest of you I feel your pain but the Golden Years are here and now and we need to enjoy them before I get any older.

moe


----------



## BeachClub1292

I would have never known about this if I didn't see it here . My parents and myself are BWV DVC members and My Sister is a SSR DVC member. This is a perk that is great to have at the Boardwalk. With the limited parking and how far away it is and I would say we use our rental cars   every other day on average to go to eat of DTD to shop(easier then the bus). My questions are what are they going to do at the Boardwalk because there won't be enough free parking and I WON"T pay $12 to park just like many of you. Also if this is part of our dues(going to check into that) there should be a reduction in our dues but has anyone heard if there will be or what they are saying about that?  I sent an e-mail pionting out how unhappy my family is lets all do this to let them know.


----------



## DebbieB

DVCBELLE said:


> Yes, I am paying full DVC price for a room.  I am charged the same even if Disney is offering free dining, etc. and in fact my dues increase each year.  So while the general population continues to pay less right now to go to Disney than in years past, I am paying the same number of points AND higher dues.



I don't consider it full price when comparing.   I paid $14,750 for my points in late 1999.   42 years = $351 per year.  Plus dues of $1300 this year.  So for $1,651 I am getting 6 nights in an AKV studio and 6 nights in a BWV 1 bedroom (bw view).   So about $138 a night.  Rack rate probably about $4,800 total, so about a 65% discount.   You can't expect an additional discount when you are already getting a huge discount.


----------



## lugnut33

BWV should charge $14 for parking, but make it free for hotel and DVC guests (people visiting the Boardwalk could get validated parking once they spend $20 bucks).  That would make sure nobody was parking there and going to the parks.  They could do the same thing at DTD.


----------



## going/again

tjkraz said:


> This is the modus operandi for any large company these days.  McDonald's doesn't tell you they are reducing the number of pickles on your favorite hamburger.  Kleenex doesn't announce that their packages are being reduced from 100 tissues to 90.  BMW doesn't put a notice on their website indicating that the base price of a vehicle is going from $55,000 to $57,000.
> 
> I guess I can understand why there are higher expectations for DVC, but I think that expectation is unrealistic.  They DID have Member Services reps begin communicating the change to callers yesterday.  The website has been updated.  And I suspect we'll get some sort of statement from DVC, too.  That alone is more than 99% of companies would have done.



we dont own anything in mc d's kleenex or bmw we do own in dvc thats the differance


----------



## Chuck S

going/again said:


> we dont own anything in mc d's kleenex or bmw we do own in dvc thats the differance



What, exactly, do you think we own?  We each legally own a very small portion of a resort building, sitting upon land leased from another company.  That gives us the right to book a room, based on Member Services rules, nothing more, nothing less.

Stockholders, on the other hand, do own a portion of the WDC, and they, legally, should expect a financial return on their actual investment.


----------



## going/again

Chuck S said:


> Compare the actual price of your DVC stay to what the same room would cost with "free dining" or a buy 4 get 3 free plan.  Your still coming out ahead.  Free dining isn't all it's cracked up to be if you pay rack rate for a DVC room to get it.



why every time this comes up do we get someone say yeah but you have to pay full rack rate to get free dining, they are advertising for next year 42% OFF AND FREE DINING, and if this year was anything to go by possible free upgrades to dvc 1 bedrooms now back in the day went i went to school 42% was  just shy of half. please if you are going to put this in your post make sure you do know the facts.


----------



## Grumpygrandpa

I feel like this my fault.  I was very unhappy that GVC was not going to have free valet parking and I contacted MS and complained that it wasn't fair that CA be treated differently than FL.   So I guess this is how they decided to make it "fair".


----------



## ADP

Grumpygrandpa said:


> I feel like this my fault.  I was very unhappy that GVC was not going to have free valet parking and I contacted MS and complained that it wasn't fair that CA be treated differently than FL.   So I guess this is how they decided to make it "fair".


I knew removing free valet parking from the list of DVC perks had something to do with guest demand.  

FWIW - I doubt you had anything to do with it.


----------



## twinklebug

going/again said:


> why every time this comes up do we get someone say yeah but you have to pay full rack rate to get free dining, they are *advertising for next year 42% OFF AND FREE DINING*, and if this year was anything to go by possible free upgrades to dvc 1 bedrooms now back in the day went i went to school 42% was  just shy of half. please if you are going to put this in your post make sure you do know the facts.



Wow - I'm interested in this for my sister and can't find it - can you link to where you saw it? Hey, I might consider it for myself too. I love my DVC, but if the deal is good enough, I have no problem banking my points and paying cash. It just means it'll be that much longer before I need an add-on.


----------



## toocherie

Grumpygrandpa said:


> I feel like this my fault.  I was very unhappy that GVC was not going to have free valet parking and I contacted MS and complained that it wasn't fair that CA be treated differently than FL.   So I guess this is how they decided to make it "fair".



I believe this was in the works long before your call to MS--Grand Cal not having valet parking free was just the opening salvo.

My issue is if there was a cost associated with the perk prior to yesterday (which I know there was) how is it that we went from having to pay $0 to $12 a day?  Let's say the "cost" to valet park previously was $10--shouldn't we have been given the option to pay the difference and keep "most of" the perk?


----------



## Deb & Bill

Grumpygrandpa said:


> I feel like this my fault.  I was very unhappy that GVC was not going to have free valet parking and I contacted MS and complained that it wasn't fair that CA be treated differently than FL.   So I guess this is how they decided to make it "fair".



Aha!  Kill the Beast!!!  (just kidding, it wasn't you, just how DVC works).


----------



## going/again

twinklebug said:


> Wow - I'm interested in this for my sister and can't find it - can you link to where you saw it? Hey, I might consider it for myself too. I love my DVC, but if the deal is good enough, I have no problem banking my points and paying cash. It just means it'll be that much longer before I need an add-on.



uk disney travel co


----------



## Chuck S

going/again said:


> why every time this comes up do we get someone say yeah but you have to pay full rack rate to get free dining, they are advertising for next year 42% OFF AND FREE DINING, and if this year was anything to go by possible free upgrades to dvc 1 bedrooms now back in the day went i went to school 42% was  just shy of half. please if you are going to put this in your post make sure you do know the facts.



Really? Because according the US WDW site, the specials are...

1)  Buy a non-discounted 4 night package, get 3 free, NOT including dining.

2) 29% discount at Value resorts

3) 40% off club level cash rates.

Using the buy 4 get 3 special, in an OKW studio, the cash price is $1809.04 plus tax for Jan 3 to Jan 10. Includes 7 day base ticket, no dining.

Points: 77 points @ $10 = $770
base ticket $ for two adults = $468
Total $1238.

1238/1809 = 68.4%  or a savings of  31.6% over the "special"

Now, given that most members actual cost is closer to $6 per point, $462 + $468 ticket = $930.

That amounts to a 48.6% savings over the buy 4 get 3 special.  I'll stick with points, thanks.

UK specials are not valid in the US.  UK has traditionally gotten better deals, they travel farther, and often stay several weeks at a time...pretty much an irrelevant comparison for US residents.


----------



## Chuck S

toocherie said:


> I believe this was in the works long before your call to MS--Grand Cal not having valet parking free was just the opening salvo.
> 
> My issue is if there was a cost associated with the perk prior to yesterday (which I know there was) how is it that we went from having to pay $0 to $12 a day?  Let's say the "cost" to valet park previously was $10--shouldn't we have been given the option to pay the difference and keep "most of" the perk?



Why?  It isn't Disney or DVC that was offering the perk for the last several years, it was the valet contractor.  The contractor _may_ have been obligated to honor the free parking when they took over the valet service until the contract was up for renewal, just as when one company buys another they have to honor existing contracts until they expire.  But now that the contract has renewed, it is at the sole discretion of the independent valet operator to offer the perk, or not.  They chose not.  No doubt Disney had the the options of either 1) not offering valet services at all, 2)renewing the contract on terms agreeable to both parties, the contractor & Disney (which evidently did not include free parking), or 3) merging the valet payroll and employee benefits back into the WDW employee system.  They chose to renew the contract on the terms wanted by the contractor.  Simple as that...they did not want to boost Disney payroll and offer a perk that they knew would cost them operating revenue.

The contractor is free to negotiate a discount or free parking for DVC, or not.  What benefit was there to the contractor to offer free parking to DVCers?  

No one yet has said they'd be in favor of dues subsidizing the contractor for free parking.


----------



## photobob

Chuck S said:


> Why?  It isn't Disney or DVC that was offering the perk for the last several years, it was the valet contractor.  The contractor _may_ have been obligated to honor the free parking when they took over the valet service until the contract was up for renewal, just as when one company buys another they have to honor existing contracts until they expire.  But now that the contract has renewed, it is at the sole discretion of the independent valet operator to offer the perk, or not.  They chose not.  No doubt Disney had the the options of either 1) not offering valet services at all, 2)renewing the contract on terms agreeable to both parties, the contractor & Disney (which evidently did not include free parking), or 3) merging the valet payroll and employee benefits back into the WDW employee system.  They chose to renew the contract on the terms wanted by the contractor.  Simple as that...they did not want to boost Disney payroll and offer a perk that they knew would cost them operating revenue.
> 
> The contractor is free to negotiate a discount or free parking for DVC, or not.  What benefit was there to the contractor to off free parking to DVCers?
> 
> No one yet has said they'd be in favor of dues subsidizing the contractor for free parking.



Chuck, thanks so much for posting this. While I don't like losing a perk, this post does help my understanding of the reason for it.

Bob


----------



## going/again

Chuck S said:


> UK specials are not valid in the US.  UK has traditionally gotten better deals, they travel farther, and often stay several weeks at a time...pretty much an irrelevant comparison for US residents.



I was pointing out that you dont have to pay full rack rate to get free dining,

nothing you wrote disproves that.


----------



## d1gitman

Chuck S said:


> ...
> Points: 77 points @ $10 = $770
> base ticket $ for two adults = $468
> Total $1238.
> 
> 1238/1809 = 68.4%  or a savings of  31.6% over the "special"
> 
> Now, given that most members actual cost is closer to $6 per point, $462 + $468 ticket = $930.
> 
> That amounts to a 48.6% savings over the buy 4 get 3 special.  I'll stick with points, thanks.
> 
> UK specials are not valid in the US.  UK has traditionally gotten better deals, they travel farther, and often stay several weeks at a time...pretty much an irrelevant comparison for US residents.



what about the annual dues?  that's a real cost, but i don't see that factored into the above analysis.


----------



## Chuck S

going/again said:


> I was pointing out that you dont have to pay full rack rate to get free dining,
> 
> nothing you wrote disproves that.



Except that it's not valid in the US.  Only to foreign visitors

But we can compare that rate, too.

For 2 adults:

A week in an OKW studio...

$2323 less 42% = 1347.34 plus tax (January 3 to 10)

Points, 77 @ $6 = 462
Dining for 7 nights = $82 per night = $588

Total $1050.  a savings of: 22% with points over a really good UK special.


----------



## childsplay

Why can't we see how much of our dues goes to "subsidize" things like valet, it must be a line item expense on a balance sheet somewhere?
I have used valet a grand total of one time in 9 years, but I know others really like it.


----------



## Chuck S

d1gitman said:


> what about the annual dues?  that's a real cost, but i don't see that factored into the above analysis.



Ahhh..but it is included.  

Dues are roughtly $5, more or less.

Initial buy in at $100 is about $2 per point per year, much less if purchased at OKW in 1992.   So that $6 per point total more than covers the initial investment and annual dues for me as an OKW purchaser in 1992.  Even newer purchasers should be able to figure roughly $7 per point total actual cost for a stay in 2010, unless dues skyrocket.


----------



## going/again

d1gitman said:


> what about the annual dues?  that's a real cost, but i don't see that factored into the above analysis.



this is what happens they quote this and that but never give the real facts and costs in their argument, and keep shoving figures at you till you are supposed to believe them. no matter what anyone says with all the constant discounting disney is doing dvc is not the bargain it was. do i like it, no

and for what its worth americans can book via the uk, you just have to know how


----------



## Deb & Bill

childsplay said:


> Why can't we see how much of our dues goes to "subsidize" things like valet, it must be a line item expense on a balance sheet somewhere?
> I have used valet a grand total of one time in 9 years, but I know others really like it.



I was looking at a few of the old annual meeting reports that have the budget for the next year listed.  There is a line item for Transportation in the budget, but it says just Cost for WDW transportation provided to the resort.   Or it could be under the Property Management Subcontract which is provision of hospitality service to the Condominium including expenses for housekeeping, maintenance and front desk oeprations (there are other housekeeping, maintenance and front desk operations line items as well) which may be shared between the condominium and the adjactent property.


----------



## hakepb

lugnut33 said:


> BWV should charge $14 for parking, but make it free for hotel and DVC guests (people visiting the Boardwalk could get validated parking once they spend $20 bucks).  That would make sure nobody was parking there and going to the parks.  They could do the same thing at DTD.


that may or may not work.  I'm not sure if the vendors would want less foot traffic.  Charging would also "legalize" anyone who would prefer to park at BWV for an EPCOT day (instead of paying the same amount at the larger, farther from World Showcase, EPCOT), but is currently obeying the rules.

In my small city, downtown establishments complained enough that paid parking (Even with validation - people hate the idea of paid parking if they are not used to it) was hurting their business that free lots were eventually made available


----------



## Deb & Bill

hakepb said:


> that may or may not work.  I'm not sure if the vendors would want less foot traffic.  Charging would also "legalize" anyone who would prefer to park at BWV for an EPCOT day (instead of paying the same amount at the larger, farther from World Showcase, EPCOT), but is currently obeying the rules.



If they made valet more expensive or at least the same as theme park parking, that might resolve some of those problems.


----------



## melissac

They could have given us a little warning here.  We are going to have a care for our vacation in 5 days and where so hoping for the valet parking.  This really stinks.


----------



## Chuck S

childsplay said:


> Why can't we see how much of our dues goes to "subsidize" things like valet, it must be a line item expense on a balance sheet somewhere?
> I have used valet a grand total of one time in 9 years, but I know others really like it.



If the valet contractor is independent, then actually none of the dues should be used to subsidize them, right?  They should be making $ from the usage fees.  But, since the contract included so much free parking, until recently, I would bet that some employee costs _has_ been included until now as park of common area expense.  Now, assuming that common area item is dropped, you can't really base it on previous years, as it was shared with Disney resorts...now it would have to be fully funded by DVC in whatever agreement they may reach with the contractor to offer free parking, if they wanted to do so.  Or DVC _could_ fund their own valets, if they wished, but again, it wouldn't be cheap when you add insurance, workmens comp, taxes and benefits for 9 or 10 people per resort.  And DVC would need to reach an agreement with Disney Resorts to even offer it...plus would likely require the negotiation of a DVC Valet parking area separate from the indepenent contractor's valet area.  I don't see DVC going to their own valets.


----------



## Chuck S

going/again said:


> this is what happens they quote this and that but never give the real facts and costs in their argument, and keep shoving figures at you till you are supposed to believe them. no matter what anyone says with all the constant discounting disney is doing dvc is not the bargain it was. do i like it, no
> 
> and for what its worth americans can book via the uk, you just have to know how



Uhh, again, the dues ARE included in the figures.  And encouraging people to break Disney policy, which is that specific regional offers are valid for that region only, is not allowed on the DVC boards.


----------



## childsplay

Chuck S said:


> ..now it would have to be fully funded by DVC in whatever agreement they may reach with the contractor to offer free parking, if they wanted to do so.  Or DVC _could_ fund their own valets, if they wished, but again, it wouldn't be cheap.



To a certain extent Chuck, I guess that's where I was headed with my thinking, free valet parking was never free, we paid for it in the form of dues.  It would be interesting to know how much.


----------



## DebbieB

All I know is $108 comes out of my checking account on the first of the month and I had 6 nights in a AKV studio in June and will have 6 nights in a BWV 1 bedroom in December.  Original cost paid off 7 years ago.   Can't beat it.


----------



## DebbieB

childsplay said:


> To a certain extent Chuck, I guess that's where I was headed with my thinking, free valet parking was never free, we paid for it in the form of dues.  It would be interesting to know how much.



Valet used to be free for everyone.   When they started charging, they did not charge DVC members.    I would like to know too if there was a dues chargeback, especially when they outsourced it.   Before that, the valets were on the resort payroll.   So were members subsidizing everyone's free valet?


----------



## MrShiny

The "outsourcing" thing is kind of funny to me.  If I am not mistaken (which I acknowledge I may be!)  Disney created CARS (which does the valet parking) as it created BAGS, which handles DME luggage.   This allowed them to expense these things without having to provie benefits etc. that they provide other workers.   Yes, it is technically a seperate company, but the management has a strong tie to Disney.

What this will most likely mean is less valet parking, especially as those using this perk are the ones who probably "need" it least (in general and with the exception of busy parking times at BCV, etc.).  They know where they are and are generally staying for a longer period, so in most cases they'll probably forego the fee and just self park.

This will man that CARS won't need as many employees, so it can cut its costs and maintain profit at whatever price it contracted with Disney (which Disney pretty much dictated anyway, imho).

So more than trying to capture more money from us DVC members, it will lead to us walking to and from the parking lot more and worse, lead to valets being out of work.  And I think that's what they really want.


----------



## Chuck S

DebbieB said:


> Valet used to be free for everyone.   When they started charging, they did not charge DVC members.    I would like to know too if there was a dues chargeback, especially when they outsourced it.   Before that, the valets were on the resort payroll.   So were members subsidizing everyone's free valet?



When it was free for everyone, the employee cost should have been shared between the DVC portion and the cash portion of the resort, similar to the cost of other common amenities.

The original agreement between the contractor and Disney _may_ have called for a subsidy of some kind by Disney until the renewal period, which likely was also split between DVC and the cash resort in a similar manner.  The renewal likely elimates any subsidy, taking them completely off of Disneys payroll and benefit package.


----------



## Chuck S

MrShiny said:


> So more than trying to capture more money from us DVC members, it will lead to us walking to and from the parking lot more and worse, lead to valets being out of work.  And I think that's what they really want.



I absolutely agree, employee benefits, unemployment ins, workmens comp are all expensive items, no matter what corporate entity or contractor is handling the payroll requirements of the valets.  

Labor is always the first line item to be cut in favor of profitability.


----------



## Sammie

I don't think we have to worry about this move putting valet out of service, with parking lot fees costing more than the valet fee, I think it will increase, which might be the reason they booted DVC out. To make room for the increase.

I do think with the increase in valet and parking lot fees, the resorts close to a park are going to see an increase in the number of people parking there that are not staying there.


----------



## Sammie

MrShiny said:


> The "outsourcing" thing is kind of funny to me.  If I am not mistaken (which I acknowledge I may be!)  Disney created CARS (which does the valet parking) as it created BAGS, which handles DME luggage.   This allowed them to expense these things without having to provie benefits etc. that they provide other workers.   Yes, it is technically a seperate company, but the management has a strong tie to Disney.
> 
> What this will most likely mean is less valet parking, especially as those using this perk are the ones who probably "need" it least (in general and with the exception of busy parking times at BCV, etc.).  They know where they are and are generally staying for a longer period, so in most cases they'll probably forego the fee and just self park.
> 
> This will man that CARS won't need as many employees, so it can cut its costs and maintain profit at whatever price it contracted with Disney (which Disney pretty much dictated anyway, imho).
> 
> So more than trying to capture more money from us DVC members, it will lead to us walking to and from the parking lot more and worse, lead to valets being out of work.  And I think that's what they really want.



The valet work for Mears.


----------



## WilsonFlyer

Has anyone actually confirmed that it happened? The release on this board seems to indicate that the price went up but that it was still free for DVC members. Confusing.

I haven't said much because I am obviously in the minority here but I could actually care less about the valet parking. We were there 2 weeks ago and didn't use it and never have. We even went to Boardwalk twice and never used it. I really don't get it. 

Park your car and walk. What *is* the big deal? It's not like that's all the walking you do at WDW. LOL I would say what some of you sound like but Carol would definitely kick me off if I did.


----------



## MrShiny

Sammie said:


> The valet work for Mears.




Yes!  You may be right!  CARS might be who they created to outsource to in California.   BAGS I think had close ties to Mears too (and I know that is the firm that handles the luggage).

For all intents and purposes, with a customer as big as Disney, Disney is pretty much in control.  It's outsourcing in name only.  

I don't think valet parking will increase, even with the bump in theme park rates.  I think the net will be a decrease, which is probably what they want, since I bet Disney isn't paying per car.  If there are fewer cars, they can still meet SLA's and reduce staff.  The tricky part is then when you have people sick etc, you have a smaller pool to draw from.  So I expect services will become spotty in the future.


----------



## eliza61

WilsonFlyer said:


> Has anyone actually confirmed that it happened? The release on this board seems to indicate that the price went up but that it was still free for DVC members. Confusing.
> 
> I haven't said much because I am obviously in the minority here but I could actually care less about the valet parking. We were there 2 weeks ago and didn't use it and never have. We even went to Boardwalk twice and never used it. I really don't get it.
> 
> *Park your car and walk. What is the big deal? It's not like that's all the walking you do at WDW. LOL I would say what some of you sound like but Carol would definitely kick me off if I did*.



Well, I guess I could be as rude and say the same about what you sound like,  but the big deal is we don't like to lose perks and we are allowed to complain about it.  You can always skip this thread.


----------



## DVCBELLE

WilsonFlyer said:


> Has anyone actually confirmed that it happened? The release on this board seems to indicate that the price went up but that it was still free for DVC members. Confusing.
> 
> I haven't said much because I am obviously in the minority here but I could actually care less about the valet parking. We were there 2 weeks ago and didn't use it and never have. We even went to Boardwalk twice and never used it. I really don't get it.
> 
> Park your car and walk. What *is* the big deal? It's not like that's all the walking you do at WDW. LOL I would say what some of you sound like but Carol would definitely kick me off if I did.


I will answer your question. 

I have two kids.  We like to stay at Boardwalk.  

When you return to the BWV after the parks close, there is often no parking in the self park lot - so you have to drive around until you find a spot, park in overflow across the street or valet.  When Valet was free - this was the obvious choice.  Add in the fact that there is also a convention center at BWV - this place can get ridiculously crowded.

Now, my DH will probably drop me and my two possibly SLEEPING children off at the lobby - no longer will each of us be able to carry one.  (my kids are older now so I won't have to worry about this as much as before) Then he will have to go find somewhere to park.  Which could take up to 1/2 an hour if the BW is full that night.  Then I am left to get my little ones to the room, bathed and in their jammies - while he hunts for a parking spot.  Sure - I can do it but at the end of the day when all 4 of us are tired -the last thing we want to do is hunt for parking spots.  So we will find another resort to stay at -even though BWV is our favorite.  I don't think it is a big deal anywhere else but if you stay at the BW you would understand.

BTW - I would even be willing to pay a discounted valet parking rate but not $12.  Sure perks aren't a guarantee but if it hits a point where all DVC is providing me is a studio/1-bedroom etc - then I would probably sell and stay in a 4 bedroom house off property.


----------



## whitfamily

As I asked before, but no one responded, is there an e-mail we can send issues/comments to?  Can't find one on the member site.


----------



## Sammie

Losing the valet perk is of course not the end of the world, I don't see anyone on this thread that feels that way. Some of us enjoyed the perk, obviously some did not use it. 

I could care less about free internet, or meet and greets or any number of things that DVC offers but obviously some enjoy those items.


----------



## Sammie

whitfamily said:


> As I asked before, but no one responded, is there an e-mail we can send issues/comments to?  Can't find one on the member site.



If you go to the member site, there is a Contact Us that will be forwarded to Member Satisfaction or email to:

dvcmembersatisfactionteam@disneyvactionclub.com


----------



## KAT4DISNEY

eliza61 said:


> I'm predicting by the end of 2010 free access to the health clubs will be eliminated.  Is it a perk I use a lot nope, but does it give me an overall impression of quality and value.  You bet it does.
> So for me it's just small chips that are craking through the pixie dust and making wdw "average"



You may not be far off Eliza.  I spoke with member satisfaction and was told the reason valet had gone from free to $12 was that a decision had been made to do a pay as you go for services rather than spread it out across the membership.  That doesn't bode well for other amenities.  I expressed that I don't want to see items go this way - we've only used valet once and I'd expect our use to be minimal in the future but I don't want this trend to continue.


----------



## TLSnell1981

WilsonFlyer said:


> I haven't said much because I am obviously in the minority here but I could actually care less about the valet parking. We were there 2 weeks ago and didn't use it and never have. We even went to Boardwalk twice and never used it. I really don't get it.
> 
> Park your car and walk. What *is* the big deal? It's not like that's all the walking you do at WDW. LOL I would say what some of you sound like but Carol would definitely kick me off if I did.



Well, free valet was a big deal to me. I have fibro and frequently rent an ECV for the parks. Not only is it a pain to find a parking place at BWV, but the walk can be very tiring. So, valet will now cost over half the price of an ECV. An occaisional taxi will be more cost effective.

On top of everything? I'm ticked MS couldn't find the time to post the change on their website.


----------



## Dean

lugnut33 said:


> Yup, I remember many people posting in this thread who were fine when DVC messed with the points charts because it didn't effect them (though many members got screwed on the whole deal).  Take away the free valet and now  they are mad because it directly affected them.


Actually almost everyone taking a stand based on their personal affect were in the complaining group.  Disney didn't mess up the points chart, they did a long overdue rebalancing that should have been in in 2001 or 2002 and likely again in 2007 or 2008.  That change happened to be negative to a relatively small portion of the membership base, myself included.  A change that was specifically allowed in the POS and one most would think they were obligated to do if things got too far out of balance from a demand and occupancy standpoint.  

Now to a general response to today's posts and the thread in general.  I hate the "sell if you don't like it approach" but there comes a point in those willing to simply complain about everything they don't like that it becomes applicable.  IMO it's OK to vent here and vent to MS but it means nothing, it's just a vent.  Likewise threatening to sell or threatening they'll have more costs in other areas due to such changes likewise means nothing or any other means of trying to rationalize why they shouldn't have made this change means nothing.  They know what's gong on, they've already factored in those issues and concerns better than any of us could do at this point.  And they've already factored in the complaints.  Other than a few people who were surprised this week at the resorts, is it any wonder why DVC doesn't give advance warning on such items, simply more time and more people complaining.  

Has anyone talked to corporate about this, what about your voting representative?  And has anyone taken me up on the suggesting to pay a visit to DVC management, look at the books, talk to people like the CFO and VP types?  Anyone getting a lawyer over these or other recent issue?


----------



## keishashadow

TLSnell1981 said:


> Well, free valet was a big deal to me. I have fibro and frequently rent an ECV for the parks. Not only is it a pain to find a parking place at BWV, but the walk can be very tiring. So, valet will now cost over half the price of an ECV. An occaisional taxi will be more cost effective.
> 
> On top of everything? I'm ticked MS couldn't find the time to post the change on their website.


 
sorry, didn't read thru whole thread, so if this has been addressed already forgive me...

i thought valet was complimentary for those w/HC plates/placard

has this changed too?


----------



## Dean

TLSnell1981 said:


> Well, free valet was a big deal to me. I have fibro and frequently rent an ECV for the parks. Not only is it a pain to find a parking place at BWV, but the walk can be very tiring. So, valet will now cost over half the price of an ECV. An occaisional taxi will be more cost effective.
> 
> On top of everything? I'm ticked MS couldn't find the time to post the change on their website.


If it's enough of an issue to be a problem from a medical standpoint, you should be able to get handicap documentation.  While I agree they should have posted it earlier, what difference would it really have made unless one had a trip short enough notice that it affected the trip planning?



KAT4DISNEY said:


> You may not be far off Eliza.  I spoke with member satisfaction and was told the reason valet had gone from free to $12 was that a decision had been made to do a pay as you go for services rather than spread it out across the membership.  That doesn't bode well for other amenities.  I expressed that I don't want to see items go this way - we've only used valet once and I'd expect our use to be minimal in the future but I don't want this trend to continue.


I've been called crazy for suggesting such a thing for things like banking, borrowing, transfer fees, etc as possible pay to play items.  As I noted previously, every system struggles with what items to spread across the entire membership and which ones to do pay to play.  You have to consider both the % of members that use a certain item as well as the economy of doing it on a larger scale.  They also struggle with how to posture to direct the habits they want and don't want.  If you don't want transfers, etc; you might institute a fee to do so not from a financial standpoint but to control the behavior.


----------



## disneynutz

TLSnell1981 said:


> Well, free valet was a big deal to me. I have fibro and frequently rent an ECV for the parks. Not only is it a pain to find a parking place at BWV, but the walk can be very tiring. So, valet will now cost over half the price of an ECV. An occaisional taxi will be more cost effective.
> 
> On top of everything? I'm ticked MS couldn't find the time to post the change on their website.



Get a blue handicap placard and you will get free valet.


----------



## Chuck S

keishashadow said:


> sorry, didn't read thru whole thread, so if this has been addressed already forgive me...
> 
> i thought valet was complimentary for those w/HC plates/placard
> 
> has this changed too?



No, it is still free for H/C plates and/or placards.

One point...if Mears is the valet contractor, as Sammie said...I wonder if there is anything in the contract that forbids Mears from giving DVCers a discount, if Mears chooses to do so?   It may, as the business takes place on Disney property, but it would be kind of an unusual contract to say they could not give a group discount, to say, a convention that is based at BWV or BCV.  But they may feel that it just isn't warranted/needed to sustain the business, and would prefer to operate with a few less personnel in some shifts rather than discount.


----------



## Paul in CT

WilsonFlyer said:


> Has anyone actually confirmed that it happened? The release on this board seems to indicate that the price went up but that it was still free for DVC members. Confusing.



I can confirm that this has happened.  When we attempted to valet park at BWV on the evening of 10/11, the attendant told me that effective that day, valet parking was no longer free to DVC members.  I was surprised since there had been no notice and the DVC member perks still lists free valet at DVC resorts as a perk.  When he asked me if I still wanted valet service, I dropped off my party and self parked.  Earlier in the week we used the perk with no problem and no mention of the upcoming change.  When I asked the DVC CM at the BWV kiosk, she indicated that they were told only that morning.  

To add "insult to injury", I found a $12 charge on my bill on check out even though I did not use the service.  The CM apparently turned in a ticket with my number from the parking pass in the car.  In any case,  they credited it back to me when I called the front desk.

IMHO, a change like this should have been posted on DVC site at the very least and even better, members should have been alerted by email. Also, a explanation for the change would be appreciated.  We have not used this perk much over the years, but it was appreciated from time to time.  This policy change will definitely reduce the need for valets.


----------



## disneynutz

KAT4DISNEY said:


> You may not be far off Eliza.  I spoke with member satisfaction and was told the reason valet had gone from free to $12 was that a decision had been made to do a pay as you go for services rather than spread it out across the membership.  That doesn't bode well for other amenities.  I expressed that I don't want to see items go this way - we've only used valet once and I'd expect our use to be minimal in the future but I don't want this trend to continue.



How does everyone feel about the new fee for riding the Disney buses and monorail?   






Not really, I just thought that I would get you ready for what will come next.


----------



## childsplay

Paul in CT said:


> I can confirm that this has happened.  When we attempted to valet park at BWV on the evening of 10/11, the attendant told me that effective that day, valet parking was no longer free to DVC members.


----------



## mwmuntz

Man, this was a perk that I used a lot!  This will definitely cut into my Mickey Ice Cream Pops budget.  Just sent an email to member sat.  Hopefully they can add it back someday.


----------



## Brian Noble

> I don't think we have to worry about this move putting valet out of service, with parking lot fees costing more than the valet fee, I think it will increase, which might be the reason they booted DVC out. To make room for the increase.


There's been a $1-$2 difference for quite a while now---before the recent changes, theme park parking was $12, and valet was $10.  So, no real difference.  Plus, when you add in tips, valet is about as expensive, or maybe a little more, depending on how you tip.



> How does everyone feel about the new fee for riding the Disney buses and monorail?


I don't know what comes next, but this won't be it.  The *last* thing Disney wants to do is give you a reason to have your own transportation, because you could use it to leave the bubble and spend money with someone else.


----------



## carolina_yankee

Chuck, you seem to keep saying that the outsourced valet company provided the free parking perk.  (I may have misread you - I'm genuinely curious in this question).  Do you know for certain that is the case?

My impression was that they took our member numbers down (they always did with me) so they could charge back to DVC (or do some sort of accounting). 

What I'm getting at is that if DVC covered the cost of member valet parking through member fees, then if they were trying to keep dues increases low (who knows what's coming down the pike this January), eliminate the valet perk might make sense if only because most DVC members probably don't take advantage of it.

Of course, the same argument could be made for internet and other amenities, but the costs to DVC on those are probably  minimal compared to valet.

Dirk


----------



## TLSnell1981

Dean said:


> If it's enough of an issue to be a problem from a medical standpoint, you should be able to get handicap documentation.  While I agree they should have posted it earlier, what difference would it really have made unless one had a trip short enough notice that it affected the trip planning?



It's more difficult to obtain handicap parking permit than you think. Fibro's painful and exhausting, but not "hang tag" worthy. If you can walk 100 feet, you're out of luck.

I'm leaving for Disney in a few days, so I was a little blind-sided by the change. Rental car, ECV plus valet parking...it adds up. This change tipped the scale for me.


----------



## Chuck S

carolina_yankee said:


> Chuck, you seem to keep saying that the outsourced valet company provided the free parking perk.  (I may have misread you - I'm genuinely curious in this question).  Do you know for certain that is the case?
> 
> My impression was that they took our member numbers down (they always did with me) so they could charge back to DVC (or do some sort of accounting).
> 
> What I'm getting at is that if DVC covered the cost of member valet parking through member fees, then if they were trying to keep dues increases low (who knows what's coming down the pike this January), eliminate the valet perk might make sense if only because most DVC members probably don't take advantage of it.
> 
> Of course, the same argument could be made for internet and other amenities, but the costs to DVC on those are probably  minimal compared to valet.
> 
> Dirk



Actually, what I said was the outsourced company may have been required to offer the perk as part of a contract agreement assumption when they first outsourced.  Likely their outsourced employees, which had previously been Disney employees, were grandfathered into some Disney employee benefit package where the cost was covered under a common area services arrangement like other shared resort services until this contract renewal date.

For them to bill out each car directly, based upon a membership number, to DVC, it would almost have to appear as a line item in our annual resort budgets that members receive every year...like transportation.  Especially given the sheer percentage of valet cars that were DVC members. I never had them take a DVC Membership number, or DDE/TiW number, for free valet...just showed the card and they noted the reason for the free service.

Even if they gave a 70% discount, and billed DVC $3 a car, it would have been a substantial amount annually.  Also, if it was actually billed per car, there would have been no reason to have restricted it to DVC resorts only, they could have billed it for all resorts.

If you figure even 150 DVC cars per day, spread through the resorts at $3 each, that is over $160K annually.

I agree, the internet service cost, since it wasn't free for a few years, until the wiring, modems and other equipment costs were recouped by the existing resorts, is likely very minimal.  New resorts would cover this equipment cost as part of the initial purchase price budget.  And any needed repair replacement would be covered under normal maintenance, like DVD players and telephones.  I'd think it would be rare that a modem would actually fail.  I've had the same cable modem for years.


----------



## DebbieB

I've never had to show my card, they always went by my member parking permit.


----------



## Dean

TLSnell1981 said:


> It's more difficult to obtain handicap parking permit than you think. Fibro's painful and exhausting, but not "hang tag" worthy. If you can walk 100 feet, you're out of luck.
> 
> I'm leaving for Disney in a few days, so I was a little blind-sided by the change. Rental car, ECV plus valet parking...it adds up. This change tipped the scale for me.


I'm very familiar with the system for getting these, I sign the paperwork at times for them.  You can get a temp one if you're having a flare and the restrictions are applicable, most places those are good for 3 months.  It does depend on the severity of the underlying condition and situation though as you suggest.  I hope you have a great trip regardless.


----------



## Paul in CT

Brian Noble said:


> There's been a $1-$2 difference for quite a while now---before the recent changes, theme park parking was $12, and valet was $10.  So, no real difference.  Plus, when you add in tips, valet is about as expensive, or maybe a little more, depending on how you tip.



Valet parking is now $12 plus tip.


----------



## TLSnell1981

Dean said:


> I hope you have a great trip regardless.



Thank you! 

I'm having a flare...probably brought on by another health issue, so I'm a "little grumpy" right now. I think, this is the only lost perk I've really complained about. (probably, has something to do with the timing)


----------



## whitfamily

I sent an e-mail, will be interesting to see if I get a response.


----------



## asianway

disneynutz said:


> How does everyone feel about the new fee for riding the Disney buses and monorail?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not really, I just thought that I would get you ready for what will come next.



Part of the ticket price way back in the day was stated as going toward the WDW Transportation Co.  This would not be unprecedented.


----------



## carolina_yankee

Chuck S said:


> Actually, what I said was the outsourced company may have been required to offer the perk as part of a contract agreement assumption when they first outsourced.  Likely their outsourced employees, which had previously been Disney employees, were grandfathered into some Disney employee benefit package where the cost was covered under a common area services arrangement like other shared resort services until this contract renewal date.
> 
> For them to bill out each car directly, based upon a membership number, to DVC, it would almost have to appear as a line item in our annual resort budgets that members receive every year...like transportation.  Especially given the sheer percentage of valet cars that were DVC members. I never had them take a DVC Membership number, or DDE/TiW number, for free valet...just showed the card and they noted the reason for the free service.
> 
> Even if they gave a 70% discount, and billed DVC $3 a car, it would have been a substantial amount annually.  Also, if it was actually billed per car, there would have been no reason to have restricted it to DVC resorts only, they could have billed it for all resorts.
> 
> If you figure even 150 DVC cars per day, spread through the resorts at $3 each, that is over $160K annually.



That's helpful. I've always seen them write my number down for a DVC comp, but not for TiW.  I also rarely have the parking permit in my car, so it may be they were more scrupulous with me.

At any rate, there were definately people getting the perk who weren't entitled  We had friends renting points at AKV.  Their parking permit said "DVC Member" so they were comped valet at Contemporary when they came to visit us at BLT (why they just didn't self-park is beyond me, but . . .)  They weren't members, and they weren't even asked to show their card so valet just comped them based on the parking permit from another resort.

Dirk


----------



## TiggerAllie

I got a message on my home phone from "Sheila" at DVC member correspondence, asking me to return her call about an email received at DVC. Of course, the number to call back isn't 1-800. (I wonder if there is a way to call MS and have them transfer me through? I don't have an extension number, just a first name and phone.)

I wondered if others who sent emails, etc. had received phone calls back and what you had heard/discussed during them.


----------



## quirty30

TiggerAllie said:


> I got a message on my home phone from "Sheila" at DVC member correspondence, asking me to return her call about an email received at DVC. Of course, the number to call back isn't 1-800. (I wonder if there is a way to call MS and have them transfer me through? I don't have an extension number, just a first name and phone.)
> 
> I wondered if others who sent emails, etc. had received phone calls back and what you had heard/discussed during them.



Was it an area code 321?  I had a very soft spoken message on my answering machine and I think I heard "Disney Vacation Club" as well.  I always list my cell # first when I correspond yet they always call my home number instead.  I sent an email last night so I was quite surprised to get a call back already. I'll try to figure out what the number was and call them back tomorrow.


----------



## DVCBELLE

TiggerAllie said:


> I got a message on my home phone from "Sheila" at DVC member correspondence, asking me to return her call about an email received at DVC. Of course, the number to call back isn't 1-800. (I wonder if there is a way to call MS and have them transfer me through? I don't have an extension number, just a first name and phone.)
> 
> I wondered if others who sent emails, etc. had received phone calls back and what you had heard/discussed during them.


I spoke with her this morning.  She was very sweet and listened to my concerns.  

The official line is that they feel only those who want this perk should pay for it - just like housekeeping - if you want it more than every 4 days or whatever the schedule - then you have to pay for it.


----------



## Paging Tom Morrow

DVCBELLE said:


> I spoke with her this morning.  She was very sweet and listened to my concerns.
> 
> The official line is that they feel only those who want this perk should pay for it - just like housekeeping - if you want it more than every 4 days or whatever the schedule - then you have to pay for it.



That explanation would be acceptable to me if no housekeeping was given at all (other than in between guest changes).  But why should I pay dues for those who want trash/towel and/or a full cleaning?


----------



## Tara

WilsonFlyer said:


> Has anyone actually confirmed that it happened? The release on this board seems to indicate that the price went up but that it was still free for DVC members. Confusing.



There are at least a couple of reports of members being charged and of valets confirming the change directly.



WilsonFlyer said:


> I haven't said much because I am obviously in the minority here but I could actually care less about the valet parking. We were there 2 weeks ago and didn't use it and never have. We even went to Boardwalk twice and never used it. I really don't get it.
> 
> Park your car and walk. What *is* the big deal? It's not like that's all the walking you do at WDW. LOL I would say what some of you sound like but Carol would definitely kick me off if I did.



Some of us really like valet parking - it can be a great time saver and convenience. It's a shame the perk is gone, but I didn't buy for the perks and I like valet enough to pay for it. I can, however, understand why others are upset, not over the practical matter of paying, but the principle - the abrupt way this happened. 

I sometimes get tired of reading complaints (in general), too. However, when that happens, I just stop reading instead of posting implied criticism of the people doing the complaining. It's not for me to judge what is important to anyone else, or why. If other people are bothered, why should that upset me, or anyone else?


----------



## kristenrice

DVCBELLE said:


> The official line is that they feel only those who want this perk should pay for it - just like housekeeping - if you want it more than every 4 days or whatever the schedule - then you have to pay for it.



I agree with the premise behind this.  The "pay-to-play" idea is not all bad, but what I do not understand is who has been "paying" for this service until now?  If the cost was spread out over all of the members, including those who do not utilize the service, then we should see a reduction in our dues, right?  If our annual dues have been paying for the valet and now they want to make it "optional", shouldn't the dues be lowered?

In reference to the comment about the housekeeping...If DVC said that there would no longer be ANY housekeeping included, and you could pay for the services you wanted, what would happen to the housekeeping budget?  Shouldn't there be a significant reduction in MF's if that service were cut by 70% or so?

I know very little about the inner workings of businesses so I have a minimal knowledge base.  I don't have any idea how much the free valet has cost members in terms of annual dues.  Since it is spread out over so many people, I doubt the reduction in MF's would be more than a few pennies per point.

FWIW, we are new members and have never used a valet service, at WDW or anywhere else, so I have no strong opinion on this matter.  I agree with a lot of other folks that the "announcement" (or rather lack thereof) was not done in the best manner.  Obviously, the decision to eliminate free valet parking did not come about overnight.  One would think that they could have given a 30-day notice.  I honestly do not expect any notice from DVC anymore when it comes to changes in perks and such.  Especially after the way they handled the point reallocation.  I just wish they would make as much of an effort to notify me of these types of changes as they do to let me know that the point cost is increasing.  We've known for over a month that the point cost at BLT is going up on November 1.  Why are they just springing the valet cost on us now?


----------



## Longhairbear

When one goes to a restaurant, the price of the salt and pepper on the table are factored into the price of all the menu items, so everyone pays for those salt shakers, whether or not you used them. My point being, free valet was paid for somehow, and probably buried into the overall operating costs, passed on to consumers. 
 I am curious as to who paid for the free valet service. Did only BWV,BCV, and VWL owners pay for it through dues? Did everyone pay?


----------



## SCFIREMAN

DVCBELLE said:


> I spoke with her this morning.  She was very sweet and listened to my concerns.
> 
> The official line is that they feel only those who want this perk should pay for it - just like housekeeping - if you want it more than every 4 days or whatever the schedule - then you have to pay for it.



So does that mean before we get our next annual dues bill we will get a survey asking what services we use so we can be billed accordingly? I think thats just what they came up with as an excuse hoping that there is more people not using valet than there is that use it. Although that is most likely the case. I look forward to my phone call.


----------



## keishashadow

disneynutz said:


> How does everyone feel about the new fee for riding the Disney buses and monorail?
> 
> Not really, I just thought that I would get you ready for what will come next.


I had thought that Disney would hook the guests on the ME benefit then start charging for it the following year, until i realized net result of having a captive audience apparently outweighs the cost of the program

TLSnell1981 - appears as though the requirements to obtain the HC placard may vary from state to state; perhaps you should recheck your state DMV for updated criteria. The following is from PA's site:
Applicant:
(1) is blind.
(2) does not have full use of an arm or both arms.
(3) cannot walk 200 feet without stopping to rest.
(4) cannot walk without the use of, or assistance
from, a brace, cane, crutch, another person,
prosthetic device, wheelchair or other assistive
device.
(5) is restricted by lung disease to such an extent
that the persons forced (respiratory) expiratory
volume for one second, when measured by
spirometry, is less than one liter or the arterial
oxygen tension is less than 60 MM/HG on room
air at rest.
(6) uses portable oxygen.
(7) has a cardiac condition to the extent that the
persons functional limitations are classified in
severity as Class III or Class IV according to
the standards set by the American Heart
Association.
(8) is severely limited in his or her ability to walk
due to an arthritic, neurological or orthopedic
condition.
(9) is a person in loco parentis of a person
specified in paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6),​(7) or (8) above.


----------



## TiggerAllie

quirty30 said:


> Was it an area code 321?  I had a very soft spoken message on my answering machine and I think I heard "Disney Vacation Club" as well.  I always list my cell # first when I correspond yet they always call my home number instead.  I sent an email last night so I was quite surprised to get a call back already. I'll try to figure out what the number was and call them back tomorrow.



Yes... 321-939.. something so other than 321 it sounds like a Disney #. I just looked up 321, and it's Brevard Co. FL.


----------



## LauraLea

Brian Noble said:


> The *last* thing Disney wants to do is give you a reason to have your own transportation, because you could use it to leave the bubble and spend money with someone else.



Yes, it appears Disney will do about anything to keep DME and the WDW transportation free.  Eliminating the expense related to this DVC perk, helps to keep the other services free.

Laura


----------



## Tigger031266

> The official line is that they feel only those who want this perk should pay for it - just like housekeeping - if you want it more than every 4 days or whatever the schedule - then you have to pay for it.



This is STUPID.  I could use this for any of the benefits.  

Community Hall - PAY UP
The Swimming Pool - PAY UP
The work out facility - PAY UP
Pool Towels - PAY UP
Transportation - PAY UP
Parking - PAY UP
That stupid Welcome home Wednesdays - PAY UP (although no one would) 

Where is the data that DVC memebers wanted to get rid of this perk instead of any of the others??????  I sent an email with no respose yet.


----------



## Chuck S

LauraLea said:


> Yes, it appears Disney will do about anything to keep DME and the WDW transportation free.  Eliminating the expense related to this DVC perk, helps to keep the other services free.
> 
> Laura



Maybe, maybe not.  If the expense was a common area maintenance item, then Disney would have paid a share and DVC would have paid a share.  But with the valets being farmed out to Mears, I would assume it really had less to do with the "perk" and more to do with Disney reducing payroll and employee  benefits, that's the reason outsourcing has become the popular solution for many companies. The question then becomes which type of outsource contract is it...it is the type where Disney pays a subsidy/payment to Mears to legally be the employer on record to reduce the cost of benefits, or is it the type of outsourcing where Mears is the independent contractor, and make their profit from a share of the paid parking receipts...the second case seems more likely, and explains the end of the free parking perk.

WDW transportation, on the other hand, is subsidized by both a percentage of the park ticket sales and billings to each resort as operating costs...which are included in the pricing of cash rooms and covered under DVC budgets as the Transportation item for the DVC resorts.  Don't worry, the costs for the DME service and internal transportation is covered and billed out on paper some where in accounting.  That is not to say that at some point they couldn't go to a "pay for transport" system, but we would have to see that change reflected in the transportation area of our dues if they started charging people at the resorts a fee for each use of the system.


----------



## Chuck S

Tigger031266 said:


> This is STUPID.  I could use this for any of the benefits.
> 
> Community Hall - PAY UP
> The Swimming Pool - PAY UP
> The work out facility - PAY UP
> Pool Towels - PAY UP
> Transportation - PAY UP
> Parking - PAY UP
> That stupid Welcome home Wednesdays - PAY UP (although no one would)
> 
> Where is the data that DVC memebers wanted to get rid of this perk instead of any of the others??????  I sent an email with no respose yet.



You don't see a difference between a service and a physical resort amenity, like a pool?  Legally they are quite different.


----------



## dizfanz

Chuck S said:


> Maybe, maybe not.  If the expense was a common area maintenance item, then Disney would have paid a share and DVC would have paid a share.  But with the valets being farmed out to Mears, I would assume it really had less to do with the "perk" and more to do with Disney reducing payroll and employee  benefits, that's the reason outsourcing has become the popular solution for many companies.



Chuck is right.  Valet is a very expensive perk. DW and I work at 2 restaurant's in suburban Indianapolis that both offer valet.  She pays over $1000/month and we pay closer to $2000/month to the valet company.  Valet is complimentary to both restaurants' guests.  Years ago, she tried to run valet in house instead of outsourcing.  Too expensive for them.  It's not employee wages, it is the liability insurance a company needs to carry.  Also, quite frankly, valet is a pain to manage.  Consider the prices above, our geographic location and cost of living here, and further consider that we both have our own lots for the cars. The valets literally pull the cars into spots 20 feet from our front door.  The kids park maybe 20-40 cars a night.  Compare that with BW. I can only imagine how much Disney has to pay.

I am ticked at the change.  I will drop off bags and pick up bags at the door while I go and park my car.  Hopefully, my TIW will get me free valet.  However, since you are supposed to be using it for dining, I could see them restricting this to no overnight valet parking. That is how they may restrict that.  

Not selling my points.  Will park my car.  What's a couple of more steps when you are walking a few miles a day anyway.  Can't wait to hear "Welcome Home" in January.


----------



## laurenspop

Just back from WDW last night.  Was staying since 10/08.  When we checked out yesterday (10/12) there was a charge for 2 day valet parking ($24) - with no notice - and I had been going and coming at least once a day.  
I have NEVER complained about free dining - but get this.  Was told that valet parking is not complimentary for DVC anymore as of 10/11 - but IS COMPLIMENTARY IF YOU ARE ON A DISNEY DINING PLAN!!!!!
and yes that made me just a little upset!


----------



## dizfanz

laurenspop said:


> Was told that valet parking is not complimentary for DVC anymore as of 10/11 - but IS COMPLIMENTARY IF YOU ARE ON A DISNEY DINING PLAN!!!!!
> and yes that made me just a little upset!



Was it DDP or TIW? Big difference here.


----------



## Chuck S

laurenspop said:


> Just back from WDW last night.  Was staying since 10/08.  When we checked out yesterday (10/12) there was a charge for 2 day valet parking ($24) - with no notice - and I had been going and coming at least once a day.
> I have NEVER complained about free dining - but get this.  Was told that valet parking is not complimentary for DVC anymore as of 10/11 - but IS COMPLIMENTARY IF YOU ARE ON A DISNEY DINING PLAN!!!!!
> and yes that made me just a little upset!



It is not complementary for the Disney Dining Plan...it is complementary for the Tables in Wonderland (formerly Disney Dining Experience) card holders....with restrictions, including proving a dining receipt from the resort and the card.  I would expect that further limitation will be placed on that in the future, like no all day or overnight parking.  It is also free for handicap guests with plates or placards.  The name was changed because of the confusion between the names of Disney Dining Plan and Disney Dining Experience.

Many long term employees still occasionally refer to the TiW as the "Disney Dining Card"


----------



## disneynutz

laurenspop said:


> Just back from WDW last night.  Was staying since 10/08.  When we checked out yesterday (10/12) there was a charge for 2 day valet parking ($24) - with no notice - and I had been going and coming at least once a day.
> I have NEVER complained about free dining - but get this.  Was told that valet parking is not complimentary for DVC anymore as of 10/11 - but IS COMPLIMENTARY IF YOU ARE ON A DISNEY DINING PLAN!!!!!
> and yes that made me just a little upset!



It isn't free on the DDP, it's currently free if you are on the TIW card.


----------



## laurenspop

Understand what you are saying here - I have a TIW card.  I was told by both the valet manager and the front desk that valet parking was free for DDP.


----------



## disneynutz

Chuck S said:


> But with the valets being farmed out to Mears, I would assume it really had less to do with the "perk" and more to do with Disney reducing payroll and employee  benefits, that's the reason outsourcing has become the popular solution for many companies.



The Valets were outsourced to reduce liability expenses. Every time a Guest would report a ding on their car caused by the Valets, Disney Security would have to take a report and Disney would have to deal with the claim.

Now if you report a ding, Disney tells you that it isn't their problem, contact BAGS. A couple of DISers have reported that BAGS takes the position of, "prove it". So legally Disney doesn't have any liability, and BAGS could care less.


----------



## clutter

dizfanz said:


> I will drop off bags and pick up bags at the door while I go and park my car.  Hopefully, my TIW will get me free valet.  However, since you are supposed to be using it for dining, I could see them restricting this to no overnight valet parking. That is how they may restrict that.




The biggest problem is that there is insufficient self-service parking at many DVC resorts.  Twice we had to use valet at Kidani because there was not one single self-park space available.  I'm sure the BCV and BWV run into the same problems.  I don't use valet when we travel, so I'm not unhappy about the change, unless there are no self-park spaces available.


----------



## trishy

We are in WDW right now.  Checked in Sunday and found out about the latest perk taken away - the valet parking.  In speaking with a representative of DVC, we were told that the MORE people who voice their complaints (he was more than a little bit peeved also) to DVCmembersatisfactionteam@disneyvacationclub.com 

the better chance we all have of getting that perk back.  So let your voices be heard loud and clear (and he suggested giving our member ID when emailing for obvious authentication reasons).  We've sent our complaints. 

Now back to the parks.


----------



## dizfanz

trishy said:


> the better chance we all have of getting that perk back.  So let your voices be heard loud and clear (and he suggested giving our member ID when emailing for obvious authentication reasons).  We've sent our complaints.
> 
> Now back to the parks.



I am pretty sure that ship has sailed.  A contract has been negotiated and signed by this point.  Our only recourse would be to get this perk back when this new contract runs out. That will likely be a few years. By that point, we DVCers will have something new to complain about.  Of course, you can sell your contract if you are that disastisfied, but Disney is gambling that we will not do that.  There line will be that it was a perk, and perks can come and go at will.  I would love to have it back, but I am not going to hold my breath.


----------



## trishy

dizfanz said:


> I am pretty sure that ship has sailed.  A contract has been negotiated and signed by this point.  Our only recourse would be to get this perk back when this new contract runs out. That will likely be a few years. By that point, we DVCers will have something new to complain about.  Of course, you can sell your contract if you are that disastisfied, but Disney is gambling that we will not do that.  There line will be that it was a perk, and perks can come and go at will.  I would love to have it back, but I am not going to hold my breath.



WOW! Reminded me of why I don't post here that much anymore.  The old "love it or leave it" line.  Interesting.  Anyway, I'm just passing along the message given to us by the DVC GUIDES who also stated that DVC tried to take this particular perk away several years back, but it only lasted a few days because of the riled up DVC members.

Take what you want out of that.  But I'll keep my DVC, thank you very much. 

DVCmembersatisfactionteam@disneyvacationclub.com


----------



## TiggerAllie

Once AKV and BLT opened, were DVC members getting comp. valet at AKL and CR? I noticed that the website (which still lists the old information) only lists BC, BW, and WL as comp. valet locations and specifically excludes any other resorts.


----------



## Chuck S

trishy said:


> WOW! Reminded me of why I don't post here that much anymore.  The old "love it or leave it" line.  Interesting.  Anyway, I'm just passing along the message given to us by the DVC GUIDES who also stated that DVC tried to take this particular perk away several years back, but it only lasted a few days because of the riled up DVC members.
> 
> Take what you want out of that.  But I'll keep my DVC, thank you very much.
> 
> DVCmembersatisfactionteam@disneyvacationclub.com



DVC/DVD (as in the corporation) really could care less whether we have this perk, in fact, from a sales perspective, they'd probably love to have more perks.  

But if the valet services are farmed out via a contract to another company who depends upon the fees to make their profits, then someone would need to compensate them, no?  And remember that such compensation would likely need to come from increased member dues at those resorts.  If those members are willing and eager to pay for the perk via dues, DVC should have no problem providing it.  Be careful what you wish for.

Nothing is free in a timeshare, any timeshare.

It is more likely, IMO, that DVC will try to negotiate a non-compensated "volume discount" for members with the valet provider and Disney (as Disney may get a percentage of the parking fees for lot rent, etc.) but I don't think we'll see it return to "free."


----------



## toocherie

DVCBELLE said:


> The official line is that they feel only those who want this perk should pay for it - just like housekeeping - if you want it more than every 4 days or whatever the schedule - then you have to pay for it.





SCFIREMAN said:


> So does that mean before we get our next annual dues bill we will get a survey asking what services we use so we can be billed accordingly?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tigger031266 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is STUPID.  I could use this for any of the benefits.
> 
> Community Hall - PAY UP
> The Swimming Pool - PAY UP
> The work out facility - PAY UP
> Pool Towels - PAY UP
> Transportation - PAY UP
> Parking - PAY UP
> That stupid Welcome home Wednesdays - PAY UP (although no one would)
> 
> Where is the data that DVC memebers wanted to get rid of this perk instead of any of the others??????  I sent an email with no respose yet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chuck S said:
> 
> 
> 
> You don't see a difference between a service and a physical resort amenity, like a pool?  Legally they are quite different.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well then--how about the lifeguards at the pool?  Aren't they a "service"?  I don't use the pools and don't have kids and know how to swim anyway--so let's do away with those--or only charge those who use the pools for them.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## Chuck S

toocherie said:


> Well then--how about the lifeguards at the pool?  Aren't they a "service"?  I don't use the pools and don't have kids and know how to swim anyway--so let's do away with those--or only charge those who use the pools for them.



The lifeguards are a safety requirement.  Not a voluntary service.

I rarely use the pools myself, but they are a part of the resort.  The valet parking is a service.


----------



## disneynutz

TiggerAllie said:


> Yes... 321-939.. something so other than 321 it sounds like a Disney #. I just looked up 321, and it's Brevard Co. FL.



321 is Celebration FL. That's where DVD/DVC's offices are located. 

On any contact with Member Services, they will try to call you to discuss your concern so you should include a good contact phone number. They will not normally use email because they don't want a written record.


----------



## disneynutz

dizfanz said:


> Of course, you can sell your contract if you are that disastisfied, but Disney is gambling that we will not do that.  There line will be that it was a perk, and perks can come and go at will.  I would love to have it back, but I am not going to hold my breath.



I don't think the Disney cares if you sell your contract. Why? Because you have to sell it to another member. Sure they would like everyone to buy direct, but once a contract is created, it will be around for 50 years you so and Disney is guaranteed income from the owners.


----------



## DVCBELLE

disneynutz said:


> I don't think the Disney cares if you sell your contract. Why? Because you have to sell it to another member. Sure they would like everyone to buy direct, but once a contract is created, it will be around for 50 years you so and Disney is guaranteed income from the owners.


That's not really true...if the market becomes saturated with resales then it hurts their sales.  If I sell my contract and someone buys from me instead of them, they have one less member.


----------



## disneynutz

DVCBELLE said:


> That's not really true...if the market becomes saturated with resales then it hurts their sales.  If I sell my contract and someone buys from me instead of them, they have one less member.



The market is saturated with resales and people still buy direct due to incentives, financing, and immediate gratification.

Disney doesn't have one less member, they have the same amount of members, they just didn't gain an additional one. The number of contracts sold will never decrease, only increase.


----------



## childsplay

As many others have pointed out, it sure would be nice to see how much this perk was costing.  I own at BCV and have stayed there 8 times and have never once used valet, but I understand others do like it.  It's alot easier for me to decide how i feel about this if I have more information, was it costing me $2.00 a point on my maitenence fees or .02 cents?


----------



## TLSnell1981

TiggerAllie said:


> I got a message on my home phone from "Sheila" at DVC member correspondence, asking me to return her call about an email received at DVC. Of course, the number to call back isn't 1-800. (I wonder if there is a way to call MS and have them transfer me through? I don't have an extension number, just a first name and phone.)
> 
> I wondered if others who sent emails, etc. had received phone calls back and what you had heard/discussed during them.



I received an e-mail from Shelia too. (She must be the designated one for our complaints.)  She said she tried to contact me by phone...please call her at *********. I returned her call and reached Member Satisfaction Team's voicemail. Hmmm...


----------



## DVCBELLE

disneynutz said:


> The market is saturated with resales and people still buy direct due to incentives, financing, and immediate gratification.
> 
> Disney doesn't have one less member, they have the same amount of members, they just didn't gain an additional one. The number of contracts sold will never decrease, only increase.


I see how you are looking at it but if someone is definatley going to buy and chooses resale - then Disney did not gain an additional member - so now instead of 2 contracts they have 1...

Over time and in large numbers that could really affect their bottom line...


----------



## Deb & Bill

If you want to hurt them, you need to stop paying dues and let them take back your contract.  If you have invested a lot and not recovered your initial investment, it will also hurt you.


----------



## Tara

TiggerAllie said:


> Once AKV and BLT opened, were DVC members getting comp. valet at AKL and CR? I noticed that the website (which still lists the old information) only lists BC, BW, and WL as comp. valet locations and specifically excludes any other resorts.



Yes, they were. The website was just never updated.


----------



## DVCBELLE

Deb & Bill said:


> If you want to hurt them, you need to stop paying dues and let them take back your contract.  If you have invested a lot and not recovered your initial investment, it will also hurt you.


I wasn't saying I want to hurt them but was just pointing out that resales do hurt DVC as that is a new contract they aren't adding.

I am very frustrated about this change and have been vocal about it - this is also the first time I have ever complained about the loss of a perk - but after our last trip in February - I was very letdown by Disney as a whole and this change really got me thinking about DVC and Disney and my growing disappointment.  Will I sell my contract - NOT A CHANCE.  But if we all sit back and never say anything then DVC will think we all just don't care.  We have invested in them and committed our future vacations to them and we have a right to express our concerns.


----------



## KAT4DISNEY

laurenspop said:


> Just back from WDW last night.  Was staying since 10/08.  When we checked out yesterday (10/12) there was a charge for 2 day valet parking ($24) - with no notice - and I had been going and coming at least once a day.
> I have NEVER complained about free dining - but get this.  Was told that valet parking is not complimentary for DVC anymore as of 10/11 - but IS COMPLIMENTARY IF YOU ARE ON A DISNEY DINING PLAN!!!!!
> and yes that made me just a little upset!


Somebody else reported (don't know if it was earlier on this thread or another) that they dined at the CR paying cash for their meal.  When they left they were charged $12 for valet and were told that it would have been free if they were on the _Disney Dining Plan_.  Perhaps it is confusion over terminology but I for one wouldn't assume it.  



dizfanz said:


> I am pretty sure that ship has sailed.  A contract has been negotiated and signed by this point.  Our only recourse would be to get this perk back when this new contract runs out. That will likely be a few years. By that point, we DVCers will have something new to complain about.  Of course, you can sell your contract if you are that disastisfied, but Disney is gambling that we will not do that.  There line will be that it was a perk, and perks can come and go at will.  I would love to have it back, but I am not going to hold my breath.


  Maybe it has sailed but it's important to voice feedback.  Things have gotten changed by doing so in the past and the only way for there to possibly be change is to let DVC know your thoughts on this matter.  I for one will always do so b/c when I read the next announcement that "due to member requests" so and so has been dropped/changed I want to know I voiced my request.


----------



## Coach81

Too bad.. what a shame..


----------



## MrShiny

DVCBELLE said:


> I see how you are looking at it but if someone is definatley going to buy and chooses resale - then Disney did not gain an additional member - so now instead of 2 contracts they have 1...
> 
> Over time and in large numbers that could really affect their bottom line...



Actually, the only way Disney losses a member is if one sells and then Disney buys the points on ROFR.  

If the member does not finance through Disney, it's all the same to them.  In fact a resale probably costs them less in terms of labor.

Disney gets the dues no matter what, if it is from one person with 2 contracts or 2 people with 1.  I would imagine in the long run they prefer members with more points (meaning longer stays, which are more profitable for them), but unless the resale market collapses (and DVC resales don't seem to sit out there like other real estate these days), it really doesn't matter to them.


----------



## Tigger031266

Help me understand what checking in will look like now.  I drive up to the BWV.  The vallet guy comes over and I say "get lost".  I go find a cart, load it myself, leave my car parked in front of the joint while I haul my stuff inside with me in the check in line.  15-20 min at checkin.  20 min to haul my stuff up the room. Come down 40-45 min latter to move my car to the parking lot????  Got it.  Sounds just great

I don't think the front of BWV will look very nice.


----------



## DVCBELLE

Tigger031266 said:


> Help me understand what checking in will look like now.  I drive up to the BWV.  The vallet guy comes over and I say "get lost".  I go find a cart, load it myself, leave my car parked in front of the joint while I haul my stuff inside with me in the check in line.  15-20 min at checkin.  20 min to haul my stuff up the room. Come down 40-45 min latter to move my car to the parking lot????  Got it.  Sounds just great
> 
> I don't think the front of BWV will look very nice.


The bell services will still take your luggage for you - and this is free - just make sure you tip.  So now, you drive up, give bell services your luggage, park your car and then go check in!


----------



## Chuck S

Tigger031266 said:


> Help me understand what checking in will look like now.  I drive up to the BWV.  The vallet guy comes over and I say "get lost".  I go find a cart, load it myself, leave my car parked in front of the joint while I haul my stuff inside with me in the check in line.  15-20 min at checkin.  20 min to haul my stuff up the room. Come down 40-45 min latter to move my car to the parking lot????  Got it.  Sounds just great
> 
> I don't think the front of BWV will look very nice.



Or...you could pull up, drop you luggage with Bell Services (usually individual guests are NOT allowed to use the carts) move the car, then check-in...or pay a valet fee.


----------



## Tigger031266

> Originally Posted by Tigger031266
> Help me understand what checking in will look like now. I drive up to the BWV. The vallet guy comes over and I say "get lost". I go find a cart, load it myself, leave my car parked in front of the joint while I haul my stuff inside with me in the check in line. 15-20 min at checkin. 20 min to haul my stuff up the room. Come down 40-45 min latter to move my car to the parking lot???? Got it. Sounds just great
> 
> I don't think the front of BWV will look very nice.
> 
> Or...you could pull up, drop you luggage with Bell Services (usually individual guests are NOT allowed to use the carts) move the car, then check-in...or pay a valet fee.



Got it...I just think that there maybe more cars just siting in front while people check in, find out if their room is ready.....  Its not that big of a deal, its more the way they did it and the fact that I really don't think they asked for our input...


----------



## suzyqqq27

We just checked in to BWV on Sunday (October 11) and were informed that valet parking is no longer free for DVC members and that we would be charged $12 a day if we used it.  I"m not sure if it's the same at all the resorts but that's what we were told here.  Just so you all know.  They said it just started that day - Sunday, October 11, 2009.

Stinks eh?
Suzanne


----------



## Sha

I advise you all to start calling and complaining.... seriously. But also, you need to be tipping these people too!! And that may be where it is coming from.


----------



## chalee94

it has come up.

here is the thread where we are allowed to discuss it: http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=2305423&page=27


----------



## dis2cruise

Sha said:


> I advise you all to start calling and complaining.... seriously. But also, you need to be tipping these people too!! And that may be where it is coming from.



my dh always tips when they are taking our car and when we receive too , what a shame that this is happened  what else will they take from us


----------



## sueg

I am very sad about this lost perk. We use it & enjoy it. I just hope they don't take away the free internet, another perk we really enjoy. I always found it hard to accept that low level motels offer free internet and we were paying at WDW. Although I just found out that our stay at the Hilton on Marco Island (spending a few days there before Food & Wine) doesn't include free internet & we are paying to park.


----------



## twinklebug

Tigger031266 said:


> Got it...I just think that there maybe more cars just siting in front while people check in, find out if their room is ready.....  Its not that big of a deal, its more the way they did it and the fact that I really don't think they asked for our input...



I hope there aren't any DVC'rs who feel they're entitled to leaving their cars at the front door while they check in. We just need to adhere to the same rules as the hotel side guests now. No biggie.

I agree, the biggest issue I see being brought up here over and over in the thread is HOW DVC notified us of this change, not that they actually made the change. I hope the person who decided to make this change official at the last minute has figuratively speaking, gotten reamed over the coals so they don't make the same error again.


----------



## TLSnell1981

I just spoke with Shelia, from Member Satisfaction. She was extremely polite and apologetic...... I was assured she was taking notes and they would be passed on.

Shelia informed me she was happy I took the time to bring this issue to Disney's attention. I commented that I know I'm not the only member to do so.....according to the forums, she's been quite busy. She was quite surprised to hear she's being discussed and asked me about the feedback.


----------



## jade1

Chuck S said:


> DVC/DVD (as in the corporation) really could care less whether we have this perk, in fact, from a sales perspective, they'd probably love to have more perks.
> 
> But if the valet services are farmed out via a contract to another company who depends upon the fees to make their profits, then someone would need to compensate them, no?  And remember that such compensation would likely need to come from increased member dues at those resorts.  If those members are willing and eager to pay for the perk via dues, DVC should have no problem providing it.  Be careful what you wish for.
> 
> Nothing is free in a timeshare, any timeshare.
> 
> It is more likely, IMO, that DVC will try to negotiate a non-compensated "volume discount" for members with the valet provider and Disney (as Disney may get a percentage of the parking fees for lot rent, etc.) but I don't think we'll see it return to "free."



Chuck, I know we are beating this to death, and you have explained very well what may have occurred recently, *but do you know who covered the costs before it was farmed out*? This would have been before ME, so it certainly had more use then, than the last few years right? It must have been part of the dues on 5 million or so (not sure how many at BWV) points back then? Or do you think Disney just had folks on the payroll to do this, finally put a pencil to it-decide it was costing say..$100K and could outsource it for $50K (examples) and not have the other issues that go along with it? Or is it possible it was costing 2 cents a point dues (to get the $100K) and they decided to shave that off the dues?


----------



## Chuck S

jade1 said:


> Chuck, I know we are beating this to death, and you have explained very well what may have occurred recently, *but do you know who covered the costs before it was farmed out*? This would have been before ME, so it certainly had more use then, than the last few years right? It must have been part of the dues on 5 million or so (not sure how many at BWV) points back then? Or do you think Disney just had folks on the payroll to do this, finally put a pencil to it-decide it was costing say..$100K and could outsource it for $50K (examples) and not have the other issues that go along with it? Or is it possible it was costing 2 cents a point dues (to get the $100K) and they decided to shave that off the dues?



I would think that prior to the Mears contracts, the valets were Disney employees, and their wages and benefits were shared as part of the common areas for the combined DVC-Cash resorts.  Remember that the free standing DVCs (OKW & SSR) have never had valet services.

As minimum wage increased, along with associated employee costs, like health insurance, retirement, etc., Disney decided it was more cost efficient, like many businesses, to contract out he valet services and remove those employees from the Disney payroll system.  Likely the first year or so, the previous Disney employees continued to receive some Disney benefits whose costs were shared by the DVC-Cash resorts.  Probably with this latest cotract, the benefits have shifted completely to Mears' responsibility.

I do think DVC tries to fund the most used items for members.  I would guess that the "free" internet, while quite a bit less to fund than valet employees, is also used by a higher percentage of members than the valet service.  Look at all the threads we had over the year prior to receiving the internet from members complaining  that even Motel 6 and Super 8 have free internet, plus laptops and other portable devices (ones where you may need to supply your own wifi router) have become much more common place for travelers.


----------



## Dean

Tigger031266 said:


> This is STUPID.  I could use this for any of the benefits.
> 
> Community Hall - PAY UP
> The Swimming Pool - PAY UP
> The work out facility - PAY UP
> Pool Towels - PAY UP
> Transportation - PAY UP
> Parking - PAY UP
> That stupid Welcome home Wednesdays - PAY UP (although no one would)
> 
> Where is the data that DVC memebers wanted to get rid of this perk instead of any of the others??????  I sent an email with no respose yet.


Not really.  Every component must be evaluated as to whether pay to play, spread it out over the entire membership or a combo is appropriate.  As I noted previously, one has to consider the percentage of people that use a given option and the cost structure.  Something that only a portion of the people use that is not really any more expensive total to do pay for play is best that way and valet likely falls into that group.  A good example of the other side is the internet option which is fairly cheap to start and very cheap to continue and that charge is mostly spread to everyone but supplemented pay to play to those who are not staying directly on member points.  Pools are not feasible to do pay to play are are a more core perk to resorts in general nationally, valet is not.  Some place to charge for spa services and workout areas but unless it's an attended area it's not worth the personnel costs to monitor such charges.  I can't think of anyone else that does free valet for a hotel or similar but I can think of many that charge for self parking and some that have mandatory valet often with required fees as well as high as $25 a day.  The reality is that some items will be included for everyone and some pay to play and there will always be a somewhat arbitrary line that divides which is which.  



DVCBELLE said:


> That's not really true...if the market becomes saturated with resales then it hurts their sales.  If I sell my contract and someone buys from me instead of them, they have one less member.


Not really.  And worst case scenario is they eliminate perks from those that buy resale or add them to those that buy retail forcing you to pay higher to be in the in group.  Besides many timeshares sell effectively (better than DVC) when there is NO real resale market.  Even with no resale market at all, DVC could still sell retail.  They might lose one here and there but they do now anyway, it's the big picture they look at in this regard.  



TLSnell1981 said:


> I just spoke with Shelia, from Member Satisfaction. She was extremely polite and apologetic...... I was assured she was taking notes and they would be passed on.
> 
> Shelia informed me she was happy I took the time to bring this issue to Disney's attention. I commented that I know I'm not the only member to do so.....according to the forums, she's been quite busy. She was quite surprised to hear she's being discussed and asked me about the feedback.


Disney, including DVC, is very good at making you feel like your concerns are heard and they will definitely pass it on and consider your concerns or complaints.  As I noted previously, this has already been factored in already.  One is not going to change decisions made from a sound financial position no matter how much complaining.  All one is going to get in complaining this route is patronized.  Sure they'll make notes and compile the complaints both in numbers and in specifics and pass them on but this decision was made at the top by the appropriate committees and agreed to by a number of high level people.  I don't see anyway to think it could be changed unless a new contract were up for bid.  I wonder what their length of contract is, I'd assume one year at a time but don't really know.

Lets actually look at where the rubber hits the road.  We've got a group of people who are complaining they can't get something for free that was previously free and they want the rest of the membership to pay for it, and pay more now, so they can cont get it for free or nearly so.  There will be other pay to play items coming eventually, this won't be the last one.


----------



## TLSnell1981

Dean said:


> Disney, including DVC, is very good at making you feel like your concerns are heard and they will definitely pass it on and consider your concerns or complaints.  As I noted previously, this has already been factored in already.
> 
> There will be other pay to play items coming eventually, this won't be the last one.



I mentioned this in our converstion. I also informed her the most pressing issue was the fact there was NO COMMUNICATION from Member Services. I got the, "oh, this needs to be addressed...they need to post these changes in a more timely manner". So, I got into the almost year old info on the website. I also mentioned I felt like Disney no longer cared once they had my money, but with 3 trips planned in the next 11 months....my spending habits are changing due to my "concerns".

I did think it was funny when she asked what was being said about her on the forums.


----------



## jodifla

TLSnell1981 said:


> I mentioned this in our converstion. I also informed her the most pressing issue was the fact there was NO COMMUNICATION from Member Services. I got the, "oh, this needs to be addressed...they need to post these changes in a more timely manner". So, I got into the almost year old info on the website. I also mentioned I felt like Disney no longer cared once they had my money, but with 3 trips planned in the next 11 months....my spending habits are changing due to my "concerns".
> 
> I did think it was funny when she asked what was being said about her on the forums.



  Were you able to find out anything about the TIW card and valet?


----------



## TLSnell1981

jodifla said:


> Were you able to find out anything about the TIW card and valet?



Oh, Shelia joyfully informed me that "for now" free valet was still included for TIW.


----------



## Tinkerbellcrafter

I would be interested in TIW perks remaining since we also have that...this really stinks and here is the information still on the DVC member website:

_Valet Parking at the Walt Disney World Resort
Valet parking is complimentary at Disney's BoardWalk Resort, Disney's Wilderness Lodge, and Disney's Beach Club Resort. Just show your Disney Vacation Club Member ID Card. Complimentary valet parking is not available at other valet parking operations or for Theme Park access.

You'll be charged the daily fee of $10.00 for this service at any other valet parking operation at the Walt Disney World Resort. Once you've paid for the valet service, you'll receive unlimited valet parking for the remainder of the day. Whether or not you are charged to valet park, gratuities are still appropriate. There will be no charge for Guests with disabilities who have the proper permits. _


They need to update the website and notify members at large...we have not received any notice and only know because of discussion boards....Very unprofessional of DVC!


----------



## Dean

TLSnell1981 said:


> I mentioned this in our converstion. I also informed her the most pressing issue was the fact there was NO COMMUNICATION from Member Services. I got the, "oh, this needs to be addressed...they need to post these changes in a more timely manner". So, I got into the almost year old info on the website. I also mentioned I felt like Disney no longer cared once they had my money, but with 3 trips planned in the next 11 months....my spending habits are changing due to my "concerns".
> 
> I did think it was funny when she asked what was being said about her on the forums.


I absolutely disagree with the idea they don't care once they have your money.  However, they certainly have multiple directions they are being pulled in on any given item and they may not care as much as they did at one time.  IMO they cared so much once upon a time that it crippled their efforts to make sound and rational business decisions and in some ways (sales) that is likely still the case.  The one area where I think the criticism is valid is on the short notice and the lack of appropriate notification of those with trips that were close at hand.  There's no need for a 3-6 months notice on such items just like there wasn't on the re-allocation issue.  One could certainly take them to task on the way they handled the two different issues at AKL (savannah closing and concierge) but not at BWV IMO.  They made a major mistake in delegating the AKV issue to the resort itself without working out an appropriate compensation plan ahead of time.  I don't think one can reasonably complain about the re-allocation, full week reservation change or the actual decision to charge for valet.


----------



## Paul in CT

TLSnell1981 said:


> Oh, Shelia joyfully informed me that "for now" free valet was still included for TIW.



I wish that I knew that on Sunday when they told me that DVC members no longer receive free valet parking.  I do have the TIW card.


----------



## Dean

TLSnell1981 said:


> Oh, Shelia joyfully informed me that "for now" free valet was still included for TIW.


I would bet there's a separate contract and some type of pay structure that TIW is responsible for though it's likely passed on to the restaurants.


----------



## TLSnell1981

Dean said:


> I absolutely disagree with the idea they don't care once they have your money....  The one area where I think the criticism is valid is on the short notice and the lack of appropriate notification of those with trips that were close at hand.....I don't think one can reasonably complain about the re-allocation, full week reservation change or the actual decision to charge for valet.



I think, a few weeks would have been sufficient...and said as much. I was fortunate I hadn't already paid for my rental car. 

We're on day 3 of the valet change and it STILL isn't on the member website.


----------



## Dean

TLSnell1981 said:


> I think, a few weeks would have been sufficient...and said as much. I was fortunate I hadn't already paid for my rental car.
> 
> We're on day 3 of the valet change and it STILL isn't on the member website.


I agree.  I'm suspecting that wasn't possible but they should have sent out an email which could EASILY have been done and should have not only updated the website but put in on the front page in a very prominent fashion.  They should have made it a priority to get it appropriately on the website.  They do look bad due to the method far more than the decision itself.


----------



## jade1

Chuck S said:


> I would think that prior to the Mears contracts, the valets were Disney employees, and their wages and benefits were shared as part of the common areas for the combined DVC-Cash resorts.  Remember that the free standing DVCs (OKW & SSR) have never had valet services.
> 
> As minimum wage increased, along with associated employee costs, like health insurance, retirement, etc., Disney decided it was more cost efficient, like many businesses, to contract out he valet services and remove those employees from the Disney payroll system.  Likely the first year or so, the previous Disney employees continued to receive some Disney benefits whose costs were shared by the DVC-Cash resorts.  Probably with this latest cotract, the benefits have shifted completely to Mears' responsibility.
> 
> I do think DVC tries to fund the most used items for members.  I would guess that the "free" internet, while quite a bit less to fund than valet employees, is also used by a higher percentage of members than the valet service.  Look at all the threads we had over the year prior to receiving the internet from members complaining  that even Motel 6 and Super 8 have free internet, plus laptops and other portable devices (ones where you may need to supply your own wifi router) have become much more common place for travelers.



Thanks Chuck, so it was Disney, DVC or maybe a combination of Disney and DVC that was paying for free valet service for years, and is now paying nothing towards it.


----------



## Chuck S

jade1 said:


> Thanks Chuck, so it was Disney, DVC or maybe a combination of Disney and DVC that was paying for free valet service for years, and is now paying nothing towards it.



That would be my guess.  But it is also possible that they have a different type of outsource agreement. 

But remember, if it _is_ as I suspect, during the last few years, they weren't technically paying for "free valet" service, they were subsidizing employee benefit packages for the employees that had formerly been part of Disney's valet service team.  There is a difference.  But because of this subsidy, Disney/DVC would have an easier time requesting such a perk from the contractor because a side effect would have been lower employee cost for the vendor.  If, again it is as I guess, the valet benefits are now fully funded by the contractor, they need increased revenue tocontinue to do business...with minimum wage contribution increases, even for tipped employees and (assumed) increasing medical insurance costs.


----------



## sdlipton

All,

Reading www.wdwinfo.com today, i noticed that while Valet Parking is going up in price, it is still indicated on here on the boards and on its sponsoring website that DVC valet is still free.  

_Valet Parking is FREE for the following:

    * Disney Vacation Club (DVC) Members parking at a DVC resort which offers valet parking. Either the DVC Member card or Resort ID indicating that the guest is a DVC Member is required as proof
    * Disney Dining Experience cardholders with an Advance Dining Reservation at the resort where they are valet parking
    * All guests who a current handicap license plate/tag_

This looks like itw as just updated this weekend by wdwinfo.com.  Can someone from the site, or a moderator clear this up?


----------



## TLSnell1981

I'd be curious to see how much, if any, the valet's income will decrease. I'm betting the DVCers and the workers will be the only ones to lose.


----------



## jade1

Chuck S said:


> That would be my guess.  But it is also possible that they have a different type of outsource agreement.
> 
> But remember, if it _is_ as I suspect, during the last few years, they weren't technically paying for "free valet" service, they were subsidizing employee benefit packages for the employees that had formerly been part of Disney's valet service team.  There is a difference.  But because of this subsidy, Disney/DVC would have an easier time requesting such a perk from the contractor because a side effect would have been lower employee cost for the vendor.  If, again it is as I guess, the valet benefits are now fully funded by the contractor, they need increased revenue tocontinue to do business...with minimum wage contribution increases, even for tipped employees and (assumed) increasing medical insurance costs.



I get that part for the last few years, I'm just saying for years before (meaning before outsourcing) is was all paid for by Disney/DVC-now (a few years later) they are paying nothing towards it.


----------



## Paul in CT

sdlipton said:


> All,
> 
> Reading www.wdwinfo.com today, i noticed that while Valet Parking is going up in price, it is still indicated on here on the boards and on its sponsoring website that DVC valet is still free.
> 
> _Valet Parking is FREE for the following:
> 
> * Disney Vacation Club (DVC) Members parking at a DVC resort which offers valet parking. Either the DVC Member card or Resort ID indicating that the guest is a DVC Member is required as proof
> * Disney Dining Experience cardholders with an Advance Dining Reservation at the resort where they are valet parking
> * All guests who a current handicap license plate/tag_
> 
> This looks like itw as just updated this weekend by wdwinfo.com.  Can someone from the site, or a moderator clear this up?



As great as the DIS site is, it is not official Disney.  Since DVC did not send out any prior notice, I would not expect the DIS to have this information.  The fact is that no free valet parking was allowed at BWV on Sunday and we were told the policy changed that day.


----------



## Deb & Bill

Found this on the member website under Latest News (View all News) - but you to look hard to find it.  The other information about free valet is still located under Perks. 



> Changes made to valet parking offering
> 
> Complimentary valet parking for Disney Vacation Club Members at Disney Vacation Club Resorts at the Walt Disney World® Resort was discontinued effective October 11, 2009.
> 
> Similar to other fee-based services, such as additional housekeeping service or additional room amenities, only those Members who choose to valet park will be charged, instead of increasing the annual dues for all Members to cover the costs.
> 
> Self parking will continue to be complimentary at all Disney Vacation Club resorts. For drivers choosing to use the valet service, the cost is $12 a day, effective October 11, 2009. Members and Guests with disabilities will continue to receive complimentary valet parking.
> 
> Once paid, the valet parking service can be used for the entire day at any resort without paying the fee again.
> 
> Back To DVC News


----------



## Dean

TLSnell1981 said:


> I'd be curious to see how much, if any, the valet's income will decrease. I'm betting the DVCers and the workers will be the only ones to lose.


The question isn't so much how will their income decrease as much as it is how much smaller a force will they need overall.  I would doubt the remaining force will see much difference but would suspect that some of these charges might to to the workers and that it's very likely that issue was in part behind this change.


----------



## TLSnell1981

Deb & Bill said:


> Found this on the member website under Latest News (View all News) - but you to look hard to find it.  The other information about free valet is still located under Perks.



Hmmm....when you go to "view all news" it's at the top of the list.  But, not on the front page??? Dee Vee still tops that list, but is under the valet announcement on the link.

I called myself looking for the info.  Would have thought it was important enough to be under "latest news"(front page).

**edited to add** I wonder why Shelia didn't know this information was posted?


----------



## Chuck S

jade1 said:


> I get that part for the last few years, I'm just saying for years before (meaning before outsourcing) is was all paid for by Disney/DVC-now (a few years later) they are paying nothing towards it.



That, too, would be my guess.

Well, they were Disney employees, so their wages should have been part of the shared resort expenses.  Remember that when valet first started, it was free for all onsite guests.  

Of course, wages and benefits costs per employee have increased as well over the years.  So as they started saving the cost of the valet wages, the savings were likely used to pay increasing wages for other resort staff.


----------



## cutakenta

Oh how nice,    "Self parking will continue to be complimentary at all Disney Vacation Club resorts."
We will let you park for free as long as you find a spot and drop $200 for dinner.





Quote:
Changes made to valet parking offering

Complimentary valet parking for Disney Vacation Club Members at Disney Vacation Club Resorts at the Walt Disney World® Resort was discontinued effective October 11, 2009.

Similar to other fee-based services, such as additional housekeeping service or additional room amenities, only those Members who choose to valet park will be charged, instead of increasing the annual dues for all Members to cover the costs.

Self parking will continue to be complimentary at all Disney Vacation Club resorts. For drivers choosing to use the valet service, the cost is $12 a day, effective October 11, 2009. Members and Guests with disabilities will continue to receive complimentary valet parking.

Once paid, the valet parking service can be used for the entire day at any resort without paying the fee again.

Back To DVC News


----------



## Chuck S

cutakenta said:


> Oh how nice,    "Self parking will continue to be complimentary at all Disney Vacation Club resorts."
> We will let you park for free as long as you find a spot and drop $200 for dinner.



I'm sure you meant that tongue in cheek...but there are some non-Disney  operated onsite resorts that charge a daily self parking fee...and Universal resorts also charge a self parking fee.

While I doubt they'd ever charge DVC for self parking, as the maintenance of the lots is covered by dues, I guess they legally _could._


----------



## Deb & Bill

TLSnell1981 said:


> ....**edited to add** I wonder why Shelia didn't know this information was posted?



Because Sheila's job is to be a sounding board, not someone to resolve your problem. 

Can't you just see her and the other DVC Member Satisfaction CMs sitting together in a room saying, "Oh damn, here's another one."


----------



## lawgs

Chuck S said:


> When you check-in you'll receive a paper tag to place on your dashboard identifying you as an onsite guest.  This will give you the free parking.



just got  back from AKV at Kidani

the parking "slip" thingy means nothing, what they are looking for when you go through a "gate" is the "keys to the world" room key you get at check in and this applied to the main magic kingdom gate we went through when we were visiting Wilderness Lodge/Polynesian Resort

they do seem to have a security check point now at night when you pass through the main Magic Kingdom parking booths....signs up say the "road is closed", you slow for security out with their crossed flashlights, and they inquire where you are going....then send you on your way ( they did not ask for room key, just wanted to know where we were going )...Perhaps this was more to prevent people from going to the Contemporary   we never did find out why they were doing this ....it happened all three times we visited the above resorts later at night 


we never displayed the parking slip after we learned this ( the slip is a convenience for the resort in case they have to contact someone about moving their vehicle if maintenance is being done near where your vehicle is parked ...this according to the resort manager we talked to )

seems some creative individuals have been photo copying the "slip" according to the security guard at the AKV gate, but since they do not have "room keys" to show they are probably denied entrance

of course anyone could ride a bus right into AKV without ever having to show anything.....


----------



## TLSnell1981

Deb & Bill said:


> Can't you just see her and the other DVC Member Satisfaction CMs sitting together in a room saying, "Oh damn, here's another one."



I thought the same thing today!! I'm thinking **speaker phone is on and they're all getting a kick out of this**

I don't see how someone can be so sweet and chipper. Shelia got off script for a moment though. I said, "you must be really busy with the valet complaints....you were mentioned a few times on the forums today." She replied, "I was? **long pause** What did they say?" (Me) Oh, that you were professional, polite, apologetic, etc., but that Disney had weighted all options, before the decision. to discontinue FREE valet AND our complaints weren't going to change anything." She stammered a little, "but they do care and we take all complaints seriously (she was back on script).


----------



## KAT4DISNEY

Dean said:


> .....I can't think of anyone else that does free valet for a hotel or similar but I can think of many that charge for self parking and some that have mandatory valet often with required fees as well as high as $25 a day......



I am not certain if there's just a particular area you are talking about but I did think you had visited NV?  Lots of free valet here and it influences why I don't like paying directly.  Charge for self parking?    I think they'd string you up for that one?!


----------



## quirty30

KAT4DISNEY said:


> Charge for self parking?    I think they'd string you up for that one?!



Try visiting any major hotel surrounding O'Hare Airport as well as those downtown.  There is 1 - yes 1, reputable hotel in downtown Chicago that offers free self parking.  All the rest charge; the last time I valet parked at a downtown hotel, I believe I paid $48 a day - no "in & out" privileges were included.  I would imagine that the situation is similar in most large metropolitan areas.  I agree that the failure to notify members that the valet parking perk was ending was a major faux pax, but honestly, $12 a day for valet parking isn't bad, especially when you consider that it's good all day at any of the resorts.  I also agree that Disney would be crazy to charge for resort self parking (but never say never.)


----------



## Chuck S

lawgs said:


> just got  back from AKV at Kidani
> 
> the parking "slip" thingy means nothing, what they are looking for when you go through a "gate" is the "keys to the world" room key you get at check in and this applied to the main magic kingdom gate we went through when we were visiting Wilderness Lodge/Polynesian Resort...



I have never, ever been asked for a room key at a theme park parking gate, which I believe is what I was referring to in the post you quoted.  I am usually asked for a room key when I visit a different resort for dining or shopping, though.  I've never been asked for a room key to enter the resort we are staying at, unless we use an automated gate.


----------



## lawgs

Chuck S said:


> I have never, ever been asked for a room key at a theme park parking gate, which I believe is what I was referring to in the post you quoted.  I am usually asked for a room key when I visit a different resort for dining or shopping, though.  I've never been asked for a room key to enter the resort we are staying at, unless we use an automated gate.




ah.... perhaps they have different operating procedures at AKV ( Kidani Village they were always asking for KEYS to World card on our return ) or  main gate entrance at magic kingdom later in the evening


guess the point being made in our post was the "paper parking pass issued" was not necessary to "enter" the wonderful world of disney areas ( at least from our experience staying there these last two weeks )


----------



## KAT4DISNEY

quirty30 said:


> Try visiting any major hotel surrounding O'Hare Airport as well as those downtown.  There is 1 - yes 1, reputable hotel in downtown Chicago that offers free self parking.  All the rest charge; the last time I valet parked at a downtown hotel, I believe I paid $48 a day - no "in & out" privileges were included.  I would imagine that the situation is similar in most large metropolitan areas.  I agree that the failure to notify members that the valet parking perk was ending was a major faux pax, but honestly, $12 a day for valet parking isn't bad, especially when you consider that it's good all day at any of the resorts.  I also agree that Disney would be crazy to charge for resort self parking (but never say never.)



Yes, it is typical in most major metropolitan areas.  Cost of real estate factors in.  In SF it may cost you more to get your car out of the garage than it did for the room you slept in.


----------



## Slakk

This was my FAVORITE perk

I am finding it harder and harder to hold onto my DVC points when there are other groups like Marriott who actually cater to the owners.  We always used valet and tipped big since it was free.  Now I will self park and they will get nothing.

I have been on the fence about selling two of my 50 point contracts but not anymore.  I am going to BLT in two weeks and am sure I will get the crappiest room labelled MK view and will run into non owners who have a spectacular room and a huge discounted rate, free dining and a pony.

In fact come to think of it - what perks do I have left other than discounted annual passes that I give a rip about?  Grrrrr


----------



## suzyqqq27

My favourite part was that we checked in on Sunday at BWV (the day they took free valet away) and told us that the only available parking left was valet at $12 a night.  We were told we couldn't self park because there were no spots left.  Wow - that adds insult to injury on the day they took away our perk.

Suzanne


----------



## Sammie

suzyqqq27 said:


> My favourite part was that we checked in on Sunday at BWV (the day they took free valet away) and told us that the only available parking left was valet at $12 a night.  We were told we couldn't self park because there were no spots left.  Wow - that adds insult to injury on the day they took away our perk.
> 
> Suzanne



This resort is going to have problems, this is ridiculous as I am sure many of those parking spots were taken with guests over at Epcot for F&W.

They are going to have to address this problem. They need to make the over flow lot across the street the only lot that non BW guests can use.


----------



## disneynutz

Sammie said:


> This resort is going to have problems, this is ridiculous as I am sure many of those parking spots were taken with guests over at Epcot for F&W.
> 
> They are going to have to address this problem. They need to make the over flow lot across the street the only lot that non BW guests can use.



Sammie, I'm surprised at you. You know Disney better than that.  

The new Disney way is to take away the perk, raise the price, and not give you a place to park other than valet! 

It's kinda like their new project of taking the backs off of the chairs at the MK restaurants to make the Guests uncomfortable. The idea is to make them eat quickly to make room for the next guy.

Just think of the money that they will make. 

 Bill


----------



## n2mm

Sammie said:


> This resort is going to have problems, this is ridiculous as I am sure many of those parking spots were taken with guests over at Epcot for F&W.
> 
> They are going to have to address this problem. They need to make the over flow lot across the street the only lot that non BW guests can use.



I agree.  We check in this weekend at the BWV and we are going to be none too happy to deal with this.  I bought my BWV for F&W stays and now it's not really going to be worth it.


----------



## Sha

Here is an address and information I had from another time I had to complain... Do more than complain about it on here people... if you really are displeased, write them.

Disney Vacation Club Member Services
200 Celebration Place 
Celebration, FL. 34747 
again to the attention of the Member Satisfaction Team

The most efficient and timely way will be through the address that you 
have currently used. members@disneyvacationclub.com is the web site that
you may express your concerns. Please put: Attention: Member 
Satisfaction Team. 

We ask that all correspondence for the Walt Disney World Resort be 
directed to the following regular mailing address:

Executive Offices
Walt Disney World Resort
Post Office Box 10040
Lake Buena Vista, FL  32830-0040

Please include a telephone number where you may be reached.

Or the following e-mail address:  
WDW.guest.communications@disneyworld.com


----------



## DisneyWalker44

Slakk said:


> I am finding it harder and harder to hold onto my DVC points when there are other groups like Marriott who actually cater to the owners.


 Marriott offers free valet????


----------



## carolina_yankee

Slakk said:


> This was my FAVORITE perk
> 
> I am finding it harder and harder to hold onto my DVC points when there are other groups like Marriott who actually cater to the owners.  We always used valet and tipped big since it was free.  Now I will self park and they will get nothing.
> 
> I have been on the fence about selling two of my 50 point contracts but not anymore.  I am going to BLT in two weeks and am sure I will get the crappiest room labelled MK view and will run into non owners who have a spectacular room and a huge discounted rate, free dining and a pony.
> 
> In fact come to think of it - what perks do I have left other than discounted annual passes that I give a rip about?  Grrrrr



Unfortunately, the MK view might be the case since some of them aren't that great.  However, I'm sure  you can ask for a better view at check-in if you don't like your location.

Here's hoping it's your best DVC trip ever - and at BLT, valet really isn't a useful perk.  



suzyqqq27 said:


> My favourite part was that we checked in on Sunday at BWV (the day they took free valet away) and told us that the only available parking left was valet at $12 a night.  We were told we couldn't self park because there were no spots left.  Wow - that adds insult to injury on the day they took away our perk.
> 
> Suzanne



This is when a manager needs to be called to answer your question, "Which part of the lawn should I use to park my car then?"  Forcing you into valet is inexcusable.

Dirk


----------



## Maxwell

We found out Sunday morning when we called the valet to bring our car up. They gave us some lame memo written by DVC. We were just a bit upset. Checked this morning and the website still says complimentary valet at the Boardwalk. They have some serious communication issues to resolve.


----------



## CT_Bev&Jeff

Our DVC website is now updated, you must click on the "all news" button, but here is what it now says as of this morning.

"Changes made to valet parking offering

Complimentary valet parking for Disney Vacation Club Members at Disney Vacation Club Resorts at the Walt Disney World® Resort was discontinued effective October 11, 2009.

Similar to other fee-based services, such as additional housekeeping service or additional room amenities, only those Members who choose to valet park will be charged, instead of increasing the annual dues for all Members to cover the costs.

Self parking will continue to be complimentary at all Disney Vacation Club resorts. For drivers choosing to use the valet service, the cost is $12 a day, effective October 11, 2009. Members and Guests with disabilities will continue to receive complimentary valet parking.

Once paid, the valet parking service can be used for the entire day at any resort without paying the fee again."

I am upset at the timing of the announcement, giving DVC Members no notice whatsoever!  It is simply unacceptable for a company to not consider informing their members as a high priority.

Secondly, I do not understand the wording, "instead of increasing the annual dues for all members to cover the costs"  How much could that possibly be?  Seriously, how many members use the Valet parking, and the increased cost would have been $2.00 per use.  How much would that have increased our MF's per point?  I believe that DVC needs to address this directly.

I know that we have bought into an agreement that allows DVC to make changes without the memberships input, but don't they understand that changes like these brought about in this manner makes DVC less attractive to both current and future members?

Here is one vote to put our own slate up at the December meeting.  If for no other reason than to show that we are getting tired of the lack of management abilties of our current DVC leadership.

Thank you for reading my vent! 

CT_Jeff


----------



## keishashadow

[





Chuck S said:


> I'm sure you meant that tongue in cheek...but there are some non-Disney operated onsite resorts that charge a daily self parking fee...and Universal resorts also charge a self parking fee.
> 
> While I doubt they'd ever charge DVC for self parking, as the maintenance of the lots is covered by dues, I guess they legally _could._


 
so many hotels have resort fees, whether a one-time per stay or daily charge; easy way to earn some $s

im wondering if a mandatory fee may be in the works for the non-DVC rooms to cover parking, internet, etc., throw in a 5 X 7 photo, or cheap collectible and call it a deal


----------



## Anal Annie

Since we don't rent a car this doesn't affect us...but pretty soon they'll probably add coin boxes on the buses.

(and tip jars for the drivers)!


----------



## Chuck S

keishashadow said:


> [
> 
> so many hotels have resort fees, whether a one-time per stay or daily charge; easy way to earn some $s
> 
> im wondering if a mandatory fee may be in the works for the non-DVC rooms to cover parking, internet, etc., throw in a 5 X 7 photo, or cheap collectible and call it a deal



And really, in some ways, it is our own fault. An ever growing percentage of travelers look for the cheapest air fare and hotel rates, use expedia and priceline, bid on vacation on ebay...

I suppose next we'll see a "deal" of _free_ park tickets, _free_ dining, and _free_ room at a Disney Value resort, with a $225 per day resort services fee per adult.  You know a lot of folks would go fo it.

And DVCers would be complaining that they don't give us the tickets and DDP _free_.


----------



## rkwier

I have been off of the boards for several days, so this was quite an interesting post to come back to.  After reading everything, these are my thoughts:

1) The communication on this was beyond terrible.  DVC should have given notice in this regard.
2) It was not appropriate to charge valet to members who checked in at their resort while valet was still complimentary.  It was unfair for those members to receive a surprise charge at the end of their stay.  Likewise, it is not appropriate to charge when valet becomes mandatory due to lack of parking.  It is their responsibility to ensure that appropriate parking spaces are available for on-site guests.
3) I applaud those who have contacted MS to voice their concerns over this matter.  If no one tells them there is an issue, they will never know.
4) I also recognize that this is also a perk, which is not guaranteed in our membership, just an added "plus."  It has always been stressed to us, both by DVC and fellow members, that these perks can be removed at any time.  Do not make your purchasing decision based on perks because they are not guaranteed.
5) Although a $12 jump seems high, it is actually a reasonable rate for hotel valet in my experience.  I travel frequently for business, so I went back to check what the valet rates are for the hotels that I have stayed in.  The majority fell in the $20-$25 range per night.  One was as high as $30.  Again, just my experience, so others may have found something different.

Just my two cents.


----------



## tjkraz

CT_Bev&Jeff said:


> How much could that possibly be?  Seriously, how many members use the Valet parking, and the increased cost would have been $2.00 per use.  How much would that have increased our MF's per point?



It's probably just a case of finally reaching that tipping point.  DME has been around for 4 years now.  Over that time I'm sure valet parking usage has declined--perhaps considerably.  

Between lower usage and higher cost, eventually you reach a point where it makes more sense to NOT have 100% of the members covering the cost of a benefit which is used by a much smaller population.


----------



## keishashadow

Chuck S said:


> And really, in some ways, it is our own fault. An every growing percentage of travelers look for the cheapest air fare and hotel rates, use expedia and priceline, bid on vacation on ebay...
> 
> I suppose next we'll see a "deal" of _free_ park tickets, _free_ dining, and _free_ room at a Disney Value resort, with a $225 per day resort services fee. You know a lot of folks would go fo it.


 
_free_ is indeed a powerful word.  

i bitfor FDP in Dec.  Had promised my points to DS for his Dec trip as I had a cruise booked, that i canceled mostly worrying re fear of impending swine flu & missed travel connections (which im rebooking for next summer)

don't forget to add the churning type of promo 'buy 4, get 3 free' (at rack rate no less).  I wonder how many people (the non-Disboard types) actually run the numbers vs their perception of value.  Yet, if they are happy, so be it.  Unfortunately, many members are taking the removal of the valet as a personal affront as the perc had great value to them.


----------



## n2mm

Quote:
Originally Posted by suzyqqq27  
My favourite part was that we checked in on Sunday at BWV (the day they took free valet away) and told us that the only available parking left was valet at $12 a night. We were told we couldn't self park because there were no spots left. Wow - that adds insult to injury on the day they took away our perk.

Suzanne 

This is when a manager needs to be called to answer your question, "Which part of the lawn should I use to park my car then?" Forcing you into valet is inexcusable.


I absolutely agree.  We arrive on Sunday and if we don't find a space to park, we will be at the front desk complaining, daily if we have to.  We are resort guest and part of being a resort guest is a parking spot.  If they can't offer me self only, they better be ready to comp my valet parking.


----------



## Maxwell

If you are a resort guest you should be given parking. No way you should be forced to valet for a fee. If they want to force you to use the service and comp the fee then that's a different story.


----------



## Opie100

From what I've read, self-parking at the resorts continues to be free.  

I agree with not wanting to raise dues, but why not instead just charge DVC members $2 for valet, to cover the difference of the increase?  If the $10 was being subsidized by dues before, does that mean the dues will now go down?  If not, why?

DVC members should at least get discounted valet.


----------



## DebbieB

Opie100 said:


> From what I've read, self-parking at the resorts continues to be free.
> 
> I agree with not wanting to raise dues, but why not instead just charge DVC members $2 for valet, to cover the difference of the increase?  If the $10 was being subsidized by dues before, does that mean the dues will now go down?  If not, why?
> 
> DVC members should at least get discounted valet.



We don't really know if it was being subsidized by dues before, at least not directly.   The fact that the valet service is outsourced it's possible that their contact conditions have changed.


----------



## crisi

Here is my theory.

Several years ago Disney outsourced valet to Mears.  In order to get what is probably a pretty sweet contract, Mears either agreed to park DVC members "gratis" or had such a small per car fee on it that DVC was willing to eat the cost.  My guess is that Disney pays Mears nothing, and Mears may pay Disney for the privledge of parking cars at $12 a shot.  

The contract comes due.  Now Mears is in a better negotiating position.  They want Disney to pay them the going rate for DVC cars.  Its the hotel side doing the negotiating, so DVCs needs aren't a top priority.  DVC wants parking DVC cars free to be part of the deal for getting the juicy contract.  Negotiations drag out.  DVC continues to hope that the negotiations will resolve in their favor, or that a compromise can be reached for DVC members to get a discount or something.  Eventually, the contract is signed by Hotels with no concessions for DVC and a commencement date of NOW.  And DVC is left either paying $12 a car out of everyone's dues until a policy change can get communicated - which will pull them into budget variance really quickly - or make a sudden change without good communication.


----------



## tjkraz

crisi said:


> Here is my theory.
> 
> Several years ago Disney outsourced valet to Mears.  In order to get what is probably a pretty sweet contract, Mears either agreed to park DVC members "gratis" or had such a small per car fee on it that DVC was willing to eat the cost.  My guess is that Disney pays Mears nothing, and Mears may pay Disney for the privledge of parking cars at $12 a shot.
> 
> The contract comes due.  Now Mears is in a better negotiating position.  They want Disney to pay them the going rate for DVC cars.  Its the hotel side doing the negotiating, so DVCs needs aren't a top priority.  DVC wants parking DVC cars free to be part of the deal for getting the juicy contract.  Negotiations drag out.  DVC continues to hope that the negotiations will resolve in their favor, or that a compromise can be reached for DVC members to get a discount or something.  Eventually, the contract is signed by Hotels with no concessions for DVC and a commencement date of NOW.  And DVC is left either paying $12 a car out of everyone's dues until a policy change can get communicated - which will pull them into budget variance really quickly - or make a sudden change without good communication.



Based upon what I have been able to piece together, I'd say that is a pretty sound theory.  DVC won't go into any details about contracts but I have been lead to believe that the net impact on dues would have been more than just the $2 published price increase in order for the "free" perk to continue.  

The valet parking folks are going to lose a lot of traffic over this.  Perhaps that will allow them to reduce staff and they'll be just fine with it.  Or maybe it will open them up to offering a reduced fee to DVC members.  Nothing wrong with sharing comments with Member Satisfaction.


----------



## MenashaCorp

I have used/not used valet on different trips, am not (yet) going to get too upset at "extras" being given and taken away.  Sadly, Disney has made me desensitized to this type of thing.

What r-e-a-l-l-y has me going  is the experiences and suggestions noted in this thread that resort guests (e.g. BWV guests) being turned away for the lot being "full." I realize this may spark a "pool hopping/refillable mug" type debate, but I think it is entirely different.  

Guests booked at a given resort should ABSOLUTELY have first access to parking there. If DVC members want to be close to EPCOT for F&W, BOOK AT BWV or BCV!!! That's why I freaking BOUGHT THERE!!! We as members/owners should NEVER be forced to park "across the street" (Where the heck is that, btw??) or pay for valet if it's the only space available.

I would hope that any members who (unlike myself) are able to attend the annual meeting and to address the parking issue at least bring this angle of the issue up as well.  No resort can call itself "deluxe" and treat guests this way.

Rant over.


----------



## Chuck S

MenashaCorp said:


> I have used/not used valet on different trips, am not (yet) going to get too upset at "extras" being given and taken away.  Sadly, Disney has made me desensitized to this type of thing.
> 
> What r-e-a-l-l-y has me going  is the experiences and suggestions noted in this thread that resort guests (e.g. BWV guests) being turned away for the lot being "full." I realize this may spark a "pool hopping/refillable mug" type debate, but I think it is entirely different.
> 
> Guests booked at a given resort should ABSOLUTELY have first access to parking there. If DVC members want to be close to EPCOT for F&W, BOOK AT BWV or BCV!!! That's why I freaking BOUGHT THERE!!! We as members/owners should NEVER be forced to park "across the street" (Where the heck is that, btw??) or pay for valet if it's the only space available.
> 
> I would hope that any members who (unlike myself) are able to attend the annual meeting and to address the parking issue at least bring this angle of the issue up as well.  No resort can call itself "deluxe" and treat guests this way.
> 
> Rant over.



To answer your question the "across the street" lot is located behind the Hess gas station.

I agree that BW/BWV guests should have first priority on self-parking.  But I wonder if it is truly other DVC members and cash resort guests as well as AP holders that are the problem. I would guess they are a very small part of the problem, with off-site guests and Florida resident seasonal pass holders being the bulk of non-BWV parkers.  as AP holders and other onsite guests get free parking at the parks, there is little reason to park at BWV and walk over vs riding the EPCOT lot trams.  

But Florida seasonal passes and offsite guests do not get free parking at the parks...so really, unless they have a confirmed dining reservation (with which there should be a 3 hour parking limit), they should not be in that lot at all.


----------



## TLinden16

Chuck S said:


> But Florida seasonal passes and offsite guests do not get free parking at the parks...so really, unless they have a confirmed dining reservation (with which there should be a 3 hour parking limit), they should not be in that lot at all.



You are on to something here.  I didn't think about this until you mentioned it, but I met a group of locals at a Flower Power concert in May who told me that they park at the BW when the come to Epcot for the concerts (the Flower Power, Eat to the Beat, and summer concerts).  I actually walked back to the BW with them at the end of the night a couple of nights.  These folks were in three seperate cars, and came to the Flower Power concerts all three nights the weekend I was there.

One of them told me she comes to pretty much all of the Flower Power concerts, and most of the Eat to the Beat concerts (and some of the summer ones).  It didn't occur to me at the time that parking there would save them the parking fee at the park lots (I never have a car when I'm there so parking is a non-issue to me).  But if they are seasonal pass holders, that would save them a lot of money over the course of a year.


----------



## cutakenta

I already said this earlier but I will say it again. I checked in at Beach Club Friday night and I could not find one spot. Friday valet was free so it wasn't an issue.

 I was forced to use FREE VALET on Friday. 


I think at times parking will be a nightmare at BWV. Many times you will be forced to use valet.


----------



## ADP

Chuck S said:


> But Florida seasonal passes and offsite guests do not get free parking at the parks...so really, unless they have a confirmed dining reservation (with which there should be a 3 hour parking limit), they should not be in that lot at all.


I know some people who park at the Boardwalk Resort are there just to visit "The Boardwalk".  Disney has marketed the Boardwalk area as a destination within Walt Disney World.  For that reason some guests flock to the resort to shop and take advantage of the free evening entertainment (magicians, jugglers and side acts).  I'm sure a lot of people park there just to visit ESPN Club on Sunday for NFL football.  

I don't agree with this practice just pointing out why the lots get full at times.


----------



## lugnut33

How bout making all the resorts valet parking only, then Disney can make lots of money?


----------



## Chuck S

ADP said:


> I know some people who park at the Boardwalk Resort are there just to visit "The Boardwalk".  Disney has marketed the Boardwalk area as a destination within Walt Disney World.  For that reason some guests flock to the resort to shop and take advantage of the free evening entertainment (magicians, jugglers and side acts).  I'm sure a lot of people park there just to visit ESPN Club on Sunday for NFL football.
> 
> I don't agree with this practice just pointing out why the lots get full at times.



Yes, but they could still limit them to 3 hours, like they do at the Monorail resorts, or charge a parking fee to everyone and refund automatically to BWI/BWV guests, and give a refund at the front desk if you present a receipt from a boardwalk shop and were there less than 3 hours.  I think that would open up a lot of parking if they used that scheme at DtD, too.


----------



## MenashaCorp

Chuck S said:


> To answer your question the "across the street" lot is located behind the Hess gas station.
> 
> I agree that BW/BWV guests should have first priority on self-parking. But I wonder if it is truly other DVC members and cash resort guests as well as AP holders that are the problem. I would guess they are a very small part of the problem, with off-site guests and Florida resident seasonal pass holders being the bulk of non-BWV parkers. as AP holders and other onsite guests get free parking at the parks, there is little reason to park at BWV and walk over vs riding the EPCOT lot trams.
> 
> But Florida seasonal passes and offsite guests do not get free parking at the parks...so really, unless they have a confirmed dining reservation (with which there should be a 3 hour parking limit), they should not be in that lot at all.


 


TLinden16 said:


> You are on to something here. I didn't think about this until you mentioned it, but I met a group of locals at a Flower Power concert in May who told me that they park at the BW when the come to Epcot for the concerts (the Flower Power, Eat to the Beat, and summer concerts). I actually walked back to the BW with them at the end of the night a couple of nights. These folks were in three seperate cars, and came to the Flower Power concerts all three nights the weekend I was there.
> 
> One of them told me she comes to pretty much all of the Flower Power concerts, and most of the Eat to the Beat concerts (and some of the summer ones). It didn't occur to me at the time that parking there would save them the parking fee at the park lots (I never have a car when I'm there so parking is a non-issue to me). But if they are seasonal pass holders, that would save them a lot of money over the course of a year.


 


ADP said:


> I know some people who park at the Boardwalk Resort are there just to visit "The Boardwalk". Disney has marketed the Boardwalk area as a destination within Walt Disney World. For that reason some guests flock to the resort to shop and take advantage of the free evening entertainment (magicians, jugglers and side acts). I'm sure a lot of people park there just to visit ESPN Club on Sunday for NFL football.
> 
> I don't agree with this practice just pointing out why the lots get full at times.


 


Chuck S said:


> Yes, but they could still limit them to 3 hours, like they do at the Monorail resorts, or charge a parking fee to everyone and refund automatically to BWI/BWV guests, and give a refund at the front desk if you present a receipt from a boardwalk shop and were there less than 3 hours. I think that would open up a lot of parking if they used that scheme at DtD, too.


 
All fair points and gratefully taken.  Points that HINTI hope are brought up at said December meeting.  I/We didn't buy in and "pay our vacations up front" to be displaced from a parking spot by people only there for a day.

Geez, I never even realized there was a lot over there.  The Back 40!!

Maybe BWV needs (gasp) a PARKING DECK!! 

I'll stay optimistic that WDW/DVC is receptive to the strong feelings of its' members.


----------



## DebbieB

At BWV, I think the main lot on the right should be hotel guests and perhaps convention goers (if there is a meeting at BW).   Others should be sent to the lot on the left by the guard shack or across the street.   As Dean mentioned earlier, they could add more public spaces on the left by reducing the valet spaces.


----------



## twinklebug

TLinden16 said:


> You are on to something here.  I didn't think about this until you mentioned it, but I met a group of locals at a Flower Power concert in May who told me that they park at the BW when the come to Epcot for the concerts (the Flower Power, Eat to the Beat, and summer concerts).  I actually walked back to the BW with them at the end of the night a couple of nights.  These folks were in three seperate cars, and came to the Flower Power concerts all three nights the weekend I was there.
> 
> One of them told me she comes to pretty much all of the Flower Power concerts, and most of the Eat to the Beat concerts (and some of the summer ones).  It didn't occur to me at the time that parking there would save them the parking fee at the park lots (I never have a car when I'm there so parking is a non-issue to me).  But if they are seasonal pass holders, that would save them a lot of money over the course of a year.



Parking at Disney's resorts, even if they have to say they're there for dining but instead heading off to the park, has been a long standing "tradition" among the elderly living in the area where my parents winter. They act like it's no big deal and will try to convince you that Disney encourages it.

My parents are sticklers for following the rules. I don't have to worry about them being a part of that group


----------



## TLSnell1981

BWV and BC will both be a problem. I guess, the only realistic solution would be Chuck's suggestion(charge for parking, require validation). I wish they'd at least reserve a lot for "resort guests only". But, I think that would also result in fewer patrons....for shopping/dining. So, I wonder how this will be handled? If Disney thinks of every angle BEFORE making a change.... Shouldn't they already have a solution? I afraid, nothing will be done and resort guests will get the short end of the stick.


----------



## wildernessDad

After thinking about this, I am okay with the doing away with free Valet parking.  I use ME and don't want to subsidize someone else's parking fee.  Of course, those that do not use ME don't really want to subsidize that.  I understand the other side of the coin.


----------



## Joan S.

Hi, I sent my letter of COMPLAINT to DVC and I hope they recieve alot of them!!  I am especially upset about NO NOTIFICATION of this change!!  Joan


----------



## manning

Velet parking not free anymore, what next?

The Swan and Dolphin charges $10.00 a day for all parking.

Hmmmmmmm.


----------



## JimC

manning said:


> Velet parking not free anymore, what next?
> 
> The Swan and Dolphin charges $10.00 a day for all parking.
> 
> Hmmmmmmm.



That would be a great way to curb the visitors who park at the resorts to avoid paying for parking at the theme parks.  They could credit or not charge those with a valid resort key card.


----------



## Opie100

Bottomline for me: I don't care much about valet, but if I arrive at my home resort (BCV) and there is no self-parking available, I will politely ask the hotel manager to cover costs for valet parking until a spot opens up.


----------



## snackyx

I am also an owner at Marriott's Ko Olina Beach Club in Oahu, the same location Disney is building next to.  Owner's at Ko Olina are charged $5.00/day for valet parking.  Non-owner's are charged $30/day for valet parking.  Disney could certainly offer members a reduced rate.

We are OKW owners so valet there is not an issue. We do rent a car every trip and make frequent trips to BWV to dine at Flying Fish, ESPN, Spoodles (now Kouzzina), etc.  The free valet at the Boardwalk was a real plus in our decisions to visit there. I have used non-valet at BWV and its a mess.  The bus links from OKW to the Boardwalk is a long trip to make for dinner.  How about getting a validation from a Boardwalk restaurant for valet parking?  Trust me--without valet we may rethink our dining choices there due to the parking hassles at Boardwalk for the abovementioned reasons.


----------



## hakepb

snackyx said:


> I am also an owner at Marriott's Ko Olina Beach Club in Oahu, the same location Disney is building next to.  Owner's at Ko Olina are charged $5.00/day for valet parking.  Non-owner's are charged $30/day for valet parking.  Disney could certainly offer members a reduced rate.
> 
> We are OKW owners so valet there is not an issue. We do rent a car every trip and make frequent trips to BWV to dine at Flying Fish, ESPN, Spoodles (now Kouzzina), etc.  The free valet at the Boardwalk was a real plus in our decisions to visit there. I have used non-valet at BWV and its a mess.  The bus links from OKW to the Boardwalk is a long trip to make for dinner.  How about getting a validation from a Boardwalk restaurant for valet parking?  Trust me--without valet we may rethink our dining choices there due to the parking hassles at Boardwalk for the abovementioned reasons.



There's no doubt that this will affect some visits.  But Disney probably has good numbers from other Deluxe hotels and has decided there is little statistical difference.

It's not like there was so little parking at DTD to merit closing the Adventurer's club..


----------



## jennyjuops

We just returned from a stay at the Beach Club Villa's and they do charge DVC members for Valet Parking. Not only were we charged, but the price went up from $10 to $12 overnight! I think it is absolutely ridiculous that they took away this "perk." They are giving away so much to other tourists (3 free nights, free meal plans,etc) and what do we get???


----------



## crisi

More to my theory.....

Several years ago when Mears got the contract, the economy was flying high and people were throwing around money on vacation.  Mears probably didn't care that it parked DVC cars for free, there were plenty of people paying $10 a pop for valet at the Deluxe resorts.

The economy crashes, and even those people taking a Deluxe vacation trim their expenses a little.  Like maybe less signature dining.  Less alcohol.  And they self park.

So the contract comes due again, and Mears reviews their numbers.  They've seen a significant drop in revenue with the economy.  They need to get their revenue up.  They are much less likely to give concessions to discount DVC members or park them for free - and they are going to raise the price.


----------



## Tara

jennyjuops said:


> We just returned from a stay at the Beach Club Villa's and they do charge DVC members for Valet Parking. Not only were we charged, but the price went up from $10 to $12 overnight! I think it is absolutely ridiculous that they took away this "perk." They are giving away so much to other tourists (3 free nights, free meal plans,etc) and what do we get???



I see this is your first post - welcome to the DIS.

What you get is a great rate on pre-paid, spacious accommodations with lots of amenities in an attractive setting. No special deal can beat that in the long run.


----------



## twinklebug

crisi said:


> So the contract comes due again, and Mears reviews their numbers.  They've seen a significant drop in revenue with the economy.  They need to get their revenue up.  They are much less likely to give concessions to discount DVC members or park them for free - and they are going to raise the price.



You may be right Crisi. It's also quite possible that when Mears won the contract they didn't read all the terms carefully and weren't aware of the free valet service for DVC members, or underestimated the quantity who'd be using it. And if the contract was up for renewal, they took advantage of the timing to make sure they got paid for their services.


----------



## Deb & Bill

I'd bet that it won't be too long and they will start to charge a nominal fee for ME, like $20 each way per adult, $10 each way for children (3-9).  Enough to keep guests from renting cars and using town cars, but enough to make some money on the deal.  

If they required all resort guests to enter their own resort parking lot using a card key and all others to go through the guard shack/toll booth, that would cut down on the non-resort guests from parking there.  If you were checking in, your name would be on the list, kind of like they do now.


----------



## Dean

Chuck S said:


> I'm sure you meant that tongue in cheek...but there are some non-Disney  operated onsite resorts that charge a daily self parking fee...and Universal resorts also charge a self parking fee.
> 
> While I doubt they'd ever charge DVC for self parking, as the maintenance of the lots is covered by dues, I guess they legally _could._


As I suggested, many resorts do charge for self parking though timeshares that do are still a minority.  Many of the Marriott's charge for parking to non Marriott members but they all are free for Marriott owners even if not staying at their resort.



lawgs said:


> just got  back from AKV at Kidani
> 
> the parking "slip" thingy means nothing, what they are looking for when you go through a "gate" is the "keys to the world" room key you get at check in and this applied to the main magic kingdom gate we went through when we were visiting Wilderness Lodge/Polynesian Resort


It varies.  Usually at the resort you are staying at (though not always), they will waive you through.  Usually for the parks likewise they won't ask for a card of ID though there are exceptions to both.  I'd say it's roughly 60/40 at other resorts that they'll ask why you're there and for either a picture ID or your room key vs just waiving your through.  And which resort also matters, the EPCOT resorts and resorts near MK are far more likely to ask than are the moderates or values it seems and that makes sense.


----------



## CR Resort Fan 4 Life

Deb & Bill said:


> If they required all resort guests to enter their own resort parking lot using a card key and all others to go through the guard shack/toll booth, that would cut down on the non-resort guests from parking there.  If you were checking in, your name would be on the list, kind of like they do now.


With the exception when you arrive the day you check-in, don't all the resorts have this option? Whenever my family and I drive back to the Contemporary sometimes we will go in the area where the Disney buses enter, insert our KTTW card and the barrier will go up.


----------



## Deb & Bill

CR Resort Fan 4 Life said:


> With the exception when you arrive the day you check-in, don't all the resorts have this option? Whenever my family and I drive back to the Contemporary sometimes we will go in the area where the Disney buses enter, insert our KTTW card and the barrier will go up.



Uh, yeh.  But they would require them to go this way instead of through the toll booth to save time.


----------



## dvcbrad

I am not a user of valet parking, as I thoroughly enjoy not having to drive while on vacation at WDW.  Nevertheless, I understand how this does impact the users of this perk.

What concerns me, and I have contacted MS regarding this as well, is the lack of advance notice and the precedent this sets for other unannounced, impromptu perk reductions and/or eliminations.  I don't feel entitled to them, but they exist and you expect them to be there when you are.

I have read here how this has impacted current guests, and would imagine that some might have made other plans had they have know of the change.  Let's face it - no one is happy when a reduction/elimination of a perk is made.  It does happen though, and when it does, it's best handled with proper notification.  THAT'S where I think Disney/DVC REALLY dropped the ball.  And, as I said, what other overnight changes could happen without first notifying the guests?  It's a rough economy, and when a change is made that will cost people additional vacation dollars, they should be forewarned rather than just having it dropped on them.  It then could be managed rather than having to come up with the extra money - and it may have influenced someone's decision to go or not - or rent a car or not, etc.  Poor execution on the part of Disney/DVC!


----------



## Tara

CR Resort Fan 4 Life said:


> With the exception when you arrive the day you check-in, don't all the resorts have this option? Whenever my family and I drive back to the Contemporary sometimes we will go in the area where the Disney buses enter, insert our KTTW card and the barrier will go up.



The difference would be that in the case of the example given, the resort key access lane would connect to resort parking that couldn't be accessed by other drivers who go through the guard shack lane. As it stands now, all people entering the resort have access to the same areas.


----------



## CR Resort Fan 4 Life

Tara said:


> The difference would be that in the case of the example given, the resort key access lane would connect to resort parking that couldn't be accessed by other drivers who go through the guard shack lane. As it stands now, all people entering the resort have access to the same areas.


Ok now I understand.


----------



## DebbieB

They could do like they do at CSR.  There's the main guard gate but then to get into the parking areas where the rooms are you have to use a room key.

At BWV, they could put a gate on the entrance to the parking on the right.  Others could use the left.    All the resorts have the valet parking areas with gates, they could do something similiar.


----------



## crisi

Deb & Bill said:


> I'd bet that it won't be too long and they will start to charge a nominal fee for ME, like $20 each way per adult, $10 each way for children (3-9).  Enough to keep guests from renting cars and using town cars, but enough to make some money on the deal.



I think they will - particularly with DVC members.  With hotel guests they can build it into the room rate.  With DVC members Disney is more fond of the "pay for play" model - which is fair.  I don't want to pay for someone else's valet from my dues, and they shouldn't pay for my ME out of theirs.

And, frankly, I wouldn't mind. If its a fair price we'd pay it.  If it wasn't, we'd grab a cab.


----------



## Sammie

Deb & Bill said:


> I'd bet that it won't be too long and they will start to charge a nominal fee for ME, like $20 each way per adult, $10 each way for children (3-9).  Enough to keep guests from renting cars and using town cars, but enough to make some money on the deal.
> 
> If they required all resort guests to enter their own resort parking lot using a card key and all others to go through the guard shack/toll booth, that would cut down on the non-resort guests from parking there.  If you were checking in, your name would be on the list, kind of like they do now.



I have made this suggestion to MS in the past. I hope now they see a real need for it especially at BWV, BCV and VWL and even BLT. They need to have a restricted parking area for resort guests only, easily restricted the same way the valet area is that is accessed with the Resort ID card. 

I hope they listen. I don't have a problem of going through the guard shack upon arrival but after you recieve your resort ID, they need to restrict parking to Resort guests only and have a very small area for those dining or shopping, that is further from the resort. At BW it needs to be the lot behind the Hess gas station. 

If they do not address this problem of guests that are staying at resort not having a place to park, you will see some parking on the grass, double parking and who knows what else.


----------



## CR Resort Fan 4 Life

Sammie said:


> I have made this suggestion to MS in the past. I hope now they see a real need for it especially at BWV, BCV and VWL and even BLT. They need to have a restricted parking area for resort guests only, easily restricted the same way the valet area is that is accessed with the Resort ID card.
> 
> I hope they listen. I don't have a problem of going through the guard shack upon arrival but after you recieve your resort ID, they need to restrict parking to Resort guests only and have a very small area for those dining or shopping, that is further from the resort. At BW it needs to be the lot behind the Hess gas station.
> 
> If they do not address this problem of guests that are staying at resort not having a place to park, you will see some parking on the grass, double parking and who knows what else.


I don't think they can add a parking lot area only for Contemporary/Bay Lake Tower guests, because there doesn't seem to be any room. A Cast Member once told me if they didn't have the convention center where it is then it might have beeen possible to have guests just visiting to park there, however they don't expect to ever add that.

Also doesn't the Boardwalk already have seperate parking for guests not staying there, because whenever my family and I went to visit there we were always told to park in the visitors lot to the left of the guard gate and not in the general parking lot.


----------



## Deb & Bill

CR Resort Fan 4 Life said:


> I don't think they can add a parking lot area only for Contemporary/Bay Lake Tower guests, because there doesn't seem to be any room. A Cast Member once told me if they didn't have the convention center where it is then it might have beeen possible to have guests just visiting to park there, however they don't expect to ever add that.
> 
> Also doesn't the Boardwalk already have seperate parking for guests not staying there, because whenever my family and I went to visit there we were always told to park in the visitors lot to the left of the guard gate and not in the general parking lot.



Then they need to offer convention guests free valet as part of their convention fees.  

At the BW, there is no requirement for non-resort guests to park at the further lot on the Hess side of the street.  All the person coming up has to say is that they are dining at the BW.


----------



## Anal Annie

Deb & Bill said:


> I'd bet that it won't be too long and they will start to charge a nominal fee for ME, like $20 each way per adult, $10 each way for children (3-9).  Enough to keep guests from renting cars and using town cars, but enough to make some money on the deal.
> 
> If they required all resort guests to enter their own resort parking lot using a card key and all others to go through the guard shack/toll booth, that would cut down on the non-resort guests from parking there.  If you were checking in, your name would be on the list, kind of like they do now.



We have a friend who's a former CM who's told us that there was a contract for the DME thru like 2010.  So who knows what changes they will implement by the end of 2010.


----------



## CR Resort Fan 4 Life

Deb & Bill said:


> Then they need to offer convention guests free valet as part of their convention fees.


Actually I meant if the Contemporary never built the convention center then they could have used that area as a parking lot for guests just going to eat there. So if they never had it then they wouldn't have convention guests and needed to offer them free valet parking to make up for it. Don't forget the convention center was not open until 1991, which means it was not apart of the Contemporary when it opened in 1971.


----------



## Sammie

CR Resort Fan 4 Life said:


> I don't think they can add a parking lot area only for Contemporary/Bay Lake Tower guests, because there doesn't seem to be any room. A Cast Member once told me if they didn't have the convention center where it is then it might have beeen possible to have guests just visiting to park there, however they don't expect to ever add that.
> 
> Also doesn't the Boardwalk already have seperate parking for guests not staying there, because whenever my family and I went to visit there we were always told to park in the visitors lot to the left of the guard gate and not in the general parking lot.



There is absolutely no reason to add a parking lot, and that is not what I suggested. They simply need to take the existing parking and divide it into Resort, valet and day guests, giving most of it to resort self parking, a little to valet and less to day guests, who have the option of taking a bus, monorail etc. to get there to dine or shop. 

They would only need to put up a few concrete dividers and one arm gate accessed by a resort ID, just like the valet lots and possibly a sign or two desiginating the different parking area. The parking for nonresort guests there to just shop or dine, needs to be further out. 

It would cost them hardly nothing and would go along way to please the guests staying there. 

At the DVC resorts they are going to see a decline in valet use with this change and some of the existing valet lots could be given back to self parking. It would also make these lots more secure.


----------



## Chuck S

CR Resort Fan 4 Life said:


> With the exception when you arrive the day you check-in, don't all the resorts have this option? Whenever my family and I drive back to the Contemporary sometimes we will go in the area where the Disney buses enter, insert our KTTW card and the barrier will go up.



No, OKW has not added a card reader or bus gate.  I wish they would, but it would be expensive,  they'd have to do a full redesign of the entryway.  Traffic does get backed up sometimes.


----------



## Dean

KAT4DISNEY said:


> I am not certain if there's just a particular area you are talking about but I did think you had visited NV?  Lots of free valet here and it influences why I don't like paying directly.  Charge for self parking?    I think they'd string you up for that one?!


Yes, LV does have free parking but it's not really free is it, LOL, and they have ulterior motives to do so.  I'm sure there are exceptions.  



DisneyWalker44 said:


> Marriott offers free valet????


They do in LV, not sure about anywhere else.  However LV does not currently have a self parking lot.  Most locations don't have valet for vacation club sites. 



keishashadow said:


> so many hotels have resort fees, whether a one-time per stay or daily charge; easy way to earn some $s
> 
> im wondering if a mandatory fee may be in the works for the non-DVC rooms to cover parking, internet, etc., throw in a 5 X 7 photo, or cheap collectible and call it a deal


Generally it's just to cover the cost of the services though there are exceptions.  Non members, and members not staying on points, do pay for internet currently.  



snackyx said:


> I am also an owner at Marriott's Ko Olina Beach Club in Oahu, the same location Disney is building next to.  Owner's at Ko Olina are charged $5.00/day for valet parking.  Non-owner's are charged $30/day for valet parking.  Disney could certainly offer members a reduced rate.


That's all Marriott owners though, not just owners at that resort.  And they also charge non owners for self parking I believe.  Marriott requires that a resort provide free parking to all Marriott owners.  BeachPlace came VERY close to losing their affiliation with Marriott in part over their demand to charge those that did not own at that resort for self parking.  

BTW, ME has not always been free.


----------



## twinklebug

Dean said:


> Yes, LV does have free parking but it's not really free is it, LOL, and they have ulterior motives to do so.  I'm sure there are exceptions.



Well, with all the free booze flowing on the casino floor, I'm sure they have to keep folk with one too many from climbing behind their wheel. It's just being responsible  ... and... if said person who would have left, goes back in and forgets his wife told him he had a $ limit on gambling, all the better.


----------



## CR Resort Fan 4 Life

Sammie said:


> There is absolutely no reason to add a parking lot, and that is not what I suggested. They simply need to take the existing parking and divide it into Resort, valet and day guests, giving most of it to resort self parking, a little to valet and less to day guests, who have the option of taking a bus, monorail etc. to get there to dine or shop.
> 
> They would only need to put up a few concrete dividers and one arm gate accessed by a resort ID, just like the valet lots and possibly a sign or two desiginating the different parking area. The parking for nonresort guests there to just shop or dine, needs to be further out.
> 
> It would cost them hardly nothing and would go along way to please the guests staying there.
> 
> At the DVC resorts they are going to see a decline in valet use with this change and some of the existing valet lots could be given back to self parking. It would also make these lots more secure.


Well at the Contemporary they have three self parking lots. The 1st one is located in front of the Tower Magic Kingdom View rooms, plus the 1st and 2nd rows are only for cars that valet park. The 2nd self parking area is the north parking lot, which is located in front of Bay Lake Tower. The 3rd self parking lot in front of the South Garden Wing building, however I guess the only guests who park there are those staying in that section, if they happen to have a car. Anyway I guess they could change some spots in front of Bay Lake Tower and make them into a parking area for guests not staying there. So here is a map of the Contemporary which shows both parking lots so you can see exactly what I am saying.


----------



## Dean

twinklebug said:


> Well, with all the free booze flowing on the casino floor, I'm sure they have to keep folk with one too many from climbing behind their wheel. It's just being responsible  ... and... if said person who would have left, goes back in and forgets his wife told him he had a $ limit on gambling, all the better.


I don't gamble, I donate.  I set a limit between the two of us and once it's gone, it's gone and we're done.  Thank goodness for the penny slots.


----------



## hakepb

Dean said:


> Yes, LV does have free parking but it's not really free is it, LOL, and they have ulterior motives to do so.  I'm sure there are exceptions.



hmmmm, I just got free valet parking today from the owners of the most expensive hotel in my little city.  Well, I didn't go to the hospital, but did have an appointment at a (fairly large) quick care location.  I'm not sure if "the sisters" have an ulterior motive, too?

Normally, I'll self-park there.  The farthest spot is about the same distance as the closest BWV spot, but I decided to take advantage of free valet since this thread popped up.


----------



## KAT4DISNEY

Dean said:


> Yes, LV does have free parking but it's not really free is it, LOL, and they have ulterior motives to do so.  I'm sure there are exceptions.



Ulterior motives?  Can't be true!    But they let you have a bit of fun with your $12 before they snatch it out of your hands.  That makes me happier!


----------



## Dean

hakepb said:


> hmmmm, I just got free valet parking today from the owners of the most expensive hotel in my little city.  Well, I didn't go to the hospital, but did have an appointment at a (fairly large) quick care location.  I'm not sure if "the sisters" have an ulterior motive, too?
> 
> Normally, I'll self-park there.  The farthest spot is about the same distance as the closest BWV spot, but I decided to take advantage of free valet since this thread popped up.


IF you're saying that "hotel" was a hospital, I think it's common for them to have free valet.  Sad that anyone would think of them as a hotel though, sad but true for some.  And yes, they do have ulterior motives.


----------



## OKW Lover

Interestingly enough, we got our bill this morning (we're at BWV) and there was no valet charge on it. We checked in on Sunday (the day the change was effective) but didn't have a car. But on Monday our guests arrived and they did have a car, which we had valet parked. I was expecting to be charged for the one night they used it, but it didn't show up. 

I wonder if DVC is having second thoughts?


----------



## Mickey'sApprentice

OKW Lover said:


> Interestingly enough, we got our bill this morning (we're at BWV) and there was no valet charge on it. We checked in on Sunday (the day the change was effective) but didn't have a car. But on Monday our guests arrived and they did have a car, which we had valet parked. I was expecting to be charged for the one night they used it, but it didn't show up.
> 
> I wonder if DVC is having second thoughts?



My guess is that was only temporary and only at Boardwalk Villas because guest were told that there were no more self-parking spaces and that the guest would be required to pay $12 for valet parking.

As someone suggested, "Where on this beautiful lawn would you like for me to park my car?"


----------



## hakepb

Dean said:


> IF you're saying that "hotel" was a hospital, I think it's common for them to have free valet.  Sad that anyone would think of them as a hotel though, sad but true for some.  And yes, they do have ulterior motives.



I hate hospital stays. While I'd love to stay in WDW more, I want to get back days wasted (I suppose all were not wasted, but there have been a few too many extra observation days when I think healing is better at home) in a hospital.  I just call it "the most expensive hotel in town" because 1)it's very, very, very expensive and 2) trying to call it a hotel is like flavoring a medicine, makes it sound better but never fully masks what it really is.

It would be sad if anyone actually used a hospital as a hotel...


----------



## chevyAZ

Think this was a big mistake by Disney.  Just checked into BWV this Sunday and learned about it.  Pretty disappointed by it.  

I can tell you its a long walk from 301x to the parking lot with 2 kids, stroller and gear especially after a shopping trip.  

For me its easier to stay at SSR.  At least the car would be closer.


----------



## TheRustyScupper

Sammie said:


> I have made this suggestion to MS in the past. I hope now they see a real need for it especially at BWV, BCV and VWL and even BLT. They need to have a restricted parking area for resort guests only, easily restricted the same way the valet area is that is accessed with the Resort ID card.



1) It is a good thought, but counter-productive.
2) They already have the visit from the DVC member.
3) But, if restaurant guests had to walk further, they might not come.
4) That would be lost revenue for WDW.
5) So, I think it will remain a free-for-all for general parking spaces.


----------



## Mlissa88

I'm curious -  Did anyone receive an email response to their email complaint regarding the lack of notification regarding the revoking of the perk  or your complaint in general?

I got an email response back...but it was only to tell me that they wouldn't respond to me because I didn't have all my membership info in my email.   At this point, I don't even know if I want to bother sending it again...


----------



## jodifla

Mlissa88 said:


> I'm curious -  Did anyone receive an email response to their email complaint regarding the lack of notification regarding the revoking of the perk  or your complaint in general?
> 
> I got an email response back...but it was only to tell me that they wouldn't respond to me because I didn't have all my membership info in my email.   At this point, I don't even know if I want to bother sending it again...



  Yeah, I got that messages as well.

  Another rule "change" without informing the members.

  But that's just what they are counting on....not hearing from you.

 I'm just going to copy and paste my message again with all these new stupid requirements. They won't wiggle out of my complaint that easily.


----------



## jodifla

So I emailed them my complaint about the horrid way they handled the valet parking perk, only to get this response:

 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Thank you for contacting Member Services.

For security purposes, we require your Name, Membership Number, address 
and phone number listed on your Membership to answer your email request.


In the future if you do not want to include all this information, please
contact us through our DISNEY VACATION CLUB Members-only site: 
www.dvcmember.com.  Since this is a secured site, some of the required 
information will automatically be included for us to respond to your 
email.    

At the main page, you will be required to log in.  Once inside the site,
you may select "Contact Us" from the tool bar on the home page, and then
"Contact Member Services."  If you do not have the Vacation Club ID and
pin that was sent to you in the mail, you will need to contact Member 
Services for further assistance at 800-******** or 407-566-3800.  
Regrettably, this information is not able to be sent through email.  

Please let us know if we can be of any further assistance.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

One wonders what the next excuse not to handle my comment will be.


----------



## crisi

TheRustyScupper said:


> 1) It is a good thought, but counter-productive.
> 2) They already have the visit from the DVC member.
> 3) But, if restaurant guests had to walk further, they might not come.
> 4) That would be lost revenue for WDW.
> 5) So, I think it will remain a free-for-all for general parking spaces.



And Boardwalk and Beachclub have the additional issue - three hours is plenty to get to Illuminations.  So the three hour parking pass isn't useful.  MK resorts can have the same issues with Spectromagic.  

I'd validate at all park attached WDW resorts (Monorail resorts, BW and Y&BC - but probably not WL or AKL).  You either show a current hotel room key when you leave, a receipt from a Boardwalk restaurant or shop for a minimum of $XX dollars, or you pay a $20 parking fee.  I'd make it over the cost to park at the parks.  That still enables people who are spending at the hotel restaurants and shops, keeps parking free for the hotel guests, but addresses the abusers who are "free parking" for Epcot.  It does require staffing a booth, but you'd only really need to staff it for half a dozen hours a day - if that.  Fireworks letting out time is the prime time to catch the abusers.


----------



## Mlissa88

jodifla said:


> Yeah, I got that messages as well.
> 
> Another rule "change" without informing the members.
> 
> But that's just what they are counting on....not hearing from you.
> 
> I'm just going to copy and paste my message again with all these new stupid requirements. They won't wiggle out of my complaint that easily.



True.   I just logged on and resent it with any additional information I may have "missed".


----------



## SCFIREMAN

Mlissa88 said:


> I'm curious -  Did anyone receive an email response to their email complaint regarding the lack of notification regarding the revoking of the perk  or your complaint in general?
> 
> I got an email response back...but it was only to tell me that they wouldn't respond to me because I didn't have all my membership info in my email.   At this point, I don't even know if I want to bother sending it again...



Yes I got a reply and this is what they sent:

"Hello Josh,

As part of the normal course of doing business, we regularly evaluate
and adjust our pricing.  As a result, effective Sunday, October 11,
2009, complimentary valet parking for Disney Vacation Club Members at
the Walt Disney World Resort has been discontinued. The valet parking
charge is $12.00 per day, however complimentary self-parking is always
available.  Similar to other fee-based services, such as additional
housekeeping service or additional room amenities, only those Members
who choose to valet park will be charged instead of increasing the
annual dues for all Members.

Thank you again for contacting us.

Sincerely,

Buffy"

The only result they got from this was making me even more annoyed  at them since they sent me a scripted reply instead of answering my questions directly. But I guess they took away replying to your emails with real responses unless you pay for it as well. I guess I just sit back and see what they say to my reply to the email they sent me.


----------



## bumbershoot

That's the second time I've seen that "blurb" message being sent to someone after they emailed through the site.  It was in a thread about Disney IT.

Sounds like their website is just ridiculous...no surprise to many!  

I'd just write back, including that info.  It seems their form doesn't include any of that information, and the bot who is responding or the harried rep who is responding isn't *thinking* that this complaint isn't something that NEEDS member info.

It's like with photopass...I sent in an email from my account, with my info all in it...and they responded back that they needed all my info.  I made myself happy by quoting myself and referring to where I'd put the info in the initial email, and we continued our email contacts from there.


----------



## DebbieB

crisi said:


> And Boardwalk and Beachclub have the additional issue - three hours is plenty to get to Illuminations.  So the three hour parking pass isn't useful.  MK resorts can have the same issues with Spectromagic.
> 
> I'd validate at all park attached WDW resorts (Monorail resorts, BW and Y&BC - but probably not WL or AKL).  You either show a current hotel room key when you leave, a receipt from a Boardwalk restaurant or shop for a minimum of $XX dollars, or you pay a $20 parking fee.  I'd make it over the cost to park at the parks.  That still enables people who are spending at the hotel restaurants and shops, keeps parking free for the hotel guests, but addresses the abusers who are "free parking" for Epcot.  It does require staffing a booth, but you'd only really need to staff it for half a dozen hours a day - if that.  Fireworks letting out time is the prime time to catch the abusers.



They'll never do that because it will discourage business from the boardwalk.   People may just want to browse or see the acts on the boardwalk.   

I think the answer is dedicated parking spots for hotel guests.   They probably have some statistics on the percentage of hotel guests that take a parking permit.


----------



## zimomiller

Glad I review the Dis boards regularly.

We had some friend that were ready to pull the trigger on a DVC ownership at WDW.

I asked them if they were aware that the rules changed re free valet parking. They did not.

Based on that info they have decided not to buy.  I think they made a good decision.

It's obvious that financial woes are are allowing Disney to justify another way to take away something of value while smiling and saying have a nice day.

Just a matter of what is next.


----------



## Chuck S

Mlissa88 said:


> True.   I just logged on and resent it with any additional information I may have "missed".



Wouldn't you rather have Member Satisfaction/Member Services replying only to members?  Really, without your membership number, they'd have no real way of knowing if this complaint was coming from a member, or a renter, or some other person.


----------



## Chuck S

zimomiller said:


> Glad I review the Dis boards regularly.
> 
> We had some friend that were ready to pull the trigger on a DVC ownership at WDW.
> 
> I asked them if they were aware that the rules changed re free valet parking. They did not.
> 
> Based on that info they have decided not to buy.  I think they made a good decision.
> 
> It's obvious that financial woes are are allowing Disney to justify another way to take away something of value while smiling and saying have a nice day.
> 
> Just a matter of what is next.



Did you ask your friends how much additonal dues they'd be willing to pay to retain the perk?

Again, I haven't seen a poster in this thread say "Yeah, I want my dues raised to pay for it!"


----------



## ddave

Mlissa88 said:


> I'm curious - Did anyone receive an email response to their email complaint regarding the lack of notification regarding the revoking of the perk or your complaint in general?
> 
> I got an email response back...but it was only to tell me that they wouldn't respond to me because I didn't have all my membership info in my email. At this point, I don't even know if I want to bother sending it again...


 

You have to post from the DVC website.  That will automatically give them your membership info.

Here is what i got back:  Needless to say, I replied back and ripped em a new one. 
Thank you for contacting Member Services.

As part of the normal course of doing business, we regularly evaluate and adjust our pricing.  As a result, effective Sunday, October 11, 2009, complimentary valet parking for Disney Vacation Club Members at the Walt Disney World Resort has been discontinued. The valet parking charge is $12.00 per day, however complimentary self-parking is always available.  Similar to other fee-based services, such as additional housekeeping service or additional room amenities, only those Members who choose to valet park will be charged instead of increasing the annual dues for all Members. 

Thank you again for contacting us.



Sincerely,

Vilma 

Member Services
Disney Vacation Club


----------



## colonialtinker

I got the standard reply too!

Thank you for contacting Member Services.

As part of the normal course of doing business, we regularly evaluate 
and adjust our pricing.  As a result, effective Sunday, October 11, 
2009, complimentary valet parking for Disney Vacation Club Members at 
the Walt Disney World Resort has been discontinued. The valet parking 
charge is $12.00 per day, however complimentary self-parking is always 
available.  Similar to other fee-based services, such as additional 
housekeeping service or additional room amenities, only those Members 
who choose to valet park will be charged instead of increasing the 
annual dues for all Members. 

Thank you again for contacting us.

Needless to say I'll be writing a reply to them from this email, as they didn't adddress my parking concerns at BWV.


----------



## Chuck S

ddave said:


> You have to post from the DVC website.  That will automatically give them your membership info.
> 
> Here is what i got back:  Needless to say, I replied back and ripped em a new one.



Yep, that will certainly make them inclined to reverse the decision.


----------



## crisi

DebbieB said:


> They'll never do that because it will discourage business from the boardwalk.   People may just want to browse or see the acts on the boardwalk.
> 
> I think the answer is dedicated parking spots for hotel guests.   They probably have some statistics on the percentage of hotel guests that take a parking permit.



But Disney isn't interested in browsers that don't spend. If you validate on spend, you've made money on the spend - if people don't spend and need to pay for parking, you've made money.  Win win for Disney.  It might cut down on foot traffic and impulse purchases, but I suspect the parking fee would more than make up for the people coming who don't intend to spend anything at all, and spend less than the validate amount.


----------



## TLSnell1981

SCFIREMAN said:


> The only result they got from this was making me even more annoyed  at them since they sent me a scripted reply instead of answering my questions directly. But I guess they took away replying to your emails with real responses unless you pay for it as well. I guess I just sit back and see what they say to my reply to the email they sent me.



Well, I received a _scripted phone call_. "We're really glad you let us know of the problem....we need to make sure our communication is better...blah, blah" At least, she didn't use " done to enhance your membership."

I was left with the impression Disney really doesn't care what we think.


----------



## dianeschlicht

Chuck S said:


> Did you ask your friends how much additonal dues they'd be willing to pay to retain the perk?
> 
> Again, I haven't seen a poster in this thread say "Yeah, I want my dues raised to pay for it!"



Exactly!  We have never and probably will never use Valet parking anyway.  I have always felt like I was subsidizing those who required valet when I continued to self park.  I'll bet if you asked, you'd find that no more than half the DVC members used "free valet" anway.  I certainly can't imagine cancelling a purchase of DVC over it!  There are FAR more advantages to DVC without any perks than to no DVC.  It seems a bit like cutting off your nose to spite your face.


----------



## CarolAnnC

If someone cancelled their DVC purchase because of the change in paying a fee to valet park, then they probably would not have been happy with their membership had they purchased.

Any such "perks" are never guaranteed and subject to change at any time.  They are nice while they last, but nobody should expect them with their DVC purchase...


----------



## vicki_c

If you e-mail through the link on the site, you don't have to provide all that (or most of it) - that's what the notice says.  I've only contacted them through the website link and never had any issue/questions, but the form there does have your membership # in it.

The OP didn't say that they e-mailed through the "contact us" link - I assumed they did not.  But they may have ...


----------



## dianeschlicht

vicki_c said:


> If you e-mail through the link on the site, you don't have to provide all that (or most of it) - that's what the notice says.  I've only contacted them through the website link and never had any issue/questions, but the form there does have your membership # in it.
> 
> The OP didn't say that they e-mailed through the "contact us" link - I assumed they did not.  But they may have ...



WRONG!  I did email through the site after signing into my account, and I got that same stupid email.  I do agree it is necessary for them to know they are being contacted by a member, but shouldn't they be able to see that when I send it from the member site?  I too was complaining about the IT problems with the website....it certainly made my point clear to me....probably not to them though.


----------



## TLSnell1981

I don't use ME. Am I paying for the service? I have a feeling we are entering the "a la carte" world of Disney.


----------



## Chuck S

Well, here is another change that has nothing to do with DVC.

A week of so ago I called to make dining ADRs for my January trip.  I specifically booked LTT for lunch, and asked if it was goingt o character meals foir lunch because of the Crystal Palace rehab.  I was told, no, standard lunch menu, no characters.  So I read on the Restaurant Board that they were going to character breakfast, lunch and dinner during the rehab.  I just called dinging, and confirmed this is true.  I asked why they were calling people that already had existing reservations to inform them of this change...no answer.  I cancelled the reservation.


----------



## KAT4DISNEY

Chuck S said:


> Did you ask your friends how much additonal dues they'd be willing to pay to retain the perk?
> 
> Again, I haven't seen a poster in this thread say "Yeah, I want my dues raised to pay for it!"



Shall I be the first?    I haven't specifically said it on the boards but I also didn't think this has been a free service anyway.  It's been difficult to tell if we have been paying since it was outsourced or not but it does seem that we did as part of overall CAM prior to the change.

I say this b/c I probably do pay for ME in CAM just as I pay for the pool, workout rooms, housekeeping (that is included) etc.  It seems fair to have a large variety of services that are covered and IMO that helps even out different member's value received.  Free valet may not be a common service provided in most timeshares but I'm under the impression that there are lots that don't provide any housekeeping service either.  Just room cleaning between guests? And certainly ME is not typical to timeshares.  So is not typical necessarily a good argument for not having it?

Now I am _assuming_ that DVC would be able to negotiate some sort of guaranteed volume rate etc. and they ought to have a pretty good idea of how many DVC members use the service to determine an amount.  If they couldn't do any better than to pay $12/room/day then no, I wouldn't want it in the dues but I'd venture that they didn't even try on our behalf if that's all the better of a deal they could get.


----------



## KAT4DISNEY

dianeschlicht said:


> WRONG!  I did email through the site after signing into my account, and I got that same stupid email.  I do agree it is necessary for them to know they are being contacted by a member, but shouldn't they be able to see that when I send it from the member site?  I too was complaining about the IT problems with the website....it certainly made my point clear to me....probably not to them though.



How perfect!  

I've only emailed thru the website and haven't gotten the message back thankfully.  That would be very annoying.  There isn't any place to put it in nor do they tell you to include it.


----------



## ddave

Chuck S said:


> Did you ask your friends how much additonal dues they'd be willing to pay to retain the perk?
> 
> Again, I haven't seen a poster in this thread say "Yeah, I want my dues raised to pay for it!"


 
Thats not the correct question!  The question we should all be asking is "how much are my dues going down by taking this perk away".

And that is the question we should he asking every time they take a perk away.  I know perks are not guaranteed, but with every loss, it devalues DVCs attraction, worth and reputation.

If they are outsourcing things, those things should be cheaper and/or better quality.  DVC members aren't getting either in this case.  DVC gets zip/zero. >again<


----------



## fers31

I got this email too and actually responded using this as an example or how they're treating their members.  Purposefully didn't include my phone number or address again this time and even wrote that I'm sure nobody will bother reading my complaint since I didn't include the info.


----------



## Tara

I got the same email and responded: 

I am copying my original email below and including the requested information. It is frustrating, however, to have my feedback shuffled back to me when even the contact form on the DVC member website does not as for phone number or address, only name, member number, email and country. If this information is required, it should be stated on the "contact us" form. (I have given feedback about the inaccurate or incomplete nature of information on the member website - this is yet another example of that problem.)

This is ridiculous, though.


----------



## puente0629

I sent an email as well letting them know about the valet parking issue and this is what they wrote back...

Thank you for contacting Member Services.

As part of the normal course of doing business, we regularly evaluate and adjust our pricing. As a result, effective Sunday, October 11, 2009, complimentary valet parking for Disney Vacation Club Members at the Walt Disney World Resort has been discontinued. The valet parking charge is $12.00 per day, however complimentary self-parking is always available. Similar to other fee-based services, such as additional housekeeping service or additional room amenities, only those Members who choose to valet park will be charged instead of increasing the annual dues for all Members.
Thank you again for contacting us.

Sincerely,
Nikki
Member Services
Disney Vacation Club

**********************************************

Basicly, if we want free valet they would have to raise our due's so that's why they are removing it...IMO, that's bull!!!


----------



## Chuck S

Your dues may not go down, as other resort cost increases may eat up any savings from the valet perk drop.  For instance, say valet costs were 5 cents a point, but 2010 wage increases for housekeeping and front desk are 10 cents a point, your dues still increase, but by less then they would have with subsidizing free valet.

What other "perks" would be subsidized by dues?  Few probably. Dining discounts, tour discounts, etc would not be subsidized. AP discount would not be subsidized.

The dining discounts, especially at non-Disney operated restaurants, are granted by the individual companies that operate the restaurants to incease overall traffic,  just like a valet discount _could_ be granted by Mears, without a subsidy, if Mears chose to do so.  Why should dues pay for it?


----------



## Brian Noble

> But Disney isn't interested in browsers that don't spend.


Perahps.  But Disney is also _masterful_ at converting browsers to buyers.


----------



## Simba's Mom

dianeschlicht said:


> WRONG!  I did email through the site after signing into my account, and I got that same stupid email.  I do agree it is necessary for them to know they are being contacted by a member, but shouldn't they be able to see that when I send it from the member site?  I too was complaining about the IT problems with the website....it certainly made my point clear to me....probably not to them though.



Exactly! The same thing happened to me a few weeks ago regarding a different matter.  Although I'd contacted them through the website, they sent me an E-mail that they wouldn't discuss anything with me because I hadn't given my member #,so they didn't know if I was a member.

I'm here now,and I've met several DVC members who were unaware of this change re valet parking. However,the CM at check-in confirmed it for me.  I haven't noticed as much valet activity (valets running to get cars,etc.) as in the past.


----------



## Chuck S

Also remember that  dues are limited to a 15% increase per year.

Minimum wage in FL increased 19% in 2005, 8.5% in 2007, 1.7% in 2008 and 6.1% in 2009.  So that can cut into allowed increases, along with increased employee health insurance and benefits cost.  So it may be that DVC _had_ to drop the valet perk, especially if their employee benefits are now on Mears shoulders.  Increased transportation, energy, employee and other costs may have put too big a dent into the 15% limit to make a valet subsidy possible.


----------



## Mlissa88

Chuck S said:


> Wouldn't you rather have Member Satisfaction/Member Services replying only to members?  Really, without your membership number, they'd have no real way of knowing if this complaint was coming from a member, or a renter, or some other person.



Certainly.   I don't have an issue with them wanting my info but it reminded me of the "fill out this form in triplicate" type brush off.   Sort of like they wanted me to re-evaluate if it's worth it to log on, send it again or just say "whatever".    

I don't really care about the perk or loss there of, I'm more miffed about the lack of communication and changes on the fly...

I've never used valet.  Would I have used it at some point, sure...if it was raining or I was going to another resort for dinner.  But again, it's the lack of proper communication that bothered me.  I feel sorry for the poor guys/girls who are working in valet that end up having to explain the new policy to folks arriving.  

That's what I wrote to them about....I'm hoping to get an actual response back rather than a cut and paste of what everyone is receiving regarding the perk because it doesn't really apply to what my email was about - which was poor communication to it's members.

Communication is key.    Without it, who knows....one day I'll get to the Magic Kingdom to see a big sign outside like in National Lampoon's Vacation  - "Sorry folks! We're closed for two weeks to clean and repair America's favorite family fun park!"


----------



## DebbieB

crisi said:


> But Disney isn't interested in browsers that don't spend. If you validate on spend, you've made money on the spend - if people don't spend and need to pay for parking, you've made money.  Win win for Disney.  It might cut down on foot traffic and impulse purchases, but I suspect the parking fee would more than make up for the people coming who don't intend to spend anything at all, and spend less than the validate amount.



The key is getting people there and then they may spend.   If I know I'm going to have to pay $20 to park if I don't buy a certain amount, I would probably say forget it.  There are other places I could go for free. If they were going to do this, they would have done already it at Downtown Disney. DTD at Disneyland charges for parking over a certain time.   I just don't see them doing it at BW, it's not a big attraction to start with and they need to draw people.


----------



## crisi

They do have the problem at all the park attached resorts, and they DO need to provide parking to people paying $300 a night for those BWI rooms (or the ones at the Contemporary).  If Disney has brains (which at this point is debatable) they should stop disappointing a $300 a night guest trying to park for someone who MIGHT buy $14 of chocolate covered Mickey shaped pretzels from the gift store.


----------



## TiggerAllie

I finally got in touch with Sheila from DVC Member Satisfaction this afternoon after a few days of phone tag.

As expected, she doesn't really have a lot of information to offer and is just calling to calm upset members and collect information for "those in leadership positions".

I'm sure I reiterated a number of issues that other people here have said. Notable points from the 20-min or so conversation:

According to her, Member Services/Member Satisfaction was only made aware of this change SUNDAY MORNING, when it went into effect. (We discussed why there might be a problem with communication.)

After describing that they wanted to go to "fee-based system" for valet, like they do with extra housekeeping, I asked her if this was going to be a trend for the future. She seemed confused--I said, "What about DME, fitness centers, bus service, etc? Are these going to become fee-based as well? These are perks I don't use but I'm sure my dues subsidize for other guests who do." She apparently hadn't considered this before (the housekeeping line seemed like a formulaic response they were told to use).

She kept saying how "leadership" makes these decisions--I told her that they needed to consider the domino effect of these decisions, like if they are going to take away free valet they should consider offering more parking for resort guests only because these resorts are very limited in parking. (She placed the blame for the over-parking at BW on the security guards not turning people away, as I had told her I knew of guests who checked in at BW only to be told they had to pay the valet fee because there was no self-park available.) She said that she hadn't considered this "domino effect" before, and that was a good point she would take to "leadership".

I asked how much the valet service had previously cost in our dues, on a per point basis (which she obviously didn't know) and how much it would have cost in 2010. She said she would have to research this and implied she might get back to me, but I doubt it.

She did encourage people to write, call, etc. and make there opinions known, because that's how changes are made, like the addition of being able to add DDP to DVC points reservations.

This wasn't a totally formulaic call, as she did seem to have my letter in front of her and made a point to ask specifically about all the concerns I brought up. We'll see if we get anywhere with these comments--maybe some valet discount will come back in the future, or they will change some of the parking rules. I'm not sure I like the idea of everything becoming "fee-based"--because I'm sure the dues will continue to go up at a regular rate and will simply cover less. I also really like the "pre-paid" nature of DVC vacations (+amenities) and that DVC makes me feel a little bit "extra special" to be a part of it.

Dang, her job sucks though. I know I couldn't sound so nice and sincere over and over and over again. I tried to remain polite (but forceful in my points/questions) though I'm sure she must talk to some people who don't (probably about issues other than this).


----------



## dizkneedoll

I have sent my dissatisfaction regarding the change in valet parking for DVC members to Member Satisfaction today.  I don't care if they were notified on Sunday ... it's now Thursday and I still have seen no communication regarding this ... guess they decided to let the valet folks do the communicating and take the heat for them ...


----------



## DebbieB

Amazing MS was notified SUNDAY morning when it was posted here on SATURDAY.   The Boardwalk parking situation has been a complaint for years, they are acting like this is the first time it became a problem.  I think it was my first trip in 2000 that I discussed it with the Boardwalk GM after the annual meeting.


----------



## TLSnell1981

TiggerAllie said:


> I finally got in touch with Sheila from DVC Member Satisfaction this afternoon
> 
> After describing that they wanted to go to "fee-based system" for valet, like they do with extra housekeeping, I asked her if this was going to be a trend for the future. She seemed confused--I said, "What about DME, fitness centers, bus service, etc? Are these going to become fee-based as well? These are perks I don't use but I'm sure my dues subsidize for other guests who do." *She apparently hadn't considered this before* (the housekeeping line seemed like a formulaic response they were told to use).
> 
> 
> This wasn't a totally formulaic call,



Hmmm....I discussed these very points with Shelia. I believe it was on TUESDAY!!!

She definitely had talking points. I felt the whole conversation was scripted...well except when I told her she'd been mentioned on the Disney forums.


----------



## Sammie

DebbieB said:


> Amazing MS was notified SUNDAY morning when it was posted here on SATURDAY.   The Boardwalk parking situation has been a complaint for years, they are acting like this is the first time it became a problem.  I think it was my first trip in 2000 that I discussed it with the Boardwalk GM after the annual meeting.



This is what bothers me. I understand things have to change, and at times  I don't like the changes such as this, but it really bothers me that they act like they think that regardless of what changes, that members are suppose to just buy into the DVC Kool-Aid theory of well gee it's ok. 

If we as members can realize that BWV has parking issues why is it so hard for them to see that too. Why do the members have to bring this to their attention. I am sorry but if that is truly what the leadership at DVC is, it is not very bright.


----------



## AJKMOM

Are the resort staff still saying "Welcome home!" at check in? I don't pay for parking at "home". I wonder if 'the leadership' knows that?


----------



## DVC Mike

zimomiller said:


> Glad I review the Dis boards regularly.
> 
> We had some friend that were ready to pull the trigger on a DVC ownership at WDW.
> 
> I asked them if they were aware that the rules changed re free valet parking. They did not.
> 
> Based on that info they have decided not to buy. I think they made a good decision.


 
No free valet parking is a dealbreaker for buying a timeshare?


----------



## Chuck S

AJKMOM said:


> Are the resort staff still saying "Welcome home!" at check in? I don't pay for parking at "home". I wonder if 'the leadership' knows that?



You have valet parking at home?


----------



## jade1

Chuck S said:


> Did you ask your friends how much additonal dues they'd be willing to pay to retain the perk?
> 
> Again, I haven't seen a poster in this thread say "Yeah, I want my dues raised to pay for it!"



We use ME, and sadly do not own at BWV. But out of curiosity, *how many points are at BWV and how much would it cost to get the $100K or so needed? *It's likely way to high, esp for those that don't use it, but we prefer a more upscale membership (within reason) even if we use some perks rarely. Also, does anyone even know on average how many DVC valet parks are made at BWV over a month/year?


----------



## Deb & Bill

Chuck S said:


> You have valet parking at home?



When my son or husband is driving, yes, I do.  

By the way, my husband happens to be a patient advocate at our hospital, so he gets these types of calls all day long, five days a week, 48 weeks out of the year (he gets four weeks of vacation based on his service).  I get to be his sounding board when he can't take them anymore.  Sometimes I'll be in his office while he is on the phone and he is sounding as nice as can be.  Then when he gets off the phone, he says same old stuff.  

So Sheila's behavior is learned behavior and anyone can learn it. Even Vilma, Nikki and anyone else answering the phone.  You think the member satisfaction team members get a raise over their last job and every month they stick around?  Sheila has been there a while, not so sure about Nikki and Vilma. 

Finally, why not just take "DVC Member" off the KTTW and require the member ID AND a current KTTW to valet park. I know some members use valet when they are staying off site and I know lots of non-members renting from a member use valet.  That would reduce the number of "DVC Members" valet parking by a percentage.  And add a nominal fee (like the statement on the website says - say $5-7 ) to valet park for members staying on site at DVC resorts.


----------



## Paul in CT

puente0629 said:


> I sent an email as well letting them know about the valet parking issue and this is what they wrote back...
> 
> Thank you for contacting Member Services.
> 
> As part of the normal course of doing business, we regularly evaluate and adjust our pricing. As a result, effective Sunday, October 11, 2009, complimentary valet parking for Disney Vacation Club Members at the Walt Disney World Resort has been discontinued. The valet parking charge is $12.00 per day, however complimentary self-parking is always available. Similar to other fee-based services, such as additional housekeeping service or additional room amenities, only those Members who choose to valet park will be charged instead of increasing the annual dues for all Members.
> Thank you again for contacting us.
> 
> Sincerely,
> Nikki
> Member Services
> Disney Vacation Club
> 
> **********************************************
> 
> Basicly, if we want free valet they would have to raise our due's so that's why they are removing it...IMO, that's bull!!!



I just received the same response from Buffy.  They must have a random name generator for the scripted response.  

Although I am not happy about this change,  I am even more upset about the way it was initiated with no prior notice even to DVC CM's.  That was totally unacceptable and really unnecessary.  DVC send enough emails from Member Services.  I think they could have sent us one on the cancellation of free valet parking.    Either way they were going to get complaints.

Regarding the comments about not buying in to DVC because of this lost perk,  IMHO there are better reasons than that like the high price of points - $112 going to $120 shortly.    I am glad I bought in when the prices were more reasonable and when they were offering free park tickets until 2000 as an incentive.  I think a resale is the only way to go now if one wants to buy in for a more reasonable price.


----------



## Dean

hakepb said:


> It would be sad if anyone actually used a hospital as a hotel...


Sadly some do in some situations, it is sad and we all pay for it.

As for the standard reply, did anyone expect any different, would anyone here do it differently if on the other end.  Realize that Disney monitors very carefully what goes out so as to be absolutely correct and consistent whenever possible.  They are not going to get in a back and forth open ended discussion on anything.  The truth is very simple, it came down to raising dues or pay to play.  Certainly we don't have the numbers including % of usage, actual costs with each option, etc to truly make an informed decision.  This is why only certain people can answer email and why you end up talking to specific people when you complain about such matters.  



TLSnell1981 said:


> I don't use ME. Am I paying for the service? I have a feeling we are entering the "a la carte" world of Disney.


My understanding is minimal or  no charge to the resorts for that service.  The bottom line is the resort cannot provide everything everyone wants for free and this is a very reasonable option to charge for.  I certainly don't want to have fees raised to pay for it, I'd rather make the choice and pay if I decide to use it just like for extra towels or the DDP.  



ddave said:


> Thats not the correct question!  The question we should all be asking is "how much are my dues going down by taking this perk away".
> 
> And that is the question we should he asking every time they take a perk away.  I know perks are not guaranteed, but with every loss, it devalues DVCs attraction, worth and reputation.
> 
> If they are outsourcing things, those things should be cheaper and/or better quality.  DVC members aren't getting either in this case.  DVC gets zip/zero. >again<


While I'd agree in principle, it does not appear to apply in this case.  The truth is the perk is gone AND dues will go up, just not as much.


----------



## Dean

AJKMOM said:


> Are the resort staff still saying "Welcome home!" at check in? I don't pay for parking at "home". I wonder if 'the leadership' knows that?


That's more than a little silly and if used in discussion with DVC I'm sure they'd tune everything out after such a statement because it is not a rational response.  Anyone who truly had valet parking at home likely wouldn't be a DVC member and certainly wouldn't care about $12 a day in charges for the Rolls or Bentley.


----------



## RAD

Paul in CT said:


> Although I am not happy about this change,  I am even more upset about the way it was initiated with no prior notice even to DVC CM's.  That was totally unacceptable and really unnecessary.  DVC send enough emails from Member Services.  I think they could have sent us one on the cancellation of free valet parking.    Either way they were going to get complaints.



DVC spend the money to send myself and wife two seperate mailings that had a chart for BLT point costs and financing costs. So they could find the time and $'s to do that but zilch, nada, nothing for notifying members of this change. I did send an e-mail to DVC saying I was VERY upset at this change. I also recommend that whatever person approved this change have their parking space at the office moved the same distance away from the building door as the average self park space is at BWV.


----------



## Disneypubgal

Had the following exchange with Nikki the past few days...

*Sent today - *
Nikky,

It wasn't there until a few days after the change took place.  I find it rather insulting that it was not posted and members were not notified before the change took place...

And to be honest, an e-mail or some offer type of correspondence should have been sent PRIOR to the change taking place not after.... and that we (the members) should have to go look for it rather than DVC informing us.

Please don't make it seem as though it has been there since the change took place...when in fact it wasn't until a few days later.

K
*
Received today frim DVc*
Hello Kim , 
Thank you for contacting Member Services. 
It is actually on the Members Only Website under the news section. 
Please let us know if there is anything else we can do to assist you. 


Sincerely, 


Nikki 


Member Services 

Disney Vacation Club 


*TUESDAY*

Original Message Follows: ------------------------ 

Thank you for getting back to me.  While I am disappointed that this perk was taken away... I am kind of surprised that I heard about it on the web and not directly from Disney/DVC... 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Disney Vacation Club 
Date: Monday, October 12, 2009 5:12 pm 
Subject: Re: Valet Parking 
To: 

Dear , 
> 
>Thank you for contacting Member Services. 
> 
>We appreciate your interest in a Disney Vacation Club Resort. 
>As of 
>October 11, 2009, Disney Vacation Club Member no longer receive 
>complimentary Valet Parking. If your sister or your father has 
>the 
>hanging Handicapped Tag, then you can use it and they still 
>receive 
>complimentary Valet Parking. 
> 
>Please let us know if we can be of any further assistance. 
> 
>Sincerely, 
> 
>Larry 
> 
>Member Services | Online Communications 
>Disney Vacation Club 
Original Message Follows: 
>------------------------ 
>Member Name:  
>Member Number: 
>Country: US 

>Is it true that DVC members will no longer receive complimentary 
>parking when staying at there DVC resort?? This causes me great 
>concern for my 
>upcoming trip in Feb 2010. My sister and my father are both 
>disabled, 
>while neither is in a wheelchair, one walks with a cane and the 
>other 
>travels with an ECV... Part of our group will be driving for 
>this trip 
>and the vehicle we will be using does not have handicap plates 
>(althoughwe will have the hanging handicap decal) is there any 
>allowances made 
>for those with disabilities??? It would be very unfortunate if 
>we had 
>to self park having disabled guests...Not to mention having this 
>perk go 
>away altogether.. please advise. 
> 
>Thank you!




While I am not happy about this change... I am even more disappointed by the method in which it was/wasn't communicated.... and having worked for Disney for almost 10 years (I don't work for them anymore)... I am certain that this decision was made way in advance of the change.  The failure to inform the members is just plain wrong... and the damage control on the back end far out weighs the upfront  cost of letting us know... wonder if that comes out of our dues as well!!  Most of the members joined because we LOVE Disney and want to vacation there....we are a captive audience, we want to be there... but we are also people and deserve to be respected and appreciated...


----------



## Mickey'sApprentice

Dean said:


> As for the standard reply, did anyone expect any different, would anyone here do it differently if on the other end.  Realize that Disney monitors very carefully what goes out so as to be absolutely correct and consistent whenever possible.  They are not going to get in a back and forth open ended discussion on anything.  The truth is very simple, it came down to raising dues or pay to play.  Certainly we don't have the numbers including % of usage, actual costs with each option, etc to truly make an informed decision.  This is why only certain people can answer email and why you end up talking to specific people when you complain about such matters.



Dean, are you saying that you would have handled informing the members exactly like Disney or that you would have handled the blowback in the exact same manner?

I must say that if I were in the same position, I would have given members at least two weeks notice, or would have at least given members with reservations a heads up of two weeks notice.  There is nothing wrong with making a decision and firmly sticking with that decision, and honestly explaining to members why the decision was made.

Yes, there would have been complaints and emails back to member services and may have been more difficult for member services to handle in the short term.  However, I believe that you get further in the long run by always doing what is on the up and up. 

I had the privilege of working for a very wise retired Air Force Colonel for many years, and learned one very valuable lesson. A lot of times its less important that you made a mistake or had to convey bad news. Its more important how you handled the situation.

Jim Lewis & Co. hasn't learned that lesson.

Wouldn't it be better if we were on here saying..."Its too bad that we lost our valet perk, but gee I understand why DVC chose not to increase our dues by $XX amount."

Instead we are on the boards talking about how DVC doesn't respect the membership, and doesn't bother to inform us of decisions that negatively effect our membership.

Again...its all about maturity and making responsible decisions!!


----------



## queenie82

Chuck S said:


> You have valet parking at home?


You don't
Oh dear....that must be rectified


----------



## disneynutz

There is something going on here that we aren't being told. I doubt that raising the cost for Valet by $2 caused DVC to cancel the perk. How much would they have to raise our dues to cover the increase, $.02.

I'm concerned that this is just the tip of the iceberg.

 Bill


----------



## SCFIREMAN

TLSnell1981 said:


> Well, I received a _scripted phone call_. "We're really glad you let us know of the problem....we need to make sure our communication is better...blah, blah" At least, she didn't use " done to enhance your membership."
> 
> I was left with the impression Disney really doesn't care what we think.



I have been trying to reach my guide since this whole thing went down to maybe get a better answer but have had no such luck in getting a return phone call.


----------



## SCFIREMAN

ddave said:


> Thats not the correct question!  The question we should all be asking is "how much are my dues going down by taking this perk away".
> 
> And that is the question we should he asking every time they take a perk away.  I know perks are not guaranteed, but with every loss, it devalues DVCs attraction, worth and reputation.
> 
> If they are outsourcing things, those things should be cheaper and/or better quality.  DVC members aren't getting either in this case.  DVC gets zip/zero. >again<



But if it truely is a "perk" we souldnt be paying for it, in my opinion anyway. So I think your question needs to be rephrased as how many services are we paying forare going to be removed with no decrease in our dues. 

If valet was $10 before and we were covering it in our dues how much could a $2 increase realy raise our dues when spread between all the contracts.


----------



## Sha

A friend asked for someone in charge of Member Services or DVC.. I dont remember right now. This was the reply:

You are welcome to contact Jim Lewis by sending an email to 
members@disneyvacationclub.com and placing his name in the subject line.
You may also send a letter to him at the following address:

Disney Vacation Club
Attn: Jim Lewis
1390 Celebration Blvd.
Celebration, FL 34747


----------



## AJKMOM

Dean said:


> That's more than a little silly and if used in discussion with DVC I'm sure they'd tune everything out after such a statement because it is not a rational response.  Anyone who truly had valet parking at home likely wouldn't be a DVC member and certainly wouldn't care about $12 a day in charges for the Rolls or Bentley.



My reply was more directed to a PP who came "home" and was forced to pay for valet because the public lots were all full.  There was some sort of event going on, and the lot was filled with cars of people who were not staying at the Boardwalk.  If they are making valet a $12 fee, they should have an option for those of us that don't mind walking, not filling up the free lot with outside guests.

They arrived and were told "there is no free parking".  We don't have valet parking at home, but we do have a place to park at home.  Seems that DVC should have given members some warning, we already rented a car and are coming "home" in a few weeks, probably too late to get in on Magical Express.  

It also makes us wonder what's next, and how much warning we'll get.


----------



## n2mm

We leave tomorrow and will be staying at the BWV and will post back how the parking is going there.  I personally think they need to turn one of the self lots (the one near Valet) into a resort guest only lot and use a gate and your room card to open it to park your car.  That just doesn't seem that hard to do.


----------



## jade1

SCFIREMAN said:


> If valet was $10 before and we were covering it in our dues* how much could a $2 increase realy raise our dues when spread between all the contracts.*



That's what I was wondering as well. Isn't there like millions of points at BWV?   If there is for example 5 million, 2 cents would bring in the $100K to pay the entire thing, much less just what it's gone up.


----------



## Chuck S

jade1 said:


> That's what I was wondering as well. Isn't there like millions of points at BWV?   If there is for example 5 million, 2 cents would bring in the $100K to pay the entire thing, much less just what it's gone up.



You are assuming that DVC was subsidizing the valet at $10 per DVCer using the valet service previously.  My supposition is that they were not, that they were more likely paying a portion of valet employee benefits for the employees that may have been grandfathered into the Disney employee system when the first outsourced contract was drawn up, through the common area costs.  If so, $12 per parked car could be a substantial jump in cost as compared to the former cost of any benefit subsidy.


----------



## tammymacb

jade1 said:


> That's what I was wondering as well. Isn't there like millions of points at BWV?   If there is for example 5 million, 2 cents would bring in the $100K to pay the entire thing, much less just what it's gone up.




My guess is that DVC is getting rid of this perk, and raising costs on other "benefits" that DVC profits directly from. Because we certainly won't see a penny back in our dues.  If that money isn't being given out to an outside entity, it can be absorbed inhouse.  Between all of us, it's a lot of money.

I've posted on another thread.  The day this broke ( I won't say announced, because it still hasn't been announced by DVC that I'm aware of ) I put my BWV points up for sale.  I'm sick of being nickle and dimed and seeing nothing come back to me.  All the changes, the poor communication and disrespect of members has made me see the light.  "Why am I paying money to be aggrivated?"  So, sold one BWV already, and will aggressively sell the other one ( don't owe on it and just want out )

I see fewer and fewer Disney trips in my future as my daugter is growing up, and I remember Disney 30 years ago, when it was "the good old days" and often these days pale in comparison.

I thought about contacting MS, but knew I'd get canned answers and they really wouldn't care anyway.  So, I'm walking.  And I can't walk fast enough.


----------



## Chuck S

tammymacb said:


> My guess is that DVC is getting rid of this perk, and raising costs on other "benefits" that DVC profits directly from. Because we certainly won't see a penny back in our dues.  If that money isn't being given out to an outside entity, it can be absorbed inhouse.  Between all of us, it's a lot of money.
> 
> I've posted on another thread.  The day this broke ( I won't say announced, because it still hasn't been announced by DVC that I'm aware of ) I put my BWV points up for sale.  I'm sick of being nickle and dimed and seeing nothing come back to me.  All the changes, the poor communication and disrespect of members has made me see the light.  "Why am I paying money to be aggrivated?"  So, sold one BWV already, and will aggressively sell the other one ( don't owe on it and just want out )
> 
> I see fewer and fewer Disney trips in my future as my daugter is growing up, and I remember Disney 30 years ago, when it was "the good old days" and often these days pale in comparison.
> 
> I thought about contacting MS, but knew I'd get canned answers and they really wouldn't care anyway.  So, I'm walking.  And I can't walk fast enough.



If the valet parking was a decent profit center for Disney, the valet services would still be under Disney's roof and not outsourced, wouldn't it?

Instead, it is outsourced.  The contract has come up for renewal, and Mears apparently feels that giving DVCers the perk cuts into their operational costs to the point that it had to be discontinued, or fully funded by DVC.

At $12 per car, and 60 cars per day, that is a cost of $262,000+ per year per valet resort.  For VWL, that would be approximately 
11.5 cents per point...or about $3 per month. on a 300 point contract.

Now, you may say that any member with 300 points shouldn't have a problem with $3 per month, even if they don't use the service.  But isn't the converse also true, that those that use the services should pay for it, especially considering that the service isn't a physical part of the resort, like a pool, or a necessity like front desk pesonnel?  Remember that they've had wage increases in those necessary areas as well that have upped dues.  At some point the scale is tipped as to what may be of most value to the most members, especially considering that dues increases are legally limited in their total amount.


----------



## jade1

Chuck S said:


> *You are assuming that DVC was subsidizing the valet* at $10 per DVCer using the valet service previously.  My supposition is that they were not, that they were more likely paying a portion of valet employee benefits for the employees that may have been grandfathered into the Disney employee system when the first outsourced contract was drawn up, through the common area costs.  If so, $12 per parked car could be a substantial jump in cost as compared to the former cost of any benefit subsidy.



Actually SCFIREMAN assumed that, mine was to cover the entire amount-which you mentioned was about $100K from a previous post. How many points are at BWV to get $100K?


----------



## jade1

Chuck S said:


> At $12 per car, and 60 cars per day, that is a cost of $262,000+ per year per valet resort.  For VWL, that would be approximately
> 11.5 cents per point...or about $3 per month. on a 300 point contract.
> 
> Now, you may say that any member with 300 points shouldn't have a problem with $3 per month, even if they don't use the service.  But isn't the converse also true, that those that use the services should pay for it, especially considering that the service isn't a physical part of the resort, like a pool, or a necessity like front desk pesonnel?  Remember that they've had wage increases in those necessary areas as well that have upped dues.  At some point the scale is tipped as to what may be of most value to the most members, especially considering that dues increases are legally limited in their total amount.



So you went from an estimated cost earlier of $100K to $262K, and you use the smallest resort to make your case. Wouldn't there be far fewer cars using valet at a resort that's what... 1/5th the size of BWV? You may be right, and it may be higher (may be way lower)-but at least someone is finally talking app costs, and I for one, appreciate that because we are not in favor of a generic membership.


----------



## jade1

Chuck S said:


> If the valet parking was a decent profit center for Disney, the valet services would still be under Disney's roof and not outsourced, wouldn't it?



I don't know, but you just increased their revenue from $0 to app $100K to $262K (plus tips) for VWL-and that's just the DVC portion of customers.


----------



## Chuck S

jade1 said:


> So you went from an estimated cost earlier of $100K to $262K, and you use the smallest resort to make your case. Wouldn't there be far fewer cars using valet at a resort that's what... 1/5th the size of BWV? You may be right, and it may be higher (may be way lower)-but at least someone is finally talking app costs, and I for one, appreciate that because we are not in favor of a generic membership.



The $100K figure was using a discounted rate of about $5 per car, or based upon funding some employee costs only,  not full funding of $12 per car.

Another unknown is the actual average number of cars parked per day.  I figured 100 turns, with DVC being 60% of those turns.  It may be more, it may be less...but it think it would make sense that there would be more "free" turns than paid turns.

The point is still, where is the tipping point for a dues subsidy to pay for this perk?


----------



## Chuck S

jade1 said:


> I don't know, but you just increased their revenue from $0 to app $100K to $262K (plus tips) for VWL-and that's just the DVC portion of customers.



Tips are not revenue for the contractor, only the individual valet, and really aren't considered in most decisions for major corporations.  The corporation needs to provide a minimum wage in FL of $4.19 per hour to tipped employees, no matter how much additional they earn per hour in tips.  They also have to pay employment taxes, business expenses, coorporate and accounting salaries, unemployment insurance.  And we don't know if they are provided health insurance.  Given that, the $100K figure seems a little low.  It isn't like a restauant or other location that offers valet for only a few hours per day, there needs to be valets available 24/7, and that requires more employees.


----------



## CT_Bev&Jeff

I am with you 100% Chuck.  I don't think it is fair to ask all the members to pay for perks that only some use.  Let them pay as they go.

Which is why I want the "free" internet to go away.  I really don't understand why that was something that DVC decided to add anyway.

I don't use that, and therefore don't see any reason why any of my dues should be used to pay for that.

As you can see this discussion can follow the pay as go plan far enough until someone has their pet perk brought up, then it becomes important to explain why we need to keep that one.

I understand the need to keep costs down, I do not understand why DVC management cannot find a way to keep the members informed in a timely fashion.  That is my biggest frustration, period.

CT_Jeff


----------



## RAD

CT_Bev&Jeff said:


> I am with you 100% Chuck.  I don't think it is fair to ask all the members to pay for perks that only some use.  Let them pay as they go.
> 
> Which is why I want the "free" internet to go away.  I really don't understand why that was something that DVC decided to add anyway.
> 
> I don't use that, and therefore don't see any reason why any of my dues should be used to pay for that.
> 
> As you can see this discussion can follow the pay as go plan far enough until someone has their pet perk brought up, then it becomes important to explain why we need to keep that one.
> 
> I understand the need to keep costs down, I do not understand why DVC management cannot find a way to keep the members informed in a timely fashion.  That is my biggest frustration, period.
> 
> CT_Jeff



OK, let's continue along that line. Let's put coin meters on the washer/dryers, why should I have to pay for those if I'm not using them? How about the pools, do like they did at BLT and put a fence around it and you need to have a room key to get in, if you haven't paid the pool use fee you can't get in. Remove the DVD players from the rooms, I've never used one, if you need one you go rent one at the front desk. 

Sorry, but I'm from the I'm willing to pay more every year to keep the features/perks that were provide when I purchased DVC group.


----------



## tjkraz

RAD said:


> OK, let's continue along that line. Let's put coin meters on the washer/dryers, why should I have to pay for those if I'm not using them? How about the pools, do like they did at BLT and put a fence around it and you need to have a room key to get in, if you haven't paid the pool use fee you can't get in. Remove the DVD players from the rooms, I've never used one, if you need one you go rent one at the front desk.



Cost is going to play a big role in these decisions.  

DVD players are practically disposable these days.  You can buy one for $20 and with normal hotel use will probably last for a couple of years.   

A washer/dryer is probably $800-1000 and could last for 5 years or more.  

I believe pool use is guaranteed by the POS so that really isn't a valid pay-for-play option.  

By comparison, if an average of 60 resort guests are valet parking per day, that's a $720 dues charge every single day of the year.  In two weeks' time the amount spent on valet parking is about equal to putting DVD players in every BWV room or equipping a full laundry room for years to come.  



> Sorry, but I'm from the I'm willing to pay more every year to keep the features/perks that were provide when I purchased DVC group.



In the face of rising costs, not every member shares that philosophy.


----------



## DVCBELLE

tjkraz said:


> Cost is going to play a big role in these decisions.
> 
> DVD players are practically disposable these days.  You can buy one for $20 and with normal hotel use will probably last for a couple of years.
> 
> A washer/dryer is probably $800-1000 and could last for 5 years or more.
> 
> I believe pool use is guaranteed by the POS so that really isn't a valid pay-for-play option.
> 
> By comparison, if an average of 60 resort guests are valet parking per day, that's a $720 dues charge every single day of the year.  In two weeks' time the amount spent on valet parking is about equal to putting DVD players in every BWV room or equipping a full laundry room for years to come.
> 
> 
> 
> In the face of rising costs, not every member shares that philosophy.


Then let's go this route

Magical Express and Property Transportation.  I always rent a car - so I rarely use the bus systems at WDW.  I propose that goes to a pay per play plan

Disney pays Mears for ME and since I am not using that then they could use the ME fees they saved on my party of 5 and apply it to my valet fees...

A price quote from mears show that it costs $151 RT for my family from the airport...I could valet for 12 days and they would still be ahead.  That doesn't include the fact that they don't have to have someone pull my luggage and transport to the resort as well.


----------



## wdwstar

Lives changes everyday, just like vacations. Maybe you have never used the
valet parking, DVD players, interenet service, washer/dryer, etc. Maybe you will use them on vacation in the future. How many complained when you bought into DVC that you didnt want part of your dues that you pay to go towards DVC for the perks?. How many didnt buy into DVC because of the dues going towards the perks? How many bought into DVC because of all the little extras? 

It is kinda hard to have nice perks and then the perks are pulled out from underneath us. 

I think the BWV will be the most difficult resort to stay at because of the parking. We will see if the attendance falls at the BWV.

DVC should have sent everyone a letter or email about the valet parking, this was a big perk for members.


----------



## dizkneedoll

Got my "canned" response from "Buffy" this morning after sending an email to member services last evening.  It was obvious my email was not even read.  They are probably at the point that they just read the title and shoot off the canned response.  Figured it would be what I got.  Oh well ... another wonderful perk down the drain ... wonder which perk will be the next one to go. .


----------



## whitfamily

I got my canned response as well.  They did not even answer 2/3 of the questions I asked regarding announcement, impact on MF's, etc.



> Thank you for contacting Member Services.
> 
> As part of the normal course of doing business, we regularly evaluate
> and adjust our pricing.  As a result, effective Sunday, October 11,
> 2009, complimentary valet parking for Disney Vacation Club Members at
> the Walt Disney World Resort has been discontinued. The valet parking
> charge is $12.00 per day, however complimentary self-parking is always
> available.  Similar to other fee-based services, such as additional
> housekeeping service or additional room amenities, only those Members
> who choose to valet park will be charged instead of increasing the
> annual dues for all Members.  Members and Guests who have disabled
> parking permits will continue to receive complimentary valet parking.
> 
> Thank you again for contacting us.
> 
> Please let us know if we can be of any further assistance.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Lisa
> 
> Member Services | Online Communications
> Disney Vacation Club




And of course between lose of valet and transportation energy cost dropping almost 30% this year I am looking forward to the transportation costs associated with MF's going down


----------



## crisi

Chuck S said:


> Tips are not revenue for the contractor, only the individual valet, and really aren't considered in most decisions for major corporations.  The corporation needs to provide a minimum wage in FL of $4.19 per hour to tipped employees, no matter how much additional they earn per hour in tips.  They also have to pay employment taxes, business expenses, coorporate and accounting salaries, unemployment insurance.  And we don't know if they are provided health insurance.  Given that, the $100K figure seems a little low.  It isn't like a restauant or other location that offers valet for only a few hours per day, there needs to be valets available 24/7, and that requires more employees.



By federal law they need to make sure that base + tips = federal minimum wage of $7 something.  So if the valets aren't getting tips to bring them up to $7 something, Mears needs to make up the difference.   And I'd guess that liability insurance for valet services is not cheap.


----------



## RAD

whitfamily said:


> And of course between lose of valet and transportation energy cost dropping almost 30% this year I am looking forward to the transportation costs associated with MF's going down



Yea, like that's going to happen.


----------



## tjkraz

DVCBELLE said:


> Then let's go this route
> 
> Magical Express and Property Transportation.  I always rent a car - so I rarely use the bus systems at WDW.  I propose that goes to a pay per play plan
> 
> Disney pays Mears for ME and since I am not using that then they could use the ME fees they saved on my party of 5 and apply it to my valet fees...
> 
> A price quote from mears show that it costs $151 RT for my family from the airport...I could valet for 12 days and they would still be ahead.  That doesn't include the fact that they don't have to have someone pull my luggage and transport to the resort as well.



In that case, the driving force behind the perk is probably Disney's own desire to market airport and theme park transportation is being included in their vacation offerings.  For better or worse, we are subject to Disney's whims when it comes to most issues.  Not saying that it's right or wrong...just that it is what it is.  

These two issues may also fall under the heading of "what serves the greater good."  You may not use theme park buses, but I suspect the vast majority of your fellow members do.  That alone justifies making it a common cost.  The same may be true for DME as well.

As for the cost, unlike Mears DME is almost certainly run as a non-profit.  Program costs are charged back to resort hotels so it doesn't make sense to show any sort of profit associated with the DME services at the expense of resort profits.  It's a resort service similar to housekeeping or front desk staff...not a profit center.  DME charges are certainly far less than any quote you would get from Mears.


----------



## tjkraz

whitfamily said:


> And of course between lose of valet and transportation energy cost dropping almost 30% this year I am looking forward to the transportation costs associated with MF's going down



Don't assume that members were paying anything for valet in the past.  Removing the perk probably will not have a positive impact on dues, but continuing it definitely would have had a negative impact. 

As for dues going down, that certainly could happen.  It has in the past.  

From 2008 to 2009 the Front Desk fees for SSR owners went from .3020 per point to .2906 per point.  BWV front desk went from .6380 to .6138.  And those weren't the only reductions at either resort.  

All transportation budgets went up sharply from '08 to '09.  With gas prices taking a dive in '09 and showing some stability, it's entirely possible that the budget for '10 will be lower.


----------



## cutakenta

Chuck S said:


> Tips are not revenue for the contractor, only the individual valet, and really aren't considered in most decisions for major corporations.  The corporation needs to provide a minimum wage in FL of $4.19 per hour to tipped employees, no matter how much additional they earn per hour in tips.  They also have to pay employment taxes, business expenses, coorporate and accounting salaries, unemployment insurance.  And we don't know if they are provided health insurance.  Given that, the $100K figure seems a little low.  It isn't like a restauant or other location that offers valet for only a few hours per day, there needs to be valets available 24/7, and that requires more employees.





Do you know that for sure? How do you know that tips aren't "pooled"
together? 

My brother had a valet business 17 years ago and paid a "fee" to the nightclub to provide service. All tips were pooled together and paid for the hourly rates on his guys.


----------



## jlewisinsyr

tjkraz said:


> As for the cost, unlike Mears DME is almost certainly run as a non-profit.  Program costs are charged back to resort hotels so it doesn't make sense to show any sort of profit associated with the DME services at the expense of resort profits.  It's a resort service similar to housekeeping or front desk staff...not a profit center.  DME charges are certainly far less than any quote you would get from Mears.



Isn't DME run by Mears, so Disney must be providing them a revenue that is profit substaining?  I do believe DME is a loss-leader for Disney though, costs born are intended to increase revenue and make people a captive audience.


----------



## Chuck S

cutakenta said:


> Do you know that for sure? How do you know that tips aren't "pooled"
> together?
> 
> My brother had a valet business 17 years ago and paid a "fee" to the nightclub to provide service. All tips were pooled together and paid for the hourly rates on his guys.



Under FL law, tips can not be used as an offset to the $4.19.


----------



## tjkraz

jlewisinsyr said:


> Isn't DME run by Mears, so Disney must be providing them a revenue that is profit substaining?  I do believe DME is a loss-leader for Disney though, costs born are intended to increase revenue and make people a captive audience.



Good point about Mears running it.

But from Disney's POV, whatever they are paying Mears is part of the operating costs.  Those costs are divvied up among the resorts.  And Mears' cut of the action is certainly nothing like the rates they independently charge tourists for airport shuttle service.  

The poster in question said that it would cost $151 RT for his/her family to use Mears' own shuttle service to and from MCO.  There is no way Disney is paying a total of $151 to provide RT shuttle service for 4 guests.


----------



## jlewisinsyr

tjkraz said:


> The poster in question said that it would cost $151 RT for his/her family to use Mears' own shuttle service to and from MCO.  There is no way Disney is paying a total of $151 to provide RT shuttle service for 4 guests.



I definately don't hold the same belief.  

Considering the resources of baggage, actual bus transfer and staffing of the podium that DME requires it very well could be close to the $37/person round trip.  My guess is that contact is very lucractive to MEARS.


----------



## photobob

DVC Mike said:


> No free valet parking is a dealbreaker for buying a timeshare?



I'm with you Mike, I don't like losing a perk but it is hardly a dealbreaker.


----------



## cutakenta

Chuck S said:


> Under FL law, tips can not be used as an offset to the $4.19.




I will call my brother tonight and ask him but I am pretty sure he paid between $9-15 an hour and that was around 1992-1994.  

Next time I am there I will ask if the tips are pooled.


----------



## CarolAnnC

It has been discussed before, but there is going to be a point in time when Magical Express will be selling tickets, and not a "free" transport to WDW.

In keeping on topic, charging DVC members for valet services seems to have become a topic with far more importance than I would have thought.  There was a time when I would never have considered valet parking as it was a "luxury" anyway.

I think there are many options for those who do bring a car on their DCV trips, even for those at the DVC resorts where valet is offered.  If you don't want to pay, then skip the valet.  Park your car yourself, or use another method of transport.


----------



## cutakenta

photobob said:


> I'm with you Mike, I don't like losing a perk but it is hardly a dealbreaker.




Me too, but it is nice to have especially when I spend $200 on dinner. And it would have been really nice when I spent $900 at 1900 park fare for my daughters birthday.  


Give us $40,000 and pay dues each year. We will market this as "DELUXE" and when we say deluxe we mean rooms have dvd players and flat screens.


----------



## edk35

WOW people are really fired up about losing this "perk". To me losing the AP discount might warrant people being upset.


----------



## Sammie

> If the valet parking was a decent profit center for Disney, the valet services would still be under Disney's roof and not outsourced, wouldn't it?



Yes that is correct.  Disney only offers valet service at 8 resorts, the cost to operate it, insurance, wages, etc. got to be more expensive than outsourcing it.


----------



## Sammie

edk35 said:


> WOW people are really fired up about losing this "perk". To me losing the AP discount might warrant people being upset.



It all depends on what one uses, we use valet or did use alot on our trips, but we do not buy an annual pass. I will miss the perk but not enough to let it ruin my trip. I will either pay it now or self park. I do hope they address the parking lot situation to ensure we have a place to self park.


----------



## Disneypubgal

RAD said:


> OK, let's continue along that line. Let's put coin meters on the washer/dryers, why should I have to pay for those if I'm not using them? How about the pools, do like they did at BLT and put a fence around it and you need to have a room key to get in, if you haven't paid the pool use fee you can't get in. Remove the DVD players from the rooms, I've never used one, if you need one you go rent one at the front desk.
> 
> Sorry, but I'm from the I'm willing to pay more every year to keep the features/perks that were provide when I purchased DVC group.



I think there is one aspect of this we all may be forgeting....  Disney put Magical Express in a few years back so that your entire vacation experience (i.e. your vacation $'s) would be at WDW...  Dining, parks etc....  

Perhaps the cost of the parking is not really the issue, but rather to encourage folks not to drive or rent cars so that all of there vacation $$ remain at WDW...  All of the costs going back and forth are not really that material in the dollars and cents world of WDW...  Mind you I am not thrilled with the perk going away... what upsets me more is the lack of upfront communication and warning that this would take place...


----------



## hakepb

CarolAnnC said:


> It has been discussed before, but there is going to be a point in time when Magical Express will be selling tickets, and not a "free" transport to WDW.
> 
> In keeping on topic, charging DVC members for valet services seems to have become a topic with far more importance than I would have thought.  There was a time when I would never have considered valet parking as it was a "luxury" anyway.
> 
> I think there are many options for those who do bring a car on their DCV trips, even for those at the DVC resorts where valet is offered.  If you don't want to pay, then skip the valet.  Park your car yourself, or use another method of transport.



I really do not care about the loss of Valet (I never want to pay a tip for something I can easily do myself), with reasonable notificatioin, DVC is in their rights to change any perk, but the implementation of this perk reduction *is* a major issue.  I will react to any changes with common sense if DVC also uses common sense in changing my member experience.
1) Completely catching members offguard (in the middle of their vacation) is unexcusable.  Basically, any perk reduction related to dining should should have a 90 day notice because members make ADR's for various reasons.
2) My members fees pay to maintain a free parking space for my unit during my stay.  I better never hear I have to pay a valet to use my parking spot that I already paid for.

Perhaps we should start, now, letting member satisfaction know that any ME charges need to communicated x months in advance.  I'd certainly hate to plan and budget a vacation, arrive at ORD only to find out I am now being charged (say $20/family member) to get to WDW.

Acually the timing of this Valet (lack of) announcement is more like letting a use ME to get to WDW, vactaion, eat and spend all their souviner $, then find out they have to pay to get back to ORD because the perk just changed.


----------



## Disney93

I don't mind parking my car myself at the Boardwalk but finding a parking spot is sometimes difficult at best. On our next visit we will have 3 cars, and yes we have 3 memberships. We will have 5 grandchildren with us and that makes things even harder. Granted we will drop them off at the entrance and then go park but can you imagine how much time is going to be wasted? When returning in the evening, the lot is full of cars belonging to people just visiting. The answer might be to charge non guests a $20.00 dollar parking fee just to use the lot. The area in front of the BWV can be very conjested with cars and buses already, making it more dangerous for people walking with small children. I have never lost the knowledge of everything at Disneyworld is about making money, but is the best way??? Please take care of the people that have taken care of you.


----------



## edk35

Sammie said:


> It all depends on what one uses, we use valet or did use alot on our trips, but we do not buy an annual pass. I will miss the perk but not enough to let it ruin my trip. I will either pay it now or self park. I do hope they address the parking lot situation to ensure we have a place to self park.




I understand that people are unhappy they lost it but this thread is crazy.


----------



## disneynutz

edk35 said:


> I understand that people are unhappy they lost it but this thread is crazy.



I think that losing free Valet has been a tipping point for a lot of Members. 

In the last year or so there have been several changes made to the membership that don't, IMHO benefit the members.

Disney's no/short notice of changes is unacceptable and the info provided on the website is often inaccurate.

All of these issues combined has been a wake up call to the fact that Disney doesn't value their DVC Members and for many, it's a hard pill to swallow. 

 Bill


----------



## LIFERBABE

edk35 said:


> I understand that people are unhappy they lost it but this thread is crazy.



For all those that find this funny, please send me my $12 back!!  We checked in on 10/10 and Valet parking was a perk.  Said so in my Portable Perks.  No mention from anyone that it was going away the next day.  We drive up to CR on 10/11, announce we are DVC and valet park.  No mention by the Valet, that perk had ended.  Drop $200 in resort restaurant and go to retrieve our vehicle and all of a sudden it's $12!  Ask when did this happen?  Told today.   Check with front desk confirms effective 10/11 all DVC pays.  No notice, no call to the room, no nothing!!  

I dont make it a habit to be ripped off no matter how small the sum.  This was a ripoff to the membership that was staying at the resorts at the time of the switch.  This decision was not made the morning of 10/11/09 and I have a real problem with the way it was handled for guests.  

DVC knew this would affect current guests and they basically said "So What!"

And I was going to yet again add on additional points at BLT before the price increase on Nov 1 2010, because I really enjoyed my 2 stays there so far, but the continued poor treatment of the membership has caused me to reconsider.  

My DH does not like valet parking at all, but this time we were travelling with another couple this trip so we decided to use the perk for an adult dinner.  Here we are telling our friends how DVC Members receive free valet only to be embarrassed to learn that it was taken away that day and scrambling for cash to pay!


----------



## edk35

LIFERBABE said:


> For all those that find this funny, please send me my $12 back!!  We checked in on 10/10 and Valet parking was a perk.  Said so in my Portable Perks.  No mention from anyone that it was going away the next day.  We drive up to CR on 10/11, announce we are DVC and valet park.  No mention by the Valet, that perk had ended.  Drop $200 in resort restaurant and go to retrieve our vehicle and all of a sudden it's $12!  Ask when did this happen?  Told today.   Check with front desk confirms effective 10/11 all DVC pays.  No notice, no call to the room, no nothing!!
> 
> I dont make it a habit to be ripped off no matter how small the sum.  This was a ripoff to the membership that was staying at the resorts at the time of the switch.  This decision was not made the morning of 10/11/09 and I have a real problem with the way it was handled for guests.
> 
> DVC knew this would affect current guests and they basically said "So What!"
> 
> And I was going to yet again add on additional points at BLT before the price increase on Nov 1 2010, because I really enjoyed my 2 stays there so far, but the continued poor treatment of the membership has caused me to reconsider.
> 
> My DH does not like valet parking at all, but this time we were travelling with another couple this trip so we decided to use the perk for an adult dinner.  Here we are telling our friends how DVC Members receive free valet only to be embarrassed to learn that it was taken away that day and scrambling for cash to pay!



I did not say it was funny that the valet parking was taken away. I just think this thread is crazy in that so many scenarios have been  been played out about everything PERK related.  If people are that unhappy then they all need to call and let their voices be heard....every person on DIS and those DVC members that don't know about Dis. I have not read every single page because I can no longer keep up with it so I get them hit or miss but it is not the end of the world as far as DVC goes. I doubt anyone thought "I guess I will buy since they offer valet parking". I understand people are upset because members are starting to feel that we are no longer valued. Well everyone that feels that way...needs to send letters, make phone calls and let their voices be heard. I don't think it is funny that this perk was taken away.....however it is not like they changed our 11 month home booking   window.


----------



## edk35

hakepb said:


> I really do not care about the loss of Valet (I never want to pay a tip for something I can easily do myself), with reasonable notificatioin, DVC is in their rights to change any perk, but the implementation of this perk reduction *is* a major issue.  I will react to any changes with common sense if DVC also uses common sense in changing my member experience.
> 1) Completely catching members offguard (in the middle of their vacation) is unexcusable.  Basically, any perk reduction related to dining should should have a 90 day notice because members make ADR's for various reasons.
> 2) My members fees pay to maintain a free parking space for my unit during my stay.  I better never hear I have to pay a valet to use my parking spot that I already paid for.
> 
> Perhaps we should start, now, letting member satisfaction know that any ME charges need to communicated x months in advance.  I'd certainly hate to plan and budget a vacation, arrive at ORD only to find out I am now being charged (say $20/family member) to get to WDW.
> 
> Acually the timing of this Valet (lack of) announcement is more like letting a use ME to get to WDW, vactaion, eat and spend all their souviner $, then find out they have to pay to get back to ORD because the perk just changed.




I completely agree with this and yes DVC members should have had a warning and a date that this was changing. Why this happened...is beyond me too. I just think that if this upsets people they need to get on the horn and start writing letters/emails and make a point. Who knows....maybe they will change it back, offer a discount off valet. If they don't know how badly this affected DVC members then it goes unnoticed.


----------



## dizkneedoll

Many, many of us ARE sending emails to Member Satisfaction ... all we seem to be receiving in return are "canned" messages obviously showing that our emails are not even being read ... I know I asked several questions ... no answer  ... just the "canned" response signed by Buffy.  As some have said ... it's not necessarily the valet issue but the lack of respect for the DVC members.


----------



## edk35

dizkneedoll said:


> Many, many of us ARE sending emails to Member Satisfaction ... all we seem to be receiving in return are "canned" messages obviously showing that our emails are not even being read ... I know I asked several questions ... no answer  ... just the "canned" response signed by Buffy.  As some have said ... it's not necessarily the valet issue but the lack of respect for the DVC members.




Is there a way to go higher up the chain?


----------



## toocherie

LIFERBABE said:


> My DH does not like valet parking at all, but this time we were travelling with another couple this trip so we decided to use the perk for an adult dinner.  Here we are telling our friends how DVC Members receive free valet only to be embarrassed to learn that it was taken away that day and scrambling for cash to pay!



That is truly terrible.  I also don't understand why dropping $200 at a restaurant doesn't entitle one to "free" valet?  I'm sorry you had this experience.



edk35 said:


> I did not say it was funny that the valet parking was taken away. I just think this thread is crazy in that so many scenarios have been  been played out about everything PERK related.



Actually--I think this one is quite tame compared to the one where the points changed for 2010.  (you want crazy?)  Also, use of the emoticon like this  (which appropriately enough, stands for lmao) also led people to believe that you thought it was funny--even though you didn't mean it that way.

I just know that someday something in DVC is going to change that is important to you and then you (and others) will understand.  And I have contacted member services--and my guide--and got the canned response.

However, I will say I think we need to keep up the messages.  I know it's a pain--but MS needs to know how we feel.


----------



## Sammie

edk35 said:


> Is there a way to go higher up the chain?



How high do you want to go? You can always go higher; but more than likely it will simply be forwarded right back to the member satisfaction team.


----------



## Dean

Mickey'sApprentice said:


> Dean, are you saying that you would have handled informing the members exactly like Disney or that you would have handled the blowback in the exact same manner?


My response wasn't in relation to the notification but rather the response system and method to those complaining.  A company has to be very careful what goes out, what gets put in writing, etc.  That's one of the reasons they either call you or suggest you call them with many of the email questions.  And they do limit who they allow to send such information.  The emails and satisfaction team conversations are intended to patronize while making you think they were really doing something.  I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that, it's standard issue when a difficult decision has been made and damage control is ongoing and they will collect the data on the complaints to review but they knew there would be complaints.

As for the different question of how I would have handled this, I've said several times we don't have the information.  Ideally would have been to make the decision with lead time, send out info to the members, post it on the website, even get it in the DF prior.  This was not done which suggests this was an overnight change OR multiple people dropped the ball.  However, even if it were something that had to change that quickly and there was no other choice, I think one can still fault them for their approach and handling of the matter.  If I'm in charge and this decision has to happen tomorrow and I find out today, everything else stops.  IT is working late and coming in early to get the web page ready for a change and that change is front and center highlighted, etc.  Management is working late and coming in early to make sure it's the way we want it.  We make sure we have the MS supervisor on the phone letting them know where we stand and as soon as final decisions are made, that we let that supervisor know what is done, an idea of why, how to phrase it, to pass it down to the front lines and what to expect on the website.  

In addition, I'm looking for a way to delay the implementation by 2 weeks even if I have to take it out of reserves or raise fees next year to cover the short term overage.  I would also want to get a basic summary of the process.  Something like the following:





> We've decided to make Valet Parking Pay to play because there was an emergency re-negotiation of the contract which required payment of X additional dollars for the next year that was not budgeted.  Rather than raise the membership fees by $X.  X% of the membership used this perk last year and the costs to the members was $X.


BTW, I would have taken a similar approach to the reallocation giving a summary of specific numbers.  IMO DVC really let the members down on the two AKV room issues and potentially in this case as well by HOW they handled it even if the decision itself was appropriate.


----------



## Deb & Bill

edk35 said:


> I understand that people are unhappy they lost it but this thread is crazy.



Sounds like a new member still snorting the pixie dust and drinking the Kool-aid.  

This is just one more incident of DVC not communicating with members.  It's happened before and it will happen again until they finally decide that the members are important.  Many members contact MS by e-mail and either get nothing in response or a canned response.  It gets tiring after a while. 

So when they take away a perk you like or change something you like, will you respond the same way??


----------



## JimC

tjkraz said:


> ...
> Quote:
> Sorry, but I'm from the I'm willing to pay more every year to keep the features/perks that were provide when I purchased DVC group.
> 
> In the face of rising costs, not every member shares that philosophy.



And thus is the inherent tension in common interest real estate -- the differing abilities and philosophies for maintaining properties and operating the association.  I'm still of the mind that the advantages of such arrangements far exceed the disadvantages.

Glad Disney makes the decisions for DVC because all I want to do is enjoy a great vacation.  I do not agree with every decision.  But as long as the overall enjoyment exceeds the cost I am fine.  I am surprised that free valet parking seems to be a significant factor for many and a deal breaker for some.  Yet each member is likely to have different priorities and this may have tipped the scales for them.


----------



## TLSnell1981

Dean said:


> The emails and satisfaction team conversations are intended to patronize while making you think they were really doing something.



Yes they are and that irratates me as much as not being informed in advance (discontinuation of free valet). Do they really think we're that stupid?


----------



## JimC

Dean said:


> ...As for the different question of how I would have handled this, I've said several times we don't have the information.  Ideally would have been to make the decision with lead time, send out info to the members, post it on the website, even get it in the DF prior.  This was not done which suggests this was an overnight change OR multiple people dropped the ball.  However, even if it were something that had to change that quickly and there was no other choice, I think one can still fault them for their approach and handling of the matter.  If I'm in charge and this decision has to happen tomorrow and I find out today, everything else stops.  IT is working late and coming in early to get the web page ready for a change and that change is front and center highlighted, etc.  Management is working late and coming in early to make sure it's the way we want it.  We make sure we have the MS supervisor on the phone letting them know where we stand and as soon as final decisions are made, that we let that supervisor know what is done, an idea of why, how to phrase it, to pass it down to the front lines and what to expect on the website.
> 
> In addition, I'm looking for a way to delay the implementation by 2 weeks even if I have to take it out of reserves or raise fees next year to cover the short term overage.  I would also want to get a basic summary of the process.  Something like the following:
> BTW, I would have taken a similar approach to the reallocation giving a summary of specific numbers.  IMO DVC really let the members down on the two AKV room issues and potentially in this case as well by HOW they handled it even if the decision itself was appropriate.



Agree.  It is not that hard to call all hands on deck, get a communication put together and emailed to all members, along with a special notice pop-up on the web-site and a news release to all the major Disney related groups asking them to post a notice.  This can literally be done overnight.  Disney, a company known for guest service excellence and attention to detail, should know this.  Now are they stretched too thin with cutbacks or do they not understand communication?


----------



## Dean

AJKMOM said:


> My reply was more directed to a PP who came "home" and was forced to pay for valet because the public lots were all full.  There was some sort of event going on, and the lot was filled with cars of people who were not staying at the Boardwalk.  If they are making valet a $12 fee, they should have an option for those of us that don't mind walking, not filling up the free lot with outside guests.
> 
> They arrived and were told "there is no free parking".  We don't have valet parking at home, but we do have a place to park at home.  Seems that DVC should have given members some warning, we already rented a car and are coming "home" in a few weeks, probably too late to get in on Magical Express.
> 
> It also makes us wonder what's next, and how much warning we'll get.


If I were staying at that resort and there were no parks even across the street, I would be unhappy.  OTOH, just visiting does not mean one is automatically entitled to parking, free or otherwise.  I know I've been directed across the street or to valet on a number of occasions when not staying at the resort but visiting.  The only resort that consistently has been a problem for parking is CR where valid PH did not qualify one to park there.  I found your statement odd, maybe I did take it out of context but I couldn't figure out the context other than this thread itself.



RAD said:


> OK, let's continue along that line. Let's put coin meters on the washer/dryers, why should I have to pay for those if I'm not using them? How about the pools, do like they did at BLT and put a fence around it and you need to have a room key to get in, if you haven't paid the pool use fee you can't get in. Remove the DVD players from the rooms, I've never used one, if you need one you go rent one at the front desk.
> 
> Sorry, but I'm from the I'm willing to pay more every year to keep the features/perks that were provide when I purchased DVC group.


A lot of places do charge for laundry.  It's fact that every system must draw a line and offer some items for free or nearly so and some pay to play.  Some, like free internet, are very cheap to offer to everyone and be figured in the dues but significantly more to do pay to play.  A pool, balcony furniture, kids area, lifeguards, pool towels, bell services are among things that many resorts provide and would generally be difficult to do pay to play or do without though there are many resorts that don't have bell services and some that don't offer pool towels.  Add to the fact there are industry standards and DVC is expected to meet many of those and they do include things like DVD players, flat screen TV's, dishes and the like.  The industry standard is not to have valet for timeshares and certainly not free valet with limited exceptions.  This is a very reasonable perk to do pay to play and a very unreasonable one to ask others to pay for.  



DVCBELLE said:


> Then let's go this route
> 
> Magical Express and Property Transportation.  I always rent a car - so I rarely use the bus systems at WDW.  I propose that goes to a pay per play plan
> 
> Disney pays Mears for ME and since I am not using that then they could use the ME fees they saved on my party of 5 and apply it to my valet fees...
> 
> A price quote from mears show that it costs $151 RT for my family from the airport...I could valet for 12 days and they would still be ahead.  That doesn't include the fact that they don't have to have someone pull my luggage and transport to the resort as well.


Disney, not DVC, gets benefits from the ME and that is why they cont to provide it for free.  It traps people on property, it is not a perk of DVC and it has not always been free.



cutakenta said:


> Next time I am there I will ask if the tips are pooled.


There are several ways to share tips for such positions including valet and bell services.  One way is to pool them, another is to rotate who goes each time but they keep what they get, the end effect is the same and essentially a pooling of tips.  There are other hybrid methods as well.


----------



## Dean

edk35 said:


> Is there a way to go higher up the chain?


I posted some suggestions earlier in this thread.  There's anyone of a number of VP types esp the CFO, there's the Prez, there's the voting rep, there's the option of examining the books and contracts by appt as required by FL law, there's the option of a lawyer and there's the option of talking to the GM at each applicable resort.  



TLSnell1981 said:


> Yes they are and that irratates me as much as not being informed in advance (discontinuation of free valet). Do they really think we're that stupid?


I'm sure they don't think we're stupid but what choice do they have at this point, the answer is NONE, BTW.  DVC members for some reason think more than about any other group I've seen that they can complain and change decisions that have come through the pipeline.  Sure sometimes things will change like the BLT minimum purchase was changed back to 25 points but that was a no brainer IMO and one that had legal implications for new buyers.  Same for the reversal of the decision to allow OKW members to borrow points from 2000 to use for free passes in 1999 and the agreement to cut future fees for OKW owners who did not extend, both examples of legal challenges that they knew they could not win.  Same should have happened for the extension as a special assessment, another one they could not have won had anyone challenged it.  BTW, does anyone know of even one example of a member who didn't extend being limited on their membership or having a lien place on their ownership?



JimC said:


> Now are they stretched too thin with cutbacks or do they not understand communication?


I don't know but it does bother me.  Is it a sign of things to come, I don't know.  The handling of the AKV rooms also bothers me for the same reasons.  Disney has always been reactive and often not proactive with such matters.  I find it insulting that they don't agree to a standard compensation when one might be appropriate and that one person is able to get more than the next (who may get nothing) simply because they called earlier or yelled louder.  One weekend night's points return on a less than a week stay for the BWV refurbishment move (as one person who given)was inappropriate for DVC to agree to, period.  It as a gross overpayment for the inconvenience at hand.  Some others similarly affected got nothing.  However, to be plucked from an AKV concierge room and given a SSR room with simply the return of the points difference and nothing else, was even more inappropriate.  It is not difficult to work out a general policy on such matters and to implement a specific plan when multiple members are sufficiently inconvenienced.  Consistency is always better in the long run for both the system and members.


----------



## stormer

I know this has probably been posted, but I don't have time to read through all 42 pages.  Can someone post the e-mail address to send a complaint to?  Thanks.

I am not happy about this either.  We stayed at Kidani in August (our home resort) and self parked easily the first 4 nights of our stay.  Then they opened another section of the building and it was chaos!  We were not able to self park again for the next 8 days and nights of our trip.  No matter when we tried, morning, afternoon, or night, it was completely full and had to valet the rest of our trip.  I will not be able if there are no spaces availbale and I have to pay 412 to park.


----------



## JimC

Dean said:


> I don't know but it does bother me.  Is it a sign of things to come, I don't know.  The handling of the AKV rooms also bothers me for the same reasons.  Disney has always been reactive and often not proactive with such matters.  I find it insulting that they don't agree to a standard compensation when one might be appropriate and that one person is able to get more than the next (who may get nothing) simply because they called earlier or yelled louder.  One weekend night's points return on a less than a week stay for the BWV refurbishment move (as one person who given)was inappropriate for DVC to agree to, period.  It as a gross overpayment for the inconvenience at hand.  Some others similarly affected got nothing.  However, to be plucked from an AKV concierge room and given a SSR room with simply the return of the points difference and nothing else, was even more inappropriate.  It is not difficult to work out a general policy on such matters and to implement a specific plan when multiple members are sufficiently inconvenienced.  Consistency is always better in the long run for both the system and members.



They may need to have an exec in charge of DVD (expansion and sales) and a separate exec, at an equal level, in charge of DVC (operations and member satisfaction).    DVD is undergoing what appears to be a major expansion and DVC operations are becoming much more expansive and geographically dispersed.

Disney has undergone major operating reductions to mitigate the revenue shortfalls brought about by a combination of heavy price discounts to keep people in the parks and overall lower leisure spending.  These have to affect DVC operations as they share resources with other departments.  DVC is also probably dealing with substantially higher default rates on dues.


----------



## Dean

stormer said:


> I know this has probably been posted, but I don't have time to read through all 42 pages.  Can someone post the e-mail address to send a complaint to?  Thanks.
> 
> I am not happy about this either.  We stayed at Kidani in August (our home resort) and self parked easily the first 4 nights of our stay.  Then they opened another section of the building and it was chaos!  We were not able to self park again for the next 8 days and nights of our trip.  No matter when we tried, morning, afternoon, or night, it was completely full and had to valet the rest of our trip.  I will not be able if there are no spaces availbale and I have to pay 412 to park.


Including the outside lots?


----------



## Dean

JimC said:


> They may need to have an exec in charge of DVD (expansion and sales) and a separate exec, at an equal level, in charge of DVC (operations and member satisfaction).    DVD is undergoing what appears to be a major expansion and DVC operations are becoming much more expansive and geographically dispersed.
> 
> Disney has undergone major operating reductions to mitigate the revenue shortfalls brought about by a combination of heavy price discounts to keep people in the parks and overall lower leisure spending.  These have to affect DVC operations as they share resources with other departments.  DVC is also probably dealing with substantially higher default rates on dues.


Usually less is more with admin type but the top must require accountability from below and must provide the appropriate oversight and direction.  IMO, DVC could and should have handled many of these issues mentioned better, period.  However, it's clear there's no way to satisfy the members and it appears DVC has simply given up in many of those areas (take room requests) which is a shame as there's so much potential in the system to excel.


----------



## stormer

Dean said:


> Including the outside lots?



Yes.  The valet guy told us there were all employees staying there as a kind of test stay and they hoped the situation would be better when "regular" guests stayed there.  I guess they are assuming many guests will use ME and not bring their own cars.


----------



## Doctor P

The reply I got from the "satisfaction" people on the valet parking issue was insulting, IMHO.  It never addressed the issues I raised of inadequate self parking or use of the lots for theme park access.  I have no issue with the removal of the valet parking perk (though we used it many times) as long as there is adequate self parking that is convenient even if one is schlepping luggage.


----------



## Mickey'sApprentice

Dean said:


> My response wasn't in relation to the notification but rather the response system and method to those complaining.  A company has to be very careful what goes out, what gets put in writing, etc.  That's one of the reasons they either call you or suggest you call them with many of the email questions.  And they do limit who they allow to send such information.  The emails and satisfaction team conversations are intended to patronize while making you think they were really doing something.  I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that, it's standard issue when a difficult decision has been made and damage control is ongoing and they will collect the data on the complaints to review but they knew there would be complaints.
> 
> As for the different question of how I would have handled this, I've said several times we don't have the information.  Ideally would have been to make the decision with lead time, send out info to the members, post it on the website, even get it in the DF prior.  This was not done which suggests this was an overnight change OR multiple people dropped the ball.  However, even if it were something that had to change that quickly and there was no other choice, I think one can still fault them for their approach and handling of the matter.  If I'm in charge and this decision has to happen tomorrow and I find out today, everything else stops.  IT is working late and coming in early to get the web page ready for a change and that change is front and center highlighted, etc.  Management is working late and coming in early to make sure it's the way we want it.  We make sure we have the MS supervisor on the phone letting them know where we stand and as soon as final decisions are made, that we let that supervisor know what is done, an idea of why, how to phrase it, to pass it down to the front lines and what to expect on the website.
> 
> In addition, I'm looking for a way to delay the implementation by 2 weeks even if I have to take it out of reserves or raise fees next year to cover the short term overage.  I would also want to get a basic summary of the process.  Something like the following:
> BTW, I would have taken a similar approach to the reallocation giving a summary of specific numbers.  IMO DVC really let the members down on the two AKV room issues and potentially in this case as well by HOW they handled it even if the decision itself was appropriate.



I totally agree with you. I would have wanted to handle this in the exact same way that you suggested. 

I originally thought you were saying that Disney handled the whole thing appropriately, and that it was best to just get the complaints after the fact. Thank you for clarifying.


----------



## Sammie

This was not an overnight change, but DVC member services and management at DVC resorts and even the member satisfaction team got the notice on the day it started. No advance notice for them either. Also as far as the member satisfaction team giving canned responses they give what they are told. They don't know any more about what happened than any of us. What they do know is what they share with the membership when you complain.   

Someone up the food chain decided it was not in the best financial interest of DVC to continue to pay for this service when the current contract with Mears expired, they have been covering the cost and did not feel that the current membership would support it being covered by our dues because based on their research not enough members use the service to warrant everyone paying for it. Which is also what happened with the $95 surcharge, let those using it pay.   

I have a feeling the mess with releasing info about Eagle Pines then it being pulled makes them very cautious. Also many CMs are DVC members and there could be times it would be beneficial to them as a member to get info before the rest of us; which would not be fair.


----------



## waltfan1957

tjkraz said:


> Don't assume that members were paying anything for valet in the past.  Removing the perk probably will not have a positive impact on dues, but continuing it definitely would have had a negative impact.



Did'nt someone from MS say it was included in the dues?


----------



## Dizholic

We are here at the Boardwalk right now, and parking is REALLY bad!!! We checked in Thursday night around 7pm, and my husband said he thinks he got the last spot in the selfparking lot right near the bus stop.  Last night we came back from DTD around 8:30, and had to park across the street in the over flow lot.  Now just let me say that we always come at this time of the year, and rarely used Valet parking because during the Food & Wine Festival, especially on the weekend, it took forever to get our car.
As an owner of the Boardwalk, and a guest at the hotel I felt that parking across the street in the overflow lot was unacceptable, and I very nicely told a hotel manager how I felt. I told him I knew this was the first week of charging for Valet parking, and everything was turned upside down, but that I hoped in the future they would have a better plan for parking.
I don't mind self parking, but I do mind leaving the hotel ground to do it.  Maybe they need to park the valet cars across the street. I don't know what the answer is, but they do need to fix this parking problem, and the manager that I talked to totally agreed.


----------



## Dean

Doctor P said:


> The reply I got from the "satisfaction" people on the valet parking issue was insulting, IMHO.  It never addressed the issues I raised of inadequate self parking or use of the lots for theme park access.  I have no issue with the removal of the valet parking perk (though we used it many times) as long as there is adequate self parking that is convenient even if one is schlepping luggage.


They can't do anything else and if you'll think about it, you'll understand why.  Just like if you were dealing with a student about a problem, you'd have to be very careful how you do so and esp with what you put in writing.  Or look at it another way, say you told your teen they couldn't do some activity, would you do a back and forth about every objection they raised.  I wouldn't, I'd ask them if they want to know why I made the decision and if they said yes, I'd tell them, then if that didn't settle it, discussion time is over and the rule still stands.  



Sammie said:


> This was not an overnight change, but DVC member services and management at DVC resorts and even the member satisfaction team got the notice on the day it started. No advance notice for them either. Also as far as the member satisfaction team giving canned responses they give what they are told. They don't know any more about what happened than any of us. What they do know is what they share with the membership when you complain.
> 
> Someone up the food chain decided it was not in the best financial interest of DVC to continue to pay for this service when the current contract with Mears expired, they have been covering the cost and did not feel that the current membership would support it being covered by our dues because based on their research not enough members use the service to warrant everyone paying for it. Which is also what happened with the $95 surcharge, let those using it pay.
> 
> I have a feeling the mess with releasing info about Eagle Pines then it being pulled makes them very cautious. Also many CMs are DVC members and there could be times it would be beneficial to them as a member to get info before the rest of us; which would not be fair.


As I said, we don't know, we are only making assumptions and many are simply reacting emotionally.  Certainly you don't want to give information to people that could easily leak it when you don't want it to be leaked including MS and the guides.  That's one of the reasons we often know info here before most of the guides do.  I'd like to believe that appropriate DVC management didn't know and plan to do it this way on purpose, if I felt that way the case I'd very likely plan to sell most or all of my points.  This would not be a punishment to them but a personal decision of where I want to go and what I want to spend my money on.


----------



## Doctor P

Dean said:


> They can't do anything else and if you'll think about it, you'll understand why.  Just like if you were dealing with a student about a problem, you'd have to be very careful how you do so and esp with what you put in writing.  Or look at it another way, say you told your teen they couldn't do some activity, would you do a back and forth about every objection they raised.  I wouldn't, I'd ask them if they want to know why I made the decision and if they said yes, I'd tell them, then if that didn't settle it, discussion time is over and the rule still stands.
> 
> As I said, we don't know, we are only making assumptions and many are simply reacting emotionally.  Certainly you don't want to give information to people that could easily leak it when you don't want it to be leaked including MS and the guides.  That's one of the reasons we often know info here before most of the guides do.  I'd like to believe that appropriate DVC management didn't know and plan to do it this way on purpose, if I felt that way the case I'd very likely plan to sell most or all of my points.  This would not be a punishment to them but a personal decision of where I want to go and what I want to spend my money on.



I agree with you, Dean.  Even one line that said "your concerns are noted and will be brought to the attention of management" or some such phrasing would have satisfied me, frankly.  

I'm very concerned that IT APPEARS that DVD pays for self parking associated with the new units they build at hotel based resorts, but that parking is not dedicated to those units.  I am concerned about the valet parking issue as the tip of the iceberg on the larger issue of inadequate parking for resort guests at these resorts.

I would add that putting dedicated luggage carts near the villas self parking areas (ala DVC Hilton Head) might also go a long way to alleviating my concerns.


----------



## Chuck S

stormer said:


> Yes.  The valet guy told us there were all employees staying there as a kind of test stay and they hoped the situation would be better when "regular" guests stayed there.  I guess they are assuming many guests will use ME and not bring their own cars.



That is pretty normal during the week right before a new resort opens.  The employees kind of test out the rooms and report any problems that only someone who actually spends the night in a room may find, vs someone who does a walk through inspection.


----------



## Dean

Chuck S said:


> That is pretty normal during the week right before a new resort opens.  The employees kind of test out the rooms and report any problems that only someone who actually spends the night in a room may find, vs someone who does a walk through inspection.


Cruise lines usually do this also.  Not sure if DCL did or if they will for the two upcoming ships.  Sometimes they cruise, sometimes they just sit at the dock depending on specifics.


> would add that putting dedicated luggage carts near the villas self parking areas (ala DVC Hilton Head) might also go a long way to alleviating my concerns.


I love having luggage carts and I do not want people messing with my things.  That's why I avoid valet and bell services whenever possible and enjoy not having housekeeping.  I'm not so far out that I can't do any of them but I MUCH prefer not to.  However the reality is that if they went this route they would likely do away with bell services or at least trim it dramatically.


----------



## Chuck S

Dean said:


> Cruise lines usually do this also.  Not sure if DCL did or if they will for the two upcoming ships.  Sometimes they cruise, sometimes they just sit at the dock depending on specifics.
> I love having luggage carts and I do not want people messing with my things.  That's why I avoid valet and bell services whenever possible and enjoy not having housekeeping.  I'm not so far out that I can't do any of them but I MUCH prefer not to.  However the reality is that if they went this route they would likely do away with bell services or at least trim it dramatically.



Plus, unmonitored luggage carts could cause problems.  Who would be "responsible" if a stray cart slammed into a car or injured someone  because kids were playing with it?  Disney seems to be a place where parents forget they actually have children.  There is a reason Disney restricts the use of lugguage cart to bell services.  They aren't giant skateboards.


----------



## Dean

Chuck S said:


> Plus, unmonitored luggage carts could cause problems.  Who would be "responsible" if a stray cart slammed into a car or injured someone  because kids were playing with it?  Disney seems to be a place where parents forget they actually have children.  There is a reason Disney restricts the use of lugguage cart to bell services.  They aren't giant skateboards.


I don't think that's a major issue though I guess it is one factor.  I have had a lot of experience with luggage carts over the years and I prefer them.  The issues you raise are controllable and minimal, IMO.  As a rule you want to either have luggage carts for guests or bell services, both make non sense for most situation.  However, the setup of most DVC resorts are not especially conducive to the use of carts.  AKV is and maybe SSR and OKW.  VB has a few and I think HH does as well.    The rest really aren't set up for cart to be a good fit to varying degrees.  For Kidani they could do away with valet totally and really cut back on bell services and have carts.  SSR & OKW have a streamlined bell system already just without valet and without the carts which they should have given the setup of those 2 resorts.


----------



## Chuck S

Dean said:


> I don't think that's a major issue though I guess it is one factor.  I have had a lot of experience with luggage carts over the years and I prefer them.  The issues you raise are controllable and minimal, IMO.  As a rule you want to either have luggage carts for guests or bell services, both make non sense for most situation.  However, the setup of most DVC resorts are not especially conducive to the use of carts.  AKV is and maybe SSR and OKW.  VB has a few and I think HH does as well.    The rest really aren't set up for cart to be a good fit to varying degrees.  For Kidani they could do away with valet totally and really cut back on bell services and have carts.  SSR & OKW have a streamlined bell system already just without valet and without the carts which they should have given the setup of those 2 resorts.



At a Hampton Inn in the FL panhandle they had luggage carts for guests use,  Some guests would basically collect the cart at night, and keep it in their room so they had use of it at their convenience.  One of those guests had kids, and they were skateboarding on two carts down the second floor hallway.  After a call to the front desk, the manager took the carts to the normal storage area near the door, where they quickly disappeared back into someones room for the duration of the night.

Why would it be different with unmonitored carts at Disney?


----------



## Brian Noble

Don't be silly, Chuck.  Disney guests would *never* do something so inconsiderate.


----------



## Dean

Chuck S said:


> At a Hampton Inn in the FL panhandle they had luggage carts for guests use,  Some guests would basically collect the cart at night, and keep it in their room so they had use of it at their convenience.  One of those guests had kids, and they were skateboarding on two carts down the second floor hallway.  After a call to the front desk, the manager took the carts to the normal storage area near the door, where they quickly disappeared back into someones room for the duration of the night.
> 
> Why would it be different with unmonitored carts at Disney?


As I noted, it is an issue but a small and controllable one.  Hoarding is an issue but usually only if there really aren't enough carts.  Once people figure out they can always find one, this practice really decreases.  But there certainly is another side as you point out.  However the overall benefit outweighs the risk IMO, esp compared to me having to drag multiple items from the car to the room then back again.  YMMV.


----------



## Sammie

Chuck S said:


> At a Hampton Inn in the FL panhandle they had luggage carts for guests use,  Some guests would basically collect the cart at night, and keep it in their room so they had use of it at their convenience.  One of those guests had kids, and they were skateboarding on two carts down the second floor hallway.  After a call to the front desk, the manager took the carts to the normal storage area near the door, where they quickly disappeared back into someones room for the duration of the night.
> 
> Why would it be different with unmonitored carts at Disney?



I don't imagine it would be any different, I have to dodge scooters, and strollers while at WDW, I do not want to have to dodge luggage carts out of control. I have no problem with them remaining in the hands of Disney.

Every resort has luggage assistance if you need it. So I see no reason to have the carts.


----------



## Doctor P

Chuck S said:


> At a Hampton Inn in the FL panhandle they had luggage carts for guests use,  Some guests would basically collect the cart at night, and keep it in their room so they had use of it at their convenience.  One of those guests had kids, and they were skateboarding on two carts down the second floor hallway.  After a call to the front desk, the manager took the carts to the normal storage area near the door, where they quickly disappeared back into someones room for the duration of the night.
> 
> Why would it be different with unmonitored carts at Disney?




My conception of the luggage carts would be of the type they have at the HH resort.  I don't think those carts would fit into a room, nor would anyone want one in their room, LOL.  They are for heavy duty moving of large amounts of luggage.  They would fit in elevators and would fit in the hallways.   BTW, I would add BCV as a place where I think the luggage carts would work as well as the ones that Dean speculated about.


----------



## Doctor P

Sammie said:


> I don't imagine it would be any different, I have to dodge scooters, and strollers while at WDW, I do not want to have to dodge luggage carts out of control. I have no problem with them remaining in the hands of Disney.
> 
> Every resort has luggage assistance if you need it. So I see no reason to have the carts.



I was quite glad to tip the bell services for their assistance while we were using valet parking.  Perhaps the answer is to put a bell stand in the self parking area if that is the issue.


----------



## Sammie

Doctor P said:


> I was quite glad to tip the bell services for their assistance while we were using valet parking.  Perhaps the answer is to put a bell stand in the self parking area if that is the issue.



You can still use bell services even if you don't valet, and even at OKW and SSR where there is no valet. Just pull up, ask them to take your luggage and then park your car.

Not as convenient as valet but at least you don't have to deal with your luggage unless you want to. 

I agree that some improvements to the parking lot situation need to be made and I shared my concerns with MS and I feel they will pass them on. I also shared them with Disney guest communications since most of the problems are the resorts with shared facilities.


----------



## Doctor P

Sammie said:


> You can still use bell services even if you don't valet, and even at OKW and SSR where there is no valet. Just pull up, ask them to take your luggage and then park your car.
> 
> Not as convenient as valet but at least you don't have to deal with your luggage unless you want to.
> 
> I agree that some improvements to the parking lot situation need to be made and I shared my concerns with MS and I feel they will pass them on. I also shared them with Disney guest communications since most of the problems are the resorts with shared facilities.



Fully understood and realized.  Actually, I think the only issues are at resorts with shared facilities because I don't think there is valet parking at resorts with non-shared facilities.


----------



## SteffyLou

Hello All,

Just wanted to let you know what happened to my husband and I yesterday.

We are DVC members and did not know about the valet being taken away until yesterday.

We were staying at another hotel and pulled up to the Boardwalk so we could eat lunch there.  We showed our DVC card at the gate and pulled up to valet.  When we got up there we were told that we no longer received free DVC however if we had Tables in Wonderland we could receive it. While we do have TiW, we forgot the card at home.

So then we said forget it, we will just self park.  Well they have changed this at Boardwalk.  Every parking lot now has a security guard standing at it.  You can't get into it unless you are staying at the Boardwalk.  

So we went across the street to the other self parking lot.  There was another guard there who told us, "Sorry we are full. You can't park here, " even though we were hotel guests and DVC members.

We ended up having to go to the Beach Club and walk to Boardwalk for our lunch reservations.


----------



## Sammie

Doctor P said:


> Fully understood and realized.  Actually, I think the only issues are at resorts with shared facilities because I don't think there is valet parking at resorts with non-shared facilities.



No valet at OKW and SSR but they do offer luggage assistance if you need it. 

In fact if you need it there, they will meet you at your room and help you unload it from the car and take it to your room. 

At the shared facilites, BWV, VWL, BLT, AKV and BCV you can still use bell services to take your luggage.

So while the loss of valet services is something I will miss, it should not affect anyone in dealing with their luggage. That has not changed.


----------



## jekjones1558

> You can still use bell services even if you don't valet, and even at OKW and SSR where there is no valet. Just pull up, ask them to take your luggage and then park your car.



I don't know how things are working now but my experience with bell services has been different since valet was outsourced.  When we have pulled up to the entrance it is valet who has taken the luggage.  Then, when the luggage gets inside the hotel, responsibility is transferred to bell services.  Since the two services have different employers and do not share tips, it seems to require tips for those unloading (valet) and a separate tip to those who bring luggage to the room (bell services).  I have not seen bell services outside of the building since valet was outsourced.  Perhaps others could post regarding this issue.


----------



## Sammie

jekjones1558 said:


> I don't know how things are working now but my experience with bell services has been different since valet was outsourced.  When we have pulled up to the entrance it is valet who has taken the luggage.  Then, when the luggage gets inside the hotel, responsibility is transferred to bell services.  Since the two services have different employers and do not share tips, it seems to require tips for those unloading (valet) and a separate tip to those who bring luggage to the room (bell services).  I have not seen bell services outside of the building since valet was outsourced.  Perhaps others could post regarding this issue.



Even if you do not wish to valet your car, you can still use assistance to get your luggage. I have confirmed this with the BWV. I was instructed to simply ask them to hold your luggage and then go park your car. When you get your room call for your luggage. 

Also as noted due to the Food and Wine and change to Valet they are securing the parking lot to make sure all guests staying at the resort will have a place to park. 

As to tipping, it has always been seperate to me. I tipped the person taking my luggage and the person bringing it to me, as it was different people.


----------



## CR Resort Fan 4 Life

Sammie said:


> Even if you do not wish to valet your car, you can still use assistance to get your luggage. I have confirmed this with the BWV. I was instructed to simply ask them to hold your luggage and then go park your car. When you get your room call for your luggage.


That's exactly what my family and I have done each time we have stayed at the Contemporary. Now since we stay Club Level it's a bit different because a Cast Member takes us up to our floor so we can check-in and the bellman takes our luggae up going on some service elevator only for Cast Members. However the process is still the same when we arrive because they un load our luggage and my dad says he wants to park our car which they don't mind him doing.


----------



## Dean

Doctor P said:


> BTW, I would add BCV as a place where I think the luggage carts would work as well as the ones that Dean speculated about.


One of the criteria I used in thinking about which ones would work well was a place to store the carts, another was the distance and retrieving the carts back for those departing.  These were the areas where BCV, BLT, VLW and BWV didn't fit to me, even for the side entrance at BCV & BWV.  Still, that doesn't mean they're unworkable at any of them if DVC chose to go that route.


----------



## Sammie

Why would Disney provide carts when they have staff getting paid and wanting tips to provide that service.


----------



## Tara

Sammie said:


> Why would Disney provide carts when they have staff getting paid and wanting tips to provide that service.



And frankly, guests are already hard enough on the resorts as it is. The last thing I want to see is luggage cart dings and scrapes all along the hallways in my DVC home.


----------



## cutakenta

SteffyLou said:


> Hello All,
> 
> Just wanted to let you know what happened to my husband and I yesterday.
> 
> We are DVC members and did not know about the valet being taken away until yesterday.
> 
> We were staying at another hotel and pulled up to the Boardwalk so we could eat lunch there.  We showed our DVC card at the gate and pulled up to valet.  When we got up there we were told that we no longer received free DVC however if we had Tables in Wonderland we could receive it. While we do have TiW, we forgot the card at home.
> 
> So then we said forget it, we will just self park.  Well they have changed this at Boardwalk.  Every parking lot now has a security guard standing at it.  You can't get into it unless you are staying at the Boardwalk.
> 
> So we went across the street to the other self parking lot.  There was another guard there who told us, "Sorry we are full. You can't park here, " even though we were hotel guests and DVC members.
> 
> We ended up having to go to the Beach Club and walk to Boardwalk for our lunch reservations.




I guess Disney wants everyone to sit on the bus like a herd of cattle. I hate the buses and refuse to be at the mercy of them. 

Disney is starting the "New Disney Experience", drive up to the front on the resort and throw your money out the window and just use your imagination on how good it might have been.


----------



## photobob

SteffyLou said:


> Hello All,
> 
> Just wanted to let you know what happened to my husband and I yesterday.
> 
> We are DVC members and did not know about the valet being taken away until yesterday.
> 
> We were staying at another hotel and pulled up to the Boardwalk so we could eat lunch there.  We showed our DVC card at the gate and pulled up to valet.  When we got up there we were told that we no longer received free DVC however if we had Tables in Wonderland we could receive it. While we do have TiW, we forgot the card at home.
> 
> So then we said forget it, we will just self park.  Well they have changed this at Boardwalk.  Every parking lot now has a security guard standing at it.  You can't get into it unless you are staying at the Boardwalk.
> 
> So we went across the street to the other self parking lot.  There was another guard there who told us, "Sorry we are full. You can't park here, " even though we were hotel guests and DVC members.
> 
> We ended up having to go to the Beach Club and walk to Boardwalk for our lunch reservations.



I have mixed feelings about this. On one hand I am glad that they are monitoring the parking lots making sure resorts guests have a place to park, but on the other hand I think a dining reservation at the Boardwalk should allow you to have a place to park.


----------



## disneynutz

jekjones1558 said:


> I don't know how things are working now but my experience with bell services has been different since valet was outsourced.  When we have pulled up to the entrance it is valet who has taken the luggage.  Then, when the luggage gets inside the hotel, responsibility is transferred to bell services.  Since the two services have different employers and do not share tips, it seems to require tips for those unloading (valet) and a separate tip to those who bring luggage to the room (bell services).  I have not seen bell services outside of the building since valet was outsourced.  Perhaps others could post regarding this issue.



You are correct. We have found this to be true at all Valet locations. Valet expects a tip and Bell Services expects a tip. Also your luggage may sit on the cart for awhile due to Bell Services being busy or short handed. Last year they lost all of our food and luggage between the Valet and Bell Services. A couple of hours later they found the cart in a storage room. 

 Bill


----------



## adminjedi

cutakenta said:


> I guess Disney wants everyone to sit on the bus like a herd of cattle. I hate the buses and refuse to be at the mercy of them.
> 
> Disney is starting the "New Disney Experience", drive up to the front on the resort and throw your money out the window and just use your imagination on how good it might have been.



You have the option of staying home - I don't think they have cornered the market on mind control and are forcing you to spend your time and money there!
That would mean one less person on the bus for the rest of us to enjoy the ride!


----------



## TiggerAllie

We checked into VWL Friday night (ok Sat AM due to plane delays), and I totally would have used the valet if it was complimentary because it was so late and I was tired. Oh well.

They need to update their information, because the "Portable Perks" flyer they give you when you check in, still says "Effective Aug 4 2009, complimentary parking at" AKL, BC, BW, BLT, WL. That's going to confuse some guests that don't read the board (or the web) for DVC info.


----------



## granmanh603

photobob said:


> I have mixed feelings about this. On one hand I am glad that they are monitoring the parking lots making sure resorts guests have a place to park, but on the other hand I think a dining reservation at the Boardwalk should allow you to have a place to park.



where at Boardwalk can you make reservations for lunch?


----------



## granmanh603

Staying here at BWV now...early yesterday morning (around 10:30) there was a long line trying to get in to BWV at gate and a stream of cars going to the self park across the street(and I mean alot ).  When we came back at around 1:30 still long line at guard gate  but we used room key to get thru gate but still had to show it and parking pass to park inside parking lot but at least could park....but at 5 that lot was filled too.  I don't know what they did with people who were checking in or coming back after that.  Oh no guard there then either.
Our room is near valet parking and there has been little business for them, except maybe yesterday. I think I did see bell people yesterday.


----------



## Dean

disneynutz said:


> You are correct. We have found this to be true at all Valet locations. Valet expects a tip and Bell Services expects a tip. Also your luggage may sit on the cart for awhile due to Bell Services being busy or short handed. Last year they lost all of our food and luggage between the Valet and Bell Services. A couple of hours later they found the cart in a storage room.
> 
> Bill


The standard for tipping for luggage is at the final destination of the bags (room on arrival, car on departure).  All of the CM and valet's know this.  But if they act like they're supposed to get a tip, they often do, sometimes it's deserved, others it is not.  I wonder if the tips and # of trips for bell services will go down due to this change, I'm guessing it will maybe 10-20% but will be the first to admit that's a sheer guess based on essentially no data.


----------



## Dean

cutakenta said:


> I guess Disney wants everyone to sit on the bus like a herd of cattle. I hate the buses and refuse to be at the mercy of them.
> 
> Disney is starting the "New Disney Experience", drive up to the front on the resort and throw your money out the window and just use your imagination on how good it might have been.


This is not a paradigm shift of how guest vacation or how Disney expects them to vacation or travel.  With very few exceptions, everyone who had a car now will still have one and those that didn't, won't.  Those that drive to the parks (like us) will still do so and those that used the bus will cont that method.  At the worst they have increased a given members costs $12 a day rather than passing that cost on to the membership at large to subsidize those that cont to valet park.  This is a small subset of the membership and an even smaller % of the overall guests.  

There is one small consolation for those that are so upset.  IF you pay for valet, you now don't have to worry about where you can valet park and where you can't.


----------



## dvcdenise

When I arrive at Boardwalk can I dirve up to the door and unload my luggage and then go self park. Same for leaving, have a person stay with luggage at circle and then go get the car and drive up and load the luggage. I will not pay for valet then tip. So I will self park, simple as that. I will miss it dearly. 
When I stay at OKW I miss the elevators. Dont think our complaining will change it. I do believe the parking at Boardwalk will be addressed by Disney and better parking will be provided.


----------



## Chuck S

dvcdenise said:


> When I arrive at Boardwalk can I dirve up to the door and unload my luggage and then go self park. Same for leaving, have a person stay with luggage at circle and then go get the car and drive up and load the luggage. I will not pay for valet then tip. So I will self park, simple as that. I will miss it dearly.
> When I stay at OKW I miss the elevators. Dont think our complaining will change it. I do believe the parking at Boardwalk will be addressed by Disney and better parking will be provided.



Yes, you can unload at the door, likely with the help of a valet or bellman, whom you should remember with a gratuity as you would anyone that handles your luggage, similar to a skycap at the airport.  I would imagine the valets will be unloading the cars, then turning it over to bell services, then Bell Services will deliver to your room, or store your luggage as needed.


----------



## Dean

One can certainly get help from the bell services but it is not required, never has been.


----------



## Sammie

Chuck S said:


> Yes, you can unload at the door, likely with the help of a valet or bellman, whom you should remember with a gratuity as you would anyone that handles your luggage, similar to a skycap at the airport.  I would imagine the valets will be unloading the cars, then turning it over to bell services, then Bell Services will deliver to your room, or store your luggage as needed.



Yes that is what will happen and you simply tell them you wish to self park but need luggage assistance. When your room is ready you can call for luggage.


----------



## photobob

granmanh603 said:


> where at Boardwalk can you make reservations for lunch?



Big River Brewery accepts reservations for lunch, I don't know about the place that replaced Spoodles, they may not serve lunch. ESPN is also open for lunch but doesn't take reservations, speaking of which does the fact that they don't take reservations preclude you from being able to park and eat there?

So if what I am reading is correct about BWV only allowing resort guests to park in the self park, what do you do if you are staying elsewhere and want to dine at one of the restaurants?


----------



## Sammie

photobob said:


> Big River Brewery accepts reservations for lunch, I don't know about the place that replaced Spoodles, they may not serve lunch. ESPN is also open for lunch but doesn't take reservations, speaking of which does the fact that they don't take reservations preclude you from being able to park and eat there?
> 
> So if what I am reading is correct about BWV only allowing resort guests to park in the self park, what do you do if you are staying elsewhere and want to dine at one of the restaurants?



My understanding this new policy is a result of the loss of valet for DVC and to ensure BW resort guests do have a place to park. I imagine it will only be enforced during peak times such as Food and Wine. The over flow lot behind the Hess gas station is available for day guests but if it is full you will be turned away. The other options are to valet, taxi or take a Disney bus or park at the Studios and take the boat or walk over.


----------



## Dean

Sammie said:


> My understanding this new policy is a result of the loss of valet for DVC and to ensure BW resort guests do have a place to park. I imagine it will only be enforced during peak times such as Food and Wine. The over flow lot behind the Hess gas station is available for day guests but if it is full you will be turned away. The other options are to valet, taxi or take a Disney bus or park at the Studios and take the boat or walk over.


It's very likely they'll reduce the size of the valet lot at some point.  If it's not a contractual issue, likely fairly soon, if it's in the contract they provide X spaces, expect that item to change with the next contract.


----------



## TLSnell1981

OMG at bwv now. This valet fiasco is unreal. You can't get to the front door. Bellman said this is one of dvc's brighter ideas. It is a massive mess. Cars left unattended everywhere!!


----------



## Sammie

Dean said:


> It's very likely they'll reduce the size of the valet lot at some point.  If it's not a contractual issue, likely fairly soon, if it's in the contract they provide X spaces, expect that item to change with the next contract.



I would think so, can't imagine with this change it won't drop off some at the DVC resorts that did offer valet. If it is contractual then it won't happen until this time next year.


----------



## Sammie

TLSnell1981 said:


> OMG at bwv now. This valet fiasco is unreal. You can't get to the front door. Bellman said this is one of dvc's brighter ideas. It is a massive mess. Cars left unattended everywhere!!



While I hated to lose this perk, there is no reason for people to be idiots over it. You pull up, you let them get your luggage then you move your car. After you self park, then you go in to check in. 

I will say that during peak times at the BW even with valet provided it can get very congested.

I might be against something but I certainly won't act a yerk over it.


----------



## DebbieB

TLSnell1981 said:


> OMG at bwv now. This valet fiasco is unreal. You can't get to the front door. Bellman said this is one of dvc's brighter ideas. It is a massive mess. Cars left unattended everywhere!!



Are cars being left unattended because there are no parking spaces?


----------



## Dean

DebbieB said:


> Are cars being left unattended because there are no parking spaces?


Likely people that would have otherwise valet parked and trying to get their luggage taken care of and this added to the normal traffic who are using the valet and those that routinely were dropping off/picking up anyway.  Some likely letting the cars sit there while they check in and this is inappropriate.  The staff will need to tell people they can't leave the cars unattended and then to ensure that people move the cars if it's more than just load/unload.  They'll also likely have to do away with the call first to get the car and only get cars when people are present when they have used valet.  I'm sure it's not related to the availability of parking in any way but the loss of free valet.


----------



## Mickey'sApprentice

I wonder if all of this will de-value the BWV points through resale.

BCV was already selling at a premium over BWV because of SAB and the fewer number of villas. How will horrible parking problems effect this all?

and yes, I know DVC will have to do something about the situation at the Boardwalk.  I'm guessing they will majorly decrease the size of the valet lot or even do away with the service all together.



The resort managers should have AT LEAST been given a head's up so that they could plan for the parking problems!


----------



## Brian Noble

> This is not a paradigm shift of how guest vacation or how Disney expects them to vacation or travel. With very few exceptions, everyone who had a car now will still have one and those that didn't, won't. Those that drive to the parks (like us) will still do so and those that used the bus will cont that method. At the worst they have increased a given members costs $12 a day rather than passing that cost on to the membership at large to subsidize those that cont to valet park.


I'd imagine that if anything changes, a few Members who rented cars when valet was included won't bother now that it is not.


----------



## Chuck S

Dean said:


> Likely people that would have otherwise valet parked and trying to get their luggage taken care of and this added to the normal traffic who are using the valet and those that routinely were dropping off/picking up anyway.  Some likely letting the cars sit there while they check in and this is inappropriate.  The staff will need to tell people they can't leave the cars unattended and then to ensure that people move the cars if it's more than just load/unload.  They'll also likely have to do away with the call first to get the car and only get cars when people are present when they have used valet.  I'm sure it's not related to the availability of parking in any way but the loss of free valet.



Probably, but that should kind have been expected.  While valet has never been available at OKW, after the resort first opened it was common to leave your car in the circle, go check-in, then move your car.  They stopped allowing that, and painted the curbing red when it became an obvious problem.  Now you can drop your luggage and go park if you wish.  The valet and bell services people could ask the people at bwv to move their cars, like they do at OKW, no real need for security to be involved.  No other resort, that I know of, allows you to simply leave your car in the drop off circles.


----------



## TLSnell1981

CM said they no longer have anything to do with parking because it was outsourced. And it's a mess we hired limo service and couldn't get to the door. Had to take our bags and walk.


----------



## jlewisinsyr

Dean said:


> They'll also likely have to do away with the call first to get the car and only get cars when people are present when they have used valet.  I'm sure it's not related to the availability of parking in any way but the loss of free valet.



HORRIBLE IDEA!  If they do that, their valet would be even worst then it normally is.


----------



## Alexander

Here's what I don't understand.....It is $12 lousy dollars.  Seriously, there isn't a lot you can buy in WDW for $12.  Obviously at some locations (BW for one) $12 is a good value for what you are getting.

It's perfectly acceptable to drop tens of thousands of dollars on membership, hundreds of dollars on admission tickets, more hundreds on food, but people don't want to pay $12 for valet parking?  It's twelve lousy dollars!  Seriously--get over it!  And if you can't get over it--move on!


----------



## Dean

jlewisinsyr said:


> HORRIBLE IDEA!  If they do that, their valet would be even worst then it normally is.


Some places do this already.  What it does is prevent the backlog of people who call and then don't get down in a reasonable period of time with the car sitting in the way.


----------



## DebbieB

Dean said:


> Likely people that would have otherwise valet parked and trying to get their luggage taken care of and this added to the normal traffic who are using the valet and those that routinely were dropping off/picking up anyway.  Some likely letting the cars sit there while they check in and this is inappropriate.  The staff will need to tell people they can't leave the cars unattended and then to ensure that people move the cars if it's more than just load/unload.  They'll also likely have to do away with the call first to get the car and only get cars when people are present when they have used valet.  I'm sure it's not related to the availability of parking in any way but the loss of free valet.



Since we aren't there, we don't know what really happened this afternoon.  There have been several reports of the Boardwalk lot being full this past week.   The Boardwalk valet area has always been a mess, especially during F & W and on weekends.  Sunday is a heavy check-in day.     My guess is they are short staffed and are not parking the cars fast enough.



Brian Noble said:


> I'd imagine that if anything changes, a few Members who rented cars when valet was included won't bother now that it is not.



I will still rent a car but will not use the valet.  I usually used it 2 or 3 times on a trip - check-in, check-out (I would put it in valet the night before) and possibly if it was raining or if the lot was full.   I refuse to be a slave to the Disney bus system or be captive on property by not renting a car. 

In the mornings, the main self park is usually about half full.  So that should be mostly people staying at the hotel.   Even if some of the people staying in the hotel were using valet, it should not fill that lot up completely.   I think they should put a gate on it and a room key slot to open it.   Have people visiting the boardwalk use the lot on the left or the lot on the other side of the street.     Maybe put some 30 minute spaces on the left closest to the hotel for check-in, like they do at AKV Kidani.


----------



## MsAmerica

I have not read this entire thread so I am not sure if this point has been made or not.

This loss of complimentary valet doesn't personally effect us as we only stay at BCV's. However, I am very sympathetic for members who own at BWV's as I do believe this impacts guests staying their who either drive to WDW or rent a car.

I know many members don't feel that they should have their dues raised in order to pay for this service but we as members do realize that many guests who have a car with them are not driving the buses to the park, correct?

We always rent a car and rarely use the Disney buses....However, I am paying dues for the guests that rely solely on Disney transportation. Should we start charging to use the bus so our dues aren't raised also? I think not! 

I hope all the members who are saying "tough, I am not having my dues increased so you get to valet your car free" understand that the guests who don't use Disney buses are paying dues so you can ride that bus.

Just my opinion... 

MsA


----------



## disneynutz

MsAmerica said:


> I have not read this entire thread so I am not sure if this point has been made or not.
> 
> This loss of complimentary valet doesn't personally effect us as we only stay at BCV's. However, I am very sympathetic for members who own at BWV's as I do believe this impacts guests staying their who either drive to WDW or rent a car.
> 
> I know many members don't feel that they should have their dues raised in order to pay for this service but we as members do realize that many guests who have a car with them are not driving the buses to the park, correct?
> 
> We always rent a car and rarely use the Disney buses....However, I am paying dues for the guests that rely solely on Disney transportation. Should we start charging to use the bus so our dues aren't raised also? I think not!
> 
> I hope all the members who are saying "tough, I am not having my dues increased so you get to valet your car free" understand that the guests who don't use Disney buses are paying dues so you can ride that bus.
> 
> Just my opinion...
> 
> MsA



BCV has Valet also so it could affect you.

 Bill


----------



## CarolMN

MsAmerica said:


> I have not read this entire thread so I am not sure if this point has been made or not.
> 
> This loss of complimentary valet doesn't personally effect us as we only stay at BCV's. However, I am very sympathetic for members who own at BWV's as I do believe this impacts guests staying their who either drive to WDW or rent a car.
> 
> I know many members don't feel that they should have their dues raised in order to pay for this service but we as members do realize that many guests who have a car with them are not driving the buses to the park, correct?
> 
> We always rent a car and rarely use the Disney buses....However, I am paying dues for the guests that rely solely on Disney transportation. Should we start charging to use the bus so our dues aren't raised also? I think not!
> 
> I hope all the members who are saying "tough, I am not having my dues increased so you get to valet your car free" understand that the guests who don't use Disney buses are paying dues so you can ride that bus.
> 
> Just my opinion...
> 
> MsA


But think how crowded the roads and parking lots would be if those who ride the buses decided to drive instead.  IMO,the buses benefit those who drive just as much as those who ride them.


----------



## TLSnell1981

Sammie said:


> While I hated to lose this perk, there is no reason for people to be idiots over it. You pull up, you let them get your luggage then you move your car. After you self park, then you go in to check in.
> 
> I will say that during peak times at the BW even with valet provided it can get very congested.
> 
> I might be against something but I certainly won't act a yerk over it.



I would I had taken a picture, but my hands were full. The entire covered area, by the door, was completely packed. The attendants were trying to squeeze traffic into on lane, but it was backed up to the parking lot. Our driver said, he'd never seen this; We just had him drop us off when we reached the first place to turn around.  We'd were in line for 15-20 minutes and traffic hadn't moved.

My understanding....folks were checking in. There seems to be a lot of confusion.


----------



## DVC Mike

disneynutz said:


> BCV has Valet also so it could affect you.
> 
> Bill


 
But self-parking at BCV is so close and convenient, so why bother with valet?

When I've used valet at DVC resorts, I've used it the most at BWV.


----------



## Tara

Alexander said:


> Here's what I don't understand.....It is $12 lousy dollars.  Seriously, there isn't a lot you can buy in WDW for $12.  Obviously at some locations (BW for one) $12 is a good value for what you are getting.
> 
> It's perfectly acceptable to drop tens of thousands of dollars on membership, hundreds of dollars on admission tickets, more hundreds on food, but people don't want to pay $12 for valet parking?  It's twelve lousy dollars!  Seriously--get over it!  And if you can't get over it--move on!



I think you'll find most posters in this thread are not concerned with the money involved, but the way in which the change was handled. Moreover, many seem curious about the dues implications and exactly what parking costs are folded into fees, what costs DVC shares with WDW resorts, and what might have prompted the change (i.e., contract changes with the valet provider).

IMO, $12 is still a rockin' good deal for daily valet with in-and-out privileges at ALL Disney valet resorts.


----------



## disneydreamingdebby

Tara, So valet is $12 a day. So I leave BCV and go to GF for breakfast, come back to BCV and nap. Leave and go to SSR for dinner. Return to BCV. I only have to pay once? This seems too good to be accurate. Am I understanding this correctly?


----------



## Mickey'sApprentice

You know quite frankly...this really effects people from the Southeast much more than people from other parts of the country. Yes, I know that people who fly sometimes rent a car.  However, some of us drive to WDW because it is much more reasonable financially for us to do that.

BTW, its not the $12/day that seems so unreasonable...its the $60 or $72 or $84 that we have to pay for our stay plus tips that seems pretty unreasonable. That's a lot of money just to let somebody park your car.

We let Disney park the car and we pick it back up when we leave to go home. That's not worth $60+.


----------



## palhockeymomof2

We have been at the bwv since thurs have had no parking issues there has been a guard at the self parking lot this weekend. I have not seen any mess at the front door and we have a sv room right there. As much as we loved and used the valet when it was free the self parking has been fine


----------



## queenie82

disneydreamingdebby said:


> Tara, So valet is $12 a day. So I leave BCV and go to GF for breakfast, come back to BCV and nap. Leave and go to SSR for dinner. Return to BCV. I only have to pay once? This seems too good to be accurate. Am I understanding this correctly?


Yes that is the case but it ISN'T that simple

You are expected to tip EVERY time you do this so it is WAY more than $12
THIS is why it is a rip off


----------



## Dean

disneydreamingdebby said:


> Tara, So valet is $12 a day. So I leave BCV and go to GF for breakfast, come back to BCV and nap. Leave and go to SSR for dinner. Return to BCV. I only have to pay once? This seems too good to be accurate. Am I understanding this correctly?


That is correct.  One charge per day with in and out at all disney resorts with valet.  



MsAmerica said:


> I have not read this entire thread so I am not sure if this point has been made or not.
> 
> This loss of complimentary valet doesn't personally effect us as we only stay at BCV's. However, I am very sympathetic for members who own at BWV's as I do believe this impacts guests staying their who either drive to WDW or rent a car.
> 
> I know many members don't feel that they should have their dues raised in order to pay for this service but we as members do realize that many guests who have a car with them are not driving the buses to the park, correct?
> 
> We always rent a car and rarely use the Disney buses....However, I am paying dues for the guests that rely solely on Disney transportation. Should we start charging to use the bus so our dues aren't raised also? I think not!
> 
> I hope all the members who are saying "tough, I am not having my dues increased so you get to valet your car free" understand that the guests who don't use Disney buses are paying dues so you can ride that bus.
> 
> Just my opinion...
> 
> MsA


The issue has been discussed from that point of view.  No one will use every item that is covered by dues, the question is where do you draw the line.  IMO, this is a very appropriate one for pay to play.  It's relatively expensive, it's not something that volume cuts the overall price dramatically (like the free internet), it's something easy to define and enforce (unlike the pool or exercise room).  I would turn your thinking upside down.  Why would it be appropriate for others to pay for my costs when there is no significant savings for the system to do so other than to shift my costs to others.


----------



## manning

TLSnell1981 said:


> CM said they no longer have anything to do with parking because it was outsourced. And it's a mess we hired limo service and couldn't get to the door. Had to take our bags and walk.



Now that's stupid. They think the limo is going to be parked?


----------



## dizkneedoll

I was asked to participate in a DVC survey via a postcard in the mail this past week.  Just got around to doing it this evening.  Quite a few questions regarding membership benefits such as dining discounts, tour discounts, Cirque discounts, and shopping discounts and how important they were to me and how often I used them.  Nothing regarding valet parking.  Also quite a few questions regarding exchange use and would you recommend DVC to others.  There were a few places where you could give feedback and I sure did in the area asking why I would not recommend DVC ... basically I said lack of communication and respect of members. My answer probably had something to do with the taking away of the free valet parking with no communication to membership.   Guess they are preparing for the meeting in December.  I know I will be at that meeting with bells on.


----------



## d-r

Tara said:


> I think you'll find most posters in this thread are not concerned with the money involved, but the way in which the change was handled. Moreover, many seem curious about the dues implications and exactly what parking costs are folded into fees, what costs DVC shares with WDW resorts, and what might have prompted the change (i.e., contract changes with the valet provider).
> 
> IMO, $12 is still a rockin' good deal for daily valet with in-and-out privileges at ALL Disney valet resorts.



I don't know, 12 bucks is 12 bucks as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## TLSnell1981

manning said:


> Now that's stupid. They think the limo is going to be parked?



No.  The car was trying to drop us off so we could check in.  The line wasn't moving. Folks were pulling up and leaving their vehicles. CM said something about uniforms were similar and guests were confusing valet for Disney emplyees?(I didn't hear everything. We've had about 4 hours sleep this weekend. My grandson decided to be born last night ......4 weeks early!! We got home after midnight and left for the airpot at 7am. Of course , I wasn't packed. It was soo hard leaving my new grandchild) I gathered the cm's were frustrated ...also the customers. They said yesterday and today was really bad

I m on my iPhone so sorry for the typos and grammar.


----------



## Chuck S

dizkneedoll said:


> I was asked to participate in a DVC survey via a postcard in the mail this past week.  Just got around to doing it this evening.  Quite a few questions regarding membership benefits such as dining discounts, tour discounts, Cirque discounts, and shopping discounts and how important they were to me and how often I used them.  Nothing regarding valet parking.  Also quite a few questions regarding exchange use and would you recommend DVC to others.  There were a few places where you could give feedback and I sure did in the area asking why I would not recommend DVC ... basically I said lack of communication and respect of members. My answer probably had something to do with the taking away of the free valet parking with no communication to membership.   Guess they are preparing for the meeting in December.  I know I will be at that meeting with bells on.



Don't worry, they don't even have to offer an open mike or answer member questions at those meetings, though they have traditionally done so.  If you've ever been to one, you know the real business meeting is the board meeting, that is fully scripted (as is the members meeting) and the board meeting allows no comments from the members at all.  If it gets to heated or intense, they'll simply shut it down.



TLSnell1981 said:


> My grandson decided to be born last night ......4 weeks early!!



Congratulations!!!


----------



## Tara

queenie82 said:


> Yes that is the case but it ISN'T that simple
> 
> You are expected to tip EVERY time you do this so it is WAY more than $12
> THIS is why it is a rip off



In my opinion it IS that simple, and tipping for service rendered is not a rip-off. Why WOULDN'T you be expected to tip each time? Someone is providing a service, parking the car and returning on foot, then retrieving the car on foot (often running). The reason it's such a good deal is that the price for the service is incredibly low, particularly. Clearly you disagree, but that's okay with me. That doesn't affect my opinion of the value of Disney valet. As I've said, I always paid for valet parking for our trips prior to DVC and will pay again now that the perk has been eliminated.


----------



## waltfan1957

manning said:


> Now that's stupid. They think the limo is going to be parked?



thats not what they said.


----------



## queenie82

Tara said:


> In my opinion it IS that simple, and tipping for service rendered is not a rip-off. Why WOULDN'T you be expected to tip each time? Someone is providing a service, parking the car and returning on foot, then retrieving the car on foot (often running). The reason it's such a good deal is that the price for the service is incredibly low, particularly. Clearly you disagree, but that's okay with me. That doesn't affect my opinion of the value of Disney valet. As I've said, I always paid for valet parking for our trips prior to DVC and will pay again now that the perk has been eliminated.


My POINT is that nothing in the US is ever the price it says it is.
$12  + tips
So valet is NOT $12 per day. It is $12 PLUS tips every time you get the car moved.

Although YOU may assume this given you live in a tipping culture not ALL people do. So I think it worth mentioning the FACTS of the matter.
A couple dollars here or there may be nothing to you but $12 is $12 and $2 is $2 and it adds up. A couple of moves of the car and you are over $20.


----------



## Doctor P

Alexander said:


> Here's what I don't understand.....It is $12 lousy dollars.  Seriously, there isn't a lot you can buy in WDW for $12.  Obviously at some locations (BW for one) $12 is a good value for what you are getting.
> 
> It's perfectly acceptable to drop tens of thousands of dollars on membership, hundreds of dollars on admission tickets, more hundreds on food, but people don't want to pay $12 for valet parking?  It's twelve lousy dollars!  Seriously--get over it!  And if you can't get over it--move on!




Per day, not per visit.  $12 PER DAY.  And if I was getting value for that and had a choice, I wouldn't complain.  I actually prefer self parking, but Disney made self parking at the valet resort so impossibly incovenient and unpredictable that we have never self parked for a resort stay where there was valet.


----------



## photobob

"Similar to other fee-based services, such as additional housekeeping service or additional room amenities, only those Members who choose to valet park will be charged, instead of increasing the annual dues for all Members to cover the costs."

How much longer will ME be free? We that drive help to subsidize this costly benefit with our maintenance fees. I know this is a "complimentary" service, not a "fee-based service", provided to anyone staying at a Walt Disney World where the valet was only complimentary for DVC members.  As long as ME is a free service for any WDW resort guest, surely it will remain so for DVC members. Right? Sorry if this strayed off topic I'm just wondering out loud here.


----------



## crisi

photobob said:


> "Similar to other fee-based services, such as additional housekeeping service or additional room amenities, only those Members who choose to valet park will be charged, instead of increasing the annual dues for all Members to cover the costs."
> 
> How much longer will ME be free? We that drive help to subsidize this costly benefit with our maintenance fees. I know this is a "complimentary" service, not a "fee-based service", provided to anyone staying at a Walt Disney World where the valet was only complimentary for DVC members.  As long as ME is a free service for any WDW resort guest, surely it will remain so for DVC members. Right? Sorry if this strayed off topic I'm just wondering out loud here.



We don't know that.  We don't know if member fees subsidize ME or if the contract with Mears for ME is paid completely out of Hotels or Marketing and Promotions and no fees are passed to DVC.  We also don't know how our "free" valet was paid for - whether that was being paid for by Mears as a cost of getting the contract, or if member fees were subsidizing it.  

My guess is ME will be free until the current contract with Mears is up.  When Mears goes to renegotiate the contract, they'll operate from a stronger position and Disney will be in a money saving mode they weren't in with the original contract.  Its unlikely at that point that DVC members will get "free" ME.

Remember when they put in ME there was a lot of speculation here that we wouldn't get it - it doesn't do Disney that much good to give it to DVC members for free - we are already captive.  And when we did get it, there didn't seem to be a corresponding increase in the transportation line on the dues.  So it doesn't appear that we are currently paying for it - they probably looked at it then as DVC members just taking up "extra" capacity on the buses.  But there are a lot more of us now than there were in the negotiation for the initial ME days - and a lot more of us proportionally to CRO guests - they've been adding DVC rooms, but have not been adding CRO rooms.


----------



## GNX231

I think this is sad. It seems to me that we (the dvc members) just keep getting things taking away, and the guy who never been too wdw who only goes once gets better services. I could go on and on four hours but i also have a great marketing strat. For the dvc team with regards to all these services.


----------



## hakepb

GNX231 said:


> I think this is sad. It seems to me that we (the dvc members) just keep getting things taking away, and the guy who never been too wdw who only goes once gets better services. I could go on and on four hours but i also have a great marketing strat. For the dvc team with regards to all these services.


In regards to Valet, we are now being treated exactly the same as "the guy who only goes once", same service, same price...  and DVC members pay much, much, much less for their accomodations to get that same service.  "The guy" should be ticked we got such a great deal.


----------



## jade1

crisi said:


> We don't know that.  We don't know if member fees subsidize ME or if the contract with Mears for ME is paid completely out of Hotels or Marketing and Promotions and no fees are passed to DVC.  We also don't know how our "free" valet was paid for - whether that was being paid for by Mears as a cost of getting the contract, or if member fees were subsidizing it.
> 
> My guess is ME will be free until the current contract with Mears is up.  When Mears goes to renegotiate the contract, they'll operate from a stronger position and Disney will be in a money saving mode they weren't in with the original contract.  Its unlikely at that point that DVC members will get "free" ME.



Why don't we know? 



crisi said:


> Remember when they put in ME there was a lot of speculation here that we wouldn't get it - *it doesn't do Disney that much good to give it to DVC members for free* - we are already captive.



Disagree. ME eliminated our trips to US and other FL destinations, we added more points and just stay at WDW. Without ME we always rented a car, which allowed us to dine/shop off site as well.


----------



## DebbieB

jade1 said:


> Why don't we know?



Every single cost isn't broken out in the budget we receive.   I would suspect that ME is included somewhere.   While you think ME is "free" at WDW resorts, I'm sure that it is included in the room rate.  Mears isn't doing it for free so that cost is being charged somewhere.  Same thing with housekeeping, if you stay on cash with CRO, it is included in your room rate, it's really not "free".


----------



## crisi

jade1 said:


> Why don't we know?



We don't know whose budget valet used to come out of or whose budget ME comes out of now. So if you are making the claim that other DVC members dues are subsidizing ME - we don't know that.  



> Disagree. ME eliminated our trips to US and other FL destinations, we added more points and just stay at WDW. Without ME we always rented a car, which allowed us to dine/shop off site as well.



Yep, but not at nearly the same profitability level as someone who is staying CRO.  We will have a little margin in dining, souvenirs, park tickets, etc.  But in the end, the dollar value of the average DVC guest isn't what the average CRO guest is.


----------



## DVCBELLE

hakepb said:


> In regards to Valet, we are now being treated exactly the same as "the guy who only goes once", same service, same price...  and DVC members pay much, much, much less for their accomodations to get that same service.  "The guy" should be ticked we got such a great deal.


Yes, that guy pays much much less for that trip...

but in the long run - I will spend many more dollars at WDW than that guy will ever think about!

Initial investment (including financing):  $19,200
Annual dues - for me is about $750
Annual Dining Plan: $700 (and my kids are still kids)
Annual Souveniors: $200
Annual tickets: $800

I figure Disney is getting at least $2500 a year from me - over the course of my contract - I will probably spend over $120,000 at WDW.  And I am points poor.  I would venture to say there are very few people outside of DVC that commit that much money to Disney over the course of their lifetime.  

There is such a thing in business called rewarding customer loyalty.  I have heard echoed on this thread MANY times that people would not feel comfortable reccomending DVC to a friend.  How much does that hurt their overall sales?  After all - if your members aren't out there championing the cause - you have a lot harder sell.


----------



## crisi

But does Disney care if they get one person who spends 120,000 at Disney or 50 who spend $2400?


----------



## tammymacb

photobob said:


> "Similar to other fee-based services, such as additional housekeeping service or additional room amenities, only those Members who choose to valet park will be charged, instead of increasing the annual dues for all Members to cover the costs."



I've never used "additional housekeeping"  As a matter of fact, I've never used housekeeping's services at all.  Since my longest stays are Sun-Fri, ( and those are rare ) the only housekeeping I receive, is the cleaning before and after my stay.  

At what point do you think that Disney should do away with all "extra" housekeeping?  It's a service that is paid for in my dues, yet, I've never used it.  ( Or ME for that matter ) Why should I pay for that?


----------



## jade1

crisi said:


> But does Disney care if they get one person who spends 120,000 at Disney or 50 who spend $2400?



Probably not, but how about 300,000 (and climbing) that spend 120,000?


----------



## DVCBELLE

crisi said:


> But does Disney care if they get one person who spends 120,000 at Disney or 50 who spend $2400?


If they truly don't care - why would they have ever started DVC?




			
				jade1 said:
			
		

> Probably not, but how about 300,000 (and climbing) that spend 120,000?



And I only own 150 points and I bought in around $80 a point....now the points are around $112.  In addition, I am points poor.  I would imagine my DVC invetment is much lower than others.

DH and I have always thought we would add on when this contract was paid off - which is next spring but have decided we don't want to commit anymore vacation dollars to Disney right now.  If I need more points - then I will rent them.


----------



## jade1

crisi said:


> Yep, but not at nearly the same profitability level as someone who is staying CRO.  We will have a little margin in dining, souvenirs, park tickets, etc.  But in the end, the dollar value of the average DVC guest isn't what the average CRO guest is.



What about the lost business to the competition?


----------



## crisi

DVCBELLE said:


> If they truly don't care - why would they have ever started DVC?



They want the steady income of visitors and the initial cash influx from DVC sales.  But once we join, we are low margin visitors.  The "base" - not the "cream"  The people you can depend on to cover your fixed costs, not the people that are going to pay your bonuses on get you making your numbers.


----------



## DVCBELLE

crisi said:


> They want the steady income of visitors and the initial cash influx from DVC sales.  But once we join, we are low margin visitors.  The "base" - not the "cream"  The people you can depend on to cover your fixed costs, not the people that are going to pay your bonuses on get you making your numbers.


And therein lies the problem - this attitude towards members who have dedicated a large chunk of money are not considered as valuable as customers who over the course of their life MIGHT drop $10,000 at Disney.


----------



## Maxwell

DVCBELLE said:


> And therein lies the problem - this attitude towards members who have dedicated a large chunk of money are not considered as valuable as customers who over the course of their life MIGHT drop $10,000 at Disney.



Agreed.


----------



## jade1

DVCBELLE said:


> And therein lies the problem - this attitude towards members who have dedicated a large chunk of money are not considered as valuable as customers who over the course of their life MIGHT drop $10,000 at Disney.


----------



## Chuck S

tammymacb said:


> I've never used "additional housekeeping"  As a matter of fact, I've never used housekeeping's services at all.  Since my longest stays are Sun-Fri, ( and those are rare ) the only housekeeping I receive, is the cleaning before and after my stay.
> 
> At what point do you think that Disney should do away with all "extra" housekeeping?  It's a service that is paid for in my dues, yet, I've never used it.  ( Or ME for that matter ) Why should I pay for that?



Actually, you should have receive T&T services for a Sun to Fri stay, so you have used some housekeeping.


----------



## crisi

DVCBELLE said:


> And therein lies the problem - this attitude towards members who have dedicated a large chunk of money are not considered as valuable as customers who over the course of their life MIGHT drop $10,000 at Disney.



But whose problem is it?  Its only Disney's problem if it decreases their profitability.  Maybe it will, maybe it won't.  But they are probably a better judge of their revenue and margin impact than anyone here.


----------



## tammymacb

Chuck S said:


> Actually, you should have receive T&T services for a Sun to Fri stay, so you have used some housekeeping.




Actually, the one time I didn't split a Sun-Fri stay, and was at BWV, I sent the housekeeper away as she came late in the afternoon and we were resting up and getting ready for a dinner reservation.  I carry out my own trash, and recycle and wash my own towels as needed.  I've never used mousekeeping, but I pay for it.  I feel like if it's "OK" for the perks I use to go away to save budget, maybe I shouldn't have to pay for those I never use.


----------



## crisi

Chuck S said:


> Actually, you should have receive T&T services for a Sun to Fri stay, so you have used some housekeeping.



Everyone uses housekeeping.  You are either using it to make sure the room is clean before you get there, or you use it when someone cleans up after you when you leave - depending on your point of view.


----------



## Chuck S

DVCBELLE said:


> And therein lies the problem - this attitude towards members who have dedicated a large chunk of money are not considered as valuable as customers who over the course of their life MIGHT drop $10,000 at Disney.



But again, on a "per trip/per room turn" basis the cash customer generally fills the coffers more than a long term DVCers.  Simply put, we received substantial room discounts for pre-paying, as opposed to booking through CRO.  Also, the DVC resorts maintenance and taxes are paid for, whether we use our points or not, so no biggie to Disney of we choose to vacation elsewhere compared to a cash guest whom they rely upon to pay those base costs on cash rooms on a continuing basis.  It doesn't matter to them if one year the costs for the cash room are paid by John Doe and his family, and the next year by John Q Public and his family, as long as there is a body in the room paying the expenses.

Just as with DVC members, they don't care if we, the individual members, sell our contracts, just so the dues and fees are paid...it doesn't matter whose pocket the money comes from.  And really, why should it?

Here's another scenario to consider...what if the free valet perk had not been paid by members dues, but was paid by DVC marketing at a reasonable negotiated rate...sales are down, marketing no longer wants the expense and Mears wants an increase in the rate. Do you think dues should then assume to cost of valet?


----------



## tammymacb

crisi said:


> Everyone uses housekeeping.  You are either using it to make sure the room is clean before you get there, or you use it when someone cleans up after you when you leave - depending on your point of view.



Oh, come on, EVERY room at EVERY hotel/motel/timeshare is cleaned when you come and go.  You can't use that as an example, it's ridiculous.  

Do you know of ANYPLACE that you check in to a dirty room or pay someone to clean it first?

I pay for cleaning on checkin/checkout with my points.  It's part of room cost.  Just like CRO.  It's additional cleaning I'm talking about.  T&T and full cleaning for longer stays.  If I don't use it, why should I pay for that "perk"?  If you want those, pay for them, just like I'm supposed to do with my BWV valet...Why not?


----------



## DVCBELLE

I guess the real problem is that there will always be people who don't care how they are treated by businesses that they are loyal customers to. And as long as there are people with that attitude - the rest of us don't stand a chance.


----------



## crisi

DVCBELLE said:


> I guess the real problem is that there will always be people who don't care how they are treated by businesses that they are loyal customers to. And as long as there are people with that attitude - the rest of us don't stand a chance.



When I'm not getting the value out of my DVC, I'll sell it.  I suspect that won't be much longer - a few more years.


----------



## Chuck S

tammymacb said:


> Oh, come on, EVERY room at EVERY hotel/motel/timeshare is cleaned when you come and go.  You can't use that as an example, it's ridiculous.
> 
> Do you know of ANYPLACE that you check in to a dirty room or pay someone to clean it first?
> 
> I pay for cleaning on checkin/checkout with my points.  It's part of room cost.  Just like CRO.  It's additional cleaning I'm talking about.  T&T and full cleaning for longer stays.  If I don't use it, why should I pay for that "perk"?  If you want those, pay for them, just like I'm supposed to do with my BWV valet...Why not?



Limited housekeeping, similar to DVCs schedule, is pretty common within the timeshare industry...some provide more, some less, DVC is probably close to average.  Free valet parking, on the other hand, is certainly not the norm for a timeshare, and since it is contracted out, we ar enot privy to what type of subsidy Mars may be wanting from DVC to coninue the service...it may have been completely unreasonable compared to the number of guests that use it.

While I'm sure _most_ DVC guests welcome having clean towels at least once during a four day stay.  And actually, since you say you've split the four day stay between resorts, you did use more housekeeping per trip than the average DVCer.  Maybe they should institute a minumun stay to eliminate that additional cost.


----------



## DVCBELLE

crisi said:


> When I'm not getting the value out of my DVC, I'll sell it.  I suspect that won't be much longer - a few more years.


The problem is - you won't get value out of selling it either.


----------



## Chuck S

DVCBELLE said:


> I guess the real problem is that there will always be people who don't care how they are treated by businesses that they are loyal customers to. And as long as there are people with that attitude - the rest of us don't stand a chance.



And there are always those that feel entitled to much more than a business can reasonably provide...ask anyone who works retail.


----------



## tammymacb

Chuck S said:


> Limited housekeeping, similar to DVCs schedule, is pretty common within the timeshare industry...some provide more, some less, DVC is probably close to average.  Free valet parking, on the other hand, is certainly not the norm for a timeshare, and since it is contracted out, we ar enot privy to what type of subsidy Mars may be wanting from DVC to coninue the service...it may have been completely unreasonable compared to the number of guests that use it.
> 
> While I'm sure _most_ DVC guests welcome having clean towels at least once during a four day stay.  And actually, since you say you've split the four day stay between resorts, you did use more housekeeping per trip than the average DVCer.  Maybe they should institute a minumun stay to eliminate that additional cost.




While I am not a business man, nor do I play one on TV, my guess is Disney budgets a certain amount of housekeeping hours for check ins and check out's on a daily basis.  Those rooms have to be cleaned.  So, since I'm paying for the room, I'm not taking anything extra from the budget.  They have my points as payment for that check in/check/out cleaning.  

But I know that after check ins and outs, there are housekeepers all over the resort being hourly paid to do trash and towel and extra cleans.  That hourly pay comes from my dues and yours.  And whether I like it, use it or not, I will be billed for it.  So, again, why should I pay for something I don't use or need.  And, why is that more "needed" by DVC members ( who all have access to a washing machine for clean towels ) than a reasonable place to park at to check in?


----------



## crisi

DVCBELLE said:


> The problem is - you won't get value out of selling it either.



Nah, if it was worth nothing on the resale market tomorrow, we'd still feel like we got value out of the years we owned.


----------



## DVCBELLE

Chuck S said:


> And there are always those that feel entitled to much more than a business can reasonably provide...ask anyone who works retail.


I don't desire things they can't reasonably give me.  The main things I want are respect (I have actually had a cast member tell me  "oh that is for people who paid for their rooms"), a user friendly website, and good communication.    

I would like to know that if I drive to BWV that there will be a parking space for me and that I will not be forced to pay $12 for valet parking in the event the lot is full.


----------



## Deb & Bill

DVCBELLE said:


> The problem is - you won't get value out of selling it either.



So sell it for $25 a point.  It will go very fast.  Or Disney will take it back at that price.


----------



## Chuck S

tammymacb said:


> While I am not a business man, nor do I play one on TV, my guess is Disney budgets a certain amount of housekeeping hours for check ins and check out's on a daily basis.  Those rooms have to be cleaned.  So, since I'm paying for the room, I'm not taking anything extra from the budget.  They have my points as payment for that check in/check/out cleaning.
> 
> But I know that after check ins and outs, there are housekeepers all over the resort being hourly paid to do trash and towel and extra cleans.  That hourly pay comes from my dues and yours.  And whether I like it, use it or not, I will be billed for it.  So, again, why should I pay for something I don't use or need.  And, why is that more "needed" by DVC members ( who all have access to a washing machine for clean towels ) than a reasonable place to park at to check in?



So then, all DVCers should be able to have daily housekeeping. After all, they're paying for the room, right?  I glad you want that type of dues increase, but I suspect we'd hear complaints about that, too.


----------



## CarolAnnC

Chuck S said:


> So then, all DVCers should be able to have daily housekeeping. After all, they're paying for the room, right?  I glad you want that type of dues increase.



Exactly.  Some DVC members seem to be of the mindset that they are "renting" rooms from MS.  They are not.  They are timeshare owners.  The timeshare industry is far different from the standard hotel room industry.

Comparing CRO to DVC is like apples to oranges.  Two different entities, and rules are not the same.   If anyone cannot deal with the timeshare aspect, then selling their points (as some have already listed theirs over this valet change) is definitely the right way for them to go.

We all have choices and we can own the timeshare by choice, sell, or never buy in.  Me, I am staying right where I am!


----------



## tammymacb

Chuck S said:


> So then, all DVCers should be able to have daily housekeeping. After all, they're paying for the room, right?  I glad you want that type of dues increase, but I suspect we'd hear complaints about that, too.




I guess if you want to go through with checking in and out every day, then free housekeeping for you!  However, again, I find this comment ridiculous.  How many people are going to move out every morning and move in after 4 every evening to have a new room?  It won't happen.  

And, my question STILL hasn't been answered.  WHY if we're picking and choosing what "perks" should be kept, shouldn't they ALL go away.  A'la cart for all!  I can chose not to pay for additional housekeeping, gyms can have a swipe locked door, you can surf the net on your Iphone.  And dues can decrease..!

 ( oh, that one was funny! )

I shouldn't have to pay for your perks that I don't use, any more than you should have to pay for mine.

And, if you want to swap rooms every day, have at it, you must really want daily housekeeping bad!


----------



## tammymacb

CarolAnnC said:


> Exactly.  Some DVC members seem to be of the mindset that they are "renting" rooms from MS.  They are not.  They are timeshare owners.  The timeshare industry is far different from the standard hotel room industry.
> 
> Comparing CRO to DVC is like apples to oranges.  Two different entities, and rules are not the same.   If anyone cannot deal with the timeshare aspect, then selling their points (as some have already listed theirs over this valet change) is definitely the right way for them to go.
> 
> We all have choices and we can own the timeshare by choice, sell, or never buy in.  Me, I am staying right where I am!



We are renting a room.  We've paid X amount for the right to use points to trade for the room of our choice.  We pay for those rooms with said points. 

We also pay all extras on top of the actual room by paying annual dues.  

If you think we're doing anything more than entering a long term rental agreement, I'd love to hear how.


----------



## jekjones1558

And while we're at it, let's not provide high chairs or pack-n-plays.  Let's have those using them pay for renting them.  Maybe the same should go for coffee makers, toasters--no use for ALL members to pay for these things when not everyone uses them.  I wonder if there could be a coin machine added to the whirlpool tubs?


----------



## toocherie

Chuck S said:


> Free valet parking, on the other hand, is certainly not the norm for a timeshare, and since it is contracted out, we ar enot privy to what type of subsidy Mars may be wanting from DVC to coninue the service...it may have been completely unreasonable compared to the number of guests that use it.



Yes, but  most timeshares I have stayed at have more than adequate self-parking--clearly not the norm at DVC resorts (other than SSR and OKW).  For example, I suspect that BWV was built with the concept that valet parking would be utilized so there didn't have to be as big a parking area for self-parkers.


----------



## tammymacb

jekjones1558 said:


> And while we're at it, let's not provide high chairs or pack-n-plays.  Let's have those using them pay for renting them.  Maybe the same should go for coffee makers, toasters--no use for ALL members to pay for these things when not everyone uses them.  I wonder if there could be a coin machine added to the whirlpool tubs?



You know, when I ask a question, even a rethorical one, all I'm looking for is the occasional common sense answer.  

When you buy DVC, there is a list of room items that come with the room.  The toaster is on it, and I believe the pack and play is also.  Even though I may not use the toaster, I have no problem with it being there because it's on the contract and "believe it or not" I'm not a total moron.

So, when I question a'la cart perks VS toasters in the room, there is a difference.  At least, I know that.


----------



## Sammie

Hopefully if any member experiences problems finding a spot to self park now, they will let MS know. I definitely think that is a very reasonsable concern and I do feel that since security was turning people away at the BW last week, they are trying.


----------



## jekjones1558

tammymacb said:


> You know, when I ask a question, even a rethorical one, all I'm looking for is the occasional common sense answer.
> 
> When you buy DVC, there is a list of room items that come with the room.  The toaster is on it, and I believe the pack and play is also.  Even though I may not use the toaster, I have no problem with it being there because it's on the contract and "believe it or not" I'm not a total moron.
> 
> So, when I question a'la cart perks VS toasters in the room, there is a difference.  At least, I know that.



Sorry, I meant no disrespect.  It is just that I think it is impossible to set up a system that every member thinks is 100% fair.  At some point we have to be glad for the perks we use AND happy that others use the perks we may not need.  We rarely use valet but I was always happy to know that it was available for free to anyone DVCer who wanted it.  It is sad to see this gone.


----------



## PrincessV

Mickey'sApprentice said:


> You know quite frankly...this really effects people from the Southeast much more than people from other parts of the country.


  I live in FL and have been pondering the repeal of free valet since it was announced, thinking hard about how much and it what ways it affects me and just _why_ I'm so irritated by it.  I think it comes down to feeling stuck; ME won't come to my door to get me an hour and half away (I've asked  ), so driving is my only option until high-speed rail comes about.  Still, I wouldn't _have_ to use valet, except...



Doctor P said:


> I actually prefer self parking, but Disney made self parking at the valet resort so impossibly incovenient and unpredictable that we have never self parked for a resort stay where there was valet.



Yep.  I have a small child and often travel alone with him - parking across the street at BWV or in the far lots of VWL isn't a good option.  I can't afford to pay valet charges every day; the only reason DVC makes sense for me is the fact that I live so close, transportation is $10 for a WDW trip.

So really, what this decision has done for me is restrict me to the resorts at which I can readily self-park, SSR and OKW, maybe AKV Kidani.  Which is _my_ issue, not Disney's - they don't care where I stay, right?  

I suspect, when added to a lot of other "advantages" Floridians have lost over the years, I'm just a little bitter about this one.  Rational?  No.  But honest.


----------



## Brian Noble

> So really, what this decision has done for me is restrict me to the resorts at which I can readily self-park, SSR and OKW, maybe AKV Kidani.


Only if you really want to drive yourself to the parks.  If you are willing to let Disney do the driving, it doesn't much matter.  The bulk of the inconvenience isn't at arrival and departure---you can always drop your bags off with bell services at the port cochere when you arrive, and pick them up there when you depart.


----------



## tammymacb

And I meant no disrespect to you.

However, my point is still the same.  If Disney is going to have ANY perks that are taken from members dues, at what point is it decided what's worth "all of us" paying for and what's not?

I own BWV points ( though I'm selling ) and drive every trip.  I use valet EVERY trip.  You may feel you shouldn't pay for it.  You may own OKW, use ME every time, stay for two weeks and love having housekeeping come in and change your beds and vacuum for you.  I feel like I shouldn't have to pay for that.  Fair is fair.

This is why I think if you're going to take away some, take away all, and a la cart.  It's the only fair way for all members.


----------



## Brian Noble

> If Disney is going to have ANY perks that are taken from members dues, at what point is it decided what's worth "all of us" paying for and what's not?


Clearly, the entity doing the deciding is DVC.  How they make the decisions is never clear.  As per usual, they did not solicit input first, because that's not the way DVC---or, for that matter, The Walt Disney Company---does things.


----------



## Chuck S

tammymacb said:


> We are renting a room.  We've paid X amount for the right to use points to trade for the room of our choice.  We pay for those rooms with said points.
> 
> We also pay all extras on top of the actual room by paying annual dues.
> 
> If you think we're doing anything more than entering a long term rental agreement, I'd love to hear how.



Yes, but DVC also reserves the right to implement a minimum number of nights per stay, it is in the contract...and if they see a lot of members doing split stays and increasing dues because of the additional housekeeping required during a single WDW stay...guess what the next rule is going to be?


----------



## Frank in WI

As an owner of BWV, the elimination of the valet parking benefit opens another issue, in my opinion.  When we first bought at BWV, I tried to use self parking so that I could get to my car easily and didn't have to wait for the valet attendants.  Each night when trying to park, I could not find a space due to the others visiting Boardwalk and potentially Epcot.  The lots were full and I had to park across the street in the lot behind the gas station.  My only choices were to walk a long way across a busy road, or use valet parking.  Valet parking became the lesser of two evils.  I, wrongly, assumed that Disney was using valet parking as a way to help the self parking issue.

I will gladly go back to self parking if Disney will limit the parking area in front of the Boardwalk to "Boardwalk Resort Guests Only".  They should also make sure there is enough parking by reducing the spaces reserved for valet parking.  It is my opinion that any Boardwalk resort guest that wishes to self park have space available.

The fee is not my issue.  It's the lack of self parking at Boardwalk that needs to be handled properly.

Thanks for listening.


----------



## Sammie

Frank in WI said:


> As an owner of BWV, the elimination of the valet parking benefit opens another issue, in my opinion.  When we first bought at BWV, I tried to use self parking so that I could get to my car easily and didn't have to wait for the valet attendants.  Each night when trying to park, I could not find a space due to the others visiting Boardwalk and potentially Epcot.  The lots were full and I had to park across the street in the lot behind the gas station.  My only choices were to walked a long way across a busy road, or use valet parking.  Valet parking became the lesser of two evils.  I, wrongly, assumed that Disney was using valet parking as a way to help the self parking issue.
> 
> I will gladly go back to self parking if Disney will limit the parking area in front of the Boardwalk to "Boardwalk Resort Guests Only".  They should also make sure there is enough parking by reducing the spaces reserved for valet parking.  It is my opinion that any Boardwalk resort guest that wishes to self park have space available.
> 
> The fee is not my issue.  It's the lack of self parking at Boardwalk that needs to be handled properly.
> 
> Thanks for listening.



Be sure to let Member Satisfaction know this, they are going to have to make sure this is not a problem for members at the DVC resorts closest to parks.


----------



## crisi

tammymacb said:


> And I meant no disrespect to you.
> 
> However, my point is still the same.  If Disney is going to have ANY perks that are taken from members dues, at what point is it decided what's worth "all of us" paying for and what's not?
> 
> I own BWV points ( though I'm selling ) and drive every trip.  I use valet EVERY trip.  You may feel you shouldn't pay for it.  You may own OKW, use ME every time, stay for two weeks and love having housekeeping come in and change your beds and vacuum for you.  I feel like I shouldn't have to pay for that.  Fair is fair.
> 
> This is why I think if you're going to take away some, take away all, and a la cart.  It's the only fair way for all members.



In the very early days, the oldtimers have said OKW owners got daily housekeeping.  That changed fairly quickly.  But Disney apparently has changed the housekeeping situation before and may again.  

They really hold all the cards for anything not in the contract.  And they are a business - they'll do what they think is in their best interest.  When that is also in our best interest, its a sympathetic relationship - but when our interests aren't sympathetic....they'll resolve in their own favor.


----------



## Chuck S

crisi said:


> In the very early days, the oldtimers have said OKW owners got daily housekeeping.  That changed fairly quickly.  But Disney apparently has changed the housekeeping situation before and may again.
> 
> They really hold all the cards for anything not in the contract.  And they are a business - they'll do what they think is in their best interest.  When that is also in our best interest, its a sympathetic relationship - but when our interests aren't sympathetic....they'll resolve in their own favor.



I never heard that, if true, they changed it VERY early in the program, as we had limited housekeeping mentioned in our 1992 POS.  I do remember when park purchases were delivered directly to your rooms rather than having to pick them up at the store...that didn't last too long, and I'm sure it required more employee time, as well as caused possible problems, even at the cash resorts, with guests perhaps claiming that items were "missing" from their rooms (or packages) after the in-room delivery.


----------



## granmanh603

Sammie said:


> Hopefully if any member experiences problems finding a spot to self park now, they will let MS know. I definitely think that is a very reasonsable concern and I do feel that since security was turning people away at the BW last week, they are trying.



Well there was no one turning anyone away today at 2:30.  and the lot was packed....there was a guard there on Sat.  Now I am thinking it is only a short term, F&W fest thing not permanent thing on the weekend for a few hours...


----------



## Tara

queenie82 said:


> My POINT is that nothing in the US is ever the price it says it is.
> $12  + tips
> So valet is NOT $12 per day. It is $12 PLUS tips every time you get the car moved.
> 
> Although YOU may assume this given you live in a tipping culture not ALL people do. So I think it worth mentioning the FACTS of the matter.
> A couple dollars here or there may be nothing to you but $12 is $12 and $2 is $2 and it adds up. A couple of moves of the car and you are over $20.



But there is nothing different in the tips - DVC members still needed to tip for this service even when the service itself was free to them. As I said (and I was very careful to label my comments as my opinion), even at $12 for the service it is still an outstanding deal. The amount of tipping is irrelevant to me as that is the money I paid or any other member paid already.


----------



## Sammie

granmanh603 said:


> Well there was no one turning anyone away today at 2:30.  and the lot was packed....there was a guard there on Sat.  Now I am thinking it is only a short term, F&W fest thing not permanent thing on the weekend for a few hours...



Be sure to let MS know and I would also let the on duty manager at the Front Desk know also.


----------



## Dean

DVCBELLE said:


> And therein lies the problem - this attitude towards members who have dedicated a large chunk of money are not considered as valuable as customers who over the course of their life MIGHT drop $10,000 at Disney.


Some may take the other side.  That the attitude of the members expect special treatment and free things is part of hte problem.  



tammymacb said:


> This is why I think if you're going to take away some, take away all, and a la cart.  It's the only fair way for all members.


The only fair way is it look at each component and make an informed decision as to what is appropriate to be included and what is appropriate pay to play based on the % of members using a given option, the ease or difficulty of doing pay to play, the economy of scale for that item and the like.  No everything can be pay to play and not everything could be included, one has to draw a somewhat arbitrary line but based on appropriate data.  As such valet parking clearly falls on the side that should be pay to play because it's relatively expensive, there's little if any economy of scale and it's easy to define to the appropriate subgroup.  I would venture that the original agreement made the economy of scale work in favor of a cheap option and those savings have evaporated.

This change will have little or NO affect on the number of cars at the resorts in question, the only question is how they're parked and how many spaces valet needs or doesn't need.


----------



## waltfan1957

crisi said:


> But does Disney care if they get one person who spends 120,000 at Disney or 50 who spend $2400?



but to get that 50 they are giving discount after discount.


----------



## waltfan1957

Brian Noble said:


> Clearly, the entity doing the deciding is DVC.  How they make the decisions is never clear.  As per usual, they did not solicit input first, because that's not the way DVC---or, for that matter, The Walt Disney Company---does things.



come on, you know it was to enhance our membership


----------



## VrBchJ

waltfan1957 said:


> come on, you know it was to enhance our membership



Or because members requested it.


----------



## DVCBELLE

Dean said:


> Some may take the other side.  That the attitude of the members expect special treatment and free things is part of hte problem.
> 
> The only fair way is it look at each component and make an informed decision as to what is appropriate to be included and what is appropriate pay to play based on the % of members using a given option, the ease or difficulty of doing pay to play, the economy of scale for that item and the like.  No everything can be pay to play and not everything could be included, one has to draw a somewhat arbitrary line but based on appropriate data.  As such valet parking clearly falls on the side that should be pay to play because it's relatively expensive, there's little if any economy of scale and it's easy to define to the appropriate subgroup.  I would venture that the original agreement made the economy of scale work in favor of a cheap option and those savings have evaporated.
> 
> This change will have little or NO affect on the number of cars at the resorts in question, the only question is how they're parked and how many spaces valet needs or doesn't need.




I have said it before but I will say it again...

if you really look at the concern - most members are upset at losing this perk at BWV ONLY - why? Because the parking situation there is a mess.  I don't think it is an unreasonable expectation that there be ample parking available for me at the resort I am staying at.

I don't anyone who would be okay with making reservations at a hotel and showing up to find out that there is no where on grounds for them to park b/c people visiting the resort have used up the free parking lot.

This isn't about being greedy and having unreasonable expectations - it is about wanting to feel like you can continue to stay at your favorite resort and know that parking will be available for you.


----------



## SuzanneSLO

Dean said:


> . . .This change will have little or NO affect on the number of cars at the resorts in question, the only question is how they're parked and how many spaces valet needs or doesn't need.



As a BWV owner who has always rented a car and used valet, this change will make it more likely that we will not rent a car at all.  We actually enjoy using the busess to get to MK and AK, so we only used our car for grocery trips and to DTD.  With rental rates skyrocketing anyway, we were spending a lot of $$ for the convenience of having a car vs. using taxis.  With no free valet, this either increases the cost or reduces the convenience.

I would suspect that others staying at BWV will also decide not to rent a car.  -- Suzanne


----------



## crisi

Parking has always been a mess at the Contemporary as well - I'd expect that to be a problem with BLT being open.  

Its a mess at the Poly, but that isn't a DVC resort.  But its STILL a mess - and its no more pleasant to have to pay for valet when you are paying for a hotel room than when you are paying via points.  Especially at Deluxe resort prices.

When I went to dinner at the GF over a year ago, they ONLY allowed valet - no self park at all.    

Disney needs to do something about the parking situation at Deluxe resorts.


----------



## Sammie

crisi said:


> Parking has always been a mess at the Contemporary as well - I'd expect that to be a problem with BLT being open.
> 
> Its a mess at the Poly, but that isn't a DVC resort.  But its STILL a mess - and its no more pleasant to have to pay for valet when you are paying for a hotel room than when you are paying via points.  Especially at Deluxe resort prices.
> 
> When I went to dinner at the GF over a year ago, they ONLY allowed valet - no self park at all.
> 
> Disney needs to do something about the parking situation at Deluxe resorts.



You can self park at the GF, its just a long way across the street and yes the situation at the Polynesian is horrible. If and if is the operative word, they add DVC to the GF and the Polynesian can you imagine the headaches with parking.


----------



## disneynutz

SuzanneSLO said:


> As a BWV owner who has always rented a car and used valet, this change will make it more likely that we will not rent a car at all.  We actually enjoy using the busess to get to MK and AK, so we only used our car for grocery trips and to DTD.  With rental rates skyrocketing anyway, we were spending a lot of $$ for the convenience of having a car vs. using taxis.  With no free valet, this either increases the cost or reduces the convenience.
> 
> I would suspect that others staying at BWV will also decide not to rent a car.  -- Suzanne



So you could say that Disney was successful in making the policy change. Take away a perk, make more money from people who continue to use Valet while causing others to not rent cars, stay on property, and spend more money.

 Bill


----------



## Dean

DVCBELLE said:


> I have said it before but I will say it again...
> 
> if you really look at the concern - most members are upset at losing this perk at BWV ONLY - why? Because the parking situation there is a mess.  I don't think it is an unreasonable expectation that there be ample parking available for me at the resort I am staying at.
> 
> I don't anyone who would be okay with making reservations at a hotel and showing up to find out that there is no where on grounds for them to park b/c people visiting the resort have used up the free parking lot.
> 
> This isn't about being greedy and having unreasonable expectations - it is about wanting to feel like you can continue to stay at your favorite resort and know that parking will be available for you.


I think the parking area is fine there, just how they use it and how they police it that's the problem, namely people not staying there parking, some for the parks.  There are no more cars now than there were this time last year.  This is not a parking lot issue, and this is not a valet parking issue, there is a parking lot management issue.  I've parked at BWV many times over the past 13 years or so, I own there and I go at least once or twice every trip for the times I don't stay at BWV so I am well versed in the ins and outs.  Figure that anyone not staying at BWV will be directed across the street, even if they have dining reservations.  If there are no spaces open there, they those not staying at the resort will be one their own.  It's also very possible that pool hoping will end at BWV as a result of this change and it likely should.  It really is as simple as who pays for valet parking and it is not a perk that should be subsidized by other members given specifics.



SuzanneSLO said:


> As a BWV owner who has always rented a car and used valet, this change will make it more likely that we will not rent a car at all.  We actually enjoy using the busess to get to MK and AK, so we only used our car for grocery trips and to DTD.  With rental rates skyrocketing anyway, we were spending a lot of $$ for the convenience of having a car vs. using taxis.  With no free valet, this either increases the cost or reduces the convenience.
> 
> I would suspect that others staying at BWV will also decide not to rent a car.  -- Suzanne


I'm sure a few will make this choice and it will actually help out with parking, there is no negative to Disney if a certain percentage of people no longer have a car that did before, if anything, it is a plus for them.  However, it's unlikely to be enough people changing their car vs no car habits to make any real difference overall due to this issue or the increase in costs from $10-12 or from free to $12 for DVC members.

As Crisi notes, BWV is not the worst parking on Campus.  CR, GF, Poly are all worse in many ways and while BCV is closer, I've had more problems there than at BWV so I don't think it's really much different or better overall.


----------



## RAD

crisi said:


> Parking has always been a mess at the Contemporary as well - I'd expect that to be a problem with BLT being open.



We drove over to BLT a couple weeks ago and was able to get a parking space very close to the entrance, much closer to any spot at BWV self park. Does BLT even have valet at that building? If not there's no reason to valet at the main Contemporary entrance since the walk would be farther then the self park spots.


----------



## Dean

waltfan1957 said:


> but to get that 50 they are giving discount after discount.


They are giving discounts either way or in the case of DVC, they have the money already and don't need to discount so how they get there doesn't really matter.



waltfan1957 said:


> come on, you know it was to enhance our membership





VrBchJ said:


> Or because members requested it.


It's no wonder DVC doesn't ask for input or give much explanation regarding decisions with statements like these.  If I felt this way about a system, I'd sell and move on even if I had to take a loss.  This change is reasonable (though not implemented well), the reallocation was necessary, the reservation system change (1 week at a time) was reasonable.  I can't think of a given system change that was not reasonable given the circumstances.  I can think of a few method issues I disagree with but no policy issues that were inappropriate.  And to date I haven't seen anyone upset that has actually taken their concerns to a level they could actually be addressed with real information.


----------



## JimC

crisi said:


> But does Disney care if they get one person who spends 120,000 at Disney or 50 who spend $2400?


  They care because they track average spend per guest in many categories.


----------



## CR Resort Fan 4 Life

crisi said:


> Parking has always been a mess at the Contemporary as well - I'd expect that to be a problem with BLT being open.


When I stayed there this past August after Bay Lake Tower had opened parking was not a problem and there are actually three self parking lots available. The 1st one is right in front of the Tower Magic Kingdom Views and the first two rows is where the valet cars get parked. The 2nd parking lot is all the spots in front of Bay Lake Tower and the 3rd one is in front of the South Garden Wing, so those spots would be best for anyone staying in that section.


----------



## JimC

tammymacb said:


> ...And, my question STILL hasn't been answered.  WHY if we're picking and choosing what "perks" should be kept, shouldn't they ALL go away.  A'la cart for all!  I can chose not to pay for additional housekeeping, gyms can have a swipe locked door, you can surf the net on your Iphone.  And dues can decrease..!...




We may be owners, but we make no decisions.  DVC runs the show.  It is pretty simple.  Don't like it -- don't buy or leave.  Like it -- buy or stay.

Disney wants returning guests spending money on property.  DD was to capture the crowd going to Church Street in Orlando.  ME got people out of rentals, eliminated some of the arrival hassles at MCO and the resort, and captured more guest time and money on property (even after the cost of ME is included).  The valet parking could get more people into ME and eliminate a hard dollar cost paid to the sub-contractor.

I don't know if DVC or DVD was responsible for the valet parking perk.  So it either reduces DVD costs or will lower DVC dues.  I doubt that valet parking is a significant cost item.  The major costs in a timeshare resort are housekeeping, maintenance, front desk and management.

There is no advantage to unbundle some perks.  Some may not capture marginal revenue that would otherwise go elsewhere.  Some may cost more to unbundle then to leave in the dues.  Some are simply not material items.  For example, high speed Internet probably costs us a penny a point.


----------



## toocherie

Dean said:


> And to date I haven't seen anyone upset that has actually taken their concerns to a level they could actually be addressed with real information.




Dean:  if someone were that upset at what level should those concerns be addressed?  I admit I have not gone back to look at the docs to see what information--if any--we are entitled to receive to try to ferret out just how much the valet perk was costing DVC.  (I've been at Disneyland and am getting ready to go again, followed by a trip to WDW.  (too bad there's not a "guilty" smilie))

ETA:  I found the "guilty" smilie but it's too late to add it!


----------



## manning

Chuck S said:


> Yes, but DVC also reserves the right to implement a minimum number of nights per stay, it is in the contract...and if they see a lot of members doing split stays and increasing dues because of the additional housekeeping required during a single WDW stay...guess what the next rule is going to be?



That's when I vote with my feet. Sell and let someone else deal with it...freedom of choice.


----------



## tammymacb

Chuck S said:


> Yes, but DVC also reserves the right to implement a minimum number of nights per stay, it is in the contract...and if they see a lot of members doing split stays and increasing dues because of the additional housekeeping required during a single WDW stay...guess what the next rule is going to be?



Just wondering if you've shared your concern with split stays with any of the number of posters who write about split stays daily.  Or is it just mine that brought on such strong feelings?


----------



## Chuck S

manning said:


> That's when I vote with my feet. Sell and let someone else deal with it...freedom of choice.



You realize that we _could_ be restricted to only our home resort, and even so, they could institure minimum stays.  I would expect to see either, or both, instituted for the last year or so, along with banking/borrowing restrictions in the last 2 to 3 years of the ownership.




tammymacb said:


> Just wondering if you've shared your concern with split stays with any of the number of posters who write about split stays daily.  Or is it just mine that brought on such strong feelings?



Actually, it was in response to your statement that you don't use housekeeping during your stay, as a way to justify keeping free valet.  Just pointing out that that is an incorrect statement, as every time you move, you _do_ get additional housekeeping that members who stay put do not receive.  And that there are costs associated with it.

And it is true, *if* DVC sees that split short term stays cause housekeeping costs to rise or front desk costs, or any of the other costs associated with split stays, they have specifically reserved the right to institute a minumun stay.  It is in the POS.


----------



## Doctor P

Frank in WI said:


> As an owner of BWV, the elimination of the valet parking benefit opens another issue, in my opinion.  When we first bought at BWV, I tried to use self parking so that I could get to my car easily and didn't have to wait for the valet attendants.  Each night when trying to park, I could not find a space due to the others visiting Boardwalk and potentially Epcot.  The lots were full and I had to park across the street in the lot behind the gas station.  My only choices were to walk a long way across a busy road, or use valet parking.  Valet parking became the lesser of two evils.  I, wrongly, assumed that Disney was using valet parking as a way to help the self parking issue.
> 
> I will gladly go back to self parking if Disney will limit the parking area in front of the Boardwalk to "Boardwalk Resort Guests Only".  They should also make sure there is enough parking by reducing the spaces reserved for valet parking.  It is my opinion that any Boardwalk resort guest that wishes to self park have space available.
> 
> The fee is not my issue.  It's the lack of self parking at Boardwalk that needs to be handled properly.
> 
> Thanks for listening.




You hit the nail on the head.


----------



## Doctor P

Tara said:


> But there is nothing different in the tips - DVC members still needed to tip for this service even when the service itself was free to them. As I said (and I was very careful to label my comments as my opinion), even at $12 for the service it is still an outstanding deal. The amount of tipping is irrelevant to me as that is the money I paid or any other member paid already.



This isn't New York.  $12 is not an "outstanding deal" in the real world.


----------



## Dizholic

Frank in WI said:


> As an owner of BWV, the elimination of the valet parking benefit opens another issue, in my opinion.  When we first bought at BWV, I tried to use self parking so that I could get to my car easily and didn't have to wait for the valet attendants.  Each night when trying to park, I could not find a space due to the others visiting Boardwalk and potentially Epcot.  The lots were full and I had to park across the street in the lot behind the gas station.  My only choices were to walk a long way across a busy road, or use valet parking.  Valet parking became the lesser of two evils.  I, wrongly, assumed that Disney was using valet parking as a way to help the self parking issue.
> 
> I will gladly go back to self parking if Disney will limit the parking area in front of the Boardwalk to "Boardwalk Resort Guests Only".  They should also make sure there is enough parking by reducing the spaces reserved for valet parking.  It is my opinion that any Boardwalk resort guest that wishes to self park have space available.
> 
> The fee is not my issue.  It's the lack of self parking at Boardwalk that needs to be handled properly.
> 
> Thanks for listening.



This is almost word for word what I told a manager Friday night when we had to park across the street in the overflow lot.


----------



## Sammie

Dizholic said:


> This is almost word for word what I told a manager Friday night when we had to park across the street in the overflow lot.



Be sure to let MS know also. They are not going to be aware of the situation unless those that experience problems let them know.


----------



## photobob

I've stayed at BWV twice and used valet parking both times, so I have no experience in the self park situation. I do have a question in regards to parking if you drive over to have dinner. I totally agree that anyone staying there should have a place to park in the resort parking. 

I am planning on going to Vero Beach this summer but we are going to stay somewhere offsite the night before in Orlando. If I want to come to the Boardwalk for dinner and just hanging around where do I park? Last year we did the same thing and just told the man at the gate we were coming for dinner and he let us in and we got complimentary valet with our DVC card. If they are not allowing non-resort guests to park in the resort's parking area, where do I park? I don't want to take a resort guests space, but at the same time I am planning to have dinner at BW. Is there any area anywhere in the Epcot resort area that has parking available to non-resort guests? Just trying to plan ahead and do what is right.


----------



## Sammie

photobob said:


> I've stayed at BWV twice and used valet parking both times, so I have no experience in the self park situation. I do have a question in regards to parking if you drive over to have dinner. I totally agree that anyone staying there should have a place to park in the resort parking.
> 
> I am planning on going to Vero Beach this summer but we are going to stay somewhere offsite the night before in Orlando. If I want to come to the Boardwalk for dinner and just hanging around where do I park? Last year we did the same thing and just told the man at the gate we were coming for dinner and he let us in and we got complimentary valet with our DVC card. If they are not allowing non-resort guests to park in the resort's parking area, where do I park? I don't want to take a resort guests space, but at the same time I am planning to have dinner at BW. Is there any area anywhere in the Epcot resort area that has parking available to non-resort guests? Just trying to plan ahead and do what is right.



There is a parking lot behind the Hess gas station just as you turn in, unless the other lots are completely full, you should be able to park there. If it is full and then you may have to valet.


----------



## LIFERBABE

I want to add for those looking for dining and entertainment options and valet parking, we spent 2 of our evenings last week at Swan and Dolphin.  Their lots are paid but they validate for self park and valet.

We valet parked there twice, went for drinks and karaoke at Kimonos, (had DDriver) got our tix validated by the restaurant and had a blast with the other couple we travelled with!!  

SD Valet was awesome!!  Kept our car right up front and ready to go.  S&D has some great dining and clubs and we will definitely return.  
We didnt have to travel offsite and we had no trouble parking.  

And one of the reasons we rarely stay at BWV is the parking situation.  Never liked it.  

I think the Valet lot should be moved behind Hess.  Why should they get prime location for parking when the membership is forced to overflow park?  They could use golf carts to drive to the lot or run for it.  They are contracted out and not part of the resort or DVC so let them fend for themselves.  I know it affects the customer, but that's not our business either.  They want the $12 bucks, let them earn it!


----------



## manning

Chuck S said:


> You realize that we _could_ be restricted to only our home resort, and even so, they could institure minimum stays.  I would expect to see either, or both, instituted for the last year or so, along with banking/borrowing restrictions in the last 2 to 3 years of the ownership.
> 
> 
> 
> .



As I said I will vote with my feet and sell. If you don't like what is being done and don't have a say in it why stick around and be unhappy. Disney has set it up so they can control things. If you are agreeable you buy in and live with it. If you are not agreeable you either don't buy in or sell and move on.

As for perks, they are upfront and state that they can come and go at anytime. You are not entitled to them. They are not contractually promised.


----------



## SCFIREMAN

tammymacb said:


> And I meant no disrespect to you.
> 
> However, my point is still the same.  If Disney is going to have ANY perks that are taken from members dues, at what point is it decided what's worth "all of us" paying for and what's not?



I was under the impression Valet came out of our dues as well. Acccording to the Member Satisfaction person I spoke with today that was not the case. She said it was a complimentary service we recieved. Although I did  ask what the dues increase would have been to keep free valet, and she said those #'s were not given to her.


----------



## Maxwell

SCFIREMAN said:


> I was under the impression Valet came out of our dues as well. Acccording to the Member Satisfaction person I spoke with today that was not the case. She said it was a complimentary service we recieved. Although I did  ask what the dues increase would have been to keep free valet, and she said those #'s were not given to her.



They probably don't know what the cost would be. They just want to give an excuse for taking away a perk.


----------



## Sammie

Maxwell said:


> They probably don't know what the cost would be. They just want to give an excuse for taking away a perk.



I have been against the change as much as anyone but MS does not know everything that happens at DVC. For one thing they found out when we did, the day it happened. 

Dues did not pay for the valet parking prior to the change but would have. Leadership and that is not the person answering the phone, made the decision to not charge the entire membership for something they felt was not widely used by the membership.

Please do not blame those answering the phones for things they had no part in. I am not happy with some of the leadership decisions but MS has always been very courteous to me when talking to them.


----------



## DebbieB

LIFERBABE said:


> I think the Valet lot should be moved behind Hess.  Why should they get prime location for parking when the membership is forced to overflow park?  They could use golf carts to drive to the lot or run for it.  They are contracted out and not part of the resort or DVC so let them fend for themselves.  I know it affects the customer, but that's not our business either.  They want the $12 bucks, let them earn it!



That's a busy street, it would not be practical to have golf carts going back and forth.   Plus the bus stop is in between.  It's too far for them to run back and forth, it would take forever to get your car.

The space that the valet lot takes up is small, no more than 25% of the 2 lots on the same side as the hotel.  It will probably be smaller now.


----------



## Deemarch

We ALWAYS rent a car but have only used valet parking 2 or 3 times...I don't trust them to bring my car in a reasonable amount of time!    We always seem to be on a schedule, I guess that's because I can't just relax and enjoy the trip...I need a schedule!   I would rather walk to my car than stand and wait for a valet to bring it to me.

As for DVC taking perks away...They give and they take...All perk are not equal for all members.  And that's the way it will always be.


----------



## DVCBELLE

For those who complain about Valet taking too long to get your car - 

you can call from your room and ask them to bring your car around - we always do this and by the time we reach the lobby - it is there waiting for us!


----------



## waltfan1957

Dean said:


> It's no wonder DVC doesn't ask for input or give much explanation regarding decisions with statements like these.  If I felt this way about a system, I'd sell and move on even if I had to take a loss.  This change is reasonable (though not implemented well), the reallocation was necessary, the reservation system change (1 week at a time) was reasonable.  I can't think of a given system change that was not reasonable given the circumstances.  I can think of a few method issues I disagree with but no policy issues that were inappropriate.  And to date I haven't seen anyone upset that has actually taken their concerns to a level they could actually be addressed with real information.



I dont actually care for myself about the valet change as we always use ME, but I understand why some are unhappy, its the implementation that bothers me, thats why the "enhance our membership quote"  as that seems to be reason for every change, DVC doesn't ask for input not because of statements like this but because they don't want to. 

the minute we feel like we are not getting value for our ownership we will sell, but not because someone on Disboards says we should.


----------



## Dean

toocherie said:


> Dean:  if someone were that upset at what level should those concerns be addressed?  I admit I have not gone back to look at the docs to see what information--if any--we are entitled to receive to try to ferret out just how much the valet perk was costing DVC.  (I've been at Disneyland and am getting ready to go again, followed by a trip to WDW.  (too bad there's not a "guilty" smilie))
> 
> ETA:  I found the "guilty" smilie but it's too late to add it!


I've posted suggestions in two different posts in this thread about the issue.  IMO, complaining to MS or the member satisfaction team is not a productive approach if you want real information and/or want you voice to be specifically heard.  This isn't going to change and it really shouldn't but the place to go with this type of concern is higher than where anyone has posted unless I missed any applicable posts.  You have a voting rep, there are a number of VP types, there is a president of the BOD.  And better, one can do so in person if you make the appt.  It is also possible to talk to legal if one questions the legality of the change.  I don't know how much specific info they'll give out, they aren't normally too free with a lot of numbers they don't have to be, but complaining to MS and member satisfaction is simply an invitation to be patronized, IMO.


----------



## Dean

waltfan1957 said:


> I dont actually care for myself about the valet change as we always use ME, but I understand why some are unhappy, its the implementation that bothers me, thats why the "enhance our membership quote"  as that seems to be reason for every change, DVC doesn't ask for input not because of statements like this but because they don't want to.
> 
> the minute we feel like we are not getting value for our ownership we will sell, but not because someone on Disboards says we should.


I didn't suggest anyone sell other than if "I" felt the way some do and enough to make such sarcastic remarks that I would sell.  No argument on the implementation but the overall decision was appropriate, they are related but really separate issues.  I'm sure there are many reasons they don't seek input but attitudes and sarcasm as expressed in the two quotes I responded to would certainly make them think twice if they were so inclined to do so.  BTW, what change did they make where there was no enhancement for some where this terminology was used?  With very few exceptions, every change will have winners and losers and that included the Valet parking, re-allocation, and reservation system change.


----------



## NJmouse

maybe a parking garage should be built more spaces would be available.


----------



## SCFIREMAN

NJmouse said:


> maybe a parking garage should be built more spaces would be available.



I heard they were doing that once at the CR and then all of a sudden it became BLT, must have been Magic  .


----------



## TDC Nala

I am not really interested in paying dues for free valet parking as I've used it twice since 2002.


----------



## crisi

Dean said:


> I didn't suggest anyone sell other than if "I" felt the way some do and enough to make such sarcastic remarks that I would sell.  No argument on the implementation but the overall decision was appropriate, they are related but really separate issues.  I'm sure there are many reasons they don't seek input but attitudes and sarcasm as expressed in the two quotes I responded to would certainly make them think twice if they were so inclined to do so.  BTW, what change did they make where there was no enhancement for some where this terminology was used?  With very few exceptions, every change will have winners and losers and that included the Valet parking, re-allocation, and reservation system change.



The strange thing is that we DO ask for this....we ask that our dues remain low.  I'm willing to bet that of all the complaints DVC gets over the course of the year, the calls and emails they get when dues are released make any other single complain (except maybe housekeeping) pale in comparison.   

DVC management has a difficult task.  They have to give members the quality they are looking for at a value.  This economy has to be particularly difficult - they have to be aware that a lot of their members are struggling with lower business volume, smaller bonuses, lost jobs, income cuts - just the threads on this board in the past year indicate that this is a tough time.  They don't want to devalue their product by having even more resales hit the market because people can't afford dues - and some of the management probably even has human feelings and empathy.


----------



## toocherie

TDC Nala said:


> I am not really interested in paying dues for free valet parking as I've used it twice since 2002.



There are always going to be services that cater to some owners and not others.  I don't have kids, but understand the desire to have the tot lots and such.  My issue is not so much that "free" valet went away, but that there was no middle ground--it didn't go from "no free valet" to "partial cost valet"--it went from zero to full price.  Overnight.  With no notice.

Of course, recall too that it was an overnight "stealth" change that introduced plastic cups to the studios--and an outcry from the membership got that changed back.  I recall some folks that exclusively stay in 1 bedrooms and up not being bothered by the change--because it didn't affect THEM.  

Like I said before--at some point something will change that will affect those who think this latest change is "no big deal" and we will see what tune gets sung then.


----------



## crisi

But a tot lot costs very little to maintain - its a non-material expense in accounting terms.

Mears wants to charge Disney $12 to park my car.  For someone who has dues that come to about $47 a night - that's a huge proportion of my dues going to parking my car.


----------



## disneynutz

Our dues covered valet at $10 but not at $12. That's a $2 short fall.

DVC collects dues from 150,000 or so members and lets say the average member owns 150 points. If DVC raises the dues by $.02, that's $450,000 dollars or 225,000 valet parks.

Something doesn't seem right. 

 Bill


----------



## tjkraz

disneynutz said:


> Our dues covered valet at $10 but not at $12. That's a $2 short fall.



Member dues are not currently being used to subsidize valet parking.  The increase in cost to members would have been the full $12 per vehicle.


----------



## disneynutz

tjkraz said:


> Member dues are not currently being used to subsidize valet parking.  The increase in cost to members would have been the full $12 per vehicle.



I can't believe that the Valet contractor Mears/Bags wasn't being paid by someone. Doesn't our dues cover common area expenses and transportation and wouldn't a portion of that pay for the Valet contract?

 Bill


----------



## Chuck S

It is possible that Mears was being paid by DVC Marketing at a much lower negotiated price than $10.  Sales are down, and they don't want that expense any longer, and Mears wants more $ per car.


----------



## crisi

disneynutz said:


> I can't believe that the Valet contractor Mears/Bags wasn't being paid by someone. Doesn't our dues cover common area expenses and transportation and wouldn't a portion of that pay for the Valet contract?
> 
> Bill



Mears apparently 'gave' DVC 'free' valet in order to get the original valet contract or it was being paid by DVD marketing.

Prior to that it was a fixed cost for the hotels - they employed the valets and paid them $X an hour whether they were parking cars or not.  The revenue from cash guests would go to the hotel, and they didn't get revenue from the DVC side.  At that point (which was several years ago) we might have reimbursed the hotel for via dues, the DVD marketing arm might have reimbursed them as a sales expense, or the hotels might have said "don't worry about it, we pay these guys anyway."


----------



## KAMLEM

NJmouse said:


> maybe a parking garage should be built more spaces would be available.


Who's going to pay for that?


----------



## NJmouse

Do not forget that it is not just a DVC resort it also has the Inn and the Convention Center that brings in money.  Why does it seem like everyone thinks the DVC is paying for everything?


----------



## Chuck S

NJmouse said:


> Do not forget that it is not just a DVC resort it also has the Inn and the Convention Center that brings in money.  Why does it seem like everyone thinks the DVC is paying for everything?



But surely even DVCs share of a parking structure would be a substantial cost, and that payment would come from....?


----------



## hakepb

Chuck S said:


> But surely even DVCs share of a parking structure would be a substantial cost, and that payment would come from....?



I almost wonder if Mears was going to bill the resorts differently, based on usage.  Then the resultant fees wind up "socking" BWV with a much higher cost (because Valet is used most there) then BWV members with the highes DVC dues wonder why their dues went up $.25 more than others and/or the resulting charge to BLT would push the new 2010 BLT dues above $4 a point and DVC sales said "no way" we want to sell BLT at a premium $120/point because there are currently low (<$4) dues...


----------



## hakepb

KAMLEM said:


> Who's going to pay for that?


Parking garages have to be very, very expensive.  You only see them if there is no available real-esate to build a flat lot on, and Disney has a lot of real estate

I'm certain it would be much cheaper to build an air-conditioned, covered walkway to across-the-street than build a parking deck.


----------



## jade1

TDC Nala said:


> I am not really interested in paying dues for free valet parking as I've used it twice since 2002.



About the same as us, but we might gladly contribute if we knew what the cost would be.


----------



## TDC Nala

Why go out of the way to have valet parking included? Valet parking is not something most would use unless in fact it's free. Especially at WDW where it's entirely possible to get around without having a car.

Be fine, I think, for those who like valet parking to be able to access a discounted or prepaid version if free won't do. But those who do not bring cars should not be asked to subsidize valet parking for those who do.


----------



## Dean

crisi said:


> The strange thing is that we DO ask for this....we ask that our dues remain low.  I'm willing to bet that of all the complaints DVC gets over the course of the year, the calls and emails they get when dues are released make any other single complain (except maybe housekeeping) pale in comparison.
> 
> DVC management has a difficult task.  They have to give members the quality they are looking for at a value.  This economy has to be particularly difficult - they have to be aware that a lot of their members are struggling with lower business volume, smaller bonuses, lost jobs, income cuts - just the threads on this board in the past year indicate that this is a tough time.  They don't want to devalue their product by having even more resales hit the market because people can't afford dues - and some of the management probably even has human feelings and empathy.


I agree, well stated.  I don't think it's strange at all, I expect them do keep costs low but do a good job.  That DOES mean tough choices at times and it also means not everyone will be happy with every decision, esp with the way times are right now.  



disneynutz said:


> Our dues covered valet at $10 but not at $12. That's a $2 short fall.
> 
> DVC collects dues from 150,000 or so members and lets say the average member owns 150 points. If DVC raises the dues by $.02, that's $450,000 dollars or 225,000 valet parks.
> 
> Something doesn't seem right.
> 
> Bill


It is my understanding that this is not the entire picture.  It is not as simple as going from $10 to $12 or $2 extra per DVC car per day spread out over the entire membership.  IF that were the case, it likely would be a reasonable choice to just suck it up and roll it into dues.  My understanding is there is a much larger expense that just the proportionate increase.  That there were other discounts in the contract that are going away so instead of a $2 per DVC car per day increase it's a much larger per day increase.  Still, none of us have the facts of the case enough to make a rational decision as to specifics, all we can do is speculate and talk about generalities.  It's certainly possible that it was truly free for the DVC members.  From Mears standpoint it could have been reasonable to do so.  They get the contract and the tips go to pay their personnel even if they themselves get nothing for those DVC cars parked.  They look at the entire project from a large picture standpoint.  Then along comes the economy issues which put a squeeze on them so they in turn put a squeeze on Disney which has to decide whether to take it back over or give in to demands.  

A parking garage might be reasonable for certain situations, esp at places like BWV, GF and CR where there are convention centers.  Obviously someone has to pay for it and that would be spread out over all involved but over years and there are other potential savings long term.  Obviously you'd only go to the aggravation and expense if ti were truly necessary.


----------



## jade1

TDC Nala said:


> Why go out of the way to have valet parking included? Valet parking is not something most would use unless in fact it's free. Especially at WDW where it's entirely possible to get around without having a car.
> 
> Be fine, I think, for those who like valet parking to be able to access a discounted or prepaid version if free won't do. But those who do not bring cars should not be asked to subsidize valet parking for those who do.



Can't disagree for some of you (or most of you), but again, we might be glad to contribute to it since we may want to use it some day (maybe when ME goes to $25 ea) and also we feel some things make a membership more upscale instead of generic-cost is a factor for us though, but nobody seems to have a clue what it would be. *It never bothered me in the least for the last 3 or 4 years that folks that did not use ME like we did, were using free valet parking-and I assumed all along that was from our dues and was more than happy for them. Why would I suddenly be against it now?*


----------



## photobob

Does anyone else have a problem with the fact that the only thing that we as owners can do is speculate as to the reasoning this was done? We don't get answers, we just have to take an educated guess. It sure would be easier to handle if we got solid reasoning from DVC instead of vague, generic statements that we will no longer have a given perk. I'm not saying that there isn't solid reasoning behind it, we just aren't given the info which leads to the speculation which  sometimes can grow wildly. There would be no reason for the speculation if we were kept in the know!


----------



## Chuck S

photobob said:


> Does anyone else have a problem with the fact that the only thing that we as owners can do is speculate as to the reasoning this was done? We don't get answers, we just have to take an educated guess. It sure would be easier to handle if we got solid reasoning from DVC instead of vague, generic statements that we will no longer have a given perk. I'm not saying that there isn't solid reasoning behind it, we just aren't given the info which leads to the speculation which  sometimes can grow wildly. There would be no reason for the speculation if we were kept in the know!



It really doesn't bother me, except from a "curious of the reason" type thing.  All businesses generally keep their contract negotiations confidential.  They have, in a sense, given a reason...to keep dues costs down.  I don't think we _need_ to know every detail, anymore than it would be a good idea to have members vote on such things.  It's a perk, not a change to our ownership, and like all perks, subject to change or cancellation at anytime.  Simple as that.


----------



## Dean

photobob said:


> Does anyone else have a problem with the fact that the only thing that we as owners can do is speculate as to the reasoning this was done? We don't get answers, we just have to take an educated guess. It sure would be easier to handle if we got solid reasoning from DVC instead of vague, generic statements that we will no longer have a given perk. I'm not saying that there isn't solid reasoning behind it, we just aren't given the info which leads to the speculation which  sometimes can grow wildly. There would be no reason for the speculation if we were kept in the know!


If it were important to me, I'd find out.  There are ways to get more info as I've posted already on this thread.  To get specific contract info it's likely to take a visit to corporate but I doubt it'd be difficult to get enough specifics by phone to be comfortable in the decision if one were so inclined to put the time and effort into it.


----------



## toocherie

Dean said:


> If it were important to me, I'd find out.  There are ways to get more info as I've posted already on this thread.  To get specific contract info it's likely to take a visit to corporate but I doubt it'd be difficult to get enough specifics by phone to be comfortable in the decision if one were so inclined to put the time and effort into it.



Dean:  I am planning on finding out the names and addresses of the board and asking specific questions and voicing concerns about communication--even if they have the right and are justified in making these decisions, it isn't right to spring it on the membership like they do--if I had been in the middle of a vacation and the policy changed I would have been really steamed--being that it's a couple of weeks after the policy change that I will be at WDW I am only slightly steamed.  And being that I am paying cash at BWI the first two nights (and would have to pay valet anyway) and then moving to SSR it probably will be a non-issue for THIS trip.  I will be most interested to discover what rights the membership has--if any--to get information.  I suspect it's extremely limited--not like a homeowners' association where you have the right to get info.  However, there also may be some Florida statutes governing the dispensing of info.


----------



## Dean

toocherie said:


> Dean:  I am planning on finding out the names and addresses of the board and asking specific questions and voicing concerns about communication--even if they have the right and are justified in making these decisions, it isn't right to spring it on the membership like they do--if I had been in the middle of a vacation and the policy changed I would have been really steamed--being that it's a couple of weeks after the policy change that I will be at WDW I am only slightly steamed.  And being that I am paying cash at BWI the first two nights (and would have to pay valet anyway) and then moving to SSR it probably will be a non-issue for THIS trip.  I will be most interested to discover what rights the membership has--if any--to get information.  I suspect it's extremely limited--not like a homeowners' association where you have the right to get info.  However, there also may be some Florida statutes governing the dispensing of info.


I posted a few pages back how I would have approached and implemented it.  No argument on the implementation, very poor and really no excuse to do it the way it was done.  Not saying it didn't have to be short notice, I don't know, but IF it had to be short notice, they didn't approach it like it was an emergency they needed to respond to as they should have.  With that and a few other poorly implemented issues the last couple of years I can certainly understand those that are concerned, waiting for the other shoe to drop and is this just the tip of the iceberg so to speak.  Given these are not contractual issues, there are no notification requirements and therefore no legal rules or laws to break in that area.  I hesitate to post the voting rep because even though I know the person who it was is still there, I don't know if they're still the voting rep currently.  That's where I'd start if it were I.  If that didn't satisfy my need for info, I'd ask the voting rep who the VP was in charge of that area and ask to speak to them.  If that didn't work out for some reason, I'd schedule a trip to go visit them as per our legal right under FL law.  BTW, I've done it once already, to my knowledge I'm the only one who's done so.  My purpose wasn't the same as in this thread, I just wanted to do it to see how it'd go.  One thing to note is that you'll only have legal access to contracts directly with DVC, not with the resorts or DVD.  BTW, the person who was the voting rep is very good, very upfront but not patronizing.  That's not to say their going to give you a lot of info, I doubt they'll share absolute specifics on contracts and the like but I would expect they'd share enough info you're comfortable that they made either the right or wrong decision based on the specifics.  The problem is going to be when those that aren't really interested in finding out information but just on trying to change their mind get involved.  Lastly members have the right to non binding arbitration if they want to go that far, actually it is a requirement prior to legal action for most areas.


----------



## crisi

photobob said:


> Does anyone else have a problem with the fact that the only thing that we as owners can do is speculate as to the reasoning this was done?



No....I'm in corporate contract negotiations now and a few audits and I can't keep my own STAFF informed of what is happening or why things are being done.  And even once the contract is done and signed or the audit completed, there are a lot of things I can't share with my staff.  And these are internal things.  Nor is every reason for every business decision made above me shared with me.


----------



## Dean

crisi said:


> No....I'm in corporate contract negotiations now and a few audits and I can't keep my own STAFF informed of what is happening or why things are being done.  And even once the contract is done and signed or the audit completed, there are a lot of things I can't share with my staff.  And these are internal things.  Nor is every reason for every business decision made above me shared with me.


I agree up to a point and I find myself in a similar situations all the time.  However I think there are some differences and additional informational obligations when you own a timeshare.  Legally DVC (only DVC) contracts are accessible by the members under certain guidelines and they do have a responsibility to share enough info to satisfy rational people that an appropriate decision was made on larger issues and also have a responsibility to give an explanation when things are done poorly on a corporate level.  

OTOH, they do not have to convince every concerned member that this was the correct decision nor should they spend much time with the whiners trying to convince them it was the wrong one.  To see such a large group of people jump from being zoned out on the Kool-aid to being irrationally upset over small ticket and/or contractually appropriate decisions has been a real eye opener for me (this, re-allocation, reservation change, BWV reno and reassignment).  Also, to see so many poorly done ? quick decision items (this implementation, AKV no savannah view and AKV concierge reassignment) is difficult for me to fathom with a normally well run company.  You'd think they'd have learned the first time and do better next time.  However, they did seem to do a much better job with the BWV reassignment though I still think they need to be more consistent with any compensation the give and not let those that yell earliest and/or loudest get a lot and others get nothing.  It does make you wonder what next.


----------



## TDC Nala

Sorry, I am still not interested in paying dues for other people to have valet parking because I "might" want to use it "someday." There's self parking for those who want access to parking. Of course it means if the membership wants to insert valet parking costs into dues and is able to bring that about, it would be better for me to own at OKW or SSR where they don't have the option of valet parking. A previous poster referred to "I might be willing to contribute" but the word "contribute" connotes that there is an option to NOT contribute and if such a thing was passed it would be mandatory. 

I'd be ok with a lot of things people want to add and pay for but I think valet parking is not something a majority would choose to use. We were lucky to have it provided to us for that long.


----------



## jade1

TDC Nala said:


> Sorry, I am still not interested in paying dues for other people to have valet parking because I "might" want to use it "someday." There's self parking for those who want access to parking. Of course it means if the membership wants to insert valet parking costs into dues and is able to bring that about, it would be better for me to own at OKW or SSR where they don't have the option of valet parking. A previous poster referred to "I might be willing to contribute" but the word "contribute" connotes that there is an option to NOT contribute and if such a thing was passed it would be mandatory.
> 
> I'd be ok with a lot of things people want to add and pay for but I think valet parking is not something a majority would choose to use. We were lucky to have it provided to us for that long.



Like I said, I have no problem with your stance. That does not mean we all are that way. I assumed all along we were paying it and not using it (and nobody has really proven otherwise actually) and did not care then, so I would not care now. I guess you knew this and were not happy about it all these years. I feel the same about the free work out facilities, ME, AP discount, lifeguards and internet-it all makes a more upscale membership IMO, but who is really paying it, how much is it, and when will it go away?


----------



## DebbieB

I agree that dues should not subsidize free valet even though I've used it in the past.   My only concern is that adequate self-parking is provided.   I shouldn't have to park a couple blocks away.


----------



## crisi

DebbieB said:


> I agree that dues should not subsidize free valet even though I've used it in the past.   My only concern is that adequate self-parking is provided.   I shouldn't have to park a couple blocks away.



I completely agree with this.


----------



## photobob

Dean said:


> I agree up to a point and I find myself in a similar situations all the time.  However I think there are some differences and additional informational obligations when you own a timeshare.  Legally DVC (only DVC) contracts are accessible by the members under certain guidelines and they do have a responsibility to share enough info to satisfy rational people that an appropriate decision was made on larger issues and also have a responsibility to give an explanation when things are done poorly on a corporate level.
> 
> OTOH, they do not have to convince every concerned member that this was the correct decision nor should they spend much time with the whiners trying to convince them it was the wrong one.  To see such a large group of people jump from being zoned out on the Kool-aid to being irrationally upset over small ticket and/or contractually appropriate decisions has been a real eye opener for me (this, re-allocation, reservation change, BWV reno and reassignment).  Also, to see so many poorly done ? quick decision items (this implementation, AKV no savannah view and AKV concierge reassignment) is difficult for me to fathom with a normally well run company.  You'd think they'd have learned the first time and do better next time.  However, they did seem to do a much better job with the BWV reassignment though I still think they need to be more consistent with any compensation the give and not let those that yell earliest and/or loudest get a lot and others get nothing.  It does make you wonder what next.



Very well put.


----------



## BEASLYBOO

DebbieB said:


> I agree that dues should not subsidize free valet even though I've used it in the past.   My only concern is that adequate self-parking is provided.   I shouldn't have to park a couple blocks away.


Totally agree!

The process of communicating these types of changes should be overhauled, and I think reasonable notice should be given to the owners.  That alone would help make some of these cuts a little more palatable.

Personally, I don't use ME nor the free valet, but that's not the issue and though it's been nice for those who do, now that the "free" part of it is over, those that benefited from it should be happy that it lasted as long as it did.  If any of ME is subsidized by dues, I think it's wrong!  

Dues should go to pay for what everyone uses like maintenance, refurbishments and housekeeping and all expenses related to those endeavors. No one wants to lose the perks used as an added bonus to purchasing DVC, but if they all went away, in the end, the reason I bought into DVC is for the resorts and their amenities.  Keeping maintenance fees down and maintaining the resorts are my biggest concern.


----------



## tjkraz

BEASLYBOO said:


> *Dues should go to pay for what everyone uses *like maintenance, refurbishments and housekeeping and all expenses related to those endeavors. No one wants to lose the perks used as an added bonus to purchasing DVC, but if they all went away, in the end, the reason I bought into DVC is for the resorts and their amenities.  Keeping maintenance fees down and maintaining the resorts are my biggest concern.



The problem is that the list of what "everyone uses" is extremely small compared to the services offered at a resort.

Not everyone uses the resort pools.  Should those who use them have to pay a pool fee?
Should there be a fee for using Disney park buses?
How about a parking lot fee for self parking?
Go back to paying for Internet?
Fees for tennis court usage, Community Hall activities, or even for the use of Bell Services since not everyone needs luggage assistance.  

If this thread has shown us anything it's that there are a lot of varying opinions on what should and should not be covered by dues.  Some favor the minimalist approach while others would prefer an all-encompassing experience.  Either way, there is no "one size fits all" solution.  As our elected management company, DVC has to make tough decisions at times and we know how they decided to go in this case.  

Obviously their communications leave something to be desired.  But it's difficult to cast any blame directly at DVC when they are subject to the whims of other Disney divisions.  If you look at things like guests being relocated due to resort rehabs, those jobs aren't scheduled 11 months out.  DVC has to deal with the fallout from whatever decisions the facilities people make.  

In the case of the point reallocation, I personally believe that was a calculated move to release info at the last possible moment.  Not exactly a member-friendly approach there...and quite a hardship for owners at resorts which had not even opened yet.  

As for the valet parking change, I'm sure there were negotiations occurring at high levels long before October 10th.  But I'm not necessarily convinced that DVC was given the opportunity necessary to forewarn members weeks or months before the change was made.


----------



## Sammie

I think the things TJ listed that are part of the resort, pools, buses, parking lots, community hall, that are part of what was there when you buy is acceptable to the pay for it, even if you don't already use it.

As to internet, personally for me if I had to choose between paying for it or valet, I would hands down pick valet. But I also can go along with my dues paying for some things that I don't personally use. 

Do we know for sure our dues pay for internet use, as our dues were not paying for valet. I don't know. Does anyone?  



> As for the valet parking change, I'm sure there were negotiations occurring at high levels long before October 10th. But I'm not necessarily convinced that DVC was given the opportunity necessary to forewarn members weeks or months before the change was made.



If you mean was MS given the opportunity to forewarn members in advance, no they were not. If you mean did upper management have the opportunity to make a decision to forewarn, yes they did but they chose not to.


----------



## LIFERBABE

Sammie said:


> If you mean was MS given the opportunity to forewarn members in advance, no they were not. If you mean did upper management have the opportunity to make a decision to forewarn, yes they did but they chose not to.




I would have settled for notification of current guests being impacted by the change on the day the change took effect.  Heck, a sign at the Valet desk, saying "effective today......." would have been notice enough for me!  The simple fact that they did NOTHING for the membership staying at the time of the change, is totally unsat and unexcusable.  

They can announce the Member Cruise 1 year in advance, and require payment in full on the day of booking, but when it comes to common courtesy, we are not worthy

Note to DVC: Kool-Aid tastes better when there is sugar in it!

I did write member satisfaction to let them know how I felt.  And I dont mind paying for amenities in my dues.  I thought I was purchasing a premium product.  Whether I use everything or not, I want to be surrounded by it.  If not I would stay at the Holiday Inn Express!


----------



## mopee3

tjkraz said:


> Not everyone uses the resort pools.  Should those who use them have to pay a pool fee?
> Should there be a fee for using Disney park buses?
> How about a parking lot fee for self parking?
> Go back to paying for Internet?
> Fees for tennis court usage, Community Hall activities, or even for the use of Bell Services since not everyone needs luggage assistance.
> 
> Some favor the minimalist approach while others would prefer an all-encompassing experience.  Either way, there is no "one size fits all" solution. .



Maybe this is how "tiered timeshares start, some people are willing to pay for more?

Free valet, pools, pool hopping, free internet, etc.  Would we be happy if all the perks and other stuff, we take as our right to have, now become only available to those willing to pay for them? 

 Be careful what you wish for or whine about.. you may get it!

I am amazed this thread has gone on so long over something that I didn't think was that big a deal.  Almost like someone licked the cherry off my lollypop.

Moe


----------



## Deb & Bill

LIFERBABE said:


> ...Note to DVC: Kool-Aid tastes better when there is sugar in it!...



My favorite new DVC saying.


----------



## tgropp

Seems to me that if some people do not want to help pay extra dues for valet parking or whatever perk DVC offers, lets eliminate all perks to keep the costs down....which means trash and towel service, free internet, valet parking, discounted annual passes, magical express, discounted golf and any other perk. The only one that I have ever used is valet parking and to hear people say that they do not want to subsidize it with their dues, I understand that.....but maybe I am  not happy with subsidizing all the perks that other people use and I dont. Actually I dont mind paying a few extra dollars to help with the perks that I dont use. I just dont like it when people say " get rid of valet parking because I don't use it but would scream murder if they took something away they They used"


----------



## tjkraz

Sammie said:


> If you mean did upper management have the opportunity to make a decision to forewarn, yes they did but they chose not to.



When did they know about it and who are the managers involved?


----------



## Chuck S

tgropp said:


> Seems to me that if some people do not want to help pay extra dues for valet parking or whatever perk DVC offers, lets eliminate all perks to keep the costs down....which means trash and towel service, free internet, valet parking, discounted annual passes, magical express, discounted golf and any other perk. The only one that I have ever used is valet parking and to hear people say that they do not want to subsidize it with their dues, I understand that.....but maybe I am  not happy with subsidizing all the perks that other people use and I dont. Actually I dont mind paying a few extra dollars to help with the perks that I dont use. I just dont like it when people say " get rid of valet parking because I don't use it but would scream murder if they took something away they They used"



I am willing to bet that dues do not subsidize the AP discount, dining perks, golf discounts or most other perks.  As a true perk, they should be offered by the vendor as an unsubsidized courtesy to encourage DVC members to use their services and thus up their gross income. No doubt it has led to an increase in DDE/TiW sales. Trash and Towel were part of the original represented agreements, and is detailed in our POS.  So the only things you talk about that truly _may_ receive contributions from dues that can easily be cut are the free internet and Magical Express services.  The internet should be a very inexpensive addition per member as compared to the labor costs involved for free valet.  That leaves the ME service, and we really don't know how much of that may be funded by dues.


----------



## Dean

BEASLYBOO said:


> Dues should go to pay for what everyone uses like maintenance, refurbishments and housekeeping and all expenses related to those endeavors. No one wants to lose the perks used as an added bonus to purchasing DVC, but if they all went away, in the end, the reason I bought into DVC is for the resorts and their amenities.  Keeping maintenance fees down and maintaining the resorts are my biggest concern.


As I've noted previously, every timeshare has to make conscious decisions about what costs are shared with everyone and which ones are pay to play.  Cost, ease of enforcement, volume savings, % members using a given option and industry standards are among the considerations.  NO timeshare can provide everything and none can do everything pay to play; there must be an in between.  Different systems make different choices but remember that those choices are often for the benefit of the developer and not necessarily the members, esp while active sales are ongoing.  

Some systems that function similarly to DVC have other charges including cancelation charges, banking/borrowing fees, and so on.  Often such fees are intended to drive behavior as much as cost.  Therefore those that want to be absurd in their list of things to make pay to play to try to make a point are really only defining themselves as childish, irrational and ill informed, IMO.  Personally I'd be very happy to see more pay to play if the savings and benefits were sufficient for the change and IMO, it is irrelevant whether those changes affect me (or anyone else) personally or not.  The only question, IMO, is what are the facts of the decision.  In this case the facts are that costs would have gone up and the only choices were pay to play or increased fees.  It also appears to be factual, but not well defined, that the increase was far more than the simple $2 per day increase to non DVC members as possibly would have gone from zero to $12, quite a chunk of change to roll into the dues.

And one last point which I don't recall seeing made previously in this context, every item that increases dues is also factored in to increase the maint contract cost even further.



Chuck S said:


> I am willing to bet that dues do not subsidize the AP discount, dining perks, golf discounts or most other perks.  As a true perk, they should be offered by the vendor as an unsubsidized courtesy to encourage DVC members to use their services and thus up their gross income. No doubt it has led to an increase in DDE/TiW sales. Trash and Towel were part of the original represented agreements, and is detailed in our POS.  So the only things you talk about that truly _may_ receive contributions from dues that can easily be cut are the free internet and Magical Express services.  The internet should be a very inexpensive addition per member as compared to the labor costs involved for free valet.  That leaves the ME service, and we really don't know how much of that may be funded by dues.


I agree, other than possibly a small amount to ME, I can't think of anything that I'd consider a perk that is subsidized by DVC.  Certainly not any of the discounts.


----------



## Dean

tgropp said:


> Seems to me that if some people do not want to help pay extra dues for valet parking or whatever perk DVC offers, lets eliminate all perks to keep the costs down....which means trash and towel service, free internet, valet parking, discounted annual passes, magical express, discounted golf and any other perk. The only one that I have ever used is valet parking and to hear people say that they do not want to subsidize it with their dues, I understand that.....but maybe I am  not happy with subsidizing all the perks that other people use and I dont. Actually I dont mind paying a few extra dollars to help with the perks that I dont use. I just dont like it when people say " get rid of valet parking because I don't use it but would scream murder if they took something away they They used"


See my post above.  IMO, whether one uses the perk or not should not affect the reasonableness of the decision, one should look at the facts involved.  Many timeshares do not do trash and towel and I suspect it will go away at some point.  ASAMOF, many, if not most, timeshares that allow reservations less than a week have additional charges for housekeeping and most do not have a trash and towel service for free though some do.  Anyone who exchanges through RCI for less than a week will be guaranteed to experience these charges first hand to the tune of $20-80 without choice depending on the resort and unit size.


----------



## Tony P. IL.

Here is something I've thought about. 
How did Cars wind up with the contract anyway. Was it just handed exclusively to them and if so why. If someone is looking out for your best interest there should have been a bid package put out to valet service companies. Maybe another one (valet co.) could/would have did the valet (free for DVC) this time around if the contract was up with Cars. Here is a link to an article from late 2006 when it was about to happen. http://www.hotel-online.com/News/PR2006_4th/Nov06_DisneyJobs.html

 With the legal dept. and contracting people (probably many) they have to figure these things out should'nt it raise a red flag (for Disney) to have given Cars a no bid contract and if this is what occured are they really looking out for members to get the most for the least amount of dues.


Was there multiple bidders for this service?  
Does anyone thats involved with this (awarding the contract) at Disney have a vested interest in Cars or anyone at Cars?


----------



## Chuck S

DVC has a resort management contract with Disney, and as the hotel portion of the combined resorts are also Disney, I would think that Disney can make whatever calls it wished as for as awarding contracts.  BTW, I thought it was Mears that had the valet parking contract at WDW, and CARS in Anaheim.


----------



## CarolMN

I've always wondered why free valet parking was made available to all DVC members no matter where you happened to be staying.  In fact, you didn't even have to be staying on site to take advantage of the perk.

Did the valet wages come out of everybody's dues?  I think not.  The owners at VWL, BWV & BCV paid them (a prorated share with the non-DVC side).

So that means prior to the outsourcing, the dues of the owners at VWL, BCV & BWV (and the associated Disney resorts) *subsidized that perk for the entire DVC membership*.  (I'm not including AKV or BLT because they are so new and I think the valet contract was out sourced before the perk was extended to those two resorts).

If the perk only applied to those actually staying at the resort that offered it, it would have made much more sense.

Count me among those who would not be happy to pay higher dues to continue the subsidy.  

I agree they could have done a better job implementing the change.


----------



## jade1

CarolMN said:


> Did the valet wages come out of everybody's dues?  I think not.  The owners at VWL, BWV & BCV paid them (a prorated share with the non-DVC side).
> 
> So that means prior to the outsourcing, the dues of the owners at VWL, BCV & BWV (and the associated Disney resorts) *subsidized that perk for the entire DVC membership*.  (I'm not including AKV or BLT because they are so new and I think the valet contract was out sourced before the perk was extended to those two resorts).



I was in that group and was glad to pay it, and would have continued with no problem. I don't remember anybody complaining actually now that I think of it.


----------



## disneynutz

CarolMN said:


> I've always wondered why free valet parking was made available to all DVC members no matter where you happened to be staying.  In fact, you didn't even have to be staying on site to take advantage of the perk.
> 
> Did the valet wages come out of everybody's dues?  I think not.  The owners at VWL, BWV & BCV paid them (a prorated share with the non-DVC side).
> 
> So that means prior to the outsourcing, the dues of the owners at VWL, BCV & BWV (and the associated Disney resorts) *subsidized that perk for the entire DVC membership*.  (I'm not including AKV or BLT because they are so new and I think the valet contract was out sourced before the perk was extended to those two resorts).
> 
> If the perk only applied to those actually staying at the resort that offered it, it would have made much more sense.
> 
> Count me among those who would not be happy to pay higher dues to continue the subsidy.
> 
> I agree they could have done a better job implementing the change.



How do you know that you would have to pay higher dues to continue the free Valet service?

 Bill


----------



## manning

The voice of my father is saying to me right now.

"Nothing in life is free, It has to be paid for somehow by someone."

Free valet parking? no, not really.


----------



## TChrist05

Bottom line fellow DVC members.....DVC and Disney is real big business....and it is the bottom line they are worried about.  Yes, many members are not happy about losing the valet...but they know that after a while we will all forget about it...until the next thing they take away and implement it poorly.  Not much we can really do about it.  Personally, we have been going down to the World 2 or 3 times a year the past ten years or so.....DW and I love doing the Disney cruise, so our vacations will be limited for the next year or so to cruising.....still love everything about Disney when it comes to the parks and nighttime entertainment...but just gonna take a little break.
Tom


----------



## Dean

TChrist05 said:


> Bottom line fellow DVC members.....DVC and Disney is real big business....and it is the bottom line they are worried about.  Yes, many members are not happy about losing the valet...but they know that after a while we will all forget about it...until the next thing they take away and implement it poorly.  Not much we can really do about it.  Personally, we have been going down to the World 2 or 3 times a year the past ten years or so.....DW and I love doing the Disney cruise, so our vacations will be limited for the next year or so to cruising.....still love everything about Disney when it comes to the parks and nighttime entertainment...but just gonna take a little break.
> Tom


This does not add to or take away from Disney's bottom line.  Any costs would be transferred to the members by way of the dues.


----------



## ReneeQ

I have read this entire thread over the last few days (but not sure how much of it I can remember now).  But I do have a few thoughts.



Alexander said:


> Here's what I don't understand.....It is $12 lousy dollars.  Seriously, there isn't a lot you can buy in WDW for $12.  Obviously at some locations (BW for one) $12 is a good value for what you are getting.
> 
> It's perfectly acceptable to drop tens of thousands of dollars on membership, hundreds of dollars on admission tickets, more hundreds on food, but people don't want to pay $12 for valet parking?  It's twelve lousy dollars!  Seriously--get over it!  And if you can't get over it--move on!



As others have mentioned, it's not "$12 lousy dollars."  For our upcoming 5 night trip, it's $60, $12 PER DAY.  Some posters are acting like all of us have a CHOICE in whether or not to have a car.  From my front door to BWV is 290 miles, so we don't fly.  We'll ALWAYS have a car, and will always need a place to put it.  I don't really understand valet pricing anyway.  I would even glady pay the $12 to drop off my car on arrival, and again to have my car brought back to me on departure day, but WHY do I have to pay $12 per day for the three days in between when I don't even see my car, and no one has to touch it?  We use the car to GET there only, once there, we enjoy the break from driving.

Also, BTW, we DON'T drop hundreds of dollars on tickets, we are still using our 10 day tickets from 5 years ago.  We rarely go to the parks.  And we haven't spent ANYTHING on food in years, we use our Disney Visa rewards, since my husbands runs his business expenses through his Disney Visa card.

On the subject of the cars being parked out front of BWV while checking in, we travel a good bit by car (to non-Disney places), and with very few exceptions, we always leave the car "out front" while checking in.  We don't decide where to park until we see where our room is, where the side entrances are, etc.  That might not really work well at BWV, but I can understand why people would do that.

Another thought is, people might be leaving their cars up front to check in to see if their room is ready, before deciding what to do with their luggage.  I often go to Disney alone with my 4 year old nephew.  If I was willing to handle my own bags, I would not be willing to park "across the street," walk with my nephew all the way to the entrance, check in, only to find out my room IS ready, then walk with him all the way BACK to my car, get my bags, walk all the way BACK to my room.  

I COULD just park, take myself, my nephew and all our stuff to the front, check in, and hopefully the room is ready.  But if it's not, then I have to go give my bags to bell services (whom I would be expected to tip, and I did all the work!).  

Maybe it's just me, but I don't get the "appeal" of using bell services for my bags, if I have to park my own car.  It felt "special" having the car and bags taken care of.  It seems odd to me to drive up, have bell services take my bags, then go park my own car.  Like if I can't get full service, why bother at all.  

Last thing, many posters have said how so many of the DVC perks aren't included at other timeshares.  Well, don't other timeshares have substantially lower dues than DVC?  Anyway to get a comparision of dues between DVC, Hilton, Marriott, and what they cover?

Sorry so long!!!


----------



## Mickey'sApprentice

ReneeQ said:


> I have read this entire thread over the last few days (but not sure how much of it I can remember now).  But I do have a few thoughts.
> 
> 
> 
> As others have mentioned, it's not "$12 lousy dollars."  For our upcoming 5 night trip, it's $60, $12 PER DAY.  Some posters are acting like all of us have a CHOICE in whether or not to have a car.  From my front door to BWV is 290 miles, so we don't fly.  We'll ALWAYS have a car, and will always need a place to put it.  I don't really understand valet pricing anyway.  I would even glady pay the $12 to drop off my car on arrival, and again to have my car brought back to me on departure day, but WHY do I have to pay $12 per day for the three days in between when I don't even see my car, and no one has to touch it?  We use the car to GET there only, once there, we enjoy the break from driving.
> 
> Also, BTW, we DON'T drop hundreds of dollars on tickets, we are still using our 10 day tickets from 5 years ago.  We rarely go to the parks.  And we haven't spent ANYTHING on food in years, we use our Disney Visa rewards, since my husbands runs his business expenses through his Disney Visa card.
> 
> On the subject of the cars being parked out front of BWV while checking in, we travel a good bit by car (to non-Disney places), and with very few exceptions, we always leave the car "out front" while checking in.  We don't decide where to park until we see where our room is, where the side entrances are, etc.  That might not really work well at BWV, but I can understand why people would do that.
> 
> Another thought is, people might be leaving their cars up front to check in to see if their room is ready, before deciding what to do with their luggage.  I often go to Disney alone with my 4 year old nephew.  If I was willing to handle my own bags, I would not be willing to park "across the street," walk with my nephew all the way to the entrance, check in, only to find out my room IS ready, then walk with him all the way BACK to my car, get my bags, walk all the way BACK to my room.
> 
> I COULD just park, take myself, my nephew and all our stuff to the front, check in, and hopefully the room is ready.  But if it's not, then I have to go give my bags to bell services (whom I would be expected to tip, and I did all the work!).
> 
> Maybe it's just me, but I don't get the "appeal" of using bell services for my bags, if I have to park my own car.  It felt "special" having the car and bags taken care of.  It seems odd to me to drive up, have bell services take my bags, then go park my own car.  Like if I can't get full service, why bother at all.
> 
> Last thing, many posters have said how so many of the DVC perks aren't included at other timeshares.  Well, don't other timeshares have substantially lower dues than DVC?  Anyway to get a comparision of dues between DVC, Hilton, Marriott, and what they cover?
> 
> Sorry so long!!!


----------



## Sammie

photobob said:


> Does anyone else have a problem with the fact that the only thing that we as owners can do is speculate as to the reasoning this was done? We don't get answers, we just have to take an educated guess. It sure would be easier to handle if we got solid reasoning from DVC instead of vague, generic statements that we will no longer have a given perk. I'm not saying that there isn't solid reasoning behind it, we just aren't given the info which leads to the speculation which  sometimes can grow wildly. There would be no reason for the speculation if we were kept in the know!



Well I got answers, so I am not guessing at anything. Dues never paid for valet parking. DVC, or DVD or whatever you want to call it, paid it. However now that Disney does not provide the service and the contract was up for renewal it was decided by those that have the power to make these type of decisions that it was not a service used widely enough by all members to warrant charging it to everyone and therefore it will be paid by those that use it. 

They felt that there was not a large enough percentage of members that used to warrant everyone paying it for. And we all must remember us here on the DIS and even other forums is a very smart part of the total membership. 

I do not have a problem with paying it, my complaint was the way it was handled. At least on the day it happened a notice could have gone out by email and on the website.


----------



## Anjelica

Sammie said:


> ...my complaint was the way it was handled. At least on the day it happened a notice could have gone out by email and on the website.



BINGO!!!  And as far as I can tell they STILL haven't sent out notification via email to DVC members.


----------



## Dean

ReneeQ said:


> IFor our upcoming 5 night trip, it's $60, $12 PER DAY.  Some posters are acting like all of us have a CHOICE in whether or not to have a car.


You do have a choice and choose to drive, same for us, we're 4 hours away.  You also have a choice whether to use valet or not, that has not changed, all that has changed is the cost of such choices.  This is no different than at OKW, SSR, HH, VB and most every other timeshare and all non DVC hotels at Disney.  You pull up and run in leaving someone with the car or you park and go in or if  it's too crowded up front or there's a line.  You can leave your luggage with bell services if the room is not ready, though we simply wait to get it out once we know the room is ready.


----------



## DisneyWalker44

ReneeQ said:


> I often go to Disney alone with my 4 year old nephew. handle my own bags, I would not be willing to park "across the street," walk with my nephew all the way to the entrance, check in, only to find out my room IS ready, then walk with him all the way BACK to my car, get my bags, walk all the way BACK to my room.
> 
> I COULD just park, take myself, my nephew and all our stuff to the front, check in, and hopefully the room is ready.  But if it's not, then I have to go give my bags to bell services (whom I would be expected to tip, and I did all the work!).
> 
> Maybe it's just me, but I don't get the "appeal" of using bell services for my bags, if I have to park my own car.


 I think your scenarios exactly explain the appeal of bell services for your bags if you have to park your own car. Drive up, hand over the bags, don't worry about them again until they are in your room.


----------



## crisi

ReneeQ said:


> I have read this entire thread over the last few days (but not sure how much of it I can remember now).  But I do have a few thoughts.


.....

I'm not going to cry tears over this.  We have little choice but to fly - driving is two days each way in the car - with vacation time we don't have.  When we started going to Disney as a family we could fly round trip for $200 a person.  Last two times have been four people at $450 a person.  Plus now they charge us for checked luggage, so our choice has become add another $200 on for luggage or try and pack four people in carryons for a seven day vacation.  From here, it looks like you don't know how good you've got it to be able to go on vacation for gas money and then CHOOSE whether or not to valet park.


----------



## jade1

Sammie said:


> Dues never paid for valet parking. DVC, or DVD or whatever you want to call it, paid it.



Doesn't some of DVC/DVD's money come from the owners or dues?


----------



## tjkraz

Anjelica said:


> BINGO!!!  And as far as I can tell they STILL haven't sent out notification via email to DVC members.



DVC hasn't really used email to communicate policy changes for some time now.  

A statement regarding the policy change has been on DVCMember.com for more than a week, and I imagine the same statement will appear in the next issue of DisneyFiles.


----------



## tjkraz

jade1 said:


> Doesn't some of DVC/DVD's money come from the owners or dues?



Yes, DVC is paid a Management Fee via member dues.  It is not a budgeted amount, rather it's a fixed percentage of the other items included in the dues.  I believe it's around 12% of other dues items except transportation and property taxes.  

What DVC does with that money is entirely up to them.  Even if they were using part of the Management Fee to subsidize valet parking, members were required to pay that fee one way or another.


----------



## jade1

tjkraz said:


> Yes, DVC is paid a Management Fee via member dues.  It is not a budgeted amount, rather it's a fixed percentage of the other items included in the dues.  I believe it's around 12% of other dues items except transportation and property taxes.
> 
> What DVC does with that money is entirely up to them.  Even if they were using part of the Management Fee to subsidize valet parking, members were required to pay that fee one way or another.



Thanks Tim, do you know about DVD as well?


----------



## Anjelica

tjkraz said:


> DVC hasn't really used email to communicate policy changes for some time now.
> 
> A statement regarding the policy change has been on DVCMember.com for more than a week, and I imagine the same statement will appear in the next issue of DisneyFiles.



I think that is an issue - basically not taking advantage of a notification process that would get to quite a few members as quickly as possible.  I guarantee people check their email way more often than they go out to the DVC website.  

I really think DVC management could have taken the opportunity to try and get out the policy change to as many members as possible as quickly as possible.


----------



## DVCBELLE

Anjelica said:


> I think that is an issue - basically not taking advantage of a notification process that would get to quite a few members as quickly as possible.  I guarantee people check their email way more often than they go out to the DVC website.
> 
> I really think DVC management could have taken the opportunity to try and get out the policy change to as many members as possible as quickly as possible.


IF they can take the time to make and send out those stupid Deevey emails - then they could do this.  I am willing to bet they could use the money they spend producing those stupid videos and keep paying for valet.


----------



## DebbieB

DVCBELLE said:


> IF they can take the time to make and send out those stupid Deevey emails - then they could do this.  I am willing to bet they could use the money they spend producing those stupid videos and keep paying for valet.



Those are 2 different things.  Those goofy videos should be coming out of their sales budget (not dues).   I doubt they would pay for valet parking out of their sales budget.

But it does show they have the means to send mass e-mails, so no excuse for lack of communication.


----------



## Chuck S

jade1 said:


> Thanks Tim, do you know about DVD as well?



DVD is the development and sales arm of DVC, they should not receive any monies from dues at all, their income/expenses have to do with building and sales.

As Tim mentioned in the case of the 12% management fees, those fees are basically theirs to do with as they please, if they chose to pay valet or services for memmerber, fine.  If they choose to have a private party in the Bahamas for their employees, fine.  If they chose to use it for corporate  bonuses and salaries, fine.  DVCers basically have no claims on that percentage.


----------



## tjkraz

DVCBELLE said:


> IF they can take the time to make and send out those stupid Deevey emails - then they could do this.  I am willing to bet they could use the money they spend producing those stupid videos and keep paying for valet.



You may be right.  But as others pointed out, that's a marketing expense and the two don't really have a direct impact on one-another.  It's kinda like saying that Disney should stop running commercials and buying billboard space in Florida and instead put that money toward a new attraction.  Not gonna happen.  

Disney doesn't usually crow about changes which negatively impact guests.  They don't issue press releases for ticket price increases or dining plan changes.  Instead we have to rely on sites like the DIS or Allears to get that sort of info.  

One could make the argument that we are "members" and deserve greater communications.  I don't necessarily disagree, but I think in Disney's eyes it's a minor distinction.  They placed a note on the member website and that's more than Disney usually does to communicate reductions in service.  I believe I read somewhere here that Disney sent memos to current resort guests when the change occurred.  

Disney has the resources to go further than that, but I don't think it would be consistent with their SOP over the last decade or so.  

Maybe I have low expectations but I think the most they could have (would have) done was to put a note on DVCMember a few days earlier.  Obviously they didn't  but even then I don't know if DVC is to blame, higher-ups at Disney or if it's simply the result of drawn-out negotiations which left other divisions unable to respond in a more appropriate manner.


----------



## LIFERBABE

> I believe I read somewhere here that Disney sent memos to current resort guests when the change occurred.



As a resort guest at the time of the change, I can attest to the fact that they did not provide any notification whatsoever.  Not even when we valet parked the car on Oct 11 were we notified.  We didnt know until it was time to pick it up and the Valet demanded $12.
We stayed at BLT and BCV Oct 10-16 and neither resort provided any type of notification and both issued the same Portable Perks
Had Friends on points (ours)at SSR and there was no notification over there either.  So that is 3 out of 7.


----------



## aes74

Wait a minute....
someone wrote previously that dvc members do not get free parking at the theme parks. Am I misunderstanding this? I have always showed my dvc card at the parking gate and had free parking before. Is this still the case?


----------



## Chuck S

aes74 said:


> Wait a minute....
> someone wrote previously that dvc members do not get free parking at the theme parks. Am I misunderstanding this? I have always showed my dvc card at the parking gate and had free parking before. Is this still the case?



DVCers have never, by virtue of DVC membership, been entitled to free parking at the theme parks.  Free parking at the parks is an onsite perk, for all onsite guests, including people staying at a DVC resort.  

If a DVCer stays offsite, they are not eligible for free parking at the theme parks, unless they also have an Annual Pass.


----------



## aes74

Chuck S said:


> DVCers have never, by virtue of DVC membership, been entitled to free parking at the theme parks.  Free parking at the parks is an onsite perk, for all onsite guests, including people staying at a DVC resort.
> 
> If a DVCer stays offsite, they are not eligible for free parking at the theme parks, unless they also have an Annual Pass.



Ok, I am feeling pretty sheepish for not having realized this. Somehow it must have gone right over my head. But, I am telling you, I live in Florida and we have gone to the parks many, many times, often without staying the night, and I have shown my card at the gate every time and been waved right on through.


----------



## Chuck S

aes74 said:


> Ok, I am feeling pretty sheepish for not having realized this. Somehow it must have gone right over my head. But, I am telling you, I live in Florida and we have gone to the parks many, many times, often without staying the night, and I have shown my card at the gate every time and been waved right on through.



I'm sure it happens, but it is not a DVC perk.  The parking gate CMs were probably not properly trained, or simply let it slide.


----------



## Maxwell

Here's the lame response I got and I sent to Jim Lewis.

Thank you for contacting Member Services.

Effective Sunday, October 11, 2009, complimentary valet parking for Disney Vacation Club Members at the Walt Disney World Resort has been discontinued. The valet parking charge is $12.00, however complimentary self-parking is available, and Members and Guests who have disabled parking permits will continue to receive complimentary valet parking. As changes in pricing to certain aspects of our business are proprietary and subject to change without notice, they are not released in advance. 
However, this change is being communicated through dvcmember.com, Member Services, an upcoming issue of Disney Files Magazine and Disney Vacation Club Resort Cast Members.

In the past, fees for valet parking have not been incorporated into Member Dues. Since the perk has been discontinued, similar to other fee-based services, such as additional housekeeping service or additional room amenities, only those Members who choose to valet park will be charged instead of increasing the annual dues for all Members. 
As always, we will continue to monitor all parking areas and make adjustments as needed.


----------



## VAgal76

I had no issues at AKV - Jambo House. However, on 10/11 I got them to valet our van. Went to pick up in the morning on the 12th with the valet guy informing me that they no longer offered free valet to DVC members and that they will have to bill me $12 for the night of the 11th. The guy was very apologetic and was bracing himself for the argument. It's not his fault none of us had a clue. The valet said he didn't know about it until that morning. In fact, I need to go look at my bill to see if I was actually charged for the night of the 11th. It would've been nice to had some notice so we could've made our choice whether or not to pay for the service.


----------



## manning

Do you realize that Disney is set up to charge parking fees for everyone. They have the gates in place for all the resorts. If that ever happened I don't think I would be staying on site.

Swan/Dolphin charges for parking per day ($10.00). Found that out when I made reservations using reward points.


----------



## crisi

aes74 said:


> Ok, I am feeling pretty sheepish for not having realized this. Somehow it must have gone right over my head. But, I am telling you, I live in Florida and we have gone to the parks many, many times, often without staying the night, and I have shown my card at the gate every time and been waved right on through.



Flashing my annual pass to park and the attention they paid to it suggested I could probably flash one of my wallet photos and park for free.  They are usually on autopilot - show them something and they wave you through.

(Note that I'm not suggesting people show them the photo of their dog to try and get free parking - that would be a violation of policy!  Just that it doesn't seem to be a well controlled process.)


----------



## Hazzard101

Maxwell said:


> Here's the lame response I got and I sent to Jim Lewis.
> 
> Thank you for contacting Member Services.
> 
> Effective Sunday, October 11, 2009, complimentary valet parking for Disney Vacation Club Members at the Walt Disney World Resort has been discontinued. The valet parking charge is $12.00, however complimentary self-parking is available, and Members and Guests who have disabled parking permits will continue to receive complimentary valet parking. As changes in pricing to certain aspects of our business are proprietary and subject to change without notice, they are not released in advance.
> However, this change is being communicated through dvcmember.com, Member Services, an upcoming issue of Disney Files Magazine and Disney Vacation Club Resort Cast Members.
> 
> In the past, fees for valet parking have not been incorporated into Member Dues. Since the perk has been discontinued, similar to other fee-based services, such as additional housekeeping service or additional room amenities, only those Members who choose to valet park will be charged instead of increasing the annual dues for all Members.
> As always, we will continue to monitor all parking areas and make adjustments as needed.



This looks a lot like what I got as well. It shows how much they care about what the members have to say, I sent an Email voicing my specific concerns. They sent back what seems to be basically a form letter with some tweaks. 
I know we aren't guaranteed perks and privileges but when you go to the tour they inform you of all the perks and how membership has it's privileges. They use perks to help sell it but they take it away just as fast.  
Here is the response I received:  
Thank you for contacting Member Services.

*As part of the normal course of doing business, we regularly evaluate
and adjust our pricing.  As a result*, effective Sunday, October 11,
2009, complimentary valet parking for Disney Vacation Club Members at
the Walt Disney World Resort has been discontinued. The valet parking
charge is $12.00 per day, however complimentary self-parking is always
available.  Similar to other fee-based services, such as additional
housekeeping service or additional room amenities, only those Members
who choose to valet park will be charged instead of increasing the
annual dues for all Members.  Members and Guests who have disabled
parking permits will continue to receive complimentary valet parking.

Thank you again for contacting us.

Please let us know if we can be of any further assistance.

Sincerely,

Todd

Member Services | Online Communications
Disney Vacation Club

Anything look a little familiar?

I just realized. look at the words I put in bold. Is this not telling us that THEY made the decision to raise parking fees and to discontinue free valet parking for members?  I sent my email to MS so it came from DVC mouse services


----------



## Simba's Mom

VAgal76 said:


> . The guy was very apologetic and was bracing himself for the argument. It's not his fault none of us had a clue. The valet said he didn't know about it until that morning.



Unfortunately, many valets and supervisors have gotten hammered so much by DVCers angry about the change that many of them have become defensive, fixing for a fight.  But the supervisor told me the same as you, that they also got very little warning and are very unhappy that they have to be the "messengers" in many cases.  And you know what they say about shooting the messenger-many people do!
BTW, I was at Jambo house that same week as you, but  without a car.


----------



## KAT4DISNEY

tjkraz said:


> DVC hasn't really used email to communicate policy changes for some time now.
> 
> A statement regarding the policy change has been on DVCMember.com for more than a week, and I imagine the same statement will appear in the next issue of DisneyFiles.



I was just cleaning up lots of old emails yesterday and two were announcements from DVC.  On Jan 23rd there was one about the 2010 point changes and the other was for the booking and waitlist changes so they did use email for those items.  I can't think of any other big changes since those two.


----------



## photobob

Simba's Mom said:


> Unfortunately, many valets and supervisors have gotten hammered so much by DVCers angry about the change that many of them have become defensive, fixing for a fight.  But the supervisor told me the same as you, that they also got very little warning and are very unhappy that they have to be the "messengers" in many cases.  And you know what they say about shooting the messenger-many people do!
> BTW, I was at Jambo house that same week as you, but  without a car.



Unfortunately the rank and file get to handle the ramifications of corporate decisions in many occasions. The people who make the decisions rarely are ones who work with the public.


----------



## Dean

jade1 said:


> Thanks Tim, do you know about DVD as well?


Mainly sales.  Supposedly they don't make anything on the exchanges members make though I'm betting there is some consideration from RCI currently.


----------



## tjkraz

LIFERBABE said:


> As a resort guest at the time of the change, I can attest to the fact that they did not provide any notification whatsoever.  Not even when we valet parked the car on Oct 11 were we notified.  We didnt know until it was time to pick it up and the Valet demanded $12.
> We stayed at BLT and BCV Oct 10-16 and neither resort provided any type of notification and both issued the same Portable Perks
> Had Friends on points (ours)at SSR and there was no notification over there either.  So that is 3 out of 7.



Fair enough.  I would swear that someone reported having a memo slipped under their door a couple days after the change was made.  I'm on vacation now  so I'm not going to go searching for it.  But even if that memo did go out, it's clear the process was flawed (some guests may not have received, perhaps some were missed if it occurred during a resort switch, etc.)  



KAT4DISNEY said:


> I was just cleaning up lots of old emails yesterday and two were announcements from DVC.  On Jan 23rd there was one about the 2010 point changes and the other was for the booking and waitlist changes so they did use email for those items.  I can't think of any other big changes since those two.



Maybe I should have said "negative changes."    Neither of those were inherently bad for ALL members, while the valet parking change is certainly viewed as hurting all.  

Still, if I remember the email you are referring to, DVC didn't exactly highlight the changes.  The mention was buried toward the end of the message.  

I don't believe there were emails for many other things like the removal of glassware from Studios, change in booking policy or the II/RCI switch.  But I'm just working from memory and could be wrong on that, too.


----------



## granmanh603

I have been here at BWV since Oct 13...I was not informed of the change...I knew about it before I came from these boards and then saw a small sign on the valet desk...but nothing under my door or even told or email...


----------



## Dean

granmanh603 said:


> I have been here at BWV since Oct 13...I was not informed of the change...I knew about it before I came from these boards and then saw a small sign on the valet desk...but nothing under my door or even told or email...


Unless you valet parked, it shouldn't matter though a more conspicuous sign than you reference would be nice.


----------



## bzzelady

tjkraz said:


> I don't believe there were emails for many other things like the removal of glassware from Studios, change in booking policy or the II/RCI switch.  But I'm just working from memory and could be wrong on that, too.



The above changes didn't incur extra costs to the members while they were staying onsite.  The fact that a change was being made should have at least been communicated to the DVC guests who had cars in the valet parking lot the night before so that they could have had the opportunity to move their cars if they did not wish to pay the fee for continued valet parking (and it would not have been too difficult to write a short memo, make 200 copies, and place it beneath the doors of those who had cars in the valet lot).  I feel bad not only for the guests that had no warning that this was coming, but also for the valet staff left on the front lines dealing with those who had no warning.  

This was just done very poorly on both DVC and Disney's part.


----------



## n2mm

I just got back last night and was at the BWV 10/17-24.  I also was never told either at checkin or a message under the door.  Also in the portable perk pamplet I received at checkin in (they discontinued the book) it is still listed as a member perk.  So if I hadn't known via the boards, I would have been clueless to this change.  Poor communications IMHO by MS.


----------



## Chuck S

bzzelady said:


> The above changes didn't incur extra costs to the members while they were staying onsite.  The fact that a change was being made should have at least been communicated to the DVC guests who had cars in the valet parking lot the night before so that they could have had the opportunity to move their cars if they did not wish to pay the fee for continued valet parking (and it would not have been too difficult to write a short memo, make 200 copies, and place it beneath the doors of those who had cars in the valet lot).  I feel bad not only for the guests that had no warning that this was coming, but also for the valet staff left on the front lines dealing with those who had no warning.
> 
> This was just done very poorly on both DVC and Disney's part.



Don't forget that Mears, the parking contractor, also did not let their employees, the valets, know this change was coming.  If Mears had let their valets know, they could have informed members a couple of days ahead of time as they parked their cars.  The blame for lask of communication isn't all on Disney's/DVC's shoulders, they share it.


----------



## DisneyWalker44

tjkraz said:


> One could make the argument that we are "members" and deserve greater communications.  I don't necessarily disagree, but I think in Disney's eyes it's a minor distinction.



Come on. Look, I tend to be in the kood-aid-drinking give Disney the benefit of the doubt crowd. But there is zero doubt in my mind Disney dropped the ball here. 

We aren't talking about The Walt Disney Corporation. We are talking about Disney Vacation Club Management Corporation. They work for us. We pay them. They have the means and capacity to easily send out an email to every member informing them of a meaningful change .

This isn't a passive-voice "one could make the argument" kind of thing. DVCMC should communicate more and better. Period. I can't believe anyone would disagree with that.


----------



## New York Digger

I am a little confused... If I park in the lot .. IS IT FREE ?

but    If they retrieve the car for me its 12 bucks..

so.. if I walk to get my car, it is free..  Yes I am a dvc guy, and will be staying at BLT  Christmas time..   I am Puzzled with this... HELP


----------



## Chuck S

New York Digger said:


> I am a little confused... If I park in the lot .. IS IT FREE ?
> 
> but    If they retrieve the car for me its 12 bucks..
> 
> so.. if I walk to get my car, it is free..  Yes I am a dvc guy, and will be staying at BLT  Christmas time..   I am Puzzled with this... HELP



Self parking is free, valet parking is not.  You can not self park/self retrieve from the valet lot.

And besides, the valet lot is much farther from the BLT than the self-parking lot.


----------



## Doctor P

New York Digger said:


> I am a little confused... If I park in the lot .. IS IT FREE ?
> 
> but    If they retrieve the car for me its 12 bucks..
> 
> so.. if I walk to get my car, it is free..  Yes I am a dvc guy, and will be staying at BLT  Christmas time..   I am Puzzled with this... HELP




It works like valet parking anywhere else.  They take your car, keep the keys, and then retrieve it for you when you want it back.  So, unless you go retrieve it with an extra set of keys, and unless you know where they parked your car, you can't retrieve it yourself.


----------



## DVCPAT

Chuck S said:


> Don't forget that Mears, the parking contractor, also did not let their employees, the valets, know this change was coming.  If Mears had let their valets know, they could have informed members a couple of days ahead of time as they parked their cars.  The blame for lask of communication isn't all on Disney's/DVC's shoulders, they share it.





Did Disney give the responsibility to Mears to notify guests?


----------



## Brian Noble

> This isn't a passive-voice "one could make the argument" kind of thing. DVCMC should communicate more and better. Period. I can't believe anyone would disagree with that.


I'm not sure anyone is.  They should communicate better.  But, they don't, and they haven't for quite some time.  I would not expect them to change anytime soon.  This is an issue of corporate culture---TWDC (of which DVCMC is a part) has always behaved as a benign dictator, whether with guests or with county and state government.  Ol' Uncle Walt _knows what's good for you._

I totally understand being frustrated with this.  But, expecting it to change is only going to lead to more frustration.


----------



## New York Digger

GREAT   !!!   I thaught that once I got there they will bill me 12$ a nite for 8 nites...  I am only going to use the car 3 or 4 days down there but BLT walk to self park  is short   COOL ....  THANKS FELLOW PEEPS


----------



## CT_Bev&Jeff

> Don't forget that Mears, the parking contractor, also did not let their employees, the valets, know this change was coming. If Mears had let their valets know, they could have informed members a couple of days ahead of time as they parked their cars. The blame for lask of communication isn't all on Disney's/DVC's shoulders, they share it.



Really Chuck, I think you are pushing the envelope here a bit.

I am a DVC Member, not a Mears Member, my Valet Parking was a DVC Perk not a Mears Perk for DVC Members.

DVC blew it big time with their last minute decision, failure to inform members, failure to update the DVC website, failure to send out emails, etc.

They FAILED the membership in this case.  Not Mears, no one else is to blame except the DVC leadership.  That bothers me way more than the actual decision to take away Valet Parking.  

To try and defend the DVC leadership or to deflect responsibility in this case is laughable.

CT_Jeff


----------



## Chuck S

DVCPAT said:


> Did Disney give the responsibility to Mears to notify guests?



If Mears is parking your car, shouldn't they notify you that the perk is ending the next day, when you park?  I would say if Mears parks your car, then yes, they certainly share responsibility.  After all, it is Mears who physically has the keys to your car, and will refuse to release it if you don't pay, not DVC.  And it is Mears who collects the money and makes the profit from the parking, not DVC.


----------



## RoutemanDan

Most members have no idea that it isn't Disney parking your car.Sure people who frequent boards like this do, but that is a small percentage of the membership.
 DVC should have let members know, not the outsourced contractor hired by Disney.


----------



## Chuck S

RoutemanDan said:


> Most members have no idea that it isn't Disney parking your car.Sure people who frequent boards like this do, but that is a small percentage of the membership.
> DVC should have let members know, not the outsourced contractor hired by Disney.



I still think they both share responsibility.  It is Mears who did not inform THEIR employees.  It is not Disney's responsibility to inform Mears' employees, who could then inform people as they park their cars.

Just as it is Disney's/DVC's responsibility to inform _their_ employees, which also apparently did not happen.


----------



## DebbieB

Mears could have informed the valets if they had been directed to do so by Disney/DVC.  It shouldn't be Mears decision to do that.  If Disney had directed Mears to do that and they didn't, then they share responsibility.   But I have my doubts that they did.


----------



## Uncleromulus

RoutemanDan:
Good point. They look as though they are regular CM's. And Mears has no real responsibility to inform DVC members of anything. That's what DVC is supposed to do.
And to add that I e-mailed a "complaint" to DVC and did get a call back. Bottom line is that it was done in an effort not to raise dues. And the lady made sure to remind me that many people do not use this perk and would not like their dues raised for something they didn't use.


----------



## Chuck S

DebbieB said:


> Mears could have informed the valets if they had been directed to do so by Disney/DVC.  It shouldn't be Mears decision to do that.  If Disney had directed Mears to do that and they didn't, then they share responsibility.   But I have my doubts that they did.



Interesting that you think Disney would need to direct Mears to communicate something to Mears employees.  Do you think Mears should also be able to decide what Disney tells Disney employees?


----------



## TDC Nala

manning said:


> Do you realize that Disney is set up to charge parking fees for everyone. They have the gates in place for all the resorts. If that ever happened I don't think I would be staying on site.
> 
> Swan/Dolphin charges for parking per day ($10.00). Found that out when I made reservations using reward points.



So do all three Universal resorts. If and when Disney wants to charge all its resort guests for self parking, it will.


----------



## KAT4DISNEY

tjkraz said:


> Maybe I should have said "negative changes."    Neither of those were inherently bad for ALL members, while the valet parking change is certainly viewed as hurting all.
> 
> Still, if I remember the email you are referring to, DVC didn't exactly highlight the changes.  The mention was buried toward the end of the message.



LOL - ok, that would be VERY different for DVC to do.  All those other items were sent out with other news but were at least highlighted enough with titles on the page before the full info.  And I think the point chart change was the top item.  Booking procedures and waitlist changes might have not been the top items but were high up.

You'd think they could have found some other "good" news to hide this info in!

Regarding who should have notified members on site I don't know if Mears had any responsibility to inform and think that really rested with DVC who is the party that decided not to continue the service.  I'm trying to think of any place I've stayed that tells me what the cost is when I pull up to valet and unless valet employees were looking at a member card (which they didn't the one time we used it at AKV) they wouldn't necessarily know until they logged it in, would they?


----------



## DebbieB

Chuck S said:


> Interesting that you think Disney would need to direct Mears to communicate something to Mears employees.  Do you think Mears should also be able to decide what Disney tells Disney employees?



The decision to remove the perk was Disney's/DVC's, it affects their guests/members.   I don't think Mears should take the inititive to start communicating it without direction from Disney/DVC.     

Bottom line is DVC blew it.  This should have been announced with some notice.    It's ridiculous that someone parks their car when it is free and then is charged the next day when the rules changed.   There still has not been an official communication and it's been a couple of weeks.


----------



## Chuck S

DebbieB said:


> The decision to remove the perk was Disney's/DVC's, it affects their guests/members.   I don't think Mears should take the inititive to start communicating it without direction from Disney/DVC.
> 
> Bottom line is DVC blew it.  This should have been announced with some notice.    It's ridiculous that someone parks their car when it is free and then is charged the next day when the rules changed.   There still has not been an official communication and it's been a couple of weeks.



We don't know that it was solely DVCs decision.  Mears could have wanted more $ per car to continue the perk.  And DVC said "no."  Without knowing all the details, it is difficult to assign all the responsibility to one party.


----------



## DebbieB

Chuck S said:


> We don't know that it was solely DVCs decision.  Mears could have wanted more $ per car to continue the perk.  And DVC said "no."  Without knowing all the details, it is difficult to assign all the responsibility to one party.



Who knows, we're not going to agree on this.     But it's 2 weeks later and there still has not been an official announcement from DVC.   You can't say that isn't DVC's responsibility.   Or do you think Mears should do that?   Should they take the inititive to e-mail all DVC members?


----------



## DisneyWalker44

Chuck S said:


> If Mears is parking your car, shouldn't they notify you that the perk is ending the next day, when you park?  I would say if Mears parks your car, then yes, they certainly share responsibility.  After all, it is Mears who physically has the keys to your car, and will refuse to release it if you don't pay, not DVC.  And it is Mears who collects the money and makes the profit from the parking, not DVC.


 If somebody pulls up to a Disney hotel, and gives their keys to a valet wearing a Disney uniform, and gets a valet slip that says Disney on it, and pays for the valet by turning their credit card over to Disney and seeing a charge on their bill from Disney, Disney is parking their car, not Mears. The fact that behind the scenes Disney and Mears have some sort of corporate deal is irrelevant. The valet service is representing itself in every possible way as Disney. 

Furthermore, I don't care about Mears. Mears doesn't' work for me. DVCMC does. Their job is to run things for us. If they have information that is important for the membership, their job is to inform us. I'm not frustrated with Disney-the-parking-company for not telling us. I'm mad at Disney-the-condo-manager.


----------



## DisneyWalker44

Brian Noble said:


> But, expecting it to change is only going to lead to more frustration.


 I expect there to be the possibility for change. So I will use - and hope others will use - what little voice we have to let DVCMC know we expect more from them. I won't bet the farm they will change, but I won't give up and do nothing.


----------



## Chuck S

DebbieB said:


> Who knows, we're not going to agree on this.     But it's 2 weeks later and there still has not been an official announcement from DVC.   You can't say that isn't DVC's responsibility.   Or do you think Mears should do that?   Should they take the inititive to e-mail all DVC members?



Actually, there has been an announcement that the perk was discontinued...on the Memeber website.  Buried, but there.


----------



## Chuck S

DisneyWalker44 said:


> If somebody pulls up to a Disney hotel, and gives their keys to a valet wearing a Disney uniform, and gets a valet slip that says Disney on it, and pays for the valet by turning their credit card over to Disney and seeing a charge on their bill from Disney, Disney is parking their car, not Mears. The fact that behind the scenes Disney and Mears have some sort of corporate deal is irrelevant. The valet service is representing itself in every possible way as Disney.
> 
> Furthermore, I don't care about Mears. Mears doesn't' work for me. DVCMC does. Their job is to run things for us. If they have information that is important for the membership, their job is to inform us. I'm not frustrated with Disney-the-parking-company for not telling us. I'm mad at Disney-the-condo-manager.



Actually, once you give them the keys, I would think the valet "works for you" just as a food server serves food, and should communicate changes on the menu or pricing, the valets _should_ also communicate such a change when you engage them to park your car.  They are the front line. just like a server, and they should have received the info.


----------



## Brian Noble

> I won't bet the farm they will change, but I won't give up and do nothing.


And, that's very reasonable.  But, given the number of times Disney has been down the "why didn't you tell us" road, I think that windmill you're tilting at is pretty sturdy.


----------



## DVCPAT

Chuck S said:


> If Mears is parking your car, shouldn't they notify you that the perk is ending the next day, when you park?  I would say if Mears parks your car, then yes, they certainly share responsibility.  After all, it is Mears who physically has the keys to your car, and will refuse to release it if you don't pay, not DVC.  And it is Mears who collects the money and makes the profit from the parking, not DVC.



You allow Disney to pass the buck too easily. Maybe they should stop calling the resort Disney World. If they rename the resort, Subcontractor World, then the subcontractors should bare the responsibility. Disney decides who handles specific jobs on site.


----------



## needtogomore

Chuck S said:


> Don't forget that Mears, the parking contractor, also did not let their employees, the valets, know this change was coming.  If Mears had let their valets know, they could have informed members a couple of days ahead of time as they parked their cars.  The blame for lask of communication isn't all on Disney's/DVC's shoulders, they share it.



Surely if DVC was handing the contract over to mears it was DVCs job to tell us


----------



## Chuck S

DVCPAT said:


> You allow Disney to pass the buck too easily. Maybe they should stop calling the resort Disney World. If they rename the resort, Subcontractor World, then the subcontractors should bare the responsibility. Disney decides who handles specific jobs on site.



Yes, and Mears handles the valets.  If the valet takes may car keys on 10/10, and I need to pay $12 when I pick my car up in the morning on 10/11, then the valet should inform me of such, no?



needtogomore said:


> Surely if DVC was handing the contract over to mears it was DVCs job to tell us



DVC did not "hand the contract over to Mears"  Mears has been the valet contractor for at least 2 years.  And DVC does not directly pickl the service providers for the resort, Disney Resorts does.  DVC has a management contract with Disney Resorts.

Say DVC Marketing had an arrangement with Mears to pay for the service for members.  For some reason, either Marketing did not want the continued expense, or Mears wanted more $$, (likely both) the agreement ended.  They should both inform members of the change...Mears via the valets when they take your car keys, and DVC via the website and member communications.


----------



## CarolAnnC

I understand folks' frustrations here.  People who were not expecting to pay $12 and then got wacked with the fee after picking up their car during the Oct 11 change date surely have something to complain about.

But, like other Member "perks" such as pool hopping, dining discounts, etc., how many times have we read here on the boards where folks successfully took advantage of the perks, such as friends, family and even renters of their DVC membership, knowing full well they were not entitled and that their KTTW card only contained the words "DVC Member" because they were staying on someone elses points.  True,  valet parking had more often requested to see the DVC Blue Membership card in recent times, but some did occasionally slip through the cracks.. 

I am going to predict that once there is a resort wide charge for self parking (which I believe will come one day) that DVC members will be paying like everyone else.  Free valet was a nice perk, but not one that every single member was using for sure.

Like it or  not, Mears is employing and operating the valet service.  When other vendors offer DVC members perks such as House of Blues or Fulton's Crab House, for example, we do not expect DVC to notify us of changes in the perks.  Why is Mears valet any different?   Again, not agreeing with their method of implementation, but pointing out some other points of view.


----------



## manning

CarolAnnC said:


> It will be easy to implement and when it does it is bye bye Disney for me. They will get parking money from me at the parks but no longer lodging money. Also I stay off site I will eat off site.


----------



## jade1

DisneyWalker44 said:


> If somebody pulls up to a Disney hotel, and gives their keys to a valet wearing a Disney uniform, and gets a valet slip that says Disney on it, and pays for the valet by turning their credit card over to Disney and seeing a charge on their bill from Disney, Disney is parking their car, not Mears. The fact that behind the scenes Disney and Mears have some sort of corporate deal is irrelevant. The valet service is representing itself in every possible way as Disney.
> 
> Furthermore, I don't care about Mears. Mears doesn't' work for me. DVCMC does. Their job is to run things for us. If they have information that is important for the membership, their job is to inform us. I'm not frustrated with Disney-the-parking-company for not telling us. I'm mad at Disney-the-condo-manager.






DVCPAT said:


> You allow Disney to pass the buck too easily. Maybe they should stop calling the resort Disney World. If they rename the resort, Subcontractor World, then the subcontractors should bare the responsibility. Disney decides who handles specific jobs on site.



Sad, but true.


----------



## DisneyWalker44

CarolAnnC said:


> When other vendors offer DVC members perks such as House of Blues or Fulton's Crab House, for example, we do not expect DVC to notify us of changes in the perks.  Why is Mears valet any different?   Again, not agreeing with their method of implementation, but pointing out some other points of view.


 I don't expect Mears to tell me - I expect our management company to tell me. And, no, burying it somewhere on the member website doesn't count as telling me. 

Better communication costs DVCMC nothing. We should expect more from them. As I've said, I'm normally in the give-Disney-the-benefit-of-the-doubt school. But, here, they did wrong. We should do what we can to try and get them to do better. Not try and justify their implementation by bring up Mears.


----------



## DisneyDreams4

sorry to see that valet service gone


----------



## manning

What irritates me are the add-on charges like parking charges at Dolphin, Universal etc. 

Just factor the charge into the room rate. What I don't know won't irritate me.

The same for parking charges at the parks. Just about everyone drives and parks there and you need a parking lot. Just factor it into the price of the ticket. Now that would be a way to save money. You eliminate the toll gate CM and the practice of people parking at DTD to avoid the parking charge. Bet we could also reduce the number of buses needed to haul those people to the parks via the resorts.


----------



## Chuck S

manning said:


> What irritates me are the add-on charges like parking charges at Dolphin, Universal etc.
> 
> Just factor the charge into the room rate. What I don't know won't irritate me.
> 
> The same for parking charges at the parks. Just about everyone drives and parks there and you need a parking lot. Just factor it into the price of the ticket. Now that would be a way to save money. You eliminate the toll gate CM and the practice of people parking at DTD to avoid the parking charge. Bet we could also reduce the number of buses needed to haul those people to the parks via the resorts.



I really don't see open parking at the theme parks happening.  It is a great marketing tool for "offsite" vs. "onsite."  Parking lot require maintenance and upkeep, and it is undoubtedly also a profit center for Disney.  If they upped the ticket prices (or resort prices and member dues) enough to offset the amount of profit from the parking lots, I'd be willing to bet there would be a sharp drop in ticket sales, and many more complaints from members than we see in this thread.


----------



## Dean

manning said:


> What irritates me are the add-on charges like parking charges at Dolphin, Universal etc.
> 
> Just factor the charge into the room rate. What I don't know won't irritate me.
> 
> The same for parking charges at the parks. Just about everyone drives and parks there and you need a parking lot. Just factor it into the price of the ticket. Now that would be a way to save money. You eliminate the toll gate CM and the practice of people parking at DTD to avoid the parking charge. Bet we could also reduce the number of buses needed to haul those people to the parks via the resorts.


There was just a price increase. As Chuck notes it is a great marketing tool for on property resorts and for the AP/PAP options though not that much different than the VIP member status possibilities we've discussed recently.  Still at some point if the resorts are consistently fairly full, they may pull the free parking for those staying on property.  I don't see this loss as a major issue overall but it likely would affect a larger number of people more than the valet issue.  Given that Universal made this change at some point previously, I wonder what their experience was, obviously it was not enough of an issue to cause them to scrap the plan.


----------



## CarolAnnC

DisneyWalker44 said:


> I don't expect Mears to tell me - I expect our management company to tell me. And, no, burying it somewhere on the member website doesn't count as telling me.
> 
> Better communication costs DVCMC nothing. We should expect more from them. As I've said, I'm normally in the give-Disney-the-benefit-of-the-doubt school. But, here, they did wrong. We should do what we can to try and get them to do better. Not try and justify their implementation by bring up Mears.



You missed my point.  The fact that DVC does not notify members of any other perks being reduced or discontinued does not seem to disturb folks.  Why don't you expect DVC to notify you of changes to other perks?


----------



## TDC Nala

> Just factor the charge into the room rate. What I don't know won't irritate me.



I don't bring a car and I'm glad they only charge parking for those who bring cars. Just like you don't pay the airline's checked luggage fee if you don't check luggage.


----------



## jlewisinsyr

Did anyone get a response back from their complaints to MS - DVC - I got one back and they used the infamous, "proprietary" information spiel in regards to why they didn't notify guests.  They also stated that previous valet was not in any part of our dues.

I didn't care so much about the not included in the dues, but I sent a really pointed and direct letter back to them in regards to proprietary information, and how using that is a cop out to the members of DVC, its in poor taste, poor judgement and does not make up for poor customer service.

At first I was annoyed at the loss of a perk, but it really isn't about that, it's about the continued poor customer service from Disney, they used to be a leader running miles ahead of the pack, and they just keep slipping up and their distance is shrinking dramatically.  In tough times you enhance your customer service not cut it.


----------



## Chuck S

jlewisinsyr said:


> Did anyone get a response back from their complaints to MS - DVC - I got one back and they used the infamous, "proprietary" information spiel in regards to why they didn't notify guests.  They also stated that previous valet was not in any part of our dues.
> 
> I didn't care so much about the not included in the dues, but I sent a really pointed and direct letter back to them in regards to proprietary information, and how using that is a cop out to the members of DVC, its in poor taste, poor judgement and does not make up for poor customer service.
> 
> At first I was annoyed at the loss of a perk, but it really isn't about that, it's about the continued poor customer service from Disney, they used to be a leader running miles ahead of the pack, and they just keep slipping up and their distance is shrinking dramatically.  In tough times you enhance your customer service not cut it.



Honestly, I think proprietary info is an excellent reason.  We, as owners, are not, nor should we be, privy to all the details of contract negotiations or of the contracts themselves.  Honestly, do you know all the inner working of you electric companies contracts with it suppliers for resources or how it may buy pre-generated electricity, even if it is city owned utilityor a co-operative?  Or do you just pay the bill every month?


----------



## DenLo

TDC Nala said:


> I don't bring a car and I'm glad they only charge parking for those who bring cars. Just like you don't pay the airline's checked luggage fee if you don't check luggage.



And who pays for the ME service and the transportation buses between the resorts and park?  They are "free" services just like free parking.  Will you be glad when they only charge those you use those services?

Disney has always added to their profit at WDW with "nickel and dime" charges.  If dropping these charges or eliminating perks will be more profitable then that is what will happen.

The sad part is that Disney could be more courteous and notify DVC members well in advance of expected changes.  But courtesy works both ways how many DVC members have been discourteous to CMs over the loss of perks or price increases?  I just think that courtesy in general has become passe in the United States whether it is with individuals or corporations.


----------



## toocherie

jlewisinsyr said:


> At first I was annoyed at the loss of a perk, but it really isn't about that, it's about the continued poor customer service from Disney, they used to be a leader running miles ahead of the pack, and they just keep slipping up and their distance is shrinking dramatically.  In tough times you enhance your customer service not cut it.



slightly off topic, but also related, was our experience at Disneyland this past weekend.  We were amazed by the number of times we were told "no."  One of our party ordered a breakfast burrito at a CS place and wanted the eggs left off--No.  One of our party ordered pasta somewhere else and wanted a little bit extra sauce--No.  We showed up for a lunch reservation for 31 people and the area they were planning to put us had a lingering family finishing their meal--move us somewhere else--No.  (That one we fought--and won--because we were decorating tables and setting up party favors.  I had to use my "lawyer voice" as my friends call it.)  It was just like the easy answer was always "no"--whereas we had always thought that Disney went out of its way to accommodate the customer.  In fact, one of our group is a former Disney plaid and was just amazed by what she heard because it was contrary to what she had been trained to do.  I will say that the one place "no" did not occur as much was Napa Rose--although even there the chef said "no" to substituting something but the server figured out a way around it (and yes, she got a big tip).


----------



## Deb & Bill

Chuck S said:


> Honestly, I think proprietary info is an excellent reason.  We, as owners, are not, nor should we be, privy to all the details of contract negotiations or of the contracts themselves.  Honestly, do you know all the inner working of you electric companies contracts with it suppliers for resources or how it may buy pre-generated electricity, even if it is city owned utilityor a co-operative?  Or do you just pay the bill every month?



No, Chuck, I don't need all the details of the contract negotiations.  But I should be told about what affects me.  Even the power company will tell me that my utility bill will be going up in December because of a price raise in coal or natural gas.


----------



## crisi

jlewisinsyr said:


> At first I was annoyed at the loss of a perk, but it really isn't about that, it's about the continued poor customer service from Disney, they used to be a leader running miles ahead of the pack, and they just keep slipping up and their distance is shrinking dramatically.  In tough times you enhance your customer service not cut it.



There are a variety of business models.  You can be a Mercedes - people will pay more for your brand and customer service and quality.  You can be Sam's Club - where you go for a standard, no frills, low price model.

Disney had had a blended model - and they have forever.  They've been high customer service - but tiered resort offerings from Campground to Value to Moderate to Deluxe allow them to tier their offerings.  And their customer service "magic" has really been in the small touches - like towel animals.  Low cost surprises.

In a tough business climate, a company with really high fixed costs like Disney needs to reduce their fixed cost, keep volume high enough at a price high enough to cover the costs.  They need to carefully manage their costs.  One way to manage costs is to outsource - another company takes some of the risks and you get predictable costing.  Plus, Mears doesn't have a reputation as a great employer to maintain, outsourcing valet or housekeeping or whatever has the outsourced company picking up benefits - and I bet they aren't as good as Disney's salaried professional staff.  Another way to reduce costs is to standardize.  And for Disney standardizing means saying no more often.  

It isn't our company (and I say this as a DVC member and Disney stockholder).  We are customers.  We can choose to buy what they are selling, or we can take our business elsewhere.  But we don't have a right to know the details of how they run their business.


----------



## CarolAnnC

toocherie said:


> slightly off topic, but also related, was our experience at Disneyland this past weekend.  We were amazed by the number of times we were told "no."  One of our party ordered a breakfast burrito at a CS place and wanted the eggs left off--No.  One of our party ordered pasta somewhere else and wanted a little bit extra sauce--No.  We showed up for a lunch reservation for 31 people and the area they were planning to put us had a lingering family finishing their meal--move us somewhere else--No.  (That one we fought--and won--because we were decorating tables and setting up party favors.  I had to use my "lawyer voice" as my friends call it.)  It was just like the easy answer was always "no"--whereas we had always thought that Disney went out of its way to accommodate the customer.  In fact, one of our group is a former Disney plaid and was just amazed by what she heard because it was contrary to what she had been trained to do.  I will say that the one place "no" did not occur as much was Napa Rose--although even there the chef said "no" to substituting something but the server figured out a way around it (and yes, she got a big tip).



I believe DL uses the same system as WDW does - not actually "reservations" but ADR's which give you the next available table.  So they don't actually reserve tables for you.  Also, I am surprised that they accepted one for a party so large - 31 people for lunch.  Isn't this unusual as well?

Anyway, it sounds like they accommodated you nicely.  I think your post actually puts a positive spin on Disneyland accommodating you.

Now back to our regularly scheduled program as yes, this is off topic, LOL.


----------



## jlewisinsyr

crisi said:


> It isn't our company (and I say this as a DVC member and Disney stockholder).  We are customers.  We can choose to buy what they are selling, or we can take our business elsewhere.  But we don't have a right to know the details of how they run their business.



As a stockholder (I am as well) and a DVC member we are NOT just customers we are owners, we control an interest in the Disney from two perspectives and we should be concerned.  Are we also customers, absolutely, but as owners we do have some rights.



crisi said:


> In a tough business climate, a company with really high fixed costs like Disney needs to reduce their fixed cost, keep volume high enough at a price high enough to cover the costs. They need to carefully manage their costs. One way to manage costs is to outsource - another company takes some of the risks and you get predictable costing. Plus, Mears doesn't have a reputation as a great employer to maintain, outsourcing valet or housekeeping or whatever has the outsourced company picking up benefits - and I bet they aren't as good as Disney's salaried professional staff. Another way to reduce costs is to standardize. And for Disney standardizing means saying no more often.



I manage a very large budget for my company (Global Fortune 25), I am fully aware of the fixed/variable income and cost concept.  That said, service is service, even small touches and forms of pleasant and informed communication go a long way.  There are many studies out there (I've read many as part of my job) that actually say dollar of dollar the return on investment for customer service is actually 5 - 10 times greater (depending on industry) then marketing.  Disney doesn't seem to have an issue throwing tons of money at marketing while they cut back on customer service initiatives.  Its short sighted.



Chuck S said:


> Honestly, I think proprietary info is an excellent reason.  We, as owners, are not, nor should we be, privy to all the details of contract negotiations or of the contracts themselves.  Honestly, do you know all the inner working of you electric companies contracts with it suppliers for resources or how it may buy pre-generated electricity, even if it is city owned utilityor a co-operative?  Or do you just pay the bill every month?



I wouldn't care to know the inner-workings, but I do expect timely notification of changes to any contract, benefit, cost structure that may effect me.  I wouldn't pay my mobile phone bill if my rate plan all of a sudden increased for no reason or the company decided it would no longer offer an unlimited texting plan, I would expect an explanation before hand and I would demand a credit to the bill for failure of notification.  This all goes back to the failure of Disney to handle customer service, notification to its members and its method for handling complaints.  It has little to do with the actual perk itself, but the manner in which it was handled.


----------



## crisi

jlewisinsyr said:


> As a stockholder (I am as well) and a DVC member we are NOT just customers we are owners, we control an interest in the Disney from two perspectives and we should be concerned.  Are we also customers, absolutely, but as owners we do have some rights.
> 
> 
> 
> I manage a very large budget for my company (Global Fortune 25), I am fully aware of the fixed/variable income and cost concept.  That said, service is service, even small touches and forms of pleasant and informed communication go a long way.  There are many studies out there (I've read many as part of my job) that actually say dollar of dollar the return on investment for customer service is actually 5 - 10 times greater (depending on industry) then marketing.  Disney doesn't seem to have an issue throwing tons of money at marketing while they cut back on customer service initiatives.  Its short sighted.



I agree, but neither you or I are Disney management....with your experience you know its never as cut and dried as people on the outside of a decision believe it is and you are probably no more fond of your customer's second guessing your business decisions than Disney is.  We have some rights as stockholders, and some as timeshare owners, but they are really limited, and don't extend to knowing the details of their contract decision process.


----------



## SuzanneSLO

crisi said:


> I agree, but neither you or I are Disney management....with your experience you know its never as cut and dried as people on the outside of a decision believe it is and you are probably no more fond of your customer's second guessing your business decisions than Disney is.  We have some rights as stockholders, and some as timeshare owners, but they are really limited, and don't extend to knowing the details of their contract decision process.



While I don't expect DVC to provide me with notice of a change that might adversely effect me, I would expect that IF I was so affected, I would have the charge removed from my bill.  We often stay for at least 10 nights at BWV with out rental car valet parked and might actually use it only once or twice, usually early in the trip.  I would have been less than happy to find we had a $96 unexpected charge on our bill if we had happened to valet park on  Oct 10 and not picked it up until Oct 18. I am actually surprised that no one on this Board has reported having such unexpected charges removed.  -- Suzanne


----------



## Simba's Mom

OK, so I accept that if DVC informed members every time a perk got discontinued, they'd be sending out Emails all the time.  Some of the resturant perks have come and gone in the space of a few short months.  However, what bothers me about no notification on this one is the length of time we had it as a perk.  It seems that when DH and I joined 7 years ago, it was a perk.  When you offer a perk for that long, then discontinue it, you owe it to your membership to notify them.


----------



## DVCPAT

Simba's Mom said:


> However, what bothers me about no notification on this one is the length of time we had it as a perk.  It seems that when DH and I joined 7 years ago, it was a perk.  When you offer a perk for that long, then discontinue it, you owe it to your membership to notify them.



I agree….but this cut back will actually save me money. On an average vacation, Id easily spend $60.00 to $70.00 on valet tips. In a way, free valet kept us (and our money) on site. Without the perk, I’m more inclined to see what the outside world has to offer. The $60.00 to $70.00 saved in valet tips will actually buy us a dinner off site.


----------



## crisi

SuzanneSLO said:


> While I don't expect DVC to provide me with notice of a change that might adversely effect me, I would expect that IF I was so affected, I would have the charge removed from my bill.  We often stay for at least 10 nights at BWV with out rental car valet parked and might actually use it only once or twice, usually early in the trip.  I would have been less than happy to find we had a $96 unexpected charge on our bill if we had happened to valet park on  Oct 10 and not picked it up until Oct 18. I am actually surprised that no one on this Board has reported having such unexpected charges removed.  -- Suzanne



I agree with that.  Communication was LOUSY.  People who parked under the original terms shouldn't have been charged when they came back, and anyone who parked under the new terms should have been told of the new terms when they parked - AT THE VERY LEAST.  Ideally, advance notice should have been sent - at least to owners with reservations for in the near term before a new Disneyfiles could be sent out with the information for everyone.

What I disagree with is that we have a right to detailed information on how or why these decisions were made.  And I refuse to believe that it was an inherently bad decisions because I really have no idea of how or why the decision was made.  I can speculate - as we all can.   But DVC does not "owe" me an explanation of why they decided to build BLT instead of at the Poly or why they reallocated points, or why they bought land in Washington DC when I'd really prefer a ski resort or why the Cirque discount is never around when I need it or why the discount was discontinued on hoppers (which I used) in favor of Annual Passes (which don't do me much good), or why I get shower gel and soap, but no lotion.


----------



## JimC

While Disney can stand behind the statement that perks are subject to change without notice warning it customarily gives; it is a basic courtesy to communicate with members.  In an electronic world a simple blast email and posting on the front page of the web-site is not all that difficult to arrange.


----------



## DVCBELLE

JimC said:


> While Disney can stand behind the statement that perks are subject to change without notice warning it customarily gives; it is a basic courtesy to communicate with members.  In an electronic world a simple blast email and posting on the front page of the web-site is not all that difficult to arrange.


I agree completely!

I wonder if this had happened with the AP discount what the reaction would have been.

To me, the discounts at restaurants are a nice perk but something I consider a transient perk

There are perks that are more substantail such as Valet Parking; AP discount; Magical Express (even if this is technically a Disney perk); free internet; pool hopping.  These are perks that I feel deserve proper and sufficient notice.

It is interesting that DVC just didn't start giving free internet one day.  They announced that starting on such and such a date, internet would be free.  Funny how when giving a perk they can give notice but when taking it away they just stop it with no notice.


----------



## DisneyWalker44

CarolAnnC said:


> You missed my point.  The fact that DVC does not notify members of any other perks being reduced or discontinued does not seem to disturb folks.  Why don't you expect DVC to notify you of changes to other perks?


Free valet is the most significant perk we've lost. All perks aren't equal. 

But at this point, we can move beyond the discussion of *should* Disney tell us and onto *how* should they tell us. If Disney is going to tell us something important, they should use an effective means. Putting something on the member website is not effective. They've got our email addresses; they want to tell us something; this is an important (and infrequent) enough change that warrants better effort.


----------



## DisneyWalker44

crisi said:


> We have some rights as stockholders, and some as timeshare owners, but they are really limited, and don't extend to knowing the details of their contract decision process.


 Keep in mind that this isn't the normal corporation-customer relationship. DVCMC works for us. We hire and pay them to make those contract decisions. Those contracts are to spend our money to buy us services. 

While I agree we aren't entitled to know *everything,* there is a need for DVCMC to be as open an honest as possible.


----------



## DisneyWalker44

crisi said:


> But DVC does not "owe" me an explanation of why they decided to build BLT instead of at the Poly or why they reallocated points, or why they bought land in Washington DC when I'd really prefer a ski resort or why the Cirque discount is never around when I need it or why the discount was discontinued on hoppers (which I used) in favor of Annual Passes (which don't do me much good), or why I get shower gel and soap, but no lotion.


 To follow up on my last point - you've lumped together two very different types of decision. Whether Disney - the developer - builds at BLT, or the Poly or DC - is their business. Whether Disney - the management company - spends our money to buy us soap, gel or lotion is very much our business.


----------



## Goofy's apprentice

Haven't read the whole thread but generally agree with the recent sentiments.  Emails arrive to encourage us to buy more.  They could be used for this communication as well.  I know not everyone has an email but at an effort to reach more should be done.

We recently arrived back home from our F&W trip.  At BWV, the front desk staff didn't even know the perk was removed.  We are no longer using it.  We park our rental at the arrival and lug our luggage in, causing congestion at the front. (or strangely have to give it to the valet for the 10 ft walk where he hands it to bell services - as bell serviices can't take it from you at the car).  They will soon have to provide spaces for those registering but not using valet like other resorts have.

The communication was bad.  The fact that it is just taken away makes it appear that little thought was given to trying to save it (and that may not be the case).

And for Crisi ---OT ---  





> why I get shower gel and soap, but no lotion


  We stayed at BLT last week and recieved shampoo, shower gel, soap AND lotion.....Thought that was really strange, but certainly didn't complain!


----------



## Dean

jlewisinsyr said:


> Did anyone get a response back from their complaints to MS - DVC - I got one back and they used the infamous, "proprietary" information spiel in regards to why they didn't notify guests.  They also stated that previous valet was not in any part of our dues.
> 
> I didn't care so much about the not included in the dues, but I sent a really pointed and direct letter back to them in regards to proprietary information, and how using that is a cop out to the members of DVC, its in poor taste, poor judgement and does not make up for poor customer service.
> 
> At first I was annoyed at the loss of a perk, but it really isn't about that, it's about the continued poor customer service from Disney, they used to be a leader running miles ahead of the pack, and they just keep slipping up and their distance is shrinking dramatically.  In tough times you enhance your customer service not cut it.


IF you talk to the front line and middle management people you're going to get the cut and dried answer, patronized and no specific info.  That's the way it is, the way it should be and it's unreasonable to expect anything different.  So far, from what I can tell, only one person has talked to people high enough to get answers and they seemed to be satisfied with those answers.  I haven't because I think it's a reasonable move and a perk that would be inappropriate to share the expense among all owners unless there were MAJOR savings by including the entire group other than just sharing the costs. No one argues the poor communication but as some have noted, it's unreasonable to expect anything differently going forward given the past experience.


----------



## andersonsc

We have only recently joinged DVC and am a little disappointed in having no valet parking.  I do have a question though.  Some have mentioned how this is fair as all should not be charged for a benefit only some use.  What about the bus service from the airport to the resorts?  Is this free for DVC members?  In doing some looking today, it appeared to be free.  We would never use this as we are a family of 6 and need a car to get to the grocery store and prefer a car to the disney transportation.  We have always rented a car at the airport.  Anyway, my thought is this is a big expense that if free, we are all paying for wheather we use it or not.  I would think more people would use the valet then the bus from the airport.  Any thoughts...


----------



## tink_2007

Is valet parking free with AP or TIW cards?


----------



## Deb & Bill

tink_2007 said:


> Is valet parking free with AP or TIW cards?



Only TIW card for dining at that specific restaurant.


----------



## jlewisinsyr

Dean said:


> No one argues the poor communication but as some have noted, it's unreasonable to expect anything differently going forward given the past experience.



Unreasonable maybe, but sitting back and not voicing ones opinion is weak, it's like complaining about the political process but not working to change it and voting in the same incumbent each time, or talking about crime and turning your back if you see something happen.  People need to stand up and complain, complement and all around voice their opinions, because if you don't nothing will ever change.


----------



## dianeschlicht

tink_2007 said:


> Is valet parking free with AP or TIW cards?



It's supposed to be with TIW if you are using it at an accompanying lot for your dining reservation.


----------



## KAMLEM

andersonsc said:


> We have only recently joinged DVC and am a little disappointed in having no valet parking. I do have a question though. Some have mentioned how this is fair as all should not be charged for a benefit only some use. What about the bus service from the airport to the resorts? Is this free for DVC members?


If you are referring to Magical Express, that's for anyone staying in WDW, not just DVC members.


----------



## Inkmahm

We just got back from a trip to WDW 10/22 to 10/27.  I paid particular attention to the valet service area at BCV and AKV.  

At BCV, this was our first stay and I knew from the DIS boards that parking should be close to the villas.  At check in, however, the CM insisted that I had to park way over at the convention center in the opposite direction of the villas.  Since I'd never been there before, I changed plans and had bell services come take the luggage from our car and then did the valet parking.  We didn't use the car again until day 3 so I had 2 nights of valet charges before I realized I was correct, that there is parking right next to the villas.  I complained at check out about the poor training of the CM who told me I had to park at the convention center if I wasn't using valet service. I got an apology, that's it.

Compared to prior trips when we almost always used the valet service, the valet parking areas were dead. There were two guys at BCV standing around with nothing to do.  When we went to AKV to Jiko for dinner on Monday night, there were 2 valet service guys and a woman at the valet desk having a rubber band fight to kill time!  No one was using valet.  When we came out from dinner, no one was still using valet and the 3 were still standing around talking.

My guess is that there have been heads cut from valet services as there are so few workers as well as so few cars. We walked past the valet lots at BCV and AKV and both were just about empty, too.


----------



## Simba's Mom

Inkmahm said:


> We just got back from a trip to WDW 10/22 to 10/27.  I paid particular attention to the valet service area at BCV and AKV.
> 
> At BCV, this was our first stay and I knew from the DIS boards that parking should be close to the villas.  At check in, however, the CM insisted that I had to park way over at the convention center in the opposite direction of the villas.  Since I'd never been there before, I changed plans and had bell services come take the luggage from our car and then did the valet parking.  We didn't use the car again until day 3 so I had 2 nights of valet charges before I realized I was correct, that there is parking right next to the villas.  I complained at check out about the poor training of the CM who told me I had to park at the convention center if I wasn't using valet service. I got an apology, that's it.
> 
> Compared to prior trips when we almost always used the valet service, the valet parking areas were dead. There were two guys at BCV standing around with nothing to do.  When we went to AKV to Jiko for dinner on Monday night, there were 2 valet service guys and a woman at the valet desk having a rubber band fight to kill time!  No one was using valet.  When we came out from dinner, no one was still using valet and the 3 were still standing around talking.
> 
> My guess is that there have been heads cut from valet services as there are so few workers as well as so few cars. We walked past the valet lots at BCV and AKV and both were just about empty, too.



It's interesting to me that you mentioned the valet parking areas being relatively "dead".  You checked in the day I left and I felt the exact same way at BCV.  A couple times I was sitting next to bell services for over 30 minutes and never saw one car valet parked during that whole time.  It was never like that in the past.  As far as the misinformation regarding where to  park, that's terrible.  Unfortunately, you can't help but wonder if the misinformation was given delibrately so the valet guy could get money.


----------



## Luigi's Girl

jlewisinsyr said:


> Unreasonable maybe, but sitting back and not voicing ones opinion is weak, it's like complaining about the political process but not working to change it and voting in the same incumbent each time, or talking about crime and turning your back if you see something happen.  People need to stand up and complain, complement and all around voice their opinions, because if you don't nothing will ever change.



I voiced my opinion in an email that I sent this morning. I will post whether or not I get a response. I urge all who are dissatisfied to do the same.

dvcmembersatisfactionteam@disneyvacationclub.com


----------



## Maxwell

We always stay at the BWV. When we travel to the Wilderness Lodge we always used to Valet Park. Now that we can no longer do that free of charge will they let us self park there?


----------



## DebbieB

Maxwell said:


> We always stay at the BWV. When we travel to the Wilderness Lodge we always used to Valet Park. Now that we can no longer do that free of charge will they let us self park there?



You shouldn't have a problem.   I haven't had a problem parking at any WDW resort with a BWV parking permit and room key.  Except for Poly, I got a 3 hour permit one time years ago.


----------



## zalansky

I sent an email a few weeks ago when the valet change was announced. I never got a reply via email - no call either. Unless you count the missed call I saw on the caller ID a few days later as a call back. I think we can send emails all we want. This is one decision they are going to stick with. 

I've seen lots of people who don't care about the change who never used valet. Well, I propose that DVC eliminate the DVC annual pass discount because I don't use it - I get a better deal as a Florida resident. But that's a little selfish eh? I'd also like to see Magical Express eliminated, although I understand it doesn't come out of the dues, but again I don't use it. Point being, just because you might not use something doesn't mean its not important to another member.


----------



## Luigi's Girl

zalansky said:


> I sent an email a few weeks ago when the valet change was announced. I never got a reply via email - no call either. Unless you count the missed call I saw on the caller ID a few days later as a call back. I think we can send emails all we want. This is one decision they are going to stick with.
> 
> I've seen lots of people who don't care about the change who never used valet. Well, I propose that DVC eliminate the DVC annual pass discount because I don't use it - I get a better deal as a Florida resident. But that's a little selfish eh? I'd also like to see Magical Express eliminated, although I understand it doesn't come out of the dues, but again I don't use it. Point being, just because you might not use something doesn't mean its not important to another member.




I received a return email about 5 minutes after I sent mine. I'm sure it was a blanket email that they send when they first receive one from a member. Hopefully they will send another and respond to my complaint as they said they would. Here is what they sent me.


Thank you for contacting Disney Vacation Club.

Your comments are important to us and we appreciate your taking the time
to write.  We will review the feedback you have provided and will 
respond within 5 business days.  Please note: Based on the nature of 
your comments or questions, we may need to forward your message to other
Walt Disney Company affiliates or nonaffiliated third party service 
providers. 

Thank you again for your message.

Sincerely,

Member Satisfaction Team
Disney Vacation Club


----------



## crisi

zalansky said:


> I sent an email a few weeks ago when the valet change was announced. I never got a reply via email - no call either. Unless you count the missed call I saw on the caller ID a few days later as a call back. I think we can send emails all we want. This is one decision they are going to stick with.
> 
> I've seen lots of people who don't care about the change who never used valet. Well, I propose that DVC eliminate the DVC annual pass discount because I don't use it - I get a better deal as a Florida resident. But that's a little selfish eh? I'd also like to see Magical Express eliminated, although I understand it doesn't come out of the dues, but again I don't use it. Point being, just because you might not use something doesn't mean its not important to another member.



Fine with me.  I haven't used much valet, but I don't use the AP discount much either.  I used the UPH discount - which they did away with years ago.  I do use Magical Express, but prior to ME we used to grab a towncar from the airport.  Maybe, if they get rid of free ME, we'll start renting a car again and have easy access to the better food offsite - we'd self park the car, that was what we did before we were DVC members.

For me, what is important to me is that I get access to rooms via the contract terms.  When that no longer works for me, I'll sell off.


----------



## Chuck S

zalansky said:


> I sent an email a few weeks ago when the valet change was announced. I never got a reply via email - no call either. Unless you count the missed call I saw on the caller ID a few days later as a call back. I think we can send emails all we want. This is one decision they are going to stick with.
> 
> I've seen lots of people who don't care about the change who never used valet. Well, I propose that DVC eliminate the DVC annual pass discount because I don't use it - I get a better deal as a Florida resident. But that's a little selfish eh? I'd also like to see Magical Express eliminated, although I understand it doesn't come out of the dues, but again I don't use it. Point being, just because you might not use something doesn't mean its not important to another member.



But here's a question....what benefit was it to Disney to give DVCers free valet, especially since valet services are contracted out?

With the AP discount and Magical Express, I could easily see that translating into more park days, and more $ being spent in the parks.

With the free valet, where was the benefit for Disney?  Most perks, discounts and coupons, offered by any company have a benefit to the company as well as the consumer.

If the contractor feels it would be beneficial to them, can't they offer discounted valet, without it being subsidized by dues?


----------



## Kathy C

Frank in WI said:


> As an owner of BWV, the elimination of the valet parking benefit opens another issue, in my opinion.  When we first bought at BWV, I tried to use self parking so that I could get to my car easily and didn't have to wait for the valet attendants.  Each night when trying to park, I could not find a space due to the others visiting Boardwalk and potentially Epcot.  The lots were full and I had to park across the street in the lot behind the gas station.  My only choices were to walk a long way across a busy road, or use valet parking.  Valet parking became the lesser of two evils.  I, wrongly, assumed that Disney was using valet parking as a way to help the self parking issue.
> 
> I will gladly go back to self parking if Disney will limit the parking area in front of the Boardwalk to "Boardwalk Resort Guests Only".  They should also make sure there is enough parking by reducing the spaces reserved for valet parking.  It is my opinion that any Boardwalk resort guest that wishes to self park have space available.
> 
> The fee is not my issue.  It's the lack of self parking at Boardwalk that needs to be handled properly.
> 
> Thanks for listening.



I agree with you 100%.  The parking area in front of the Boardwalk should be for Boardwalk resort guests only.  It's not too hard to ask for ID when entering the resort for confirmation.  And, I think people staying elsewhere on property but that have ADRs should have to park in the overflow lot.


----------



## Doctor P

Chuck S said:


> But here's a question....what benefit was it to Disney to give DVCers free valet, especially since valet services are contracted out?
> 
> With the AP discount and Magical Express, I could easily see that translating into more park days, and more $ being spent in the parks.
> 
> With the free valet, where was the benefit for Disney?  Most perks, discounts and coupons, offered by any company have a benefit to the company as well as the consumer.
> 
> If the contractor feels it would be beneficial to them, can't they offer discounted valet, without it being subsidized by dues?



For us, the benefit was spending more at the resorts.  We often valet parked to go to resort restaurants that we would not have dined at if we didn't have free valet parking.  At bare minimum, it helped Disney spread out the demand for their dining.  In the best light, it added $ in terms of spending on dining.

Every $ I spend on valet now will go into the vendor's pocket.  The subtraction will be from $ that would have gone into Disney's pocket.  Somehow, I see that as a loss to Disney.


----------



## Chuck S

Doctor P said:


> For us, the benefit was spending more at the resorts.  We often valet parked to go to resort restaurants that we would not have dined at if we didn't have free valet parking.  At bare minimum, it helped Disney spread out the demand for their dining.  In the best light, it added $ in terms of spending on dining.
> 
> Every $ I spend on valet now will go into the vendor's pocket.  The subtraction will be from $ that would have gone into Disney's pocket.  Somehow, I see that as a loss to Disney.



But is it really a loss to Disney?  If you stop dining in the restaurants to pay for valets, or if you did dine in the restaurants and Disney pays the valet for you...that money still goes from Disney to the valet and is a loss of profit.


----------



## tjkraz

I think one of the more interesting aspects of this discussion is the fact that it is likely to COST Disney money.  

If the "free" valet parking perk were to have continued, member dues would have been used to pay some fee per guest or per vehicle parked.  It seems reasonable to assume that the daily parking fees are split between the outsourced vendor and Disney.  So they could easily have gouged our dues on the fees, kept the "perk" in place and increased their bottom line.  

Elimination of the "free" perk means lower revenue for valet.  It also means the self-park lots will fill up quicker and guests who otherwise want to dine or shop at resorts will be turned away when the parking lots are full (or restricted to resort guests.)  

If there's any sniff test that this change does not pass (IMO), it's the suggestion that DVC wasn't acting in the best interest of members.  I think Disney stood to make considerably more by having our dues charged millions per year in parking fees.


----------



## BEASLYBOO

Doctor P said:


> For us, the benefit was spending more at the resorts.  We often valet parked to go to resort restaurants that we would not have dined at if we didn't have free valet parking.  At bare minimum, it helped Disney spread out the demand for their dining.  In the best light, it added $ in terms of spending on dining.
> 
> Every $ I spend on valet now will go into the vendor's pocket.  The subtraction will be from $ that would have gone into Disney's pocket.  Somehow, I see that as a loss to Disney.


So, no free valet, you won't pay the $12 nor will you self park?  I think most people have sticker shock right now about the whole thing and how it was abruptly done but the lack of free valet won't hinder most folks in continuing to do what they want to do or stay where they want to stay.  

Personally I hate waiting for the valet to get my car so I always self park no matter where I'm staying or dining, even at BWV. If I have people who can't walk, I just drop them off 1st and then park.


----------



## Pooh for Presid

We checked into BCV Oct 20.  I had not gotten an email or any other information until I went to leave the car with the valet.  When I checked in I asked to speak to a manager, who I know had nothing to do with the DVC decision.  I explained that I was at the annual meeting last year and nothing was discussed about this and that I was not infomed of the change.  In addition I was upset that I had paid my annual fees last January and they were cutting off something in essence I had already paid for.  He seemed suprised that I was not informed but promised to look into it.  

I then called Member services and got a supervisor who I repeated all of my concerns to and this is the line I got.  They were discontinuing the service in my best interest.  (I love when other people do stuff in my best interest b/c they know more than I do and yet somehow it never seems to be in MY best interest).  It was explained that with valet fees going up they had to stop the service or my annual dues next year would go way up.  In addition they had done a study and found that a lot more members were utilizing DME so they were keeping it instead.  

I asked the obvious question if more people use DME than valet how could costs be going way up for valet service?  I never got an answer for this, however I did get the answer that annual dues do go to pay for the valet service.  When I asked if I was going to get a refund for the portion of my annual dues paid last year for valet that was cut off before the end of the year, I never got an answer for that either.

A short time later the BCV manager called back with in essence the same corporate line.  

My problems are that I was not informed on something that I had already paid for through the end of the year, they took something away in the middle of the year, and they did it in my best interest to save me money.  I would like to know how much of annual dues goes to DME.  I wonder how much we are subsidizing a service that Disney is providing to other guests to keep them on property vs something that really was just to my benefit.  just my 2 cents worth.


----------



## crisi

Pooh for Presid said:


> My problems are that I was not informed on something that I had already paid for through the end of the year, they took something away in the middle of the year, and they did it in my best interest to save me money.  I would like to know how much of annual dues goes to DME.  I wonder how much we are subsidizing a service that Disney is providing to other guests to keep them on property vs something that really was just to my benefit.  just my 2 cents worth.



We have been told that NONE of your dues were supporting valet parking (so you hadn't paid for it until the end of the year because you hadn't paid for it at all) and are told that NO dues are currently going towards DME.  

Something OTHER than dues was/is paying for those services - unless DVC is outright lying to us on dues accounting - which WOULD be something that they'd get into legal trouble for, so I doubt it.


----------



## jmsdvc

I agree my feelings are it is not the cutting off of the benefit as much as the lack of communication to DVC members.
I wonder if members would care if they cut off our use of the pools or towels?
We don't seem to have a say in the decisions.


----------



## Chuck S

Pooh for Presid said:


> We checked into BCV Oct 20.  I had not gotten an email or any other information until I went to leave the car with the valet.  When I checked in I asked to speak to a manager, who I know had nothing to do with the DVC decision.  I explained that I was at the annual meeting last year and nothing was discussed about this and that I was not infomed of the change.  In addition I was upset that I had paid my annual fees last January and they were cutting off something in essence I had already paid for.  He seemed suprised that I was not informed but promised to look into it.
> 
> I then called Member services and got a supervisor who I repeated all of my concerns to and this is the line I got.  They were discontinuing the service in my best interest.  (I love when other people do stuff in my best interest b/c they know more than I do and yet somehow it never seems to be in MY best interest).  It was explained that with valet fees going up they had to stop the service or my annual dues next year would go way up.  In addition they had done a study and found that a lot more members were utilizing DME so they were keeping it instead.
> 
> I asked the obvious question if more people use DME than valet how could costs be going way up for valet service?  I never got an answer for this, however I did get the answer that annual dues do go to pay for the valet service.  When I asked if I was going to get a refund for the portion of my annual dues paid last year for valet that was cut off before the end of the year, I never got an answer for that either.
> 
> A short time later the BCV manager called back with in essence the same corporate line.
> 
> My problems are that I was not informed on something that I had already paid for through the end of the year, they took something away in the middle of the year, and they did it in my best interest to save me money.  I would like to know how much of annual dues goes to DME.  I wonder how much we are subsidizing a service that Disney is providing to other guests to keep them on property vs something that really was just to my benefit.  just my 2 cents worth.



Poor communication aside, we have no way of knowing if dues actualy paid for the valet service.  It has been by other reliable sources that it was paid by DVC Marketing, who chose no longer to pay for it.

Plus, _if_ dues did pay for it, we do not know if it was really paid until the end of the year, or only through the end of an existing contract.  Also, DME is available to all resort guests, so _if_ dues do go towards it, it is part of the management agreement with Disney.  Remember that Disney also owns an interest in DVC resorts, and they rent out those rooms to cash guests.  So, it would be a resort cost, where valet is not a shared resort cost, as non-DVCers pay for the service.


----------



## Chuck S

jmsdvc said:


> I agree my feelings are it is not the cutting off of the benefit as much as the lack of communication to DVC members.
> I wonder if members would care if they cut off our use of the pools or towels?
> We don't seem to have a say in the decisions.



Once again, pools and towels are physical parts of the resort, not perks.  Valet service was a non-guaranteed perk.


----------



## toocherie

Chuck S said:


> Once again, pools and towels are physical parts of the resort, not perks.  Valet service was a non-guaranteed perk.



Chuck--while there are existing towels I daresay that those probably get worn and have to be replaced periodically--not to mention the costs of laundry and stocking/re-stocking.  Maybe it would be a good idea to charge those people using the pool an additional fee for use of the pool towels and the replacement/laundering of same.  I've never used the pools (me in a bathing suit would not be a good thing) so would not want to pay these costs.  I doubt the DVC documents "guarantee" towels at the pool.


----------



## Chuck S

toocherie said:


> Chuck--while there are existing towels I daresay that those probably get worn and have to be replaced periodically--not to mention the costs of laundry and stocking/re-stocking.  Maybe it would be a good idea to charge those people using the pool an additional fee for use of the pool towels and the replacement/laundering of same.  I've never used the pools (me in a bathing suit would not be a good thing) so would not want to pay these costs.  I doubt the DVC documents "guarantee" towels at the pool.



But they are a "furnishing" of the resort as represented.  They can not simply discontinue pool towels any more than they could switch the king beds for a single bed.  The towel replacement costs are part of the maintenance funds.


----------



## Pooh for Presid

I have no way to prove it, and I guess Chuck S does not believe me, but I was told both by the manager at the Beach Club and and the supervisor at member services that the decision was made to cut off the service to prevent a increase of my annual dues and this was done in my best interest.


----------



## Chuck S

Pooh for Presid said:


> I have no way to prove it, and I guess Chuck S does not believe me, but I was told both by the manager at the Beach Club and and the supervisor at member services that the decision was made to cut off the service to prevent a increase of my annual dues and this was done in my best interest.



I never said I didn't believe you.  But, if the valet was being paid by DVC Marketing, and they decided to no longer cover it, then dues would have to do so...so yes, either way, to continue the service would mean an increase in dues.  _If_ it was previously provided by marketing, it would mean a BIG increase in dues.  _If_ dues were previously paying for it, it would mean a smaller increase, but still an increase.

I simply said that many here on the DIS were told that dues had not been previously covering the valet services.


----------



## drommer0

Don't valet cost come out of the maintenance fund.  Isn't that what our dues pay for just as they pay for the pool towels.  If they can't discontinue pool towels how can they discontinue valet?.  Just wondering


----------



## hakepb

Pool towels must be a very minimial cost because even Values include pool towels. (and really, how many full-time housekeeper(s) are being paid for this service?)
I think it is in member's best interest to include pool towels because there would be even more wet people dripping through the halls...


----------



## Chuck S

drommer0 said:


> Don't valet cost come out of the maintenance fund.  Isn't that what our dues pay for just as they pay for the pool towels.  If they can't discontinue pool towels how can they discontinue valet?.  Just wondering



No, Valet isn't resort maintenance, there is nothing to "maintain" no upkeep.  _If_ it was paid by dues, it would either be a shared common area expense, or a direct employee expense, likely the former, as the valets have been contracted out for at least a year, maybe two.

But since it_ is _contracted, they likely receive their operating income from the parking fees, so someone would have to have been paying those fees...likely DVC Marketing.

Towels, on the other hand, are a represented furnishing at time of purchase, just like the furniture in the rooms.


----------



## Dean

andersonsc said:


> We have only recently joinged DVC and am a little disappointed in having no valet parking.  I do have a question though.  Some have mentioned how this is fair as all should not be charged for a benefit only some use.  What about the bus service from the airport to the resorts?  Is this free for DVC members?  In doing some looking today, it appeared to be free.  We would never use this as we are a family of 6 and need a car to get to the grocery store and prefer a car to the disney transportation.  We have always rented a car at the airport.  Anyway, my thought is this is a big expense that if free, we are all paying for wheather we use it or not.  I would think more people would use the valet then the bus from the airport.  Any thoughts...


I don't think we know if the DVC dues pay for any of the ME and if so, how much.  There was a charge for ME at one time.  ME is free if you use it, I'm not sure how it's paid for otherwise.  I think we all agree there are things that should be paid and things that shouldn't and things that fall in middle.  Ultimately someone has to make a decision based on the facts of the case.  To go from paying nothing to $12 per day per user is a very clear cut decision IMO.  Were there a major economy of scale, the appropriate decision might be different, it would depend on the specifics.  However, the fact there are some things that are paid for that not everyone uses makes little difference in this discussion unless they are things where there is no economy of scale, the cost is significant, a relatively small % of people use it and it can easily be segregated into those that do and do not use that service.



jlewisinsyr said:


> Unreasonable maybe, but sitting back and not voicing ones opinion is weak, it's like complaining about the political process but not working to change it and voting in the same incumbent each time, or talking about crime and turning your back if you see something happen.  People need to stand up and complain, complement and all around voice their opinions, because if you don't nothing will ever change.


I'm all for working for change from the inside, however, I'd suggest that complaining to member services and member satisfaction is not doing so.  It's really only complaining to hear yourself complain and/or asking to be patronized.  That's not to say it's totally worthless but pretty close, IMO.  I'm also all about complementing the positives when they occur, and to me, the re-allocation was a positive.  



tjkraz said:


> I think one of the more interesting aspects of this discussion is the fact that it is likely to COST Disney money.
> 
> If the "free" valet parking perk were to have continued, member dues would have been used to pay some fee per guest or per vehicle parked.  It seems reasonable to assume that the daily parking fees are split between the outsourced vendor and Disney.  So they could easily have gouged our dues on the fees, kept the "perk" in place and increased their bottom line.
> 
> Elimination of the "free" perk means lower revenue for valet.  It also means the self-park lots will fill up quicker and guests who otherwise want to dine or shop at resorts will be turned away when the parking lots are full (or restricted to resort guests.)
> 
> If there's any sniff test that this change does not pass (IMO), it's the suggestion that DVC wasn't acting in the best interest of members.  I think Disney stood to make considerably more by having our dues charged millions per year in parking fees.


I don't believe Disney gets any windfall from this, only elimination of liability for both incidents and personnel.  Certainly there are subtle risks.  Say when the contract is up next time and the system is not paying for itself, the contractor may want more money or a guaranteed subsidy.  I think the likely end point is no valet for most, if not all, resorts.



Pooh for Presid said:


> They were discontinuing the service in my best interest.  (I love when other people do stuff in my best interest b/c they know more than I do and yet somehow it never seems to be in MY best interest).  It was explained that with valet fees going up they had to stop the service or my annual dues next year would go way up.  In addition they had done a study and found that a lot more members were utilizing DME so they were keeping it instead.


Not necessarily in your best interest but the membership as a whole because otherwise it would have been an increase in dues for others to pay for your valet parking.  The info I have, and what others have received as well, is DVC would have gone from paying nothing to paying the entire $12 per day per vehicle.  

More applicable than pool towels is the laundry the pool towels, a much larger expense comparatively from what I've been told.


----------



## DisneyWalker44

Chuck S said:


> I never said I didn't believe you.  But, if the valet was being paid by DVC Marketing, and they decided to no longer cover it, then dues would have to do so...so yes, either way, to continue the service would mean an increase in dues.  _If_ it was previously provided by marketing, it would mean a BIG increase in dues.  _If_ dues were previously paying for it, it would mean a smaller increase, but still an increase.
> 
> I simply said that many here on the DIS were told that dues had not been previously covering the valet services.


 It seems to be that previously, there was no charge to DVC for the free parking. Then there was some sort of change in the valet contract. DVC could no longer offer it without charge. They either had to stop it, or increase dues.


----------



## jlewisinsyr

Dean said:


> I'm all for working for change from the inside, however, I'd suggest that complaining to member services and member satisfaction is not doing so.  It's really only complaining to hear yourself complain and/or asking to be patronized.  That's not to say it's totally worthless but pretty close, IMO.  I'm also all about complementing the positives when they occur, and to me, the re-allocation was a positive.



So if you have a problem with your mobile phone service, you don't complain, you don't send communications (written/verbal) to the service provider?  You suggest that change should only be worked on from inside?

Honestly, if I am understanding you correctly, I cannot disagree more with your stance.  Complaints written and verbal do go a long way, they do at my company and one can only hope they do at Disney (refer back to service versus marketing dollars statistic I provided before).

In regards to the reallocation, I'm indifferent, I see the positives on the whole, but again, it was poorly handled I think on the whole (granted it was marginally better then this current event).


----------



## Anjelica

Anyone else gotten a call from DVC regarding email they sent on this issue?  They called and left a message for me to call them back - I got their voicemail when I returned their call.  Will let you know what they say when they get back to me.


----------



## jlewisinsyr

Anjelica said:


> Anyone else gotten a call from DVC regarding email they sent on this issue?  They called and left a message for me to call them back - I got their voicemail when I returned their call.  Will let you know what they say when they get back to me.



Yes, received one last night, I was unable to take the call at the time, but I plan on calling them back.


----------



## KAT4DISNEY

Anjelica said:


> Anyone else gotten a call from DVC regarding email they sent on this issue?  They called and left a message for me to call them back - I got their voicemail when I returned their call.  Will let you know what they say when they get back to me.



Yes, I spoke with them a couple of weeks ago.  I just gave my input, they told me they decided to go with the "pay as you go" model and that was about it.  Nothing more I expected than to give my feedback.  Even if it is a bit patronizing as Dean says (and it is) at least the next time I see the phrase - due to member requests - I will know whether _I_ requested it or not. 

At the same time I mentioned my hope that point charts for 2011 would not be as delayed as 2010.  I was told that had happened b/c of the change with RCI.


----------



## Dean

jlewisinsyr said:


> So if you have a problem with your mobile phone service, you don't complain, you don't send communications (written/verbal) to the service provider?  You suggest that change should only be worked on from inside?
> 
> Honestly, if I am understanding you correctly, I cannot disagree more with your stance.  Complaints written and verbal do go a long way, they do at my company and one can only hope they do at Disney (refer back to service versus marketing dollars statistic I provided before).
> 
> In regards to the reallocation, I'm indifferent, I see the positives on the whole, but again, it was poorly handled I think on the whole (granted it was marginally better then this current event).


I suspect you misunderstand my position.  I don't own part of the cell phone company, if I have a problem, I question what's going on and I go up the ladder if need be until I get to someone that can do something about it.  I'm with Sprint and it seems they always screw something up every time they have to add or delete a phone or there is a rebate involved.  So I call and get usually to 2 levels of CS, none of which have any authority to do anything that involves money.  They tell me they agree but can't do anything and generally direct me to the right group.  Unfortunately the right group is usually the retention department but they always seem to get it fixed.  

My stance with DVC is that MS and Members Satisfaction have little or no power other than over minor issues and one time fixes.  They cannot change system issues and their input after a change means little in all but extreme and obvious circumstances.  I'm not saying one should not complain if it's appropriate, only that this level is a waste of time to do so in policy matters such as this.  And specifically to complain to MS and Mem Satisfaction ONLY is an invitation to keep getting the same result, patronized.  

I don't see the re-allocation as being one of the items that was all that poorly handled.  The 3 months notice was reasonable IMO and I truly don't expect a flashing billboard every time something is changed.


----------



## DebbieB

Dean said:


> I don't see the re-allocation as being one of the items that was all that poorly handled.  The 3 months notice was reasonable IMO and I truly don't expect a flashing billboard every time something is changed.



3 months notice?   They released the 2010 charts about 10 days before January 1, 2010 reservations could be made (1/21/09).


----------



## Dean

DebbieB said:


> 3 months notice?   They released the 2010 charts about 10 days before January 1, 2010 reservations could be made (1/21/09).


You're right, 11 months and 10 days ahead.


----------



## DebbieB

Dean said:


> You're right, 11 months and 10 days ahead.




No, not 11 months.  If I wanted to make a January 1, 2010 reservation, I could call on February 1, 2009.   So about 10 days before I found out I need more points for that reservation.     Actually even less than that because I could book a stay arriving December 26 that includes January 1, calling on January 26, 2009, 5 days after the notice.


----------



## Dean

DebbieB said:


> No, not 11 months.  If I wanted to make a January 1, 2010 reservation, I could call on February 1, 2009.   So about 10 days before I found out I need more points for that reservation.     Actually even less than that because I could book a stay arriving December 26 that includes January 1, calling on January 26, 2009, 5 days after the notice.


I'm messing with you a little, it could have been 1 Feb and still been OK in my book.


----------



## jlewisinsyr

Dean said:


> I'm messing with you a little, it could have been 1 Feb and still been OK in my book.



You cut them way too much slack.

In regards to the other post (avoiding a long quote), I agree, you need to address your complaints at various levels, which I think many have done (and continue to do).

But I also realize working for a company that takes complaints VERY seriously, that even front line complaints are often heard at the top during reviews and quality control.  Often there is no wall between the two and people do hear them.

It doesn't matter in our company if you call and complain to a general call center representative, our switchboard, or sent a complain to our mailroom employee, it will be tracked in most cases, logged and reviewed by our management teams who then analyze and report them to our Executive Management Group (which includes CEO and his direct reports).  We are not a small company either, we have over 5,000 employees in the US, 10,000 agents, and over a few hundred thousand worldwide.

If a company takes complaints seriously, it shouldn't matter where the complaint starts.


----------



## DisneyWalker44

Dean said:


> My stance with DVC is that MS and Members Satisfaction have little or no power other than over minor issues and one time fixes.  They cannot change system issues and their input after a change means little in all but extreme and obvious circumstances.  I'm not saying one should not complain if it's appropriate, only that this level is a waste of time to do so in policy matters such as this.  And specifically to complain to MS and Mem Satisfaction ONLY is an invitation to keep getting the same result, patronized.


 If you assume DVC is a monolithic corporation and it's us vs them, member feedback is probably of little value. But to the extent there is debate, or uncertainty within DVC, member feedback can be an important factor. Member feedback - by itself - isn't going to change much. But things won't change without that feedback. 

I also think there are things than can change based on member feedback. While it probably won't sway Disney on policy matters such as whether to charge for valet, I think it can change their mind on things like communication channels (website posting vs email.)


----------



## Dean

jlewisinsyr said:


> You cut them way too much slack.
> 
> In regards to the other post (avoiding a long quote), I agree, you need to address your complaints at various levels, which I think many have done (and continue to do).
> 
> But I also realize working for a company that takes complaints VERY seriously, that even front line complaints are often heard at the top during reviews and quality control.  Often there is no wall between the two and people do hear them.
> 
> It doesn't matter in our company if you call and complain to a general call center representative, our switchboard, or sent a complain to our mailroom employee, it will be tracked in most cases, logged and reviewed by our management teams who then analyze and report them to our Executive Management Group (which includes CEO and his direct reports).  We are not a small company either, we have over 5,000 employees in the US, 10,000 agents, and over a few hundred thousand worldwide.
> 
> If a company takes complaints seriously, it shouldn't matter where the complaint starts.


The answer is "it depends".  When a company makes a decision they know, or should know, is likely to cause consternation, they generally take into account that there will be complaints up front and generate some idea of how to deal with those.  They are not going to re-evaluate the decision for each and every complaint that comes in and for the predictable complaints, all their going to look at are the numbers of complaints (and positive contacts) and a summary of the comments from the front line type people.  OTOH, direct and appropriate contacts to higher level people will be given more weight, inappropriate ones such as many we've seen on this thread, won't matter where they're made.  The truth is that an appropriate contact in this case will likely result more in information gathering for the member than in complaining and that most reasonable people will come away from such a contact agreeing with the decision though still unhappy about the method it was enacted.  As I noted earlier, I've only seen posts from one person that suggests they've talked to someone who could actually give them info and they were satisfied that the actual decision was appropriate from the way I read their posts.



DisneyWalker44 said:


> If you assume DVC is a monolithic corporation and it's us vs them, member feedback is probably of little value. But to the extent there is debate, or uncertainty within DVC, member feedback can be an important factor. Member feedback - by itself - isn't going to change much. But things won't change without that feedback.
> 
> I also think there are things than can change based on member feedback. While it probably won't sway Disney on policy matters such as whether to charge for valet, I think it can change their mind on things like communication channels (website posting vs email.)


I don't disagree with you overall.  In many ways DVC has become somewhat us vs them though and has always been one member vs another to a degree.  Timeshares usually have a certain amount of conflict of interest from one side to the other and DVC is actually more than most in this area.  As I stated, I think member feedback at the lower levels for such an issue is pretty useless though maybe not totally so.  The patronizing is predictable in such a situation, no one really should expect anything else.  Still, I think it's very obvious that this is not a policy that will change unless there are changes in the facts of the case, namely a change in the before and after costs or some other material change.  I also feel that a complain to MS and the member satisfaction team is pretty close to worthless is such a situation but more likely to be helpful when major decisions have not been made and implemented. There a dramatic difference between taking member input into account in making a decision and reversing a major decision that's already been made and implemented.


----------



## DVCPAT

Dean said:


> I also feel that a complain to MS and the member satisfaction team is pretty close to worthless is such a situation but more likely to be helpful when major decisions have not been made and implemented. There a dramatic difference between taking member input into account in making a decision and reversing a major decision that's already been made and implemented.




I dont think anyone expects an immediate reversal from a complaint. Time usually tells if decisions are good or bad. The first barometer is how your customers feel about the change. If you complain, they know your unhappyunhappy customers dont increase spending. As time passes, Disney will look at DVC member resort spending. If resort spending drops, Disney will decide if the decision increased profits. 

I think the decision will be a lose/lose situation. The valet employees are going to lose a lot of income from tips creating unhappy employees. I would easily spend more tipping valet employees than the new $12.00 per day cost. Our resort hopping for lunch, dinner and souvenirs will greatly diminish. 

I feel DVC members have made a long term commitment to Disney. If I dont see a reciprocal benefit from being a member, Ill go offsite. You can never go wrong when you reward loyal customers.


----------



## Chuck S

DVCPAT said:


> I dont think anyone expects an immediate reversal from a complaint. Time usually tells if decisions are good or bad. The first barometer is how your customers feel about the change. If you complain, they know your unhappyunhappy customers dont increase spending. As time passes, Disney will look at DVC member resort spending. If resort spending drops, Disney will decide if the decision increased profits.
> 
> I think the decision will be a lose/lose situation. The valet employees are going to lose a lot of income from tips creating unhappy employees. I would easily spend more tipping valet employees than the new $12.00 per day cost. Our resort hopping for lunch, dinner and souvenirs will greatly diminish.
> 
> I feel DVC members have made a long term commitment to Disney. If I dont see a reciprocal benefit from being a member, Ill go offsite. You can never go wrong when you reward loyal customers.



Or, it may be that Disney did the analysis, and those members staying at SSR/OKW, resorts that never had free valet, had similar spending to those that stayed at the resorts that offered free valet. _If_ that is true, it was likely a good decision on Disney's part.  We have no way of knowing.


----------



## DVCPAT

Chuck S said:


> Or, it may be that Disney did the analysis, and those members staying at SSR/OKW, resorts that never had free valet, had similar spending to those that stayed at the resorts that offered free valet. _If_ that is true, it was likely a good decision on Disney's part.  We have no way of knowing.



OKW and SSR members had to pay valet fees when visiting BWV, BCV, AKV and WLV resorts?


----------



## Chuck S

DVCPAT said:


> OKW and SSR members had to pay valet fees when visiting BWV, BCV, AKV and WLV resorts?



No, I'm saying those staying at SSR and OKW may have had similar spending patterns WDW Wide to those staying at a resort that had valet services.  If that is true, there was no advantage to Disney offering the free valet.

For instance, if people staying at OKW/SRR spent about the same on restaurants, souvenirs and store items as those staying at a resort that offered valet services, what was the advantage to Disney of continuing the service?


----------



## DVCPAT

Chuck S said:


> No, I'm saying those staying at SSR and OKW may have had similar spending patterns WDW Wide to those staying at a resort that had valet services.  If that is true, there was no advantage to Disney offering the free valet.
> 
> For instance, if people staying at OKW/SRR spent about the same on restaurants, souvenirs and store items as those staying at a resort that offered valet services, what was the advantage to Disney of continuing the service?



But you did get free valet parking at BWV, BCV, AKV and WLV? Now you will have to spend an additional $12.00 + tip to shop around.


----------



## Chuck S

DVCPAT said:


> But you did get free valet parking at BWV, BCV, AKV and WLV? Now you will have to spend an additional $12.00 + tip to shop around.



No, I'll just self park, if I go to those resorts (MMmmm, Beaches & Cream.) My spending habits won't change.  I just won't use the valet.


----------



## DVCPAT

Chuck S said:


> No, I'll just self park, if I go to those resorts (MMmmm, Beaches & Cream.) My spending habits won't change.  I just won't use the valet.



Thats the question. How many members will continue to accept the increase in costs and reduction of services? Everyone has a tipping point.yours hasnt been reached.


----------



## tjkraz

DVCPAT said:


> I dont think anyone expects an immediate reversal from a complaint. Time usually tells if decisions are good or bad. The first barometer is how your customers feel about the change. If you complain, they know your unhappyunhappy customers dont increase spending. As time passes, Disney will look at DVC member resort spending. If resort spending drops, Disney will decide if the decision increased profits.



But DVC knew going in that the decision would be unpopular with many members.  The decision was apparently based upon the determination that it was not just to have 100% of members paying for a benefit only used by...significantly less than 100%.  DVC would have gone into this with the expectation that the vast majority of those who were valet parking would be upset and/or complain about the change.  Still, the numbers would speak for themselves.  



> I think the decision will be a lose/lose situation. The valet employees are going to lose a lot of income from tips creating unhappy employees. I would easily spend more tipping valet employees than the new $12.00 per day cost. Our resort hopping for lunch, dinner and souvenirs will greatly diminish.



Again, something DVC would have known up-front.  In fact, as I suggested in another reply, you could certainly argue that it was in DISNEY'S best interest to subsidize parking.  The company as a whole would stand to make millions of additional dollars per year in valet parking fees paid by member dues.  The fact that they didn't go that route suggests that perhaps it wasn't in the best interest of DVC MEMBERS to do so.  



> I feel DVC members have made a long term commitment to Disney. If I dont see a reciprocal benefit from being a member, Ill go offsite. You can never go wrong when you reward loyal customers.



Disney doesn't do loyalty programs.  Doesn't matter if you're a DVC member visiting every year, a local who visits every-other-weekend or a cash guest who drops $5 grand at the Poly every year.  Disney doesn't have any magic punch card system where every 10th trip is free.  

These so-called "loyalty programs" are most useful in competitive industries where all vendors offer a similar product.  Office Max has a points program to keep you from buying the exact same product from Staples or Office Depot.  Delta offers sky miles to keep you from flying Northwest or American.  Alamo offers perks to keep you from renting from Budget or Hertz.  

Apparently Disney doesn't feel similar competition exists in the theme park industry.  It's been nearly a decade since they have had any sort of rewards club (Magic Kingdom Club / Disney Club?)  And that situation isn't likely to change until the beancounters decide there's a financial reason to offer such benefits.  

Discounts usually do increase business, but the question is whether the added business will exceed the cost of the perk.  Let's say that Artist's Palette at SSR generates about $1 million in revenue per year and DVC is considering a 20% discount.  With that discount, the restaurant now needs to generate $1.25 million in gross receipts (before 20% discount applied) just to equal the non-discounted revenues.  And that doesn't take into account the added overhead involved with selling $1.25 million in product rather than $1 million.  They would need to add more staff, have higher material costs, higher packaging costs, condiments, utilities, etc.  Disney would probably need to see a 40-50% increase in sales to justify a 20% discount.  Is that a realistic expectation?  

If perks don't generate added revenue, they will disappear.  If Artist's Palette offers that 20% discount and revenues go from $1 mil to $800,000 there's no sense in offering it.  Disney isn't going to accept a $200k drop in sales on the assumption that the 20% dining discount will somehow increase DVC point sales.


----------



## lochbox

Has anyone noticed a lack of DVC sales or resales?   Does anyone have any hard data on this?  

I was considering a new contract but taking away the valet perk affected us tremendously.  I wonder what is next to disappear.  Therefore, all dvc future purchases are on indefinite hold.


----------



## tjkraz

lochbox said:


> Has anyone noticed a lack of DVC sales or resales?   Does anyone have any hard data on this?
> 
> I was considering a new contract but taking away the valet perk affected us tremendously.  I wonder what is next to disappear.  Therefore, all dvc future purchases are on indefinite hold.



It would be nearly impossible to draw any conclusions based upon sales numbers.  The change was only made 3 weeks ago.  Even after some time has passed, sales will be impacted by a variety of factors including DVC's pricing, promotions offered, the state of the economy, and even seasonal fluctuations in demand for contracts.  

The most sensible approach is to assume that EVERY SINGLE PERK could disappear someday.  The only thing guaranteed is what's in the POS.  

Even with all perks eliminated it doesn't change the fact that DVC allows me to vacation for pennies on the dollar over the next 4-5 decades.  That's about the only factor that will ever play a role in my purchase decisions.  The presence or absence of free valet parking, AP discounts or any other incentives would never play a role in my decision to add or not add more points.


----------



## Dean

DVCPAT said:


> I dont think anyone expects an immediate reversal from a complaint. Time usually tells if decisions are good or bad. The first barometer is how your customers feel about the change. If you complain, they know your unhappyunhappy customers dont increase spending. As time passes, Disney will look at DVC member resort spending. If resort spending drops, Disney will decide if the decision increased profits.
> 
> I think the decision will be a lose/lose situation. The valet employees are going to lose a lot of income from tips creating unhappy employees. I would easily spend more tipping valet employees than the new $12.00 per day cost. Our resort hopping for lunch, dinner and souvenirs will greatly diminish.
> 
> I feel DVC members have made a long term commitment to Disney. If I dont see a reciprocal benefit from being a member, Ill go offsite. You can never go wrong when you reward loyal customers.


Given the responses on this thread I think some did expect an immediate reversal because they complained, if not why were there posts about selling, not recommending to friends and complaining about the canned responses.  Disney looks at DVC spending now along with many other groups.  However, while they are closely linked, DVC is not Disney or vice versa.  DVC has a legal obligation to the members in spite of having multiple masters.  Do realize all DVC owes us is a room and management of the resort itself.  
While it may (or may not) be good business sense to provide more, there is no obligation to do so implied or otherwise and it's unreasonable to expect more, IMO.  I think in many ways it's the entitlement mentality that's gotten where we are at this point.  

Unfortunately we don't have all the facts to decide if this was truly a reasonable decision and we won't have the facts to re-evaluate the decision later.  

On the surface DVC doesn't care specifically about the income of the valet employees or the profit of the contractor because they are not responsible, this is a different company.  I'm sure that there were high level discussions between the resorts, DVC and the contractor around this issue and all concerned knew up front it was going to be a headache.  But it will die down and short of the way it was implemented, it's really hard to argue with the decision no matter what the reason.  Most such resorts charge more for valet than does DVC, many charge for self parking as well, often as much or more than the valet costs are at Disney.  Few timeshares have valet parking at all and the only one I can think of that does and is free, doesn't have a place to self park.  

It boils down to very simple issues.  Is it reasonable to supplement valet parking for a subset of members by spreading the costs to the entire group.  The answer is absolutely not UNLESS there are other benefits such as volume discounts.  The idea that other items are paid for by the group that not everyone uses clearly is not a valid argument in this situation but merely childish ranting, IMO.


----------



## DebbieB

I think DVC could have saved themselves alot of grief by just coming out with an announcement and stating the reason.  By mass communication, not burying it on the member website.     I think the lack of communication just ticks people off more.

And maybe there would not have been a 1,000 post topic on Dis.....996......


----------



## Dean

DebbieB said:


> I think DVC could have saved themselves alot of grief by just coming out with an announcement and stating the reason.  By mass communication, not burying it on the member website.     I think the lack of communication just ticks people off more.
> 
> And maybe there would not have been a 1,000 post topic on Dis.....996......


No argument from me.  IMO it's how they've done a number of things the last couple of years I would quibble with, not the conclusions themselves.


----------



## DVCPAT

Dean said:


> It boils down to very simple issues.  Is it reasonable to supplement valet parking for a subset of members by spreading the costs to the entire group.  The answer is absolutely not UNLESS there are other benefits such as volume discounts.  The idea that other items are paid for by the group that not everyone uses clearly is not a valid argument in this situation but merely childish ranting, IMO.



You think Disney stopped free valet parking because it wasnt fair to other members who dont use it? Disney originally offered free valet for one reason, to get DVC members to spend money in DVC resorts. I think Disney is simply cutting costs.


----------



## Golden Rose

DebbieB said:


> I think DVC could have saved themselves alot of grief by just coming out with an announcement and stating the reason.  By mass communication, not burying it on the member website.     I think the lack of communication just ticks people off more.
> 
> And maybe there would not have been a 1,000 post topic on Dis.....996......



I agree with this entirely.  In all honesty, I don't care about valet parking.  My car is my extended purse, and I don't like to give strangers access to it.  The only time I consider using valet parking is when it is pouring down rain, or the self-parking lots are all full.  (This is true of us in our daily lives, not just at WDW.)   

However, I think the removal of this perk was handled absolutely terribly.  I am appalled at how little notice members were given, and how the website continued to say it was offered after it was taken away.  It wasn't buried on the website initially; it wasn't changed at all.

I don't mind them trying to keep dues down.  I wholeheartedly approve of keeping dues down!  And, I will say, when we were at the BWV just over a week ago, none of us had any trouble finding self-parking.  Sometimes we had to walk a while, but the spaces were available.  The guards were already doing a better job at keeping spaces for guests of the resort.  So, what it comes down to for us is not what was done, but the way it was done.

It doesn't really lower the quality of our vacations, but it does lower our opinion of DVC.  We're relatively new members (just a bit more than a year), so we don't remember any "good ol' days."   What we do see is a complete lack of respect for DVC members... and that does worry us.  We're not going to race out and sell our points.  We love our points, and we've loved the DVC resorts we've stayed in.  We are enjoying the timeshare world, and what this makes us do in more seriously consider buying other timeshares rather than adding on more DVC points.  When we're ready to buy again, we'll certainly take how DVC treats its members into serious consideration.  This one incident isn't that big a deal to us, if it is an isolated incident, but if it becomes part of pattern of terrible communication and decreased services, we'll certainly find other places to spend our money where we feel more appreciated.


----------



## Dean

DVCPAT said:


> You think Disney stopped free valet parking because it wasnt fair to other members who dont use it? Disney originally offered free valet for one reason, to get DVC members to spend money in DVC resorts. I think Disney is simply cutting costs.


In a way, I think DVC stopped free Valet parking because of a significant increase in price, basically from nothing to $12 per person per day which they would have had to pass on to the members then add their 12% management fee on top of.  I don't think we can say for sure why DVC originally offered free valet but my understanding was it was included as a sales perk.  I don't think there's any evidence it was a ploy to get them to spend more money as free ME is.


----------



## lawgs

Pooh for Presid said:


> We checked into BCV Oct 20.  I had not gotten an email or any other information until I went to leave the car with the valet.  When I checked in I asked to speak to a manager, who I know had nothing to do with the DVC decision.  I explained that I was at the annual meeting last year and nothing was discussed about this and that I was not infomed of the change.  In addition I was upset that I had paid my annual fees last January and they were cutting off something in essence I had already paid for.  He seemed suprised that I was not informed but promised to look into it.
> 
> I then called Member services and got a supervisor who I repeated all of my concerns to and this is the line I got.  They were discontinuing the service in my best interest.  (I love when other people do stuff in my best interest b/c they know more than I do and yet somehow it never seems to be in MY best interest).  It was explained that with valet fees going up they had to stop the service or my annual dues next year would go way up.  In addition they had done a study and found that a lot more members were utilizing DME so they were keeping it instead.
> 
> I asked the obvious question if more people use DME than valet how could costs be going way up for valet service?  I never got an answer for this, however I did get the answer that annual dues do go to pay for the valet service.  When I asked if I was going to get a refund for the portion of my annual dues paid last year for valet that was cut off before the end of the year, I never got an answer for that either.
> 
> A short time later the BCV manager called back with in essence the same corporate line.
> 
> My problems are that I was not informed on something that I had already paid for through the end of the year, they took something away in the middle of the year, and they did it in my best interest to save me money.  I would like to know how much of annual dues goes to DME.  I wonder how much we are subsidizing a service that Disney is providing to other guests to keep them on property vs something that really was just to my benefit.  just my 2 cents worth.





did you see the "rubber stamp" they used last year at the annual meeting to approve all "items"  after we all had input as to DVC's direction.....tongue in cheek ???


----------



## jrl153

I read the last day for the valet perk was on Oct. 11th.  It was on the DVCNews.com website.  Just go to the site and search valet parking.  It also gives an email address to let them know what we think about losing this perk.
   I used the service last March at AKV, it was a nice perk that will be missed.


----------



## Deb & Bill

jrl153 said:


> I read the last day for the valet perk was on Oct. 11th.  It was on the DVCNews.com website.  Just go to the site and search valet parking.  It also gives an email address to let them know what we think about losing this perk.
> I used the service last March at AKV, it was a nice perk that will be missed.



I take it you didn't read the other 1001 posts before yours.


----------



## DVCBELLE

Deb & Bill said:


> I take it you didn't read the other 1001 posts before yours.


jrl153 started a new thread yesterday - it must have been moved into here so another discussion didn't start!  It does seem funny placed where it is in this thread


----------



## MELSMICE

I was surprised the other day when we were at the Boardwalk & was informed this.  I was standing by the valet waiting for someone to arrive & asked if parking was still free for DVC members.  CM told me that this changed as of October 11 & it was $14 per day to park.  

It was a nice perk.  I actually feel bad for the valet CM's that relied on their tips because I'm sure that many members will choose to self park now - I know not all will, but a big handful probably will.  We probably will.  

Oh well.............just my thoughts on this new change.  I'm sad!


----------



## photobob

There's a 1,000+ post thread if you'd like to read all about it.


----------



## chalee94

here is the thread for discussion of the valet change.


----------



## Tara

I thought it was $12/day, not $14/day for valet. (Isn't it theme park parking that went up to $14?)


----------



## shortypots

I never used it anyway, so not a big loss to me, but frankly, $12 or $14 is way to high for someone to park my car for me so I don't have to walk! And let's face it, with all the wonderful food we eat when we are there, I need to walk!


----------



## DenLo

And what is another block or two when you're going to be walking miles around the different parks?


----------



## NEM

As a mom who travels by herself to Disney with still 2 kids under 2 AND the fact that they used this perk as a big selling point when I bought my DVC.  This really ticks me off.  I have just gotten back into things after having my last baby and found this out today when making reservations for next summer. I definitely called and sent a letter today stating my opinion. 

I used (and tipped well) this free perk.  
I have to figure out what I am going to do now that it is gone.  

I still think this is rotten...

Michelle


----------



## awilliams4

Curious as to whether this so called Perk was ever free.  I would assume that MF paid for it...thus we all paid for it already.  I suspect that since prices are going up and Valet services were outsourced, the cost to DVC was going up two-fold so basically those that weren't using it are now no longer being charged and those that will use it will get charged.  Not sure how this is a bad thing at all.  Assuming I am correct.

So if I am correct, this was not a Free Perk that was taken away.  It is a service where the charge is getting reallocated to the persons using it.  If I am right and people have a problem with that, then they got bigger problems.


----------



## Sammie

awilliams4 said:


> Curious as to whether this so called Perk was ever free.  I would assume that MF paid for it...thus we all paid for it already.  I suspect that since prices are going up and Valet services were outsourced, the cost to DVC was going up two-fold so basically those that weren't using it are now no longer being charged and those that will use it will get charged.  Not sure how this is a bad thing at all.  Assuming I am correct.
> 
> So if I am correct, this was not a Free Perk that was taken away.  It is a service where the charge is getting reallocated to the persons using it.  If I am right and people have a problem with that, then they got bigger problems.



MF did not pay for it, however MF would have paid for it had it continued.


----------



## DebbieB

Somewhere in the 1000+ posts, someone posted that they talked to DVC and it was not part of dues previously.  The valets are not Disney employees and their new contract no longer provides it free to members.


----------



## eliza61

DenLo said:


> And what is another block or two when you're going to be walking miles around the different parks?




That's actually the reason why I loved valet parking.  After walking all day in the parks especially in the hot sun, I really enjoyed pulling up and going straight into the resort.


----------



## photobob

shortypots said:


> I never used it anyway, so not a big loss to me, but frankly, $12 or $14 is way to high for someone to park my car for me so I don't have to walk! And let's face it, with all the wonderful food we eat when we are there, I need to walk!



$12 is way too much, free was much better!  I will miss it because I did use it when we stayed at BWV, I won't miss it enough to pay for it!


----------



## Terry

I feel like I have been slimed.  Welcome Home!  Gimme your $12!

We used the free valet service every day of every trip and always tipped well.  Does Disney really think that they will improve the bottom line by nickel and diming their very best customers (DVC Members)?

We just got back from a week at CSR/AKL.  My wife and I love to have dinner at the nice "sit down" restaurants around WDW.  Not this time.  We decided to support some of the local area restaurants where our business was appreciated and the parking was free and close to the door.  I don't think Disney will miss a few hundred bucks, but, who knows.  A flood starts with a single raindrop.


----------



## Dean

NEM said:


> As a mom who travels by herself to Disney with still 2 kids under 2 AND the fact that they used this perk as a big selling point when I bought my DVC.  This really ticks me off.  I have just gotten back into things after having my last baby and found this out today when making reservations for next summer. I definitely called and sent a letter today stating my opinion.
> 
> I used (and tipped well) this free perk.
> I have to figure out what I am going to do now that it is gone.
> 
> I still think this is rotten...
> 
> Michelle


The option is still there but those that use it will have to pay for it.

For a resort area, $12 is fairly low for valet parking.  I'm headed to DC area this weekend where self parking is $19 a day and valet is $28.  Stayed on Oahu last year with $25 mandatory valet and no real self park option.


----------



## JimC

Dean said:


> ...Stayed on Oahu last year with $25 mandatory valet and no real self park option.



Seems to be common in Marina Del Rey as well.


----------



## Robo-Daddy 3000

Dean said:


> The option is still there but those that use it will have to pay for it.
> 
> For a resort area, $12 is fairly low for valet parking.  I'm headed to DC area this weekend where self parking is $19 a day and valet is $28.  Stayed on Oahu last year with $25 mandatory valet and no real self park option.



I think its $17 for valet at the Grand Californian Villas.


----------



## tjkraz

Terry said:


> I feel like I have been slimed.  Welcome Home!  Gimme your $12!
> 
> We used the free valet service every day of every trip and always tipped well.  Does Disney really think that they will improve the bottom line by nickel and diming their very best customers (DVC Members)?
> 
> We just got back from a week at CSR/AKL.  My wife and I love to have dinner at the nice "sit down" restaurants around WDW.  Not this time.  We decided to support some of the local area restaurants where our business was appreciated and the parking was free and close to the door.  I don't think Disney will miss a few hundred bucks, but, who knows.  A flood starts with a single raindrop.



As multiple posters have confirmed, if the "free valet" service were to continue, the fees would have been charged to member dues and shared by all members.  If Disney's primary concern were the bottom line, they could have easily billed those MILLIONS of dollars worth of valet fees to members.  It would have been well within their rights to add the service to member dues, and undoubtedly would have increased revenue for TWDC. 

Although I used the free parking perk myself, I'm forced to agree that it's a service which is best paid for by those who use it rather than spreading the costs among everyone.  Free self-park lots are available for those who do not wish to pay the valet fees.


----------



## Terry

$12 to valet park is not an outrageous sum.  We have all probably paid more than that somewhere.  The point is we bought memberships that included free valet parking.  That perk is now gone.  What's next?  Should the free high speed internet perk be paid for by only the members who use it, too?  How about DVC member discounts?  Why should we all subsidize discounts on meals and souvenirs if we don't all partake?  How about the trash & towel service?  We can wash our own towels and empty our own trash.  Why should I pay for a maid to do that for someone else?  Free parking anywhere on Disney property?  We can all take a bus for free.  Those are perks we were all sold.  This is how big business works.  When the budget isn't being met, executive incentives don't get paid unless costs are reduced and operating income increases.  The customers pay more and get less.

Don't get me wrong.  We still love Disney and will continue to go.  Unfortunately, the business side of this takes some of the shine off of the experience.


----------



## Brian Noble

Except that, in this case, Disney would clearly have made *more* money by continuing to include it as a "free" perk, but charging the costs back to the Members via dues.  More people would use "free" valet, therefore more valet revenue---plus the management fee percentage taken off that operational cost.

By passing the charge through explicitly, valet is generating less money, not more.


----------



## Terry

Your argument makes the assumption that Disney would indeed need to increase fees across the board via dues if the valet parking remained "free".  Mine does not.  I understand that.  My point is, what is next?  Certainly there are costs associated with the other "perks".  When does Disney start spreading out the costs for those perks as well?  The answer is...they already have.  Costs go up or services go down.   It is simple math.  In this case, rather than increasing everyone's dues a few bucks, they elected to eliminate this perk.  Probably not the best financial move and certainly not a good PR move.


----------



## dis2cruise

today I received a phone call from dvc in regards to my email to DVC about no more free valet parking.  They told me their  DVC leadership team is working on this perk that was "taken away" and also trying to get "new perks" for us . 

That's all I can tell you but at least they called me back and did appoligize about taking this perk away. We will see what happens next.........


----------



## Chuck S

Terry said:


> $12 to valet park is not an outrageous sum.  We have all probably paid more than that somewhere.  The point is we bought memberships that included free valet parking.  That perk is now gone.  What's next?  Should the free high speed internet perk be paid for by only the members who use it, too?  How about DVC member discounts?  Why should we all subsidize discounts on meals and souvenirs if we don't all partake?  How about the trash & towel service?  We can wash our own towels and empty our own trash.  Why should I pay for a maid to do that for someone else?  Free parking anywhere on Disney property?  We can all take a bus for free.  Those are perks we were all sold.  This is how big business works.  When the budget isn't being met, executive incentives don't get paid unless costs are reduced and operating income increases.  The customers pay more and get less.
> 
> Don't get me wrong.  We still love Disney and will continue to go.  Unfortunately, the business side of this takes some of the shine off of the experience.



Except that we didn't buy a membership that included free valet.  We bought an ownership interest in a leasehold timeshare...at least according my documents.  Everything else, except those items necessary to maintain and operate the resorts and membership data, are perks.

The membership does not subsidize the AP discount, the dining perks, and few shopping discounts. Those are offered as a courtesy by those vendors to members to encourage us to purchase APs and dine at those locations.  The same _could_ be offered.  There is likely nothing stopping the vendor of the valet services from offering an unsibsidized discount if they would like to do so.

The internet wasn't free until the vendor has recouped the initial investment to wire the resorts, it was two to three years after the wired internet was installed before it was offered free, and likely the actual price of the service is extremely cheap, as it does not need to be manned 24 hours a day by at least 2 people per resort.

The limited maid services are actually detailed in the POS.  The valet service is not.  On the otherhand, why should al lthe members pay for your washer water usage dryer electric usage to lander a handful of towels? Overall, it may actually cost us more than the $6 a towel pack would cost...but of course the corect answer is that the laundry services are part of the "furnishings" of the resort as represented in the POS and at the time of purchase...again, the valet services are not.  And again, free parking at the parks can be discountinued, and is likely not subsidized  by dues, as it is offered to all onsite guests.  We do pay for the bus/boat/monorail transportation as part of our dues.


----------



## disneynutz

Just because the gouging for Valet is lower at WDW doesn't make it right. I wish that people would stop making excuses for Disney. 

 Bill


----------



## Chuck S

disneynutz said:


> Just because the gouging for Valet is lower at WDW doesn't make it right. I wish that people would stop making excuses for Disney.
> 
> Bill



Who do you think should pay for the service if it is proveded "free" to DVCers?

Disney (ie the Disney stockholders) DVC marketing, or the members via dues?  Someone has to pay those valet's wages, and the the operating expenses of the contractor.


----------



## Terry

This is exactly why I don't usually post on this site.  I know what the documents say.  So does everyone else.  Should that make us all feel good about this?  Not me.  Perception is reality.  We were "sold" on features and benefits.  I'm not trying to make a legal argument, just stating the facts.  There have been thousands of phone calls and emails to member services and to the DVC Member Satisfaction Team on this topic.  It would appear that the membership is not pleased.  Happy customers spend more money.  Unhappy ones spend it somewhere else.  Disney is certainly not doing anything wrong according to our contracts, but, this was a PR mistake.


----------



## Chuck S

Terry said:


> This is exactly why I don't usually post on this site.  I know what the documents say.  So does everyone else.  Should that make us all feel good about this?  Not me.  Perception is reality.  We were "sold" on features and benefits.  I'm not trying to make a legal argument, just stating the facts.  There have been thousands of phone calls and emails to member services and to the DVC Member Satisfaction Team on this topic.  It would appear that the membership is not pleased.  Happy customers spend more money.  Unhappy ones spend it somewhere else.  Disney is certainly not doing anything wrong according to our contracts, but, this was a PR mistake.



Again, whom do think should pay for the valet services?


----------



## zalansky

Terry said:


> This is exactly why I don't usually post on this site.  I know what the documents say.  So does everyone else.  Should that make us all feel good about this?  Not me.  Perception is reality.  We were "sold" on features and benefits.  I'm not trying to make a legal argument, just stating the facts.  There have been thousands of phone calls and emails to member services and to the DVC Member Satisfaction Team on this topic.  It would appear that the membership is not pleased.  Happy customers spend more money.  Unhappy ones spend it somewhere else.  Disney is certainly not doing anything wrong according to our contracts, but, this was a PR mistake.





I have said it before several times on this thread and I will say it again. Those who didn't use this perk are not bothered by it being removed. We get it. I cannot wait until a perk that those members DO use is taken away. (DVC annual passs discount being on top of MY list of things to go) We'll see how much support these same people are giving to DVC then.


----------



## disneynutz

We don't know why it went from "free" to $12 over night so everyone is just guessing. We also don't know how much profit is in the $12 fee or how their contract reads. We don't know what our dues paid towards Valet before and we don't know why they don't charge a DVC discounted fee. 

I do know that Disney out sourced Valet due to the liability issues and claims resulting from vehicular damage. I also know if you currently have a claim that Disney will refer you to the contractor and the contractor will tell you to "prove it". 

I also know that there are a lot of services that Disney could switch to pay for use and I hate to think that this could be the start.

What's next, Bell Services, Front Desk, Concierge, laundry room, activity room? My dues pays for all of these and I don't use most of them.

DVC is going to have to offer perks and reduced fees to it's members to keep up the value of the product. If they told the truth and only offered you a room for your DVC purchase would you have many buyers?

I get frustrated because people accept negative change too easily. They don't question or demand answers. The worst is when they feel compelled to defend the change and try to convince others to do the same.

 Bill


----------



## zalansky

disneynutz said:


> We don't know why it went from "free" to $12 over night so everyone is just guessing. We also don't know how much profit is in the $12 fee or how their contract reads. We don't know what our dues paid towards Valet before and we don't know why they don't charge a DVC discounted fee.
> 
> I do know that Disney out sourced Valet due to the liability issues and claims resulting from vehicular damage. I also know if you currently have a claim that Disney will refer you to the contractor and the contractor will tell you to "prove it".
> 
> I also know that there are a lot of services that Disney could switch to pay for use and I hate to think that this could be the start.
> 
> What's next, Bell Services, Front Desk, Concierge, laundry room, activity room? My dues pays for all of these and I don't use most of them.
> 
> DVC is going to have to offer perks and reduced fees to it's members to keep up the value of the product. If they told the truth and only offered you a room for your DVC purchase would you have many buyers?
> 
> I get frustrated because people accept negative change too easily. They don't question or demand answers. The worst is when they feel compelled to defend the change and try to convince others to do the same.
> 
> Bill




Exactly. Thank you!


----------



## DebbieB

zalansky said:


> I have said it before several times on this thread and I will say it again. Those who didn't use this perk are not bothered by it being removed. We get it. I cannot wait until a perk that those members DO use is taken away. (DVC annual passs discount being on top of MY list of things to go) We'll see how much support these same people are giving to DVC then.



I did use it and am fine with it being taken away if it meant higher dues to be shared by everyone.   I also think if free DME is being supported by member dues, that should be taken away too.   Let everyone pay only for what they are using.   The annual pass discount is not being paid by member dues.


----------



## arielrocks

Chuck S said:


> Again, whom do think should pay for the valet services?



how about the people that are covering the Tables in Wonderland valet still??


----------



## Terry

Well said, Bill.  

Chuck -  I am the customer making a decision on where to spend my discretionary funds (which ain't what they used to be).  It isn't my job to figure out how Disney accounts for the cost of the valet service.  I don't care how they account for it.  I'm a DVC member because I like to get away from that kind of stuff for a couple weeks each year.  It is my job to make good spending decisions and to make sure my family has a great vacation.  That's really all there is to it.

Again, I am the customer.  The value that I am getting today is less than it was before this policy change.  I'm not happy about that.  Sorry if that is offensive in any way.  As a business man myself, I depend on the "voice of the customer" to make sure we are pointed in the right direction.  Knowing when my customers are not happy is tremendously valuable information and provides a great opportunity to improve customer satisfaction (that's marketing "code" for improving sales).  My guess is that Disney understands this.  I am just providing feedback.


----------



## MELSMICE

Terry said:


> This is exactly why I don't usually post on this site.  I know what the documents say.  So does everyone else.  Should that make us all feel good about this?  Not me.  Perception is reality.  We were "sold" on features and benefits.  I'm not trying to make a legal argument, just stating the facts.  There have been thousands of phone calls and emails to member services and to the DVC Member Satisfaction Team on this topic.  It would appear that the membership is not pleased.  Happy customers spend more money.  Unhappy ones spend it somewhere else.  Disney is certainly not doing anything wrong according to our contracts, but, this was a PR mistake.


Agreed!  



zalansky said:


> I have said it before several times on this thread and I will say it again. Those who didn't use this perk are not bothered by it being removed. We get it. I cannot wait until a perk that those members DO use is taken away. (DVC annual passs discount being on top of MY list of things to go) We'll see how much support these same people are giving to DVC then.


Also agree!  



DebbieB said:


> I did use it and am fine with it being taken away if it meant higher dues to be shared by everyone.   I also think if free DME is being supported by member dues, that should be taken away too.   Let everyone pay only for what they are using.   The annual pass discount is not being paid by member dues.


We used it also & I think it stinks that it has been taken away.  

When we entered into our contract we knew that we had yearly dues to pay, we also knew that those yearly dues would increase.  DVC is a luxury for us, not an investment.  A luxury costs money & usually the expenses for that luxury increase if the luxury is going to live up to it's standards.  

My guess (& it's only a guess) is that the cost of dues increase to the thousands of DVC members that there are would be minimal to continue this service.


----------



## tjkraz

zalansky said:


> I have said it before several times on this thread and I will say it again. Those who didn't use this perk are not bothered by it being removed. We get it. I cannot wait until a perk that those members DO use is taken away. (DVC annual passs discount being on top of MY list of things to go) We'll see how much support these same people are giving to DVC then.



We did not have an annual pass discount when I joined and I wouldn't be surprised if it went away some day.  I believe every ticket that I've purchased since the discount came into being was an annual pass, yet by no means do I feel *entitled *to it.  If the perk is eliminated it may change my approach to Disney park tickets, but it's up to Disney to deal with the fallout of my changes in plans.

What I find most surprising about this discussion is the number of people who apparently don't understand what a DVC purchase gives them.  We can reserve discounted rooms under a specific set of guidelines.  That's it.  If all of the perks went away tomorrow it would neither surprise me nor would it change my perception of the program's value.  

Beyond what DVC told me I would get at the time of purchase, I don't feel entitled to anything extra.  If they want to offer discounts, so be it.  But I'm not going to demand extras, nor will I be upset when they go away.  




disneynutz said:


> We don't know why it went from "free" to $12 over night so everyone is just guessing. We also don't know how much profit is in the $12 fee or how their contract reads. We don't know what our dues paid towards Valet before and we don't know why they don't charge a DVC discounted fee.
> 
> I do know that Disney out sourced Valet due to the liability issues and claims resulting from vehicular damage. I also know if you currently have a claim that Disney will refer you to the contractor and the contractor will tell you to "prove it".
> 
> I also know that there are a lot of services that Disney could switch to pay for use and I hate to think that this could be the start.
> 
> What's next, Bell Services, Front Desk, Concierge, laundry room, activity room? My dues pays for all of these and I don't use most of them.
> 
> DVC is going to have to offer perks and reduced fees to it's members to keep up the value of the product. If they told the truth and only offered you a room for your DVC purchase would you have many buyers?
> 
> I get frustrated because people accept negative change too easily. They don't question or demand answers. The worst is when they feel compelled to defend the change and try to convince others to do the same.
> 
> Bill



I get frustrated by people who consistently use Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt to as the primary weapons in their arsenal.  Who needs facts and rational discussion when it's much easier to get people worked-up about the possibility of paying for Bell Services, Front Desk (?) and Community Halls.  

I get frustrated when anyone who dares to look at changes from another viewpoint is immediately branded some sort of DVC apologist who blindly "defend the change."  

I get frustrated by people who completely ignore positive changes while pouncing on anything they perceive to be a negative change.  

These aren't black and white issues.  There is substantial gray area involved.  If you happen to get a look at that contract or can get Disney to clarify why the rate went up so substantially, please share it with us.  Until then, all we can do is respond to what we do know to be true (based upon on-the-record or off-the-record comments.)  

I don't think it's quite fair to issue a blanket condemnation of every poster who verbally votes against having their dues pay for "free" valet parking.


----------



## Simba's Mom

disneynutz said:


> We don't know why it went from "free" to $12 over night so everyone is just guessing. We also don't know how much profit is in the $12 fee or how their contract reads. We don't know what our dues paid towards Valet before and we don't know why they don't charge a DVC discounted fee.
> 
> Bill



I thought I read somewhere in the last many pages that DVC members didn't pay anything in their dues.  The change isn't due to the outsourcing, if I understand it right.  Didn't the outsourcing happen a few years ago, yet the discontinuation of it being free just happened last month?  So if paying the valets is the issue, as Chuck S maintains, well, somehow they got paid for the last few years.  I agree with wondering WHY this change happened NOW.  Why not at the time of outsourcing, if that's the big issue?


----------



## Chuck S

Simba's Mom said:


> I thought I read somewhere in the last many pages that DVC members didn't pay anything in their dues.  The change isn't due to the outsourcing, if I understand it right.  Didn't the outsourcing happen a few years ago, yet the discontinuation of it being free just happened last month?  So if paying the valets is the issue, as Chuck S maintains, well, somehow they got paid for the last few years.  I agree with wondering WHY this change happened NOW.  Why not at the time of outsourcing, if that's the big issue?



It was likely being funded by DVC Marketing, or the contractor, or both, which, given the economy, decided to no longer fund it.  Now the cost would need to be assumed by dues.


----------



## disneynutz

Chuck S said:


> It was likely being funded by DVC Marketing, or the contractor, or both, which, given the economy, decided to no longer fund it.  Now the cost would need to be assumed by dues.



As I said, we can guess all we want. That is one of the big problems that I have with the DVC, no information, just change and politics.

 Bill


----------



## bookwormde

And there is the problem with DVC, nothing is communicated in an informative, honest and timely manner.

I never use valet but it still is not right that changes are made this way

Bookwormde


----------



## Dean

Terry said:


> $12 to valet park is not an outrageous sum.  We have all probably paid more than that somewhere.  The point is we bought memberships that included free valet parking.  That perk is now gone.  What's next?  Should the free high speed internet perk be paid for by only the members who use it, too?  How about DVC member discounts?  Why should we all subsidize discounts on meals and souvenirs if we don't all partake?  How about the trash & towel service?  We can wash our own towels and empty our own trash.  Why should I pay for a maid to do that for someone else?  Free parking anywhere on Disney property?  We can all take a bus for free.  Those are perks we were all sold.  This is how big business works.  When the budget isn't being met, executive incentives don't get paid unless costs are reduced and operating income increases.  The customers pay more and get less.
> 
> Don't get me wrong.  We still love Disney and will continue to go.  Unfortunately, the business side of this takes some of the shine off of the experience.


That's one area I would absolutely disagree with.  Some bought WHEN valet parking was free, it was never part of the sales package and is not referenced in any of the sales materials.  Something a timeshare salesperson mentioned during a sales discussion that is not included in the legal paperwork is of no meaning IMO.  

As I've said previously, the fact that there are other services that all may pay for but not everyone uses has little to no bearing on this discussion unless those are things that are significantly costly, easy to police, is there a significant volume saving, easy to charge and that a significant minority use.  The other criteria is what items should generally be provided by a resort.  Valet parking clearly falls on the side of pay to play using these criteria in every area.  It is as simple as whether one who uses it pay for it or do other members subsidize those that use it.  Since all indications are that there was no charge before and now there would be full charge, that is a cut and dried decision in my book.  

As for what next, perks will come and go and fees will go up.  Some will be negative and some positive but overall most will likely be negative.  



disneynutz said:


> Just because the gouging for Valet is lower at WDW doesn't make it right. I wish that people would stop making excuses for Disney.
> 
> Bill


No excuses.  I don't see anyway to say it's gouging, no one is required to use the service.  I don't personally know the financial and other factors well enough to know what's a reasonable charge in their situation but even if it were twice as much as anywhere, it's still 100% optional for everyone with the possible exception of some who are handicapped and there are other ways to possibly account for those as well by altering the parking set up.



zalansky said:


> I have said it before several times on this thread and I will say it again. Those who didn't use this perk are not bothered by it being removed. We get it. I cannot wait until a perk that those members DO use is taken away. (DVC annual passs discount being on top of MY list of things to go) We'll see how much support these same people are giving to DVC then.


 This is not about who is affected, it's about a rational decision based on the facts.  To make an interpretation of such an issue based on how it affects you directly is intellectually dishonest, IMO.



disneynutz said:


> We don't know why it went from "free" to $12 over night so everyone is just guessing. We also don't know how much profit is in the $12 fee or how their contract reads. We don't know what our dues paid towards Valet before and we don't know why they don't charge a DVC discounted fee.


Only partly true.  We do know it went from no charge to $12 pp/pd.  We do know that DVC management has stated DVC dues were not used to pay for the perk previously.  We do not know if DVC gets a kickback, nor is it especially important in the discussion IMO.



arielrocks said:


> how about the people that are covering the Tables in Wonderland valet still??


One would have to assume that this cost is being paid for either by TIW and/or by the restaurants affected in some way.  Even if it were negotiated as free in the new contract, I wouldn't think it especially relevant to the DVC valet issue.


----------



## Deb & Bill

bookwormde said:


> And there is the problem with DVC, nothing is communicated in an informative, honest and timely manner.
> 
> I never use valet but it still is not right that changes are made this way
> 
> Bookwormde



Exactly.


----------



## Doctor P

Though I have expressed my displeasure in the perk being taken away, the valet parking perk was added AFTER we became members.  To the best of my recollection, this was not an available perk until several years after DVC started.  My best guess is that it was after BCV was opened if my memory serves correctly.


----------



## arielrocks

One would have to assume that this cost is being paid for either by TIW and/or by the restaurants affected in some way.  Even if it were negotiated as free in the new contract, I wouldn't think it especially relevant to the DVC valet issue.[/QUOTE]

I only see it as relevant because they took away the perk for DVC members, but kept it for TIW.  I understand that using valet with TIW means that people are spending more money in Disney by eating at the restaurants.....but aren't members spending enough money with initial purchase and member fees every year?

I have not used the free valet - didn't get a chance too before it was taken away but I don't agree with the change and I was looking forward to using it.

I think the main bug bear is the WAY disney do things, just because they haave the power and the right to make changes, it doesn't mean they should when it upsets so many people!  

this thread is sooooo long now I wonder what member services would think if they saw the reaction of its members (they probably woulfn't care right?)


----------



## Chuck S

arielrocks said:


> this thread is sooooo long now I wonder what member services would think if they saw the reaction of its members (they probably woulfn't care right?)



I'm reasonably sure Disney monitors Disney related fansites, including the DIS.  As far as "caring," that is irrelevent, there are other issues at work here besides emotions.  The valet company needs compensation, they are an independent contractor.  The question is...from where should that compensation come?  The owners of BWV/BCV/AKV and BLT through increased dues? As OKW and SSR have never offered valet services, they really couldn't up the dues at those resorts to cover it, as dues are tied to the operation of the resort where you own.

Should another Disney entity compensate the contractor, even considering each Disney operating company has to justify their expenses and profitability?

Should the contractor simply do it "out of the goodness of his heart," and give away what is essentially his product?  

I think the best answer, if the contractor sees a substantial drop in profitability would be to offer a discount to DVC members to encourage them to once again use valet services.  If there is not substantial drop in profit (and I would assume some valets are let go to make up for the drop in needed services) there is no reason for the contractor to offer a discount.


----------



## zalansky

Disney most certainly monitors the DIS - I took a survey emailed to me by Disney recently and one of the questions was if I used internet and online related services to research vacations. The next question was which sites do I use? One of the options was the DIS - internet message board.


----------



## DisneyWalker44

disneynutz said:


> If they told the truth and only offered you a room for your DVC purchase would you have many buyers?


 I don't know about you, but Disney did tell the truth that perks weren't guaranteed and to not buy for them. I bought anyway. 



> I get frustrated because people accept negative change too easily.


 With all due respect, I think your frustration is that people aren't agreeing with you as to how "negative" this change is.



> They don't question or demand answers.


 We questioned, we got answers.



> The worst is when they feel compelled to defend the change and try to convince others to do the same.


 I don't feel compelled to defend the change. I thought about it and came to the conclusion that it was reasonable. 

I know you are upset with Disney. But don't get mad at posters who don't agree with you.


----------



## DisneyWalker44

Terry said:


> Should the free high speed internet perk be paid for by only the members who use it, too?


 For the record, when most of us bought, there was no free internet. That's a perk we've gained. Perks come and go. The notion (which people might get from reading the DIS) that we just lose, lose, lose perks is wrong.


----------



## Dean

> Should the free high speed internet perk be paid for by only the members who use it, too?


Terry, using the criteria I explained above this would be a perk that MIGHT be reasonable to do pay to play because many won't use it and it is one you can charge the individual fairly easily.  The differences likely are that there is an economy of scale, a higher percent of users and that it is increasingly part of the expectations of a resort.  I think you'll see it move to wireless in the next 3-5 years as well.  DVC does charge some for internet (exchangers, cash guests, even members not staying on points) and it's those that are likely paying the bulk of these charges, not DVC members themselves.  So it likely is the closest example that makes sense to compare but it is dramatically different than valet in many key area. I'd guess than less than 10% used free valet routinely and likely less than 20% used it more than once or twice.  I suppose one could post a poll for that but given the bias where those interested are dramatically more likely to vote when they are invested, it'd overstate the numbers likely by about double or more.


----------



## DebbieB

Doctor P said:


> Though I have expressed my displeasure in the perk being taken away, the valet parking perk was added AFTER we became members.  To the best of my recollection, this was not an available perk until several years after DVC started.  My best guess is that it was after BCV was opened if my memory serves correctly.



It used to be free for everyone.   When they started charging, DVC members were exempt.   I don't think there was a period in between when members had to pay.   I think when they first started charging, it was only $6.


----------



## TLSnell1981

disneynutz said:


> As I said, we can guess all we want. That is one of the big problems that I have with the DVC, no information, just change and politics.
> 
> Bill


ITA!



bookwormde said:


> And there is the problem with DVC, nothing is communicated in an informative, honest and timely manner.
> 
> Bookwormde


Again, I agree.

I used free valet. I also use the AP discount and rent the "free" movies. These are about the only "perks" we utilize. So, does this mean I don't care about other perks? The perks other use and I don't? No, it doesn't.

I'm curious as to how much it would've cost to have continued free valet. I wish we'd been given the option.


----------



## disneynutz

TLSnell1981 said:


> ITA!
> 
> 
> Again, I agree.
> 
> I used free valet. I also use the AP discount and rent the "free" movies. These are about the only "perks" we utilize. So, does this mean I don't care about other perks? The perks other use and I don't? No, it doesn't.
> 
> I'm curious as to how much it would've cost to have continued free valet. I wish we'd been given the option.



I have asked DVC Management several questions about the recent hot topics and none of my questions were answered. First Jim Lewis won't answer my emails, now Member Satisfaction.

Guess I'm Black Listed. 

 Bill


----------



## Dean

TLSnell1981 said:


> I'm curious as to how much it would've cost to have continued free valet. I wish we'd been given the option.


I'd estimate between $10 and $20 per week for each membership per year (not just those that use it) by the time you add the direct costs, admin fees associated and DVCMC 12%.


----------



## DisneyWalker44

disneynutz said:


> First Jim Lewis won't answer my emails,


 You're serious???

I suspect you have unrealistic expectations about the level of service DVC can provide it's 300,000 members (and what Jim Lewis does all day.)


----------



## TLSnell1981

Dean said:


> *I'd estimate between $10 and $20 per week for each membership per year* (not just those that use it) by the time you add the direct costs, admin fees associated and DVCMC 12%.



So, you estimate it would cost between $520-$1040 per year per membership? Seriously or am I misreading your post?


----------



## Dean

TLSnell1981 said:


> So, you estimate it would cost between $520-$1040 per year per membership? Seriously or am I misreading your post?


You are misreading and I probably wasn't clear enough.  Assuming an average contract size in the 180-200 point range, my rough estimate would be $10-20 per year per contract.  That assumes no reductions could be negotiated but it's likely that the price could have been reduced somewhat by contractual negotiations.  Obviously it there are many variables we simply don't know.


----------



## MandMLUVMMandDVC

I was a guest at the Boardwalk two weeks ago and wasn't given much of a choice about parking.  We unloaded my bags in front and then my son went to park my car.  He calls me a few minutes later to say that the choice was to either do the valet for $12 or he could park at Downtown Disney & take a bus back to hotel.  There were so many "day visitors" that both self parking areas were filled and no room for resort guests.  Sure enough, at 9:30 (after EPCOT fireworks) there was a rush of people leaving the self parking areas.  Really ticked me off!  I had to pay to park because security doesn't keep non-guests from parking there?!?!


----------



## Robo-Daddy 3000

disneynutz said:


> I have asked DVC Management several questions about the recent hot topics and none of my questions were answered. First Jim Lewis won't answer my emails, now Member Satisfaction.
> 
> Guess I'm Black Listed.
> 
> Bill



Sadly, Jim Lewis does not communicate directly with members-unless you consider his fluff column in the Disney Files to be communication. 


Instead, you can write to DVC MemberSatisfaction and then get a phone call from Sheila who will tell you that you've got some good ideas and she's taking notes about what you are saying and that she will pass your comments along to "leadership". 

 I assume Jim Lewis would be considered "leadership", right?


----------



## disneynutz

Robo-Daddy 3000 said:


> Sadly, Jim Lewis does not communicate directly with members-unless you consider his fluff column in the Disney Files to be communication.
> 
> 
> Instead, you can write to DVC MemberSatisfaction and then get a phone call from Sheila who will tell you that you've got some good ideas and she's taking notes about what you are saying and that she will pass your comments along to "leadership".
> 
> I assume Jim Lewis would be considered "leadership", right?



Not even Sheila will call me, or Joy, or Chad, or Sam, or Nicole. 

 Bill


----------



## BlakeNJ

MandMLUVMMandDVC said:


> I was a guest at the Boardwalk two weeks ago and wasn't given much of a choice about parking.  We unloaded my bags in front and then my son went to park my car.  He calls me a few minutes later to say that the choice was to either do the valet for $12 or he could park at Downtown Disney & take a bus back to hotel.  There were so many "day visitors" that both self parking areas were filled and no room for resort guests.  Sure enough, at 9:30 (after EPCOT fireworks) there was a rush of people leaving the self parking areas.  Really ticked me off!  I had to pay to park because security doesn't keep non-guests from parking there?!?!



Are you surprised?  I think they underestimated the number of people who would be parking there given the resort and it's guests, additional restaurants all the way around to Beach Club and the atmosphere of the Boardwalk.  We have parked at Boardwalk, not as guests, but to eat at Spoodles.  I don't know how much larger their lots are at BW but it seems like a popular parking spot of those who want the atmosphere of the Boardwalk.  I don't know how they would ever control this, unless tey designated certain lots for resort guests only and all others had a separate lot.


----------



## Chuck S

According to more recent guests, they have restricted the better parking lot to BWI/BWV resort guests only.


----------



## Hazzard101

tjkraz said:


> We did not have an annual pass discount when I joined and I wouldn't be surprised if it went away some day.  I believe every ticket that I've purchased since the discount came into being was an annual pass, yet by no means do I feel *entitled *to it.  If the perk is eliminated it may change my approach to Disney park tickets, but it's up to Disney to deal with the fallout of my changes in plans.
> 
> What I find most surprising about this discussion is the number of people who apparently don't understand what a DVC purchase gives them.  We can reserve discounted rooms under a specific set of guidelines.  That's it.  If all of the perks went away tomorrow it would neither surprise me nor would it change my perception of the program's value.
> 
> Beyond what DVC told me I would get at the time of purchase, I don't feel entitled to anything extra.  If they want to offer discounts, so be it.  But I'm not going to demand extras, nor will I be upset when they go away.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I get frustrated by people who consistently use Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt to as the primary weapons in their arsenal.  Who needs facts and rational discussion when it's much easier to get people worked-up about the possibility of paying for Bell Services, Front Desk (?) and Community Halls.
> 
> I get frustrated when anyone who dares to look at changes from another viewpoint is immediately branded some sort of DVC apologist who blindly "defend the change."
> 
> I get frustrated by people who completely ignore positive changes while pouncing on anything they perceive to be a negative change.
> 
> These aren't black and white issues.  There is substantial gray area involved.  If you happen to get a look at that contract or can get Disney to clarify why the rate went up so substantially, please share it with us.  Until then, all we can do is respond to what we do know to be true (based upon on-the-record or off-the-record comments.)
> 
> I don't think it's quite fair to issue a blanket condemnation of every poster who verbally votes against having their dues pay for "free" valet parking.




You are correct that we don't know why this perk went away. But to expect me to accept the fact that we are kept in the dark as to why they take away things and add them is completely unreasonable. I, like many others on this thread have asked DVC to explain the reason behind the Perk being discontinued. They skated around the question and never gave a specific answer.

 I also think it was a planned, calculated move not to tell anyone until it was happening, they knew the response they were going to get and they figured if they just did it people would have to accept it and move on. Ok, they saved themselves from a slew of complaints as to why it was going away. 
By not telling us about the change until the last min they were able to still use the Perk to sell DVC memberships up to the day before it went away.

All though perks are not a reason to buy DVC they are still used to make DVC more palatable to buyers. Perks say " being a DVC member is something special and Disney appreciates your commitment and they reward you for coming back year after year and spending boat loads of cash when you come" Anyone that wants to say that Perks don't help to sell memberships is not being realistic.

IMHO, it is a Black and white issue or should I say it is a black and GREEN issue. Lets take the new dinning plan pricing. The dining plan went up for everyone and the food has gone down in quality and the snack credits have been seriously cut as to what you can get for your credits. This was not a perk it was something DVC members paid for and because they gave it away so much over the past year it has become low quality.

 We were informed that Disney was going to start charging prime rates for 
different times of the year for the dinning plan (the only thing this could be called is unbelievable greed, charging people more for the same food because they decided to come at a time when it is busy) We had a chance to send in complaints and tell MS that we were not happy with the decision. Wow, we aren't going to be charged the extra that all the other poor full price paying people are gong to have to pay.. 

That is why they decided not to tell us about VP before it was too late. Now they can charge people 12 dollars. This isn't such a big deal for me I stay at Kidani and the parking is much easier for us (underground and elevators) than for those at BWV they are almost forced to use it due to inadequate parking. 

The biggest problem I see with this situation is the fact that was stated in the quoted post a few times.  WE DON'T KNOW WHY !!

The poster has a point that we should not make blanket statements condemning anyone. But people using scare tactics I don't see this. I see people worried about what stupid, greedy move Disney will make to try to raise their bottom line. We are in a time of a bad economy and it seems that Disney looks at DVC members as a captive guest that has no choice as to where to eat and were to go when it comes to staying at our special priced rooms that are Guaranteed to us for being members. Call me a conspiracy theorist but making it more of a hassle to take your car would keep you in the parks and on property. 

Where are the positive changes we need to be looking at?  
Fear and doubt as weapons in our arsenal?  I didn't look at this discussion as a war. Just some concerned DVC members sharing their thoughts and discussing a situation that concerns us all.

Lastly, we don't have any facts and I believe the discussion of what is next for us as DVC members is rational and justified seeing we are never made privy to the information behind the decisions that are made. If they keep us guessing, we can never question or complain about loosing any benefits thay feel like charging us for.   Even Jack Sparrow told people what e was doing before he stole the treasure. I just wish DVC would be a little more open with the info......


----------



## snappy

Chuck S said:


> According to more recent guests, they have restricted the better parking lot to BWI/BWV resort guests only.



I find the timing of dropping the perk the most troubling.  The effect of the timing at least at BWV during Food and Wine, BEFORE they had the restrictions that have been reported in place, was guaranteed to create chaos and thus complaints.

Not sure if this indicates that there was not much lead time to the making the decision or very short sighted advance planning (maybe both?).


----------



## tjkraz

Hazzard101 said:


> You are correct that we don't know why this perk went away. But to expect me to accept the fact that we are kept in the dark as to why they take away things and add them is completely unreasonable. I, like many others on this thread have asked DVC to explain the reason behind the Perk being discontinued. They skated around the question and never gave a specific answer.



DVC has specifically said this:

_"Similar to other fee-based services, such as additional housekeeping service or additional room amenities, only those Members who choose to valet park will be charged, instead of increasing the annual dues for all Members to cover the costs."_

We know for a fact that member dues were not being charged for valet parking until now, but that all members WOULD have been charged in order for complimentary service to be offered as a perk.  The only thing we don't know is how valet parking was being funded up to this point.  I'm not sure that's even relevant.  Whether it was complimentary as a result of vendor negotiations or because DVC was paying for it out of their own pockets, that arrangement ended on Oct 11.  It then came down to whether it was more proper to have all members pay for the cost of the perk or just those who will use it.  



> I also think it was a planned, calculated move not to tell anyone until it was happening, they knew the response they were going to get and they figured if they just did it people would have to accept it and move on. Ok, they saved themselves from a slew of complaints as to why it was going away.
> By not telling us about the change until the last min they were able to still use the Perk to sell DVC memberships up to the day before it went away.



Maybe...maybe not.  With a company as large as Disney, there is no guarantee that all divisions know what the others are doing.  

Regardless, it doesn't surprise me that they sprung it on members rather than announcing it well in advance.  Not saying that it's right...just that it doesn't surprise me.  



> All though perks are not a reason to buy DVC they are still used to make DVC more palatable to buyers. Perks say " being a DVC member is something special and Disney appreciates your commitment and they reward you for coming back year after year and spending boat loads of cash when you come" Anyone that wants to say that Perks don't help to sell memberships is not being realistic.



I'm not going to disagree.  But people need to understand that:

1)  Most perks are backed by financial justification.  Members don't get 10% off lunch at the ESPN Club because Disney is saying "thanks for being a DVC member"...we get that perk because the ESPN Club is under-utilized during lunch hours.  

2)  Perks come and perks go.  Someday they may all disappear.



> IMHO, it is a Black and white issue or should I say it is a black and GREEN issue. Lets take the new dinning plan pricing. The dining plan went up for everyone and the food has gone down in quality and the snack credits have been seriously cut as to what you can get for your credits. This was not a perk it was something DVC members paid for and because they gave it away so much over the past year it has become low quality.
> 
> We were informed that Disney was going to start charging prime rates for
> different times of the year for the dinning plan (the only thing this could be called is unbelievable greed, charging people more for the same food because they decided to come at a time when it is busy) We had a chance to send in complaints and tell MS that we were not happy with the decision. Wow, we aren't going to be charged the extra that all the other poor full price paying people are gong to have to pay..



DVC members were always going to be exempt from the higher seasonal pricing of the DDP.  



> The biggest problem I see with this situation is the fact that was stated in the quoted post a few times.  WE DON'T KNOW WHY !!



Again, we do know that the only options available were to either charge all members or charge just those who use the benefit.  

If any of the change is related to contracts with the outsourced valet parking vendor, there is no way Disney will publish any other details.  



> The poster has a point that we should not make blanket statements condemning anyone. But people using scare tactics I don't see this. I see people worried about what stupid, greedy move Disney will make to try to raise their bottom line. We are in a time of a bad economy and it seems that Disney looks at DVC members as a captive guest that has no choice as to where to eat and were to go when it comes to staying at our special priced rooms that are Guaranteed to us for being members. Call me a conspiracy theorist but making it more of a hassle to take your car would keep you in the parks and on property.



This is exactly why...in this instance...I believe DVC has acted in the best interest of members.  

As I've said repeatedly, it would have been well within their rights to start charging our dues for "free" valet parking.  Based upon a daily rate of $14 per vehicle it would have put millions of dollars in Disney's pockets every year.  

By making it a pay-as-you-go option, valet parking business will certainly decline and Disney risks losing some residual income from things like resort shopping and dining.  



> Where are the positive changes we need to be looking at?



How far back do you want to go?  Changes to the booking policies which eliminated the need for day-by-day calls...improvements in new resort guest rooms and locations...Top of the World Lounge at BLT...improvements in existing rooms like new patio furniture, new mattresses, new sofabeds, flat panel TVs...more guaranteed booking categories (OKW, AKV, BLT)...AP discount...free Internet service...no peak season fees for DDP...discounts for after-hours party tickets...admission to attraction sneak previews...on-line reservations being developed, and so on.



> Fear and doubt as weapons in our arsenal?  I didn't look at this discussion as a war. Just some concerned DVC members sharing their thoughts and discussing a situation that concerns us all.



I'm all for people sharing feedback with DVC.  But when posters suggest that DVC will start charging for things like Bell services, Front Desk (fees to check-in?) and Concierge (fees to pick up pre-ordered tickets?), I see that as making inflammatory statements primarily to further one's one agenda.


----------



## Simba's Mom

tjkraz said:


> DVC has specifically said this:
> 
> _"Similar to other fee-based services, such as additional housekeeping service or additional room amenities, only those Members who choose to valet park will be charged, instead of increasing the annual dues for all Members to cover the costs."_



Wasn't charging for internet a "fee-based" service?  So using the reasoning they gave for eliminating free valet parking makes the new perk of free internet, instead of leaving it as fee based, really puzzling to me.  Didn't that increase everyone's member dues just as free valet parking would have?  What's the big difference?


----------



## tjkraz

Simba's Mom said:


> Wasn't charging for internet a "fee-based" service?  So using the reasoning they gave for eliminating free valet parking makes the new perk of free internet, instead of leaving it as fee based, really puzzling to me.  Didn't that increase everyone's member dues just as free valet parking would have?  What's the big difference?



We've had subsidized Internet for a couple of years now and there were no major upticks in dues when it was implemented.  That suggests members are getting a pretty good deal on Internet--we're certainly not paying $10 per day, per room.  And as another poster mentioned, Internet usage has grown significantly, as has the number of hotels which offer service for free.  

As for valet, the numbers are probably not as favorable.  The BoardWalk has a max of about 530 rooms.  If just 1/3 of guests valet park that's 176 rooms x $14 daily fee x 365 days = $899,000 in annual valet parking fees.  

The BoardWalk operating budget for 2009 is around $18 million.  At those numbers we could be looking at 5% dues increase just for the valet parking.  That would be in addition to the normal 2-4% increase due to higher CM salaries, increased benefits costs, higher utilities costs, etc.  

If the number of valet parkers is higher, the cost increase would be even more dramatic.  If the number of valet parkers is lower than 1/3, it increasingly begs the question of why 100% of owners should pay for an *expensive *perk only used by a small percentage.


----------



## DebbieB

tjkraz said:


> We've had subsidized Internet for a couple of years now and there were no major upticks in dues when it was implemented.  That suggests members are getting a pretty good deal on Internet--we're certainly not paying $10 per day, per room.  And as another poster mentioned, Internet usage has grown significantly, as has the number of hotels which offer service for free.
> 
> As for valet, the numbers are probably not as favorable.  The BoardWalk has a max of about 530 rooms.  If just 1/3 of guests valet park that's 176 rooms x $14 daily fee x 365 days = $899,000 in annual valet parking fees.
> 
> The BoardWalk operating budget for 2009 is around $18 million.  At those numbers we could be looking at 5% dues increase just for the valet parking.  That would be in addition to the normal 2-4% increase due to higher CM salaries, increased benefits costs, higher utilities costs, etc.
> 
> If the number of valet parkers is higher, the cost increase would be even more dramatic.  If the number of valet parkers is lower than 1/3, it increasingly begs the question of why 100% of owners should pay for an *expensive *perk only used by a small percentage.



I thought the valet was now $12 per day.   Is it $14?


----------



## Hazzard101

tjkraz said:


> DVC has specifically said this:
> 
> "Similar to other fee-based services, such as additional housekeeping service or additional room amenities, only those Members who choose to valet park will be charged, instead of increasing the annual dues for all Members to cover the costs."
> 
> *That's a good point they make. We get our rooms at a discounted rate and we accept the fact that we only get housekeeping a limited part of our stay and we get towels every four days. We get free laundry service along with all the people who Pay and stay. They really didn't answer the question as to why it happened. A real answer to the question would be more specific. Something like" Free VP for members was paid for through the contract with the VP contractor, new negotiations with the contractor has made it necessary to make this perk a pay for use and no longer a perk"  not saying this is at all the reason just giving an example of what a specific answer to a question looks like*.
> 
> We know for a fact that member dues were not being charged for valet parking until now, but that all members WOULD have been charged in order for complimentary service to be offered as a perk.  The only thing we don't know is how valet parking was being funded up to this point.  I'm not sure that's even relevant.  Whether it was complimentary as a result of vendor negotiations or because DVC was paying for it out of their own pockets, that arrangement ended on Oct 11.  It then came down to whether it was more proper to have all members pay for the cost of the perk or just those who will use it.
> 
> *How do we know this? they do not mention this in the response. They simply say that our dues would have to go up if they keep it.*
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe...maybe not.  With a company as large as Disney, there is no guarantee that all divisions know what the others are doing.
> 
> Regardless, it doesn't surprise me that they sprung it on members rather than announcing it well in advance.  Not saying that it's right...just that it doesn't surprise me.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not going to disagree.  But people need to understand that:
> 
> 1)  Most perks are backed by financial justification.  Members don't get 10% off lunch at the ESPN Club because Disney is saying "thanks for being a DVC member"...we get that perk because the ESPN Club is under-utilized during lunch hours.
> 
> 2)  Perks come and perks go.  Someday they may all disappear.
> 
> 
> 
> DVC members were always going to be exempt from the higher seasonal pricing of the DDP.
> 
> *When was this announced by Disney?  There was a rumor on DVC news . com but it has never been announced officially to my knowledge if it has I would like to see it. I could have missed that
> *
> 
> Again, we do know that the only options available were to either charge all members or charge just those who use the benefit.
> 
> If any of the change is related to contracts with the outsourced valet parking vendor, there is no way Disney will publish any other details.
> 
> 
> 
> This is exactly why...in this instance...I believe DVC has acted in the best interest of members.
> 
> As I've said repeatedly, it would have been well within their rights to start charging our dues for "free" valet parking.  Based upon a daily rate of $14 per vehicle it would have put millions of dollars in Disney's pockets every year.
> 
> By making it a pay-as-you-go option, valet parking business will certainly decline and Disney risks losing some residual income from things like resort shopping and dining.
> 
> 
> 
> How far back do you want to go?  Changes to the booking policies which eliminated the need for day-by-day calls...improvements in new resort guest rooms and locations...Top of the World Lounge at BLT...improvements in existing rooms like new patio furniture, new mattresses, new sofabeds, flat panel TVs...more guaranteed booking categories (OKW, AKV, BLT)...AP discount...free Internet service...no peak season fees for DDP...discounts for after-hours party tickets...admission to attraction sneak previews...on-line reservations being developed, and so on.
> 
> *How is building a new resort like BLT a perk? As a member I can't stay at AKV and go to the Top of the World Lounge.
> 
> New patio furniture, mattresses, Sofabeds, and flatpanel TVs, these are all upgrades and amenities that are for one, part of the new construction and is paid for at the price of the points and member dues...not perks. Updating old out of date rooms is a business expense  and also what should be expected by the due paying members  of the resort. Not a perk.
> 
> Free internet access, in this day and age I get free internet access at fast food restaurants and at most motels. I believe that even paying guests should not be charged.
> 
> Yes AP discounts are great. It also makes Disney money and makes up for the fact that they give away dinning and park tickets to people for staying at the resorts. I also would like to point out that there are a lot of people who stay at the resorts and go to other Orlando attractions. The AP discount helps Disney keep them on property.
> 
> The  other perks mentioned don't matter to me like you said you don't use it so you don't care. VP was one perk that made a member feel like a member. I feel that they should change the greeting from Welcome Home to Oh it's You Again.
> *
> 
> 
> I'm all for people sharing feedback with DVC.  But when posters suggest that DVC will start charging for things like Bell services, Front Desk (fees to check-in?) and Concierge (fees to pick up pre-ordered tickets?), I see that as making inflammatory statements primarily to further one's one agenda.




*I don't have an agenda, I have a concern about the Club I have joined along with others here. I could see Disney taking away the Concierge desk. why can't you pick up your tickets at the parks like everyone else? A couple less people to have to pay to man the desk.  Bell service? Why do we need bell service, is it in our contract that we get bell service?  I remember toting all my stuff to the room from my car at SSR. But I wouldn't worry about that because we basically pay them, if Disney had to pay them more you would see them disappear I would guess.  BTW they do charge us for all these things they come out of our dues.  *


----------



## Hazzard101

DebbieB said:


> I thought the valet was now $12 per day.   Is it $14?



No the Park Parking has gone up to $14 a day. And guess where people are parking now more than ever, that's correct, Downtown Disney. They use the free parking and then jump on a bus to the parks. So guess how long it takes to get places on Disney bus services!


----------



## Chuck S

Hazzard101 said:


> [/COLOR]
> 
> *I don't have an agenda, I have a concern about the Club I have joined along with others here. I could see Disney taking away the Concierge desk. why can't you pick up your tickets at the parks like everyone else? A couple less people to have to pay to man the desk.  Bell service? Why do we need bell service, is it in our contract that we get bell service?  I remember toting all my stuff to the room from my car at SSR. But I wouldn't worry about that because we basically pay them, if Disney had to pay them more you would see them disappear I would guess.  BTW they do charge us for all these things they come out of our dues.  *



Bell services is a standard offering, especially considering the DVC resorts also rely on cash guests to offset the cost of trades.  All Disney resorts, including DVC offer the ability to purchase your park tickets at the resort, plus the concierges at the lobby desk often double for standard Front Desk personnel when needed.  

Complementary valet parking being offered is not the norm for hotels, and even seen less with timeshares.


----------



## needtogomore

Dean said:


> I'd estimate between $10 and $20 per week for each membership per year (not just those that use it) by the time you add the direct costs, admin fees associated and DVCMC 12%.



$10 $20 per week, how, that would equate to more than many peoples dues now


----------



## Hazzard101

Chuck S said:


> Bell services is a standard offering, especially considering the DVC resorts also rely on cash guests to offset the cost of trades.  All Disney resorts, including DVC offer the ability to purchase your park tickets at the resort, plus the concierges at the lobby desk often double for standard Front Desk personnel when needed.
> 
> Complementary valet parking being offered is not the norm for hotels, and even seen less with timeshares.




The point I was making is that all the things the person had mentioned were paid for by members dues and others. Bell hops and wait staff and all other tipped professionals are paid a lower rate. and the tips make up a large part of their pay. I never said That VP was a common part of timeshares but Disney set the standard bar higer and we have grown to expect more from them and Disney.  

Will now take my opinions and keep them to myself.


----------



## needtogomore

Hazzard101 said:


> . Perks say " being a DVC member is something special and Disney appreciates your commitment and they reward you for coming back year after year and spending boat loads of cash when you come"



while it doesnt affect us as we dont have a car, I dont think its fair to BWV owners, as for the spending boat loads of cash since we bought DVC our spend at WDW has dropped by at least half mainly due to the generic merchandise.


----------



## Chuck S

Hazzard101 said:


> The point I was making is that all the things the person had mentioned were paid for by members dues and others. Bell hops and wait staff and all other tipped professionals are paid a lower rate. and the tips make up a large part of their pay. I never said That VP was a common part of timeshares but Disney set the standard bar higer and we have grown to expect more from them and Disney.
> 
> Will now take my opinions and keep them to myself.



Wait staff should not be paid by dues.  They work for the restaurant division, not DVC.


----------



## tjkraz

Hazzard101 said:


> *I don't have an agenda, I have a concern about the Club I have joined along with others here. I could see Disney taking away the Concierge desk. why can't you pick up your tickets at the parks like everyone else? A couple less people to have to pay to man the desk.  Bell service? Why do we need bell service, is it in our contract that we get bell service?  I remember toting all my stuff to the room from my car at SSR. But I wouldn't worry about that because we basically pay them, if Disney had to pay them more you would see them disappear I would guess.  BTW they do charge us for all these things they come out of our dues.  *



I never claimed that YOU have an agenda with your comments but I believe  some posters do as noted in my previous clarifications.  

Just to repeat, you are certainly welcome to your opinions and welcome to share them with DVC.  I have no problem with that.  DVC has made changes in the past which they claim were based upon members' requests.  

As for other topics:  

I personally confirmed with DVC that our dues were/are not being charged anything for valet parking.  Contact member accounting and I'm sure they can clarify for you as well.  

DDP pricing is listed on the member website.  If you look up prices for 2010 you will see just the lower pricing listed.  Again I confirmed with DVC that this means we are exempt from seasonal increases.  

As for the issue of what exactly constitutes a "perk", that's certainly open to interpretation.  Yes, things like new mattresses and sofabeds are paid for by member dues.  But so would valet parking if it had continued to be offered for "free."  To me they are one in the same.  If you see a continuation of "free" valet parking as a perk, then getting better patio furniture, better appliances and flat panel TVs is similarly beneficial.

Access to new resorts may not be the textbook definition of a "perk", but I certainly view it as a plus for the program.  When I joined 6+ years ago I had no affordable access to the Contemporary, AKL, Grand Californian or the Treehouse Villas.  Now those are all options available to me.  And the high quality of the accommodations (larger, more luxurious rooms) makes them even more attractive.  

Free Internet may be prevalent in other areas of our society.  But that doesn't change the fact that Walt Disney World guests are still charged $9.99 per day while DVC members are not.  

Other perks will come and go.  In addition to the things I mentioned there are a handful of new perks just revealed recently--discount shopping days in Disneyland and WDW, free admission to the PGA tour event, 50% discount at the pirate's league.  We've been offered discount Broadway show tickets, discount Cirque tickets, discounts on tours and dozens of different restaurants over the years.  

Obviously none of us will be interested in every offer.  But DVC has to view this from a high level--offering perks that will appeal to members of different ages, incomes and interests.  I understand that the valet parking is your particular hot button.  But looking at the many different offers we have been extended in recent months and years, it's very difficult to argue that Disney/DVC is operating in exclusively a "take, take, take" mode.


----------



## CarolMN

Hazzard101 said:


> No the Park Parking has gone up to $14 a day. And guess where people are parking now more than ever, that's correct, Downtown Disney. They use the free parking and then jump on a bus to the parks. So guess how long it takes to get places on Disney bus services!


There is no bus service from Downtown Disney to the parks.  Those who park t DD to avoid paying have to catch a bus to a resort and then transfer to a park bus.  Very time consuming and inconvenient.  Don't think many are doing it, especially since buses from DD back to the resorts in the mornings are quite scarce.


----------



## Dean

Hazzard101 said:


> You are correct that we don't know why this perk went away. But to expect me to accept the fact that we are kept in the dark as to why they take away things and add them is completely unreasonable. I, like many others on this thread have asked DVC to explain the reason behind the Perk being discontinued. They skated around the question and never gave a specific answer.


Actually we do know the reason, what we don't know is the info and actions that led up to it.  The reason is simply that the amount to cont the perk was deemed unreasonable and would have had to be passed on to the members.  Given the additonal admin charges and 12% DVCMC add on, even those that used it are not hurt nearly as much as many are thinking.  Have you really asked DVC for the info in a meaningful way?  By that I mean that MS and Member Satisfaction are NOT a meaningful level to ask such a question.  A couple have talked to more meaningful options and so far, none of them have come away unhappy with the explanation that I can say.  Also, as a member and under FL law, you have the right to inspect the books and contracts by appt.  Want to spend a day of your vacation doing so?


----------



## Dean

Simba's Mom said:


> Wasn't charging for internet a "fee-based" service?  So using the reasoning they gave for eliminating free valet parking makes the new perk of free internet, instead of leaving it as fee based, really puzzling to me.  Didn't that increase everyone's member dues just as free valet parking would have?  What's the big difference?


While this is likely the closest example one can come up with, there are many differences.  Internet usage is likely more widely used, there is an economy of scale where the per member amount is almost negligible, it is an item often considered normal to a resort (though some still charge) and it is still being subsidized by those that are not members and do pay for it including exchangers and cash guests.


----------



## Dean

needtogomore said:


> $10 $20 per week, how, that would equate to more than many peoples dues now


Only if you have 5 points or less.  See my second post on this subject just after the one you quoted.


----------



## Deb & Bill

tjkraz said:


> ...I personally confirmed with DVC that our dues were/are not being charged anything for valet parking.  Contact member accounting and I'm sure they can clarify for you as well. ...When I joined 6+ years ago I had no affordable access to the Contemporary, AKL, Grand Californian or the Treehouse Villas.  ....



Tim, we have always been able to use DVC points at CR, AKL, GC. And the THV have been closed for a long, long time until DVC decided to renovate them.  We used DVC points at the CR back in 2005.  



CarolMN said:


> There is no bus service from Downtown Disney to the parks.  Those who park t DD to avoid paying have to catch a bus to a resort and then transfer to a park bus.  Very time consuming and inconvenient.  Don't think many are doing it, especially since buses from DD back to the resorts in the mornings are quite scarce.



No, they park at DTD, then walk over to SSR and catch a bus at either Congress Park or the Paddock.   Or they even park at SSR and catch a bus from there.


----------



## Dean

Deb & Bill said:


> Tim, we have always been able to use DVC points at CR, AKL, GC. And the THV have been closed for a long, long time until DVC decided to renovate them.  We used DVC points at the CR back in 2005.


I suspect affordable is the key word in Tim's post.


----------



## Deb & Bill

Dean said:


> I suspect affordable is the key word in Tim's post.



I'd bet we used about as many points as it takes at BLT now.


----------



## Dean

Deb & Bill said:


> I'd bet we used about as many points as it takes at BLT now.


I'm not home to look at the old points charts but for a hotel room compared to a studio at BLT, I doubt it.  If I recall it was about 2.5 times the points roughly compared to a studio at BCV/BWV.  Hopefully someone has the points charts to check for certain.


----------



## Deb & Bill

Dean said:


> I'm not home to look at the old points charts but for a hotel room compared to a studio at BLT, I doubt it.  If I recall it was about 2.5 times the points roughly compared to a studio at BCV/BWV.  Hopefully someone has the points charts to check for certain.



Since the hotel room at CR had two queen beds and a day bed, it's not quite fair to compare it to a studio.  The points for Magic Season in a one bedroom at BLT now is about the same for Magic Season at CR- Wing Room in 2005. 

You can probably fit two studios into one Wing Room at CR.


----------



## Dean

Deb & Bill said:


> Since the hotel room at CR had two queen beds and a day bed, it's not quite fair to compare it to a studio.  The points for Magic Season in a one bedroom at BLT now is about the same for Magic Season at CR- Wing Room in 2005.
> 
> You can probably fit two studios into one Wing Room at CR.


I would absoluteluy disagree that the proper comparison would be to a 1 BR in this situation.  IMO the proper comparison to all moderate and deluxe options that are or have been available is the studio.  They will all vary minimally but the closest size to all of these rooms would be a studio plus the studio would have the mini kitchen.  Suites would be appropriate to compare to the same size unit.  The rooms are around 400 sq ft if I recall correctly.


----------



## Hazzard101

Dean said:


> Actually we do know the reason, what we don't know is the info and actions that led up to it.  The reason is simply that the amount to cont the perk was deemed unreasonable and would have had to be passed on to the members.  Given the additonal admin charges and 12% DVCMC add on, even those that used it are not hurt nearly as much as many are thinking.  Have you really asked DVC for the info in a meaningful way?  By that I mean that MS and Member Satisfaction are NOT a meaningful level to ask such a question.  A couple have talked to more meaningful options and so far, none of them have come away unhappy with the explanation that I can say.  Also, as a member and under FL law, you have the right to inspect the books and contracts by appt.  Want to spend a day of your vacation doing so?



I wrote them a note, they called back, we went out and had a candle light dinner and shared some wine and I asked...........A meaningful way?  I sent them an email and called MS I guess I need to send them a thinking of you card. 

That is really not the point. The original posts on this thread were about the way VP was taken away with no explanation and no pre-warning. 
This whole thing has gotten bigger than the original problem. We should not have to ask higher ups to find out simple answers. I sent an email to MS and to one other place that  I don't know right now. I got the same cut and paste run around as everyone else.  I am done, the perk is gone, life goes on.


----------



## Hazzard101

needtogomore said:


> while it doesnt affect us as we dont have a car, I dont think its fair to BWV owners, as for the spending boat loads of cash since we bought DVC our spend at WDW has dropped by at least half mainly due to the generic merchandise.


 
Not sure you saw it but I also said I thought it was bad for the BWV people.
as far as spending money there, you are so right, the merchandise has gotten Doller store cheap and very generic!  I for one am happy, it costs much less as you put it.


----------



## Dean

Hazzard101 said:


> I wrote them a note, they called back, we went out and had a candle light dinner and shared some wine and I asked...........A meaningful way?  I sent them an email and called MS I guess I need to send them a thinking of you card.
> 
> That is really not the point. The original posts on this thread were about the way VP was taken away with no explanation and no pre-warning.
> This whole thing has gotten bigger than the original problem. We should not have to ask higher ups to find out simple answers. I sent an email to MS and to one other place that  I don't know right now. I got the same cut and paste run around as everyone else.  I am done, the perk is gone, life goes on.


My point was that sending an email or calling MS or Member Satisfaction was NOT a meaningful communication is this situation if you wanted real information.


----------



## Hazzard101

Chuck S said:


> Wait staff should not be paid by dues.  They work for the restaurant division, not DVC.




I was using waitperson as an example of people who get paid less and rely on tips. Not as someone who was paid by dues.  Sorry if I wasn't clear. Are we done, you win. Glad I decided to share my thoughts. I really needed to be reminded why I don't post that often.  Thanks


----------



## Hazzard101

tjkraz said:


> I never claimed that YOU have an agenda with your comments but I believe  some posters do as noted in my previous clarifications.
> 
> Just to repeat, you are certainly welcome to your opinions and welcome to share them with DVC.  I have no problem with that.  DVC has made changes in the past which they claim were based upon members' requests.
> 
> As for other topics:
> 
> I personally confirmed with DVC that our dues were/are not being charged anything for valet parking.  Contact member accounting and I'm sure they can clarify for you as well.
> 
> DDP pricing is listed on the member website.  If you look up prices for 2010 you will see just the lower pricing listed.  Again I confirmed with DVC that this means we are exempt from seasonal increases.
> 
> As for the issue of what exactly constitutes a "perk", that's certainly open to interpretation.  Yes, things like new mattresses and sofabeds are paid for by member dues.  But so would valet parking if it had continued to be offered for "free."  To me they are one in the same.  If you see a continuation of "free" valet parking as a perk, then getting better patio furniture, better appliances and flat panel TVs is similarly beneficial.
> 
> Access to new resorts may not be the textbook definition of a "perk", but I certainly view it as a plus for the program.  When I joined 6+ years ago I had no affordable access to the Contemporary, AKL, Grand Californian or the Treehouse Villas.  Now those are all options available to me.  And the high quality of the accommodations (larger, more luxurious rooms) makes them even more attractive.
> 
> Free Internet may be prevalent in other areas of our society.  But that doesn't change the fact that Walt Disney World guests are still charged $9.99 per day while DVC members are not.
> 
> Other perks will come and go.  In addition to the things I mentioned there are a handful of new perks just revealed recently--discount shopping days in Disneyland and WDW, free admission to the PGA tour event, 50% discount at the pirate's league.  We've been offered discount Broadway show tickets, discount Cirque tickets, discounts on tours and dozens of different restaurants over the years.
> 
> Obviously none of us will be interested in every offer.  But DVC has to view this from a high level--offering perks that will appeal to members of different ages, incomes and interests.  I understand that the valet parking is your particular hot button.  But looking at the many different offers we have been extended in recent months and years, it's very difficult to argue that Disney/DVC is operating in exclusively a "take, take, take" mode.



That's all good, I think one thing and you think another. I have no problem with that. The only reason I even responded to your post ( the first one ) is because it seemed that the loss of this one perk has split everyone into two groups and now it is a battle, I am not happy with the change VS. get over it.
I probably should have just read on and not commented but the temptation got the best of me.  

I am not upset or have hurt feelings. I just think that enough is enough and we have gotten off the original topic.  So for that reason, lets agree to respect each others opinions and leave it at that.


----------



## Sammie

I am really surprised this discussion is still going on. I was as upset as anyone over the change. I talked to MS and got answers I was satisfied with. 

I still feel they could improve thier communication of changes so that members are not caught unaware, kinda embarrassing to pull up to the BWV with guests and have plans to use free valet only to be told no, afraid not.

So hopefully communications will improve, but I doubt it, when you have a company that has over 55,000 employees in Orlando alone and spans the globe and decisions are being made in CA that affect WDW, I doubt it can improve. 

I was also told that they guard much of the info closely because many CMs are also DVC members and it would not be fair for them to have an inside track over members who do not work for Disney. I can see that being an issue. 

So I have moved on, I will either pay for it or walk from the self lot. I am glad they listened to member concerns about BWV and have taken action on it. 

It was nice while it lasted, but it does not affect my enjoyment of the resort stay.


----------



## Hazzard101

CarolMN said:


> There is no bus service from Downtown Disney to the parks.  Those who park t DD to avoid paying have to catch a bus to a resort and then transfer to a park bus.  Very time consuming and inconvenient.  Don't think many are doing it, especially since buses from DD back to the resorts in the mornings are quite scarce.



People are doing it. If you choose to believe otherwise that's fine. There is a direct rout from DD to SSR, it is a very short trip and there are many bus stops from there to the parks. And when we were there last May, the buses were full in the mornings. It only takes about 15-20 min to get from DD to most parks.  Sure beats paying 14 dollars to park. Disney is really in need of a reality check.
Raising parking prices during this economic time? This upsets me and that is why I threw in that foot note. Sorry about that. Soap box is put away now.


----------



## Hazzard101

Sammie said:


> I am really surprised this discussion is still going on. I was as upset as anyone over the change. I talked to MS and got answers I was satisfied with.
> 
> I still feel they could improve thier communication of changes so that members are not caught unaware, kinda embarrassing to pull up to the BWV with guests and have plans to use free valet only to be told no, afraid not.
> 
> So hopefully communications will improve, but I doubt it, when you have a company that has over 55,000 employees in Orlando alone and spans the globe and decisions are being made in CA that affect WDW, I doubt it can improve.
> 
> I was also told that they guard much of the info closely because many CMs are also DVC members and it would not be fair for them to have an inside track over members who do not work for Disney. I can see that being an issue.
> 
> So I have moved on, I will either pay for it or walk from the self lot. I am glad they listed to member concerns about BWV and have taken action on it.
> 
> It was nice while it lasted, but it does not affect my enjoyment of the resort stay.



Well said  I wish I was able to put it so smoothly and elegantly.


----------



## TLSnell1981

Sammie said:


> I am really surprised this discussion is still going on. I was as upset as anyone over the change. I talked to MS and got answers I was satisfied with.



I think, a few of us are still a little sour. It's not just the loss of the perk, but the way it was handled. I also spoke with MS and I'm not satified with their answer. There really was no answer.....just a load of manure.

I don't like being patronized.


----------



## Brian Noble

> I don't like being patronized.


I don't know that anyone does, but this is Disney's modus operandi.  It is very very unusual to get a "Real Answer" out of Disney---either verbally or in writing---when it comes to matters of pricing and policy.  They tightly control what their front-line customer relations people can and cannot say.  I don't really like it either, but I've learned to accept that it is what it is.


----------



## Hazzard101

TLSnell1981 said:


> I think, a few of us are still a little sour. It's not just the loss of the perk, but the way it was handled. I also spoke with MS and I'm not satified with their answer. There really was no answer.....just a load of manure.
> 
> I don't like being patronized.



Well put.


----------



## DebbieB

Sammie said:


> I am really surprised this discussion is still going on. I was as upset as anyone over the change. I talked to MS and got answers I was satisfied with.
> 
> I still feel they could improve thier communication of changes so that members are not caught unaware, kinda embarrassing to pull up to the BWV with guests and have plans to use free valet only to be told no, afraid not.
> 
> *So hopefully communications will improve, but I doubt it, when you have a company that has over 55,000 employees in Orlando alone and spans the globe and decisions are being made in CA that affect WDW, I doubt it can improve. *
> 
> I was also told that they guard much of the info closely because many CMs are also DVC members and it would not be fair for them to have an inside track over members who do not work for Disney. I can see that being an issue.
> 
> So I have moved on, I will either pay for it or walk from the self lot. I am glad they listened to member concerns about BWV and have taken action on it.
> 
> It was nice while it lasted, but it does not affect my enjoyment of the resort stay.



They have an e-mail distribution list setup for DVC Members,how hard would it have been to send an e-mail out?  They don't seem to have a problem sending marketing e-mails out.


----------



## MELSMICE

DebbieB said:


> They have an e-mail distribution list setup for DVC Members,how hard would it have been to send an e-mail out?  They don't seem to have a problem sending marketing e-mails out.


Agreed - just an e-mail to explain the change in the valet parking would have been nice.  The day I inquired about it was October 30.  About 3 weeks after the change was put in to affect.  (effect???)


----------



## PinkTink63

DebbieB said:


> If this is true, there darn well better be a space for me in the self park at BWV when I stay there.  There have been times I've gone round and round and just gave up and valet parked.



This is exactly what I was thinking!  
I feel like I can always use the exercise so, I really have only used this a few times, but it is a nice perk to have!
I am quite sure I will not be using it at $12.00/day!  Now all those people that used to valet park are going to be taking up my spot in the outfield!


----------



## lchez

I am tired of being "nickled and dimed" by the DVC.  Non-members get offers for free nights, free dining, etc.  We get things taken away.  Plus, their member "perks" are garbage!


----------



## Dean

lchez said:


> I am tired of being "nickled and dimed" by the DVC.  Non-members get offers for free nights, free dining, etc.  We get things taken away.  Plus, their member "perks" are garbage!


As timeshares go, DVC is on the mild end for the nickel and dime stuff.  Timeshares aren't for everyone.


----------



## TChrist05

But communication works for everyone!


----------



## Tara

MELSMICE said:


> Agreed - just an e-mail to explain the change in the valet parking would have been nice.  The day I inquired about it was October 30.  About 3 weeks after the change was put in to affect.  (effect???)



Effect.


----------



## MELSMICE

Tara said:


> Effect.


LOL - Thanks!


----------



## kindra657

tjkraz said:


> We've had subsidized Internet for a couple of years now and there were no major upticks in dues when it was implemented.  That suggests members are getting a pretty good deal on Internet--we're certainly not paying $10 per day, per room.  And as another poster mentioned, Internet usage has grown significantly, as has the number of hotels which offer service for free.
> 
> As for valet, the numbers are probably not as favorable.  The BoardWalk has a max of about 530 rooms.  If just 1/3 of guests valet park that's 176 rooms x $14 daily fee x 365 days = $899,000 in annual valet parking fees.
> 
> The BoardWalk operating budget for 2009 is around $18 million.  At those numbers we could be looking at 5% dues increase just for the valet parking.  That would be in addition to the normal 2-4% increase due to higher CM salaries, increased benefits costs, higher utilities costs, etc.
> 
> If the number of valet parkers is higher, the cost increase would be even more dramatic.  If the number of valet parkers is lower than 1/3, it increasingly begs the question of why 100% of owners should pay for an *expensive *perk only used by a small percentage.



This makes a lot of sense! 
I am not a BWV owner and I've never used valet because we utilize Disney's FREE ME service and their FREE transportation service all over the world. I do miss about an hour of park time a day using Disney's transportation system but I don't mind because using wdw's transportation is part of the experience for us. 
I understand that some people like having their own vehicle but Disney has made it to where you don't HAVE to drive if you don't want to (on property) and for those with disabilities, the valet is paid for.


----------



## Deb & Bill

kindra657 said:


> This makes a lot of sense!
> I am not a BWV owner and I've never used valet because we utilize Disney's FREE ME service and their FREE transportation service all over the world. I do miss about an hour of park time a day using Disney's transportation system but I don't mind because using wdw's transportation is part of the experience for us.
> I understand that some people like having their own vehicle but Disney has made it to where you don't HAVE to drive if you don't want to (on property) and for those with disabilities, the valet is paid for.



What about when they decide to start to charge for ME because the contract is up?


----------



## LIFERBABE

Deb & Bill said:


> What about when they decide to start to charge for ME because the contract is up?



EXACTLY!!!  ME is a PERK!  It is not in the POS or part of what we as members purchased.  It will not be free forever.

I can see it now.  Charge $40 each for RT transfers on ME but Resort Guests that book a package will receive FREE DINING and FREE ME! LOL!!

DVC Members will have to pay and everyone else will be getting it free as part of their Free Dining Package.


----------



## Dean

TChrist05 said:


> But communication works for everyone!


But that wasn't the issue Ichez was addressing.  In general, timeshares aren't very good at communication and knowing that also, one can decide whether they want to participate or not from that point of view as a somewhat separate issue from the nickel and dime question.  I doubt things are going to change much at DVC in this arena, they have never been good in this area and have gotten worse in recent years.  As such each person has to decide whether DVC is still right for them, it likely isn't for some that thought it was previously.  In addition it's likely the pay to play and separate charges will become more common, not less so, with DVC.


----------



## Dean

Deb & Bill said:


> What about when they decide to start to charge for ME because the contract is up?


It has not always been free and it likely will not be going forward.  I don't know when it'll change but I would be surprised if it took more than 2 or 3 years.


----------



## Sammie

DebbieB said:


> They have an e-mail distribution list setup for DVC Members,how hard would it have been to send an e-mail out?  They don't seem to have a problem sending marketing e-mails out.



Oh I agree they have the ability to do it, but I don't think it is going to happen. I was told that after Eagle Pines they would be very, very cautious about announcing anything that might possibly change. 

So I guess that means they are not going to take a chance. 

Also I do understand that due to the fact so many DVC staff are also members it could cause problems if certain info was released ahead of time.


----------



## Chuck S

LIFERBABE said:


> EXACTLY!!!  ME is a PERK!  It is not in the POS or part of what we as members purchased.  It will not be free forever.
> 
> I can see it now.  Charge $40 each for RT transfers on ME but Resort Guests that book a package will receive FREE DINING and FREE ME! LOL!!
> 
> DVC Members will have to pay and everyone else will be getting it free as part of their Free Dining Package.



If they start charging DVCers for ME, I doubt it would be truly "free" to cash guests.  It would be hidden in an increased cost of the package or room.


----------



## kindra657

Deb & Bill said:


> What about when they decide to start to charge for ME because the contract is up?



I guess I'll be paying for transportation then. In 2020, when room rates are $600 a night, I'll still be paying the same number of points for my room. If DVC membership ever becomes "not worth it" in my opinion, then I will sell my points and sign up for free dining and 4/3 deals at POP like everyone else and maybe get a free upgrade to SSR in a 1bdrm!!


----------



## Deb & Bill

kindra657 said:


> I guess I'll be paying for transportation then. In 2020, when room rates are $600 a night, I'll still be paying the same number of points for my room. If DVC membership ever becomes "not worth it" in my opinion, then I will sell my points and sign up for free dining and 4/3 deals at POP like everyone else and maybe get a free upgrade to SSR in a 1bdrm!!



But what will you be paying in member fees in 2020?  I'm a member I who also bought into the prepaid vacation concept.  But when you start adding in the fees,.....


----------



## TLSnell1981

Dean said:


> In general, timeshares aren't very good at communication and knowing that also, one can decide whether they want to participate or not from that point of view as a somewhat separate issue from the nickel and dime question.  I doubt things are going to change much at DVC in this arena, they have never been good in this area and have gotten worse in recent years.  As such each person has to decide whether DVC is still right for them, it likely isn't for some that thought it was previously.  In addition it's likely the pay to play and separate charges will become more common, not less so, with DVC.



I feel much better knowing things have gone from bad to worse...regarding communication. NOT!!

And, BTW.....this is no excuse, but it's unlikely to change as long as they continue to get a free pass.


----------



## Dean

TLSnell1981 said:


> I feel much better knowing things have gone from bad to worse...regarding communication. NOT!!
> 
> And, BTW.....this is no excuse, but it's unlikely to change as long as they continue to get a free pass.


I'm not making excuses only giving a reality check.  For those that can't accept it they should consider moving on or working for change.  And complaining at the level of MS or similar isn't going to be a reasonable method to affect change, IMO.


----------



## DebbieB

Dean said:


> It has not always been free and it likely will not be going forward.  I don't know when it'll change but I would be surprised if it took more than 2 or 3 years.



As long as it has been "Magical Express" it has been free.   Before that, you could get a Mears Shuttle on your own for a fee but that did not include the luggage delivery.


----------



## Dean

DebbieB said:


> As long as it has been "Magical Express" it has been free.   Before that, you could get a Mears Shuttle on your own for a fee but that did not include the luggage delivery.


That is not my recollection but you may be correct, thanks for the info.


----------



## MELSMICE

Dean said:


> That is not my recollection but you may be correct, thanks for the info.


I don't ever remember them charing for ME.


----------



## Sammie

Magical Express being free is about as free as Free Dining, believe me the guest is paying for it. It is just marketed as "free".


----------



## DRT-eagle

If the valet parking is worth $12, then a week stay on my points would be $60 less and fees on my points would be $0.25 less per point. I doubt we will see that decrease. If you valet once a day and it takes 20 minutes to retrieve and store the car, the next cost is about $6 fully burdened on a valet employee. Nice markup. Way to take away a cheap benefit and make it a profit center for the other resort guests.


----------



## CarolAnnC

You won't see a decrease in dues because of valet as you were not paying for it in your dues to begin with.

With costs rising for everything that dues does include, an increase in dues will be no surprise to me.  If valet was included,  had they not switched to pay by use, then they would have risen even more....


----------



## Dean

DRT-eagle said:


> If the valet parking is worth $12, then a week stay on my points would be $60 less and fees on my points would be $0.25 less per point. I doubt we will see that decrease. If you valet once a day and it takes 20 minutes to retrieve and store the car, the next cost is about $6 fully burdened on a valet employee. Nice markup. Way to take away a cheap benefit and make it a profit center for the other resort guests.


IF DVC member dues had been paying for the option previously then there should be a line item debit on the balance sheet going forward, the cost was not $12 until this change though.  However, the info several have gathered is that there was previously no charge for the service to DVC members though going forward there would have been the full cost charged to membership plus any admin costs plus the 12% DVCMC add on.  However even if there was full charge previously, your numbers are flawed in that only a relatively small percent of owners used the service routinely and the cost was $10 per day at the time of budget implementation, so you'd have to adjust your representation to a much smaller number of maybe 3¢ a point (your thinking but adjusting for the DVCMD add on and price differences).


----------



## jade1

Dean said:


> IF DVC member dues had been paying for the option previously then there should be a line item debit on the balance sheet going forward, the cost was not $12 until this change though.  However, the info several have gathered is that there was previously no charge for the service to DVC members though going forward there would have been the full cost charged to membership plus any admin costs plus the 12% DVCMC add on.  However even if there was full charge previously, your numbers are flawed in that only a relatively small percent of owners used the service routinely and the cost was $10 per day at the time of budget implementation, so you'd have to adjust your representation to a much smaller number of maybe 3¢ a point (your thinking but adjusting for the DVCMD add on and price differences).



What a long, but great thread actually. I would have much preferred to pay 3 cents a point and kept it, even though we currently use ME. Does ME have a similar set up coming on the horizon? I think they may be trying to make parking difficult and valet expensive (in a we have 48 square miles undeveloped unlike NY city kind of way), so when the ME charges hit-folks may still want to stay with it? IF ME contract comes up, and everyone needs to start paying-are we currently paying anything towards it in dues, or will this be a huge (much bigger than valet) dues increase, and therefore be pay as you go? If it's even close to a car rental (5 of us) we will rent a car, and subsequently miss the valet perk. But we will be back to US or Clearwater on the weekends-which we do miss also-hey maybe that's why the week day points are going up as well-crafty.


----------



## Dean

jade1 said:


> What a long, but great thread actually. I would have much preferred to pay 3 cents a point and kept it, even though we currently use ME. Does ME have a similar set up coming on the horizon? I think they may be trying to make parking difficult and valet expensive (in a we have 48 square miles undeveloped unlike NY city kind of way), so when the ME charges hit-folks may still want to stay with it? IF ME contract comes up, and everyone needs to start paying-are we currently paying anything towards it in dues, or will this be a huge (much bigger than valet) dues increase, and therefore be pay as you go? If it's even close to a car rental (5 of us) we will rent a car, and subsequently miss the valet perk. But we will be back to US or Clearwater on the weekends-which we do miss also-hey maybe that's why the week day points are going up as well-crafty.


The 3¢ guess is a rough approximation of the previous costs and situation.  Going forward, it might be a little more, say 5-7¢ per point and I would not personally want to have the increase even though I occasionally used the service.  What would have been best though, IMO, is had DVC asked the membership what they wanted with a cost attached AND a representation of what the fees would have been like otherwise.  For example, the fees for next year might go up say $1 a point even with free valet not being added in.  I chose not to believe in the conspiracy theory, YMMV.


----------



## jade1

Dean said:


> The 3¢ guess is a rough approximation of the previous costs and situation.  Going forward, it might be a little more, say 5-7¢ per point and I would not personally want to have the increase even though I occasionally used the service.  What would have been best though, IMO, is had DVC asked the membership what they wanted with a cost attached AND a representation of what the fees would have been like otherwise.  For example, the fees for next year might go up say $1 a point even with free valet not being added in.  I chose not to believe in the conspiracy theory, YMMV.



Thanks Dean, the 3 is now 5 to 7 and will soon be back to 25 cents (or more), so that part is not really worth contemplation IMO, *was more interested in your thoughts about ME though if you don't mind*, or is that what you meant by "the fees may go to $1 next year"? The loss of valet came out of left field IMO, and none of us were educated on the issue going in, it would be nice to know more about ME and what may transpire.


----------



## Dean

jade1 said:


> Thanks Dean, the 3 is now 5 to 7 and will soon be back to 25 cents (or more), so that part is not really worth contemplation IMO, *was more interested in your thoughts about ME though if you don't mind*, or is that what you meant by "the fees may go to $1 next year"? The loss of valet came out of left field IMO, and none of us were educated on the issue going in, it would be nice to know more about ME and what may transpire.


The loss of valet was a surprise acutely but if you think in the big picture it was not a surprise this was taken away.  The truth is it likely should never have been free if you think about the economics and certainly should have not been free once the program were outsourced.  ME is not free, it's simply paid for by someone else as a marketing tool.  At some point it's likely that the cost for ME will be shifted toward the consumer.  It has been pointed out that "ME" was always free, however, there was a previous bus service run by the same company (Mears) that did have a cost associated to the consumer.


----------



## MELSMICE

Dean said:


> *ME is not free, it's simply paid for by someone else as a marketing tool.  *At some point it's likely that the cost for ME will be shifted toward the consumer.  It has been pointed out that "ME" was always free, however, there was a previous bus service run by the same company (Mears) that did have a cost associated to the consumer.


Definitely correct........it should just be worded as "ME is a service that is *"included"* in the cost of your WDW vacation."  

Just like "free dining" is not really free (as has been stated previously).  

Nothing is ever free - the costs are just passed along somewhere else down the line.


----------



## Paging Tom Morrow

Dean said:


> The loss of valet was a surprise acutely but if you think in the big picture it was not a surprise this was taken away.  The truth is it likely should never have been free if you think about the economics and certainly should have not been free once the program were outsourced.  ME is not free, it's simply paid for by someone else as a marketing tool.  At some point it's likely that the cost for ME will be shifted toward the consumer.  It has been pointed out that "ME" was always free, however, there was a previous bus service run by the same company (Mears) that did have a cost associated to the consumer.



I assume that Disney did some sort of analysis that returned this simple fact: If Disney were to bus their guests from MCO to WDW, the average profit per guest would increase enough to pay for that busing service and increase additional profits.

Until that analysis shows that it doesn't, I wouldn't expect for Disney to make ME a pay-per-use service.

Granted, DVC guests are unique, particularly those staying in 1, 2 or 3-bedroom villas.  With a full kitchen available, the chances of those guests eating somewhere profitable for Disney decreases.  In my opinion, it's probably even more profitable for Disney to offer ME to these guests as ME service means those guests aren't stopping at a supermarket and bringing food to prepare for themselves and thus will purchase food from Disney.

(Yes, I know of multiple food delivery services, but it's my experience that most don't take advantage of this service.)


----------



## jade1

Paging Tom Morrow said:


> Granted, DVC guests are unique, particularly those staying in 1, 2 or 3-bedroom villas.  With a full kitchen available, *the chances of those guests eating somewhere profitable for Disney decreases. * In my opinion, it's probably even more profitable for Disney to offer ME to these guests as ME service means those guests aren't stopping at a supermarket and bringing food to prepare for themselves and thus will purchase food from Disney.
> 
> (Yes, I know of multiple food delivery services, but it's my experience that most don't take advantage of this service.)



I would think the opposite, if they (DVC guests) have a car-they may still just cook in the room, as you pointed out Garden Grocer etc are set up for planners/veterans such as DVCers. I don't think they want us to have a car persay, but if ME becomes billable-there will be more cars. I would think encouraging car rental (charging for ME) at non DVC resorts would result in much more offsite travel/shopping/dining.


----------



## Brian Noble

I think Ken's on target here.  ME isn't a perk.  It's a profit center.  Someone who takes ME would find it much more difficult to get offsite to eat, shop, visit an attraction, etc.  Instead, every moment between leaving the airport and returning to it is spent with Mickey, and therefore so is every penny of vacation dollars.


----------



## jade1

MELSMICE said:


> Definitely correct........it should just be worded as "ME is a service that is *"included"* in the cost of your WDW vacation."
> 
> Just like "free dining" is not really free (as has been stated previously).
> 
> Nothing is ever free - *the costs are just passed along somewhere else down the line*.



Certainly agree as well, and that's exactly what happened with valet. The contract came up, prices went up, and the decision was made to not pass that expense on.* Simply wondering if anyone knows the ME situation, are we paying anything toward ME now through dues, if so how much?* If we all have time to sit here typing for weeks about a change nobody really knew how much it was costing, why can't we educate ourselves before a change...for a change.  Maybe ME will always stay "included", but we thought that about valet as well.


----------



## mommacat56

Dean said:


> What would have been best though, IMO, is had DVC asked the membership what they wanted with a cost attached AND a representation of what the fees would have been like otherwise.  For example, the fees for next year might go up say $1 a point even with free valet not being added in..



I don't know if this was already raised in this thread or not (sorry if it has), but I agree that the member/owners should have been polled and allowed the opportunity to vote just like any other condo association prior to any change (outsourcing) of goods, suppliers, or services, especially since this change occurred in the middle of the current contract year already covered by a dues schedule adopted last year going forward.  I'm sure it's legal (it's probably in the fine print somewhere), but it's really disheartening to the owners, who feel (like me) that they should be treated a little bit better than the average visitor to BWV, otherwise, why own if there isn't something to set us apart?  How expensive is it now in terms of dues?  I realize not all of use it (I rarely do), but I have no problem paying a little bit more in dues for all of us to feel just a little more special.  I use the ME too, and if the valet parking issue is allowed to stand unopposed, it will be next as a "pay as you go" service.  Isn't there any way to keep these services free to owners and shift the brunt of the costs to non-owners (increase the price of valet services and charge for ME)? Our dues associated with these sevices should be little affected this way.  Just a thought...M


----------



## tjkraz

Paging Tom Morrow said:


> Until that analysis shows that it doesn't, I wouldn't expect for Disney to make ME a pay-per-use service.



Disney could still be competitive even with some token fee in place.  If they charged, say, $10 per guest round-trip, the prices would still be very competitive compared to a car rental or town car service.  Disney claims that more than 2 million guests per year are using DME.  They could add a nice little bump to the bottom line with some minimal fee.  

I'm sure there are very valid arguments against charging for DME but I'm still a bit surprised they haven't begun charging already.


----------



## Dean

Paging Tom Morrow said:


> I assume that Disney did some sort of analysis that returned this simple fact: If Disney were to bus their guests from MCO to WDW, the average profit per guest would increase enough to pay for that busing service and increase additional profits.
> 
> Until that analysis shows that it doesn't, I wouldn't expect for Disney to make ME a pay-per-use service.
> 
> Granted, DVC guests are unique, particularly those staying in 1, 2 or 3-bedroom villas.  With a full kitchen available, the chances of those guests eating somewhere profitable for Disney decreases.  In my opinion, it's probably even more profitable for Disney to offer ME to these guests as ME service means those guests aren't stopping at a supermarket and bringing food to prepare for themselves and thus will purchase food from Disney.
> 
> (Yes, I know of multiple food delivery services, but it's my experience that most don't take advantage of this service.)


I would assume they checked it out thoroughly as well and that the cost justified the benefit in their eyes.  Less cars and overall more time=money spent at Disney venue's including shopping, restaurants, parks, etc.  



jade1 said:


> Certainly agree as well, and that's exactly what happened with valet. The contract came up, prices went up, and the decision was made to not pass that expense on.* Simply wondering if anyone knows the ME situation, are we paying anything toward ME now through dues, if so how much?* If we all have time to sit here typing for weeks about a change nobody really knew how much it was costing, why can't we educate ourselves before a change...for a change.  Maybe ME will always stay "included", but we thought that about valet as well.


Actually the price for valet would have gone from free to $12 per car per day, that's a big jump.  The questions about this are why was this the situation and what transpired in between that forced this decision.  I previously posted on some of the possibilities and they basically come back to contracts and contract negotiations between the Disney resorts, DVC and the valet vendor without many real details being available.  



mommacat56 said:


> I don't know if this was already raised in this thread or not (sorry if it has), but I agree that the member/owners should have been polled and allowed the opportunity to vote just like any other condo association prior to any change (outsourcing) of goods, suppliers, or services, especially since this change occurred in the middle of the current contract year already covered by a dues schedule adopted last year going forward.  I'm sure it's legal (it's probably in the fine print somewhere), but it's really disheartening to the owners, who feel (like me) that they should be treated a little bit better than the average visitor to BWV, otherwise, why own if there isn't something to set us apart?  How expensive is it now in terms of dues?  I realize not all of use it (I rarely do), but I have no problem paying a little bit more in dues for all of us to feel just a little more special.  I use the ME too, and if the valet parking issue is allowed to stand unopposed, it will be next as a "pay as you go" service.  Isn't there any way to keep these services free to owners and shift the brunt of the costs to non-owners (increase the price of valet services and charge for ME)? Our dues associated with these sevices should be little affected this way.  Just a thought...M


Somewhat earlier in this thread I posted HOW I would have handled it assuming a short notice change had to occur, I won't go back through that.  IMO, there really are 2 main issues at work here.  One is the choice itself which I really don't see how anyone can legitimately argue with, the other is the method and there is a lot to take issue with on HOW it was done.  However to deal with your posted issues, while it might be in the middle of the DVC budget year it may not be in the middle of the contract for the valet.  I don't know the resort fiscal year nor the contract cycle and both would be applicable to any evaluation of this decision as would any terms that might be included in the contract that could change the costs midstream.  For example, they could have tied the free DVC member valet to volume or revenues and fell below a specified threshold.

A point I made earlier is that a a given resort cannot do everything pay to play nor everything included, the question is WHERE do you draw the line.  Even most  ALL INCLUSIVE resorts charge for some items on top of the AI fees. Considerations include the cost, % of members using the option, any volume savings and the ease of charging for it appropriately.  IMO, valet comes down on the wrong side of including it in ALL areas.  It is relatively expensive, it is used by a minority, there is LIKELY little or no volume discount and it is easy to discern who to charge and how to charge.  Internet is likely the next closest item and it is vastly different within the terms I used to evaluate this issue and summarized above.  

One fundamental difference that some of us have with some on the other side is this.  I paid for a timeshare for a place to stay.  I expect it to be kept to a certain standard and managed appropriately.  I DO NOT feel they need to continue to compete for my affection beyond doing that job well.  Obviously anything they can offer will be great but I will consider it gravy and not part of "what I paid for".  I think this is a basic difference between the two sides of many of these type of debates.

Basically the question related to the removal of free valet comes down to VERY simple terms.  Am I going to pay for my own valet or am I going to ask others that don't use it to pay for it.  Given the ONLY benefit to me for others to pay for it is a reduction in my costs at their expense, I can see no legitimate way to ask them to do so.  Now if a week for each instance became $20 per vehicle when the cost was shared rather than $84, I would vote to include it as a line item instead of pay to play.


----------



## dizkneedoll

Just got back from a week at WDW.  One of our evenings we valet parked at the Boardwalk.  I could not believe the difference.  There was hardly a car in sight ... in the past you could barely make your way to the valet stand.  On return I have to say that was the fastest we have ever gotten a car back in years.  I really do feel sorry for the guys/gals who work valet as they must be seeing a huge cut in their income thru lack of tips.


----------



## kindra657

When analyzing the way disney has made their vacations "more affordable" and very "all inclusive" in keeping guests completely on-property, I sometimes wonder if all of the things they have done, they done so as to get people (especially new disney vacationers and dvc members) used to certain style of vacationing in disney and now that they have us hooked, they will slowly take the wonderful perks away. For example, when we first began vacationing to wdw, the dining plan included the appetizer and the gratuity. We got used to dining at disney's restaurants and when they changed the ddp, we continued to use it and began paying the higher costs and receiving less (less food and less quality). Also, IMO, the food has become very standardized across the board. 
Another part of our wdw vacationing that we have grown to love and become accustomed to is NOT driving while on vacation. We enjoy using the ME service, the luggage service, and the on-property transportation. If disney slowly took those things away, we would still want them because these are the things we've become accustomed to and disney knows that we will pay another 3% of our vacation to have it. 
For many of you, valet parking (especially at bwv) has become a part of your vacationing and I wonder if disney assumes that people will continue the service even with an added cost. 
Many different businesses and industries are practicing this: give less and charge more (airline baggage fees....) I just hope that the big wigs in the disney company stop behaving selfishly, realize that Walt wouldn't be making poor guest-relation decisions such as these, and also come to realize that dvc members are loyal costumers and very important to the continued success of wdw.


----------



## Dean

kindra657 said:


> When analyzing the way disney has made their vacations "more affordable" and very "all inclusive" in keeping guests completely on-property, I sometimes wonder if all of the things they have done, they done so as to get people (especially new disney vacationers and dvc members) used to certain style of vacationing in disney and now that they have us hooked, they will slowly take the wonderful perks away. For example, when we first began vacationing to wdw, the dining plan included the appetizer and the gratuity. We got used to dining at disney's restaurants and when they changed the ddp, we continued to use it and began paying the higher costs and receiving less (less food and less quality). Also, IMO, the food has become very standardized across the board.
> Another part of our wdw vacationing that we have grown to love and become accustomed to is NOT driving while on vacation. We enjoy using the ME service, the luggage service, and the on-property transportation. If disney slowly took those things away, we would still want them because these are the things we've become accustomed to and disney knows that we will pay another 3% of our vacation to have it.
> For many of you, valet parking (especially at bwv) has become a part of your vacationing and I wonder if disney assumes that people will continue the service even with an added cost.
> Many different businesses and industries are practicing this: give less and charge more (airline baggage fees....) I just hope that the big wigs in the disney company stop behaving selfishly, realize that Walt wouldn't be making poor guest-relation decisions such as these, and also come to realize that dvc members are loyal costumers and very important to the continued success of wdw.


I almost mentioned this earlier.  At work we have MJO's (Major Job Objectives), once we have staff in the habit of doing things a certain way, we move on and adjust those objectives to shape behavior in other areas.


----------



## Tara

Just thought I'd report that I had no issues with using my TIW card for valet parking. In fact, every time I valeted, the attendant asked if I was a TIW cardholder.


----------



## Galls

kindra657 said:


> Another part of our wdw vacationing that we have grown to love and become accustomed to is NOT driving while on vacation.



Move to Brooklyn, where it is a Disney vacation year round!


----------



## Maistre Gracey

kindra657 said:


> When analyzing the way disney has made their vacations "more affordable" and very "all inclusive" in keeping guests completely on-property, I sometimes wonder if all of the things they have done, they done so as to get people (especially new disney vacationers and dvc members) used to certain style of vacationing in disney and now that they have us hooked, they will slowly take the wonderful perks away. For example, when we first began vacationing to wdw, the dining plan included the appetizer and the gratuity. We got used to dining at disney's restaurants and when they changed the ddp, we continued to use it and began paying the higher costs and receiving less (less food and less quality). Also, IMO, the food has become very standardized across the board.
> Another part of our wdw vacationing that we have grown to love and become accustomed to is NOT driving while on vacation. We enjoy using the ME service, the luggage service, and the on-property transportation. If disney slowly took those things away, we would still want them because these are the things we've become accustomed to and disney knows that we will pay another 3% of our vacation to have it.
> For many of you, valet parking (especially at bwv) has become a part of your vacationing and I wonder if disney assumes that people will continue the service even with an added cost.
> Many different businesses and industries are practicing this: give less and charge more (airline baggage fees....) I just hope that the big wigs in the disney company stop behaving selfishly, realize that Walt wouldn't be making poor guest-relation decisions such as these, and also come to realize that dvc members are loyal costumers and very important to the continued success of wdw.


The problem as I see it would be the difficulty in attracting new customers/guests. Word of diminished services gets around very quickly in recent years due to the Internet. People seem to check everything out ahead of time with a quick Google search.

MG


----------



## Mickey'sApprentice

Maistre Gracey said:


> The problem as I see it would be the difficulty in attracting new customers/guests. Word of diminished services gets around very quickly in recent years due to the Internet. People seem to check everything out ahead of time with a quick Google search.
> 
> MG



I totally agree. 

When we bought DVC (TIMESHARE), we were looking for complaints. It wouldn't have taken many complaints for us to decide against it!


----------



## tjkraz

Maistre Gracey said:


> The problem as I see it would be the difficulty in attracting new customers/guests. Word of diminished services gets around very quickly in recent years due to the Internet. People seem to check everything out ahead of time with a quick Google search.
> 
> MG



That may be one of the benefits of the Internet but it's also one of its 
weaknesses.  These days it isn't hard to find a certain element--either fringe or mainstream--which openly (and loudly) dislikes every major product and company in existence.  

There are people who hate Microsoft and people who hate Apple.  Yet consumers still continue to buy Xboxes and iPhones.  

There are people who hate Dell, Sony, HP, McDonald's, GE, Disney...the list goes on and on.  If consumers used the Internet as chapter-and-verse on which manufacturers and products to avoid, our economy would have come to a screeching halt years ago.  

The average consumer who is discovering DVC for the first time will still find a breakeven point in the 7-9 year range for a new resort purchase.  They'll see the "ownership" aspect of a DVC purchase coupled with the ability to return year-after-year.  In many cases they see the same resorts they've grown to love as frequently Disney guests (BoardWalk, Contemporary, Grand Californian, etc.)  

I think it's a stretch to suggest that charging for valet parking is going to have any significant impact on the finances of a DVC purchase, or that Average Joe will view this as a sign that they should avoid doing business with Disney Vacation Club.


----------



## Maistre Gracey

tjkraz said:


> I think it's a stretch to suggest that charging for valet parking is going to have any significant impact on the finances of a DVC purchase, or that Average Joe will view this as a sign that they should avoid doing business with Disney Vacation Club.


I agree it's a stretch for anyone to decide against purchasing based on any ONE factor... But, add the new booking rules, diminished housekeeping and maintenance, and other common complaints, and there may be a problem.

I realize you, or anyone reading this, may not have had any problems with the items I listed above. That said, when somebody new researches and reads several people did have problem with them, it doesn't sit well.

MG


----------



## Dean

Maistre Gracey said:


> The problem as I see it would be the difficulty in attracting new customers/guests. Word of diminished services gets around very quickly in recent years due to the Internet. People seem to check everything out ahead of time with a quick Google search.
> 
> MG


In general I think this issue is over rated.  I'm sure some would be influenced but only a minority.  In timeshare purchases it's unusual for people to check them out ahead of time, it happens but not nearly as much as you'd think though maybe more with DVC than most.  I've even seen people buy retail when they were told repeatedly they could buy resale for 10¢ on the dollar and get the exact same thing.


----------



## DebbieB

Dean said:


> In general I think this issue is over rated.  I'm sure some would be influenced but only a minority.  In timeshare purchases it's unusual for people to check them out ahead of time, it happens but not nearly as much as you'd think though maybe more with DVC than most.  I've even seen people buy retail when they were told repeatedly they could buy resale for 10¢ on the dollar and get the exact same thing.



I agree.   I've been a member 10 years, it was only OKW and BWV when I bought.  There are always complaints and it never stopped DVC from growing by leaps and bounds.   They have the Disney name and location and that is a huge influence.


----------



## Maistre Gracey

DebbieB said:


> I agree.   I've been a member 10 years, it was only OKW and BWV when I bought.  There are always complaints and it never stopped DVC from growing by leaps and bounds.   They have the Disney name and location and that is a huge influence.


Yup... BUT, they didn't start reducing benefits, closing PI, cutting back fireworks, etc.. in those 10 years. It has really come to light in the last year.

Prior to the past year I believe things were indeed pretty rosy, and prospective members read the good reviews..

MG


----------



## tjkraz

Maistre Gracey said:


> Yup... BUT, they didn't start reducing benefits, closing PI, cutting back fireworks, etc.. in those 10 years. It has really come to light in the last year.
> 
> Prior to the past year I believe things were indeed pretty rosy, and prospective members read the good reviews..
> 
> MG



Still disagree. There's always been a topic du jour that seemed to get people worked-up.  

Going back 10+ years there were things like new rooms which were smaller than OKW, much higher point charts, potential impact of building so many off-site rooms (Vero, HHI), discontinuation of free park pass incentive.  

Then it was things like no AP discount for members, no dining plan for members, no free Internet service, 40-year contracts for BCV buyers, changes to transfer rules, no guaranteed BoardWalk View reservations (before implemented) and the years-long debate over SSR destroying the entire program.  

In the last couple of years the hot button issues seem to be changes to booking rules (very, very few complaints in the aftermath), maintenance/refurbs (several resorts now in the midst of upgrades) and housekeeping (which, when you stop and think, have seen a noticeable decrease in complaints here on the forums in the last 6 months.)  

I really don't see DVC benefits being any worse in the long run.  Looking at the last 18 months, it appears that we've traded free valet for free Internet.  The volume of other perks are largely unchanged going back as far as I can recall.  

As far as general cuts at the parks, IMO the post-9/11 reductions were far worse than what we see now.  I vividly remember eating dinner at Tony's a full year after 9/11 when the MK was closed at 6pm.  EMH was discontinued entirely.  MK fireworks and Spectromagic were only performed once or twice per week.  Hunchback show ended at DHS with no replacement.  Tapestry of Dreams ended at Epcot with no replacement.  Entire resorts were shuttered for months to save money and Eagle Pines was scrapped.  

While some people are upset over Pleasure Island, it seems like many more are either ambivalent or quite happy at seeing the clubs close.  

Individuals certainly view specific changes differently.  But to someone researching DVC for the first time, I don't think they would find a higher volume of complaints today than they would have 5 or 10 years ago.


----------



## Maistre Gracey

tjkraz said:


> Still disagree. There's always been a topic du jour that seemed to get people worked-up.
> 
> Going back 10+ years there were things like new rooms which were smaller than OKW, much higher point charts, potential impact of building so many off-site rooms (Vero, HHI), discontinuation of free park pass incentive.
> 
> Then it was things like no AP discount for members, no dining plan for members, no free Internet service, 40-year contracts for BCV buyers, changes to transfer rules and the years-long debate over SSR destroying the entire program.
> 
> In the last couple of years the hot button issues seem to be changes to booking rules (very, very few complaints in the aftermath), maintenance/refurbs (several resorts now in the midst of upgrades) and housekeeping (which, when you stop and think, have seen a noticeable decrease in complaints here on the forums in the last 6 months.)
> 
> I really don't see DVC benefits being any worse in the long run.  Looking at the last 18 months, it appears that we've traded free valet for free Internet.  The volume of other perks are largely unchanged going back as far as I can recall.
> 
> As far as general cuts at the parks, IMO the post-9/11 reductions were far worse than what we see now.  I vividly remember eating dinner at Tony's a full year after 9/11 when the MK was closed at 6pm.  EMH was discontinued entirely.  MK fireworks and Spectromagic were only performed once or twice per week.  Hunchback show ended at DHS with no replacement.  Tapestry of Dreams ended at Epcot with no replacement.  Entire resorts were shuttered for months to save money and Eagle Pines was scrapped.
> 
> While some people are upset over Pleasure Island, it seems like many more are either ambivalent or quite happy at seeing the clubs close.
> 
> Individuals certainly view specific changes differently.  But to someone researching DVC for the first time, I don't think they would find a higher volume of complaints today than they would have 5 or 10 years ago.


Yeah... But... The Internet, and people Googling such items was not as prevelant back in 1996 when BWV came out with smaller rooms and higher points. We kind of need a baseline of when the Internet started getting serious usage.

The items you describe in the past couple years... well... DVC isn't selling all that well at present.
Same can be said for the amount spent at WDW.
Certainly much of that is attributed to the economic situation, but do we really know how much?

Point is, information, good or bad, is readily available now unlike it was 15 years ago.
Want to buy a car?? Does anyone even bother haggling at a dealer anymore?
Need a question answered on, ohh, ANYTHING?? Just type in a Google search.

Obviously anyone should see the amount of instant information is far, far more available today than 15 years ago.
Do you make a major purchase today without doing some research on the web? Did you do so 20 years ago?

MG


----------



## dianeschlicht

tjkraz said:


> Still disagree. There's always been a topic du jour that seemed to get people worked-up.
> 
> Going back 10+ years there were things like new rooms which were smaller than OKW, much higher point charts, potential impact of building so many off-site rooms (Vero, HHI), discontinuation of free park pass incentive.
> 
> Then it was things like no AP discount for members, no dining plan for members, no free Internet service, 40-year contracts for BCV buyers, changes to transfer rules, no guaranteed BoardWalk View reservations (before implemented) and the years-long debate over SSR destroying the entire program.
> 
> In the last couple of years the hot button issues seem to be changes to booking rules (very, very few complaints in the aftermath), maintenance/refurbs (several resorts now in the midst of upgrades) and housekeeping (which, when you stop and think, have seen a noticeable decrease in complaints here on the forums in the last 6 months.)
> 
> I really don't see DVC benefits being any worse in the long run.  Looking at the last 18 months, it appears that we've traded free valet for free Internet.  The volume of other perks are largely unchanged going back as far as I can recall.
> 
> As far as general cuts at the parks, IMO the post-9/11 reductions were far worse than what we see now.  I vividly remember eating dinner at Tony's a full year after 9/11 when the MK was closed at 6pm.  EMH was discontinued entirely.  MK fireworks and Spectromagic were only performed once or twice per week.  Hunchback show ended at DHS with no replacement.  Tapestry of Dreams ended at Epcot with no replacement.  Entire resorts were shuttered for months to save money and Eagle Pines was scrapped.
> 
> While some people are upset over Pleasure Island, it seems like many more are either ambivalent or quite happy at seeing the clubs close.
> 
> Individuals certainly view specific changes differently.  But to someone researching DVC for the first time, I don't think they would find a higher volume of complaints today than they would have 5 or 10 years ago.



I totally agree, and perks like valet parking weren't ALWAYS around anyway.  I figure perks come and go, and you have to be flexible with those things.  The same goes for details like booking rules etc.  Sure it was a big change at first, but we've all adjusted to it, and we'll live with it.  Just like the closed attractions and parades (Think Tapestry) that we loved and miss.  Their demise doesn't prevent us from going to Disney and still enjoying it.


----------



## Chuck S

dianeschlicht said:


> I totally agree, and perks like valet parking weren't ALWAYS around anyway.  I figure perks come and go, and you have to be flexible with those things.  The same goes for details like booking rules etc.  Sure it was a big change at first, but we've all adjusted to it, and we'll live with it.  Just like the closed attractions and parades (Think Tapestry) that we loved and miss.  Their demise doesn't prevent us from going to Disney and still enjoying it.



I agree, too.  The only thing certain is that there will be changes, no perks are constant.

As far as the booking window change, by reading the boards, it really seems to have had an overall negligible impact for the vast majority of members, and I was quite leary of it for the members at smaller resorts.


----------



## Bobbles

My guess about the next DVC "Perk" to disappear.....?

Free internet service for DVC members.

I didn't know about the valet parking loss until we checked in yesterday. (Unfortunately, I let the BW staff know that I was "irritated". Not their fault. I apologized.)

I do not understand how some members have no problem with the erosion of perks. Are they part of some form of management group that decides that "outsourcing" is good for them?

We joined DVC in 2002 with the belief that perks were some kind of benefit. I pay almost $2000 a year for maintenance fees. 

DVC is a big disappointment to me now.

I will let them know this week while I am here. (Like I think they care about my opinion. )


----------



## tjkraz

Maistre Gracey said:


> Yeah... But... The Internet, and people Googling such items was not as prevelant back in 1996 when BWV came out with smaller rooms and higher points. We kind of need a baseline of when the Internet started getting serious usage.
> 
> The items you describe in the past couple years... well... DVC isn't selling all that well at present.
> Same can be said for the amount spent at WDW.
> Certainly much of that is attributed to the economic situation, but do we really know how much?
> 
> Point is, information, good or bad, is readily available now unlike it was 15 years ago.
> Want to buy a car?? Does anyone even bother haggling at a dealer anymore?
> Need a question answered on, ohh, ANYTHING?? Just type in a Google search.
> 
> Obviously anyone should see the amount of instant information is far, far more available today than 15 years ago.
> Do you make a major purchase today without doing some research on the web? Did you do so 20 years ago?
> 
> MG



Regarding Internet use, undoubtedly it's more prevalent today than in the past.  My point is simply that it's an unreliable resource and that individuals are constantly forced to filter what they read.  No matter what product you Google, you're going to find negative feedback.  That's true of iPhones, Xboxes, Mac computers, cars, restaurants, Disney parks, etc.  Every single product and company has dissatisfied customers.  And many of those products & companies continue to thrive.  

It's apparent that many members are upset by the way this perk was removed.  But do you really think that a non-member who researches DVC for the first time, loves the resorts and calculates the financial benefits of a purchase will decide not to buy simply over these sorts of issues?  Is a $14 per day valet fee (with free self parking still available) plus some members' open mistrust of DVC management enough to convince Average Joe to decide against a DVC purchase?  

As for sales being slow, DVC sold about 10% more contracts in Fiscal Year 2009 than they did in FY 2008.  Prices are also higher.  Through most of '08 prices were around $104 less a $8 discount ($96 net.)  Today AKV and VGC are $112 less $15 ($98) while BLT is $120 less $5 ($115).  Incentives were a bit higher in early 2009 as the economy was really struggling.  But the fact that we've seen incentives reduced and even a price increase suggests DVC is pretty happy with the rate of sales.  

If the economy hadn't tanked I'm sure DVC anticipated a banner year in '09.  But they still did quite well in spite of our struggles.


----------



## Maistre Gracey

tjkraz said:


> Regarding Internet use, undoubtedly it's more prevalent today than in the past.  My point is simply that it's an unreliable resource and that individuals are constantly forced to filter what they read.  No matter what product you Google, you're going to find negative feedback.  That's true of iPhones, Xboxes, Mac computers, cars, restaurants, Disney parks, etc.  Every single product and company has dissatisfied customers.  And many of those products & companies continue to thrive.


But how much MORE market share would Apple have if potential customers didn't read about the poor battery life etc..? 



> It's apparent that many members are upset by the way this perk was removed.  But do you really think that a non-member who researches DVC for the first time, loves the resorts and calculates the financial benefits of a purchase will decide not to buy simply over these sorts of issues?  Is a $14 per day valet fee (with free self parking still available) plus some members' open mistrust of DVC management enough to convince Average Joe to decide against a DVC purchase?


No, but when someone reads ALL the negatives, including the many negative comments about Jim Lewis, I do believe it has an impact.
After all.. Prospective Members come here everyday asking for the good & bad, should I buy or sould I not buy. I'm sure many, many more are lurking.



> As for sales being slow, DVC sold about 10% more contracts in Fiscal Year 2009 than they did in FY 2008.  Prices are also higher.  Through most of '08 prices were around $104 less a $8 discount ($96 net.)  Today AKV and VGC are $112 less $15 ($98) while BLT is $120 less $5 ($115).  Incentives were a bit higher in early 2009 as the economy was really struggling.  But the fact that we've seen incentives reduced and even a price increase suggests DVC is pretty happy with the rate of sales.
> 
> If the economy hadn't tanked I'm sure DVC anticipated a banner year in '09.  But they still did quite well in spite of our struggles.


But, as we all know, in business it's not about net number of sales. It's about expectations, and beating expectations. I would bet things are not rosy in that category, thus the increase in hard sell tactics.
We don't really know what the numbers would be if the economy didn't tank.

I believe I read the Parks & Resorts division is down around 18%. Again, much of that is due to the economy, but I guarantee not all of it is.

Okay, all I'm saying is- If you purchase a new car, do you read about the safety, reliability, costs, repairs,etc.. before you buy it?
If you learn it's a repair queen do you buy it anyway, just because you like it?
I don't. I will buy a different car with more positive reviews.

MG


----------



## tjkraz

Maistre Gracey said:


> Okay, all I'm saying is- If you purchase a new car, do you read about the safety, reliability, costs, repairs,etc.. before you buy it?  If you learn it's a repair queen do you buy it anyway, just because you like it?  I don't. I will buy a different car with more positive reviews.



Depends upon whether I can even find negative reviews, the overall volume and how much stock I place in those opinions.  

What is the "different car with more positive reviews" in DVC terms?  You're not going to find a timeshare program or even a hotel chain with universally glowing reviews.  WDW alone has something like 30,000 resort rooms and not every guest staying in those rooms is going to report a positive experience.  

Most DVC buyers are experienced WDW park guests who have already formed their own expectations for their Disney resort stays.  I will concede that some people may read these forums and be wary of comments about maintenance or housekeeping at DVC resorts.  Whether those fears are realistic or not is an entirely different topic, as is the extent to which Disney can even control and combat such perceptions.  

That said, I'm hard-pressed to believe that DVC will lose business over a valet parking fee (which non-members are used to paying anyway) and subjective comments about how DVC management treats members.  IMO, it's more likely to have impacted sales if dues had risen by 5-8% in 2010 with the addition of a subsidized valet perk.


----------



## BWV Dreamin

tjkraz said:


> Depends upon whether I can even find negative reviews, the overall volume and how much stock I place in those opinions.
> 
> What is the "different car with more positive reviews" in DVC terms? You're not going to find a timeshare program or even a hotel chain with universally glowing reviews. WDW alone has something like 30,000 resort rooms and not every guest staying in those rooms is going to report a positive experience.
> 
> Most DVC buyers are experienced WDW park guests who have already formed their own expectations for their Disney resort stays. I will concede that some people may read these forums and be wary of comments about maintenance or housekeeping at DVC resorts. Whether those fears are realistic or not is an entirely different topic, as is the extent to which Disney can even control and combat such perceptions.
> 
> *That said, I'm hard-pressed to believe that DVC will lose business over a valet parking fee (which non-members are used to paying anyway) and subjective comments about how DVC management treats members*. IMO, it's more likely to have impacted sales if dues had risen by 5-8% in 2010 with the addition of a subsidized valet perk.


 
FYI....posters on the Cruiseline boards are posting negatives posts about DCL due to its last minute cancellations/suspensions to bookings of the 2011 Mediterranean Cruises. Lots of conflicting info, but all DCL did was halt bookings and had TA's call clients asking if they will consider booking to other cruise dates. No explanations. They are not happy over there, so this same mentality has migrated from DVC.....


----------



## Brian Noble

> Certainly much of that is attributed to the economic situation, but do we really know how much?


Occam's Razor suggests almost all of it.  First, even current members mostly have no idea of many of these issues---just listen to the conversations around the resort pool, and it's clear that most Members have never *visited* disboards, let alone read all these threads.  

Second, on balance, the overall attitude of the DVC discussion, even here in this little corner of the Internet, is overwhemlingly positive.  Every other day, there's an "Is DVC Worth It" post---almost all of the responses boil down to "I should have done it sooner".  There are a few who aren't happy about this or that, for good or ill reason.  But, on balance, a third-party observer would conclude that even here, DVC is viewed more positively than not.


----------



## crisi

Brian Noble said:


> Second, on balance, the overall attitude of the DVC discussion, even here in this little corner of the Internet, is overwhemlingly positive.  Every other day, there's an "Is DVC Worth It" post---almost all of the responses boil down to "I should have done it sooner".  There are a few who aren't happy about this or that, for good or ill reason.  But, on balance, a third-party observer would conclude that even here, DVC is viewed more positively than not.



And in all the financial analysis I've seen over the years, I've never seen anyone add in what they save on valet into the ROI numbers - but most people are still coming out with positive ROI.  I have seen people add in the AP discount - which probably isn't a good analysis since it can be taken away - but I've seen people do it.  You don't find many people here who say that DVC is a bad financial deal.


----------



## Maistre Gracey

Brian Noble said:


> Occam's Razor suggests almost all of it.  First, even current members mostly have no idea of many of these issues---just listen to the conversations around the resort pool, and it's clear that most Members have never *visited* disboards, let alone read all these threads.
> 
> Second, on balance, the overall attitude of the DVC discussion, even here in this little corner of the Internet, is overwhemlingly positive.  Every other day, there's an "Is DVC Worth It" post---almost all of the responses boil down to "I should have done it sooner".  There are a few who aren't happy about this or that, for good or ill reason.  But, on balance, a third-party observer would conclude that even here, DVC is viewed more positively than not.


You're right.. Nobody ever researches on the Internet before a major purchase. It truly is a wasted resource. 
Instead, people will go to the corner store and buy a Consumer Reports magazine. While they are there they ask around the other customers for word of mouth opinions on DVC, automobiles, colleges, etc..
We all know word of mouth is very important for business. Thank goodness for the corner store, because nobody uses the most powerful word of mouth tool of all time.. the Internet.
Bad publicity for a company? Don't worry.. Just put it on the information highway we call the Internet. Nobody will read it there.

MG


----------



## BWV Dreamin

Brian Noble said:


> Occam's Razor suggests almost all of it.  First, even current members mostly have no idea of many of these issues---just listen to the conversations around the resort pool, and it's clear that most Members have never *visited* disboards, let alone read all these threads.
> 
> Second, on balance, the overall attitude of the DVC discussion, even here in this little corner of the Internet, is overwhemlingly positive.  Every other day, there's an "Is DVC Worth It" post---almost all of the responses boil down to "I should have done it sooner".  There are a few who aren't happy about this or that, for good or ill reason.  But, on balance, a third-party observer would conclude that even here, DVC is viewed more positively than not.



I don't buy the notion few people view the Internet for DVC info/opinions. While few may post, many read and Google. People are more informed than you think.


----------



## crisi

How many people has this board talked out of DVC?  I've seen people come here who were bad fits for the program...and we didn't talk them out of it.  Even when someone comes on here with "I'm about to buy but all of these complaints about (availability/room cleanliness/ how DVC treats members) are making me nervous" turn into three pages of people saying "don't worry, those are the exceptions."

The ratio of people saying "hey, it isn't all roses" has gone up since I first joined this board.  When I first joined I could count on one hand the people willing to answer "should I buy?" with "it isn't for everyone" - now I think I can fill two hands.  But its still a minority compared to the "I only wish I'd have bought sooner/best purchase of my life/you can't go wrong" crowd.


----------



## Maistre Gracey

crisi said:


> How many people has this board talked out of DVC?  I've seen people come here who were bad fits for the program...and we didn't talk them out of it.  Even when someone comes on here with "I'm about to buy but all of these complaints about (availability/room cleanliness/ how DVC treats members) are making me nervous" turn into three pages of people saying "don't worry, those are the exceptions."
> 
> The ratio of people saying "hey, it isn't all roses" has gone up since I first joined this board.  When I first joined I could count on one hand the people willing to answer "should I buy?" with "it isn't for everyone" - now I think I can fill two hands.  But its still a minority compared to the "I only wish I'd have bought sooner/best purchase of my life/you can't go wrong" crowd.


I don't think we should assume DISboards, a very friendly, pro Disney site, is the only place people find information about Disney.

I think it's hard to tell how many people read, and do not buy. My guess is the likely purchasers are more likely to actually post.

MG


----------



## disneynutz

crisi said:


> How many people has this board talked out of DVC?  I've seen people come here who were bad fits for the program...and we didn't talk them out of it.  Even when someone comes on here with "I'm about to buy but all of these complaints about (availability/room cleanliness/ how DVC treats members) are making me nervous" turn into three pages of people saying "don't worry, those are the exceptions."
> 
> The ratio of people saying "hey, it isn't all roses" has gone up since I first joined this board.  When I first joined I could count on one hand the people willing to answer "should I buy?" with "it isn't for everyone" - now I think I can fill two hands.  But its still a minority compared to the "I only wish I'd have bought sooner/best purchase of my life/you can't go wrong" crowd.



Most folks won't publicly admit that DVC was a bad decision or that it has lost it's shine. Contracts currently  being put on the resale market are partially a result of this.

Personally, I would like to see more of Disney's attention spent on the Membership, maintaining the resorts, and improving communication.

Saving money on our rooms currently makes DVC a good fit for us, so for now, we are owners at 5 resorts and we vacation at WDW 2 or 3 times per year.

 Bill


----------



## BWV Dreamin

Maistre Gracey said:


> I don't think we should assume DISboards, a very friendly, pro Disney site, is the only place people find information about Disney.
> 
> I think it's hard to tell how many people read, and do not buy. My guess is the likely purchasers are more likely to actually post.
> 
> MG



There are plenty of other boards to visit to get various opinions about DVC. Some are more monitored than others, thus regulating what actually gets posted. Just because you don't see it doesn't mean they(negative posts) don't exist.


----------



## BUDDYBEAR

I hope this is not true


----------



## Dean

Bobbles said:


> My guess about the next DVC "Perk" to disappear.....?
> 
> Free internet service for DVC members.
> 
> I didn't know about the valet parking loss until we checked in yesterday. (Unfortunately, I let the BW staff know that I was "irritated". Not their fault. I apologized.)
> 
> I do not understand how some members have no problem with the erosion of perks. Are they part of some form of management group that decides that "outsourcing" is good for them?
> 
> We joined DVC in 2002 with the belief that perks were some kind of benefit. I pay almost $2000 a year for maintenance fees.
> 
> DVC is a big disappointment to me now.
> 
> I will let them know this week while I am here. (Like I think they care about my opinion. )


I would be surprised, the internet wasn't free initially to members but it's cheap in relative terms, there is a major economy of scale, it's used by a larger % of owners, it's often considered an expected option at a resort (I know some still charge but not that many) and it's subsidized by cash guests and exchangers.  



Maistre Gracey said:


> Yup... BUT, they didn't start reducing benefits, closing PI, cutting back fireworks, etc.. in those 10 years. It has really come to light in the last year.
> 
> Prior to the past year I believe things were indeed pretty rosy, and prospective members read the good reviews..
> 
> MG


As I noted, it will likely have some effect as do the positive things that get posted here and elsewhere.  However, I think you overestimate the amount of preplanning and investigation that goes into such a purchase for the majority of people and I think you overestimate the ability of many individuals to help themselves no matter what they see or hear.  You still see people buying to use for CC, DCL and exchanging and if they can't look at the hard facts against those choices and move on, minor issues that no one thinks about going in aren't going to stop them.  

To look at it another way, I think that many who feel that complaints and negative posts will have much of an effect are overestimating the importance of a given member in the big scheme of things.  How many people did we see post early in this thread that portrayed the idea that they'd complain and DVC would actually re-think this decision based on those individual complaints or even the aggregate complaints.  They were, IMO, overestimating their own importance.


----------



## DebbieB

BUDDYBEAR said:


> I hope this is not true



The end of free valet parking?   There have been many first hand reports that it is true.


----------



## Brian Noble

> I don't buy the notion few people view the Internet for DVC info/opinions


How many people post on this site regularly?  A few hundred?  How many more read it.  A factor of 10?  A factor of 20?  So, a few thousand or two.

How many members are there?  (Hint: a lot more.)

Even if you don't buy that back-of-the-envelope calculation, the simple observation around the pool should tell you all you need to know.  At least half the conversations you hear, and probably more, clearly demonstrate that the conversants fail to understand some fundamental piece of their Memberships.


----------



## bumbershoot

BWV Dreamin said:


> There are plenty of other boards to visit to get various opinions about DVC. Some are more monitored than others, thus regulating what actually gets posted. Just because you don't see it doesn't mean they(negative posts) don't exist.





BUDDYBEAR said:


> I hope this is not true





DebbieB said:


> The end of free valet parking?   There have been many first hand reports that it is true.





I got the feeling that buddybear was reacting to the idea that the dis erases negative posts about DVC.


----------



## tjkraz

Maistre Gracey said:


> You're right.. Nobody ever researches on the Internet before a major purchase. It truly is a wasted resource.
> Instead, people will go to the corner store and buy a Consumer Reports magazine. While they are there they ask around the other customers for word of mouth opinions on DVC, automobiles, colleges, etc..
> We all know word of mouth is very important for business. Thank goodness for the corner store, because nobody uses the most powerful word of mouth tool of all time.. the Internet.
> Bad publicity for a company? Don't worry.. Just put it on the information highway we call the Internet. Nobody will read it there.



On Amazon.com nearly 1300 people have reviewed a popular model of the iPod Touch.  Of those 1300 reviews almost 10% (121 reviewers) gave it a poor rating of just one or two stars.  Complaints ranged from iPods being overpriced to obscure technical problems to total hardware failures.  

In spite of those very public complaints, the iPod Touch is considered a groundbreaking product which has helped propel Apple to record financial growth in a time when other companies are simply struggling to stay afloat.  

You're right--many people do go to the Internet to research a purchase like DVC.  But people realize that no product is universally praised.  This isn't like the old Consumer Reports days when you had a single black & white product score to fall back on--when you solicit feedback from 1300 people you're going to get a wide range of opinions.  But the existence of negative feedback does not mean that the product should be ignored, nor that my experiences will reflect those cons.  

IMO, something like the point reallocation is more likely to have an impact on DVC sales.  Of course that impact could be positive or negative depending upon one's intended travel patterns.  By comparison, I don't see DVC losing a lot of sales over this valet parking issue.  Many people wouldn't valet park anyway.  Those who do are used to paying for it at Disney resorts.  (Doesn't make much sense to forego DVC on those grounds since they will be paying for valet either way.)  

Any derogatory comments regarding DVC management are among the first to be disregarded by potential buyers.  That's part of your 10% bad iPod reviews--the "Steve Jobs is a greedy ***" component.  People who have made the intellectual or emotional decision to buy DVC aren't going to be swayed by a handful of message board posters who have negative opinions of Jim Lewis or who--in true Chicken Little style--warn that "your favorite perk could be next!"

I don't begrudge current members who are displeased with certain changes DVC has made and decide to move on.  That's certainly their prerogative.  But I also think those who claim this sort of move will harm the DVC product as a whole are not looking at the big picture.  At its core DVC is a product which allows guests to stay on-site for pennies on the dollar over the long haul.  DVC has no competition in that market, which makes buyers willing to overlook some potential warts along the way.


----------



## BWV Dreamin

The only change that I witnessed a reversal on from DVD due to complaints (both from the DIS and emails/phone calls was the studio glasswares change. That did get reversed. What was the impact that forced the change? Why has nothing else been reversed?




Dean said:


> I would be surprised, the internet wasn't free initially to members but it's cheap in relative terms, there is a major economy of scale, it's used by a larger % of owners, it's often considered an expected option at a resort (I know some still charge but not that many) and it's subsidized by cash guests and exchangers.
> 
> As I noted, it will likely have some effect as do the positive things that get posted here and elsewhere.  However, I think you overestimate the amount of preplanning and investigation that goes into such a purchase for the majority of people and I think you overestimate the ability of many individuals to help themselves no matter what they see or hear.  You still see people buying to use for CC, DCL and exchanging and if they can't look at the hard facts against those choices and move on, minor issues that no one thinks about going in aren't going to stop them.
> 
> To look at it another way, I think that many who feel that complaints and negative posts will have much of an effect are overestimating the importance of a given member in the big scheme of things.  How many people did we see post early in this thread that portrayed the idea that they'd complain and DVC would actually re-think this decision based on those individual complaints or even the aggregate complaints.  They were, IMO, overestimating their own importance.


----------



## Robo-Daddy 3000

Bobbles said:


> I do not understand how some members have no problem with the erosion of perks. Are they part of some form of management group that decides that "outsourcing" is good for them?



I guess you've noticed how there are a few people here who will defend nearly every change that DVC makes as totally justifiable. It's like that on almost every message board that there is.


----------



## Chuck S

Robo-Daddy 3000 said:


> I guess you've noticed how there are a few people here who will defend nearly every change that DVC makes as totally justifiable. It's like that on almost every message board that there is.



There are also a lot of people that don't seem to have read their POS and purchase agreements, and feel "entitled" to things not described in the documents.  While DVC certainly sells because of an emotional factor, it is at its core a purchase of a interest in a limited lease timeshare, nothing more.

Certain rights are guaranteed in those contracts, perks are not.  Perks have been changing, cycling between more and less, since my purchase in 1992. I would expect that to continue.  I also expect Disney/DVC to fulfill their legal obligations under the purchase documents...those obligations basically are to maintain the resorts, allow me to book based upon availability, adjust point charts if deemed necessary to balance demand, and maintain the rooms with furnishings of similar functions and quality as what was represented at time of purchase, allowing for scheduled upgrades with improving and less costly technology.  Those are things to which we are entitled under our contracts.  The glassware mentioned by BWV Dreamin is such a furnishing.

Perks on the other hand are not entitlements, they are temporary discounts and "freebies" that may be granted without notification for an unspecified time period.

The AP discount, which I use, could disappear tomorrow.  I know that, so I enjoy it while it is available.  When it disappears, I'll miss it, but that is the way it is with perks.  It has no direct bearing on my ownership.

Other perks that could disappear...dining discounts, new attraction previews, discounted golf/mini-golf/water park/DQ admissions and many more.

If you have purchased DVC based upon perks, you are setting yourself up for disappointment.


----------



## dianeschlicht

Robo-Daddy 3000 said:


> I guess you've noticed how there are a few people here who will defend nearly every change that DVC makes as totally justifiable. It's like that on almost every message board that there is.



And there are a few people who think perks can and should never change!  Perks are just that....a bonus to your membership.  Frankly, we are all lucky we get "perks"!  Lots of other timeshares give you nothing more than the chance to use your timeshare and pay dues!


----------



## MELSMICE

BUDDYBEAR said:


> I hope this is not true


It's 100% true.  I was at BCV & BWV a few weeks ago & was informed of the change when we wanted to valet park.


----------



## dianeschlicht

Bobbles said:


> My guess about the next DVC "Perk" to disappear.....?
> 
> Free internet service for DVC members.
> 
> I will let them know this week while I am here. (Like I think they care about my opinion. )



See, and I figure Free internet is there IN PLACE of free valet.  We paid for internet up until a couple years ago.  Either way...the few bucks I'd spend on either one isn't going to make or break a Disney trip for me.


----------



## Kathy C

We've been members since 2000 w/300 pts at BWV and the "free" valet parking didn't play into our decision to buy at all.  I'd much rather have the discounted AP passes!


----------



## tjkraz

Robo-Daddy 3000 said:


> I guess you've noticed how there are a few people here who will defend nearly every change that DVC makes as totally justifiable. It's like that on almost every message board that there is.



It's not about defending, Rob, it's simply understanding the nature of the product.  It's about having realistic expectations going forward.  

If perks were static, we wouldn't have gained the AP discount back in 2005 or Internet service in '08.  Some changes will work in our favor and others will not.


----------



## jade1

tjkraz said:


> It's not about defending, Rob, it's simply understanding the nature of the product.  It's about having realistic expectations going forward.
> 
> If perks were static, we wouldn't have gained the AP discount back in 2005 or Internet service in '08.  Some changes will work in our favor and others will not.



I think some are talking "perks", and some are talking "changes". Kind of the same but, not really. To me a perk would be 3 FP's a day on DVC stays for example. Pre-paid valet would be not be a perk IMO. I think some of us prefer a more inclusive (pre-paid) membership and are willing to pay for it-not an entitlement. Some have pointed out we should expect to stare at 4 walls and nothing more-well that explains the importance of a good view anyway. 

By the way, if perks were static, wouldn't we all have no charge AP's? I thought those were included in the beginning.


----------



## Chuck S

jade1 said:


> I think some are talking "perks", and some are talking "changes". Kind of the same but, not really. To me a perk would be 3 FP's a day on DVC stays for example. Pre-paid valet would be not be a perk IMO. I think some of us prefer a more inclusive (pre-paid) membership and are willing to pay for it-not an entitlement. Some have pointed out we should expect to stare at 4 walls and nothing more-well that explains the importance of a good view anyway.
> 
> By the way, if perks were static, wouldn't we all have no charge AP's? I thought those were included in the beginning.



APs were not included at the beginning, they were free Length of Stay passes for 1/2 the stated capacity of the room.  If you stayed in studio or 1 bed, you received 2 passes for the length of stay, a 2 bedroom received 4 passes and GV 6 passes.

It was a purchase incentive, not a "perk" as detailed in our POS, with a contracted and stated end date (12/31/1999) for the incentive.  This pass was funded by DVC Marketing, not dues.

As far as paying for the valet and other services via dues, remember that DVC is limited in the amount that dues can increase, thus if valet was free/being funded by means other than dues, and that funding ended and would need to now be funded by dues, the amount _could_ with increases in other normal and needed increases in operating expenses, have put them over that limit.  

Even though _you_ may not mind increasing your dues to pay for the service, other owners may not feel such an increase is justified.  As Dean has said, valet really is one of the services that lends itself well to a pay as you play structure vs a dues budget item.

Plus, it would potentially throw the dues for those resorts completely out of whack with the dues of the resorts that do not offer the service.  remember that OKW and SSR have never offered valet, yet the owners of those resorts could use the free service at your resort.  If the service became dues based, the owners of that resort would be paying for a service used by members at other resorts, whether they were staying at that resort or not.

There would be no legal way to include the valet service in the OKW or SSR dues, unless those resorts also added valet services, as dues are legally based upon the operating expenses of each resort, not a combined total of all the resorts.

The other option would be to restrict the valet service to those staying at those respective resorts, only.  So owners at those resorts would not be entitled to the free valet unless they are staying there.  And I think a lot of owners used the service when staying elsewhere, including offsite.

Now, there is a good option, I think.  They could sell some sort of "annual pass" for valet services...though the pricing could be prohibitive.


----------



## DebbieB

jade1 said:


> By the way, if perks were static, wouldn't we all have no charge AP's? I thought those were included in the beginning.



That was a marketing promotion when OKW opened.  It was not free AP's.  It was a length of stay pass for half of the occupancy of room room based on the nights of stay (studio, 1 bedroom = 2, 2 bedroom = 4, GV = 6).   The marketing promotion was clear from the start that it ended 12/31/99.

Oops...Chuck beat me to it!


----------



## Brian Noble

> They could sell some sort of "annual pass" for valet services...


They do, after a fashion---the Tables in Wonderland card.  You need a dining receipt, though.


----------



## Mickey'sApprentice

Chuck S said:


> There are also a lot of people that don't seem to have read their POS and purchase agreements, and feel "entitled" to things not described in the documents.  While DVC certainly sells because of an emotional factor, it is at its core a purchase of a interest in a limited lease timeshare, nothing more.



I have never understood the complaints about the point re-allocation. It was on the boards before we bought; we saw it in the POS as we bought. It was absolutely no surprise to me.

I read and understood what the re-allocation meant going in. Disney did exactly what they said they would do. No problem. Yes, it had been a long time since they had re-allocated but it was within DVCs rights to do so.


----------



## BWV Dreamin

dianeschlicht said:


> See, and I figure Free internet is there IN PLACE of free valet. We paid for internet up until a couple years ago. Either way...the few bucks I'd spend on either one isn't going to make or break a Disney trip for me.


 With the smart phone technology( Iphones, Blackberries) in place now, many might not even care about free internet.


----------



## MELSMICE

BWV Dreamin said:


> With the smart phone technology( Iphones, Blackberries) in place now, many might not even care about free internet.


I can check e-mail right from my regular cell phone, so I seriously don't have a need for Internet.  Plus, my DH has the Verizon card for his computer & we can get Internet through that.  For us, doesn't matter if there is free Internet or not.


----------



## dianeschlicht

BWV Dreamin said:


> With the smart phone technology( Iphones, Blackberries) in place now, many might not even care about free internet.



For email, that might be true, but I like having my laptop AND my BlackBerry!


----------



## crisi

Robo-Daddy 3000 said:


> I guess you've noticed how there are a few people here who will defend nearly every change that DVC makes as totally justifiable. It's like that on almost every message board that there is.



Its fascinating, because the people who defend DVC in these threads are a lot of the same people who will tell other people not to buy.  I know that Dean and Tim and I have all been dinged in the "should I buy" threads as being "too negative."  I think Chuck has too.

But the thrust of what we say, those of us who "defend everything DVC does" is the same from thread to thread.  Buy DVC for what you are contracted to get.  Understand that it is a timeshare, not a luxury hotel.  Understand that you are about to become a captured customer.  Make sure it makes sense as a program for the way you travel and your financial situation.   And our "defense" of Disney tends to be in reaction to people who didn't understand these points going in.  Who expect Disney to run as something other than a business whose job it is to legally maximize return for their shareholders.


----------



## Chuck S

MELSMICE said:


> I can check e-mail right from my regular cell phone, so I seriously don't have a need for Internet.  Plus, my DH has the Verizon card for his computer & we can get Internet through that.  For us, doesn't matter if there is free Internet or not.



And for many of us, there are applications that we have to run, that won't work on a hand held device. Just before the internet service was free, do remember how many complaints there were here that "even Motel 6" has free internet?


----------



## Deb & Bill

Brian Noble said:


> They do, after a fashion---the Tables in Wonderland card.  You need a dining receipt, though.



That free valet parking is only good for three hours if I recall correctly.  Not overnight.


----------



## Brian Noble

> That free valet parking is only good for three hours if I recall correctly.


I don't recall any such limitation in the fine print, but I don't have my fine print with me at the moment.  Perhaps you're thinking of the self-parking time limit for dining?  That said, I suppose you could construe "for the purposes of dining at the resort" to eliminate overnight parking.  In any event, I also expect the valets to be a bit more careful about checking for these receipts, and I wouldn't be surprised to see that entitlement terminated for TIWs sold after the first of the year.


----------



## disneynutz

crisi said:


> Its fascinating, because the people who defend DVC in these threads are a lot of the same people who will tell other people not to buy.  I know that Dean and Tim and I have all been dinged in the "should I buy" threads as being "too negative."  I think Chuck has too.
> 
> But the thrust of what we say, those of us who "defend everything DVC does" is the same from thread to thread.  Buy DVC for what you are contracted to get.  Understand that it is a timeshare, not a luxury hotel.  Understand that you are about to become a captured customer.  Make sure it makes sense as a program for the way you travel and your financial situation.   And our "defense" of Disney tends to be in reaction to people who didn't understand these points going in.  Who expect Disney to run as something other than a business whose job it is to legally maximize return for their shareholders.



There is only one thing that I can say about your post.




 Bill


----------



## Beth

A really stupid question ....I apologize in advance....   

My DH and I go over to WDW quite often for only one night.

If we check in on a Saturday and valet, then check out the next morning and retrieve our car - are we paying $14 or $28?

...I'm assuming $28 - and that would really stink....

Could someone please confirm?

TIA...
~ Beth


----------



## hakepb

MELSMICE said:


> I can check e-mail right from my regular cell phone, so I seriously don't have a need for Internet.  Plus, my DH has the Verizon card for his computer & we can get Internet through that.  For us, doesn't matter if there is free Internet or not.


..for a long enough stay it might, those Verizon cards have bandwidth limits.  My SIL has one for home because there is no DSL or Cable availability.  After 3 weeks of standard browsing they are usually at their cap, and they already turned off automatic updates and save those for free wi-fi areas...

And I've read, if you really want a huuuuge Verizon bill, watch a night of Internet video streaming..


----------



## MELSMICE

hakepb said:


> ..for a long enough stay it might, those Verizon cards have bandwidth limits.  My SIL has one for home because there is no DSL or Cable availability.  After 3 weeks of standard browsing they are usually at their cap, and they already turned off automatic updates and save those for free wi-fi areas...
> 
> And I've read, if you really want a huuuuge Verizon bill, watch a night of Internet video streaming..


He pays a flat fee every month.  We don't have a problem using it, although it is slow & sometimes kicks you off so you have to sign back on.  

Shows though how different perks mean something different to different guests.  I would prefer the valet park perk & others would prefer the Internet perk.


----------



## Maistre Gracey

Chuck S said:


> There are also a lot of people that don't seem to have read their POS and purchase agreements, and feel "entitled" to things not described in the documents.  While DVC certainly sells because of an emotional factor, it is at its core a purchase of a interest in a limited lease timeshare, nothing more.
> 
> Certain rights are guaranteed in those contracts, perks are not.  Perks have been changing, cycling between more and less, since my purchase in 1992. I would expect that to continue.  I also expect Disney/DVC to fulfill their legal obligations under the purchase documents...those obligations basically are to maintain the resorts, allow me to book based upon availability, adjust point charts if deemed necessary to balance demand, and maintain the rooms with furnishings of similar functions and quality as what was represented at time of purchase, allowing for scheduled upgrades with improving and less costly technology.  Those are things to which we are entitled under our contracts.  The glassware mentioned by BWV Dreamin is such a furnishing.
> 
> Perks on the other hand are not entitlements, they are temporary discounts and "freebies" that may be granted without notification for an unspecified time period.
> 
> The AP discount, which I use, could disappear tomorrow.  I know that, so I enjoy it while it is available.  When it disappears, I'll miss it, but that is the way it is with perks.  It has no direct bearing on my ownership.
> 
> Other perks that could disappear...dining discounts, new attraction previews, discounted golf/mini-golf/water park/DQ admissions and many more.
> 
> If you have purchased DVC based upon perks, you are setting yourself up for disappointment.


Having 4 theme parks in your backyard isn't guaranteed in the POS either, but I would bet if Disney closed the parks many POS worshipers would be up in arms.
Heck, I wonder if someday we are charged to self park at the DVC resorts?

Valet parking may be a stretch, but some perks are considered more guaranteed than others. 

MG


----------



## Brian Noble

If Disney resorts to closing parks, what's in or not in the POS isn't going to be anyone's first concern.  Any situation in which the parks become unprofitable are pretty grim---$400 oil making flying prohibitively expensive, etc.


----------



## Chuck S

Maistre Gracey said:


> Having 4 theme parks in your backyard isn't guaranteed in the POS either, but I would bet if Disney closed the parks many POS worshipers would be up in arms.
> Heck, I wonder if someday we are charged to self park at the DVC resorts?
> 
> Valet parking may be a stretch, but some perks are considered more guaranteed than others.
> 
> MG



We actually were made well aware at our first sales tour that the parks are not guaranteed, and could be closed.  In fact, I think it was in our product understanding checklist that DVC/Disney made no guarantees of continued theme park operations.

However, the resort self parkig areas are likely maintained by DVC dues.  I would think that in order for them to charge for resort parking, that the maintenance of the parking areas would need to become the responsibility of another operating company and not DVC.


----------



## crisi

Brian Noble said:


> If Disney resorts to closing parks, what's in or not in the POS isn't going to be anyone's first concern.  Any situation in which the parks become unprofitable are pretty grim---$400 oil making flying prohibitively expensive, etc.



I suspect I'll have sold my DVC long before Disney gives up on the parks.  But if Disney does give up on the parks before closing DVC, my guess is the default rate on dues would be so high that the resorts would be unsustainable very quickly.


----------



## jade1

Chuck S said:


> Even though _you_ may not mind increasing your dues to pay for the service, other owners may not feel such an increase is justified.



My point is there is a lot of folks saying "entitlements" and "free", and that's not the case for some of us-we are willing to pay for these things. Not saying which is the best way to approach it, just that some of us have different views. Hopefully other opinions are accepted on the here-please let us know if not.


----------



## jade1

Chuck S said:


> DVC/Disney made no guarantees of continued theme park operations.
> .



I would agree-somebody could buy Disney over the years and close it all down.


----------



## Dean

BWV Dreamin said:


> The only change that I witnessed a reversal on from DVD due to complaints (both from the DIS and emails/phone calls was the studio glasswares change. That did get reversed. What was the impact that forced the change? Why has nothing else been reversed?


That and the decision to cont to allow 25 pt contracts was a reversal.  IMO there is a fundamental difference here though.  While this decision (valet) was implemented rapidly, it was clearly a major decision that required collaboration and input from the very top of DVC, the resorts and likely outside DVC as well.  It was not a minor decision that could have gone either way (as the other 2 were) though i would classify the other 2 as minor.  I personally would have been surprised had they not made some allowance for BLT given the change after sales began but before opening, the glassware could have gone either way.  Regardless, both were fairly minor issues with low dollar amounts associated overall.



Robo-Daddy 3000 said:


> I guess you've noticed how there are a few people here who will defend nearly every change that DVC makes as totally justifiable. It's like that on almost every message board that there is.


It's not generally blind justification but rather more objective evaluations, usually combating selfish and/or emotional responses not based on fact or reason, as in this thread.  



jade1 said:


> I think some are talking "perks", and some are talking "changes". Kind of the same but, not really. To me a perk would be 3 FP's a day on DVC stays for example. Pre-paid valet would be not be a perk IMO. I think some of us prefer a more inclusive (pre-paid) membership and are willing to pay for it-not an entitlement. Some have pointed out we should expect to stare at 4 walls and nothing more-well that explains the importance of a good view anyway.
> 
> By the way, if perks were static, wouldn't we all have no charge AP's? I thought those were included in the beginning.


IMO, anything not guaranteed by law and legal paperwork is a perk.  That's true no matter what one was verbally promised or how long it's been in place.



crisi said:


> Its fascinating, because the people who defend DVC in these threads are a lot of the same people who will tell other people not to buy.  I know that Dean and Tim and I have all been dinged in the "should I buy" threads as being "too negative."  I think Chuck has too.
> 
> But the thrust of what we say, those of us who "defend everything DVC does" is the same from thread to thread.  Buy DVC for what you are contracted to get.  Understand that it is a timeshare, not a luxury hotel.  Understand that you are about to become a captured customer.  Make sure it makes sense as a program for the way you travel and your financial situation.   And our "defense" of Disney tends to be in reaction to people who didn't understand these points going in.  Who expect Disney to run as something other than a business whose job it is to legally maximize return for their shareholders.


Exactly, thank you Crisi.  I'm not a homer, I'm a realist.  I expect a lot out of our DVC and that's why I value each and every point as I do and refuse to use them for trivial low value options.  And I want people to buy DVC because it's right for them, not because they're enamored with it or Disney.  It is funny to be seen as a homer on one thread and chastised for comparing DVC in a negative light to Marriott or others on another thread.  



Maistre Gracey said:


> Having 4 theme parks in your backyard isn't guaranteed in the POS either, but I would bet if Disney closed the parks many POS worshipers would be up in arms.
> Heck, I wonder if someday we are charged to self park at the DVC resorts?
> 
> Valet parking may be a stretch, but some perks are considered more guaranteed than others.
> 
> MG


I have specifically stated that the parks are not guaranteed and have wondered out loud on these boards how people would react if there were DVC resorts and not parks including how prices would hold up and how DVC would compete with others in Orlando and elsewhere.  Frankly I would expect to be charged at least at the hotel type resorts (if not all) someday for self parking.  Just like I expect PH to go away at some point and another reallocation.


----------



## dmoore22

crisi said:


> Its fascinating, because the people who defend DVC in these threads are a lot of the same people who will tell other people not to buy.  I know that Dean and Tim and I have all been dinged in the "should I buy" threads as being "too negative."  I think Chuck has too.
> 
> But the thrust of what we say, those of us who "defend everything DVC does" is the same from thread to thread.  Buy DVC for what you are contracted to get.  Understand that it is a timeshare, not a luxury hotel.  Understand that you are about to become a captured customer.  Make sure it makes sense as a program for the way you travel and your financial situation.   And our "defense" of Disney tends to be in reaction to people who didn't understand these points going in.  Who expect Disney to run as something other than a business whose job it is to legally maximize return for their shareholders.



Agreed. If the issue is so important they would contact Member Services or attend the condo association meetings to express their views and vote as opposed to venting on a discussion list. If enough members use those avenues something may change because, as in the old cliche, the squeaky wheel gets attention. How many times has DVC changed, added, or altered benefits, perks, or points, based on, as they report it, member input?


----------



## Chuck S

jade1 said:


> My point is there is a lot of folks saying "entitlements" and "free", and that's not the case for some of us-we are willing to pay for these things. Not saying which is the best way to approach it, just that some of us have different views. Hopefully other opinions are accepted on the here-please let us know if not.



But that's the thing...someone has to pay, whether it is paid individually by the people that use it, or whether it is included in dues, or if it is discounted/subsidized by Disney (which isn't likely to happen.)  You're saying it should be included in dues.  That would be to the benefit only of those that use the service, and be to the detriment of those that do not use the service.

Others feel it is more fair for the people that use the service to foot the bill.  

And if it were added to dues, those resorts involved would be the owners billed, OKW and SSR would not be affected...as they have never had valet, and there is really no parking lot available for them to start such a service.

Thus those other resorts could have a substantially higher increase in dues compared to OKW, SSR, HHI and VB.  Would that not impact the resale values of BWV, BCV, VWL and BLT? 

It is all a balancing act as to what benefits the majority of members at a resort, while still being fiscally responsible to the ownership of that resort as a whole.  Apparently, in this case, DVC thought it was not a fiscally responsible move to continue providing the service for _some_ owners of the resort by billing _all_ owners of the resort.  Obviously, for some services, like the internet, the cost would be minimal.  For others, like energy and utilities, the cost is more, but necessary under the POS for resort operation.

Without having the ability to see the financial estimates, we don't know what the increase would have been per point at the varying resorts to continue the service, but it is not a necessity like utilities.

Would it be a minimal financial impact? Possibly.  Or would it be somewhat expensive? Again, possibly.  We just don't know.

What we can surmise, is that the majority of owners would not like to see dues increased to pay for it.  How can we assume this?  From the straw vote taken of OKW owners by DVC many years ago, asking if dues should be increased at OKW to build the pool slide.  And that was a one time cost.  Services like valet are labor intensive, and a continuing and increasing annual cost. 

At OKW, DVC/Disney thought the slide would be a benefit to the resort and were probably looking at increasing demand for cash rentals. Members disagreed, so DVD financed the slide construction.  Members, however, are obligated to pay for the continuing upkeep and lifeguards.

The bottom line, you may disagree with whom you think should foot the bill, the individual or all owners at the resort,  but the bill still would need to be paid by someone.  And Disney/DVD is unlikely to finance this increasing annual cost.


----------



## Dean

There are 2 groups of perks. Those that are more marketing and don't cost anyone anything like restaurant discounts and those that are tied to the resort and have cost like internet.  Then there are required elements that are tied to the POS like exercise room, pool, etc.


----------



## crisi

Chuck S said:


> What we can surmise, is that the majority of owners would not like to see dues increased to pay for it.  How can we assume this?  From the straw vote taken of OKW owners by DVC many years ago, asking if dues should be increased at OKW to build the pool slide.  And that was a one time cost.  Services like valet are labor intensive, and a continuing and increasing annual cost.
> 
> At OKW, DVC/Disney thought the slide would be a benefit to the resort and were probably looking at increasing demand for cash rentals. Members disagreed, so DVD financed the slide construction.  Members, however, are obligated to pay for the continuing upkeep and lifeguards.



For anyone "fairly new" who missed the OKW slide thing - this "DVC making decisions in our best interest that we don't all agree is in our best interest" has been going on for quite some time - this isn't new.

Another old time one that caused a lot of consternation was the move to "room ready"  - particularly for the first six weeks when BWView was not a booking category.

Then there was the closing of SAB to pool hopping when BCVs opened.  For those that were making use of SAB from the BW or OKW who'd been "promised" that perk at purchase, there was a great gnashing of teeth.


----------



## CarolAnnC

Just a reminder here folks - the topic of "smoking" is not allowed here on our DVC DIScussion boards.

Thank you and now back to our "No More Free Valet.." discussion...


----------



## Deb & Bill

Beth said:


> A really stupid question ....I apologize in advance....
> 
> My DH and I go over to WDW quite often for only one night.
> 
> If we check in on a Saturday and valet, then check out the next morning and retrieve our car - are we paying $14 or $28?
> 
> ...I'm assuming $28 - and that would really stink....
> 
> Could someone please confirm?
> 
> TIA...
> ~ Beth



You'll be paying $14 for the one night.  The valet parking day coincides with the resort day/night.


----------



## Beth

Deb & Bill said:


> You'll be paying $14 for the one night.  The valet parking day coincides with the resort day/night.



Thanks for the info - that's good to hear!


----------



## MELSMICE

Chuck S said:


> What we can surmise, is that the majority of owners would not like to see dues increased to pay for it.  How can we assume this?  From the straw vote taken of OKW owners by DVC many years ago, asking if dues should be increased at OKW to build the pool slide.  And that was a one time cost.  Services like valet are labor intensive, and a continuing and increasing annual cost.



Of course, no one would like to see a dues increase ever, but the reality is that they will increase over the years.  

We purchased DVC as a luxury for our family.  We wanted nicer/larger accommodations for our vacation.  We wanted what we consider a first class vacation at WDW.  If that means upgrading the amenities (which includes an OKW slide) and offering member perks, such as free valet, which will increase our dues over time, then so bet it.  Members couldn't have purchased thinking that dues would stay the same and that costs wouldn't be increased.  

If I have to pay a little more yearly to make mine or someone else's vacation what they expected when they joined, then I'll pay a few pennies/dollars more.  We never bought DVC for it's great monetary value - it was purchased for relaxing, fun, entertaining vacations for our family.


----------



## disneynutz

Beth said:


> Thanks for the info - that's good to hear!



The price for Valet was increased from $10 to $12 per night.

The price for auto parking at the parks went from $12 to $14 per day.

 Bill


----------



## Robo-Daddy 3000

dianeschlicht said:


> And there are a few people who think perks can and should never change!  Perks are just that....a bonus to your membership.  Frankly, we are all lucky we get "perks"!  Lots of other timeshares give you nothing more than the chance to use your timeshare and pay dues!



And I'm not one of those people. Other than the AP discount, we don't take advantage of too many perks.

I'm not sure if I've ever even weighed in on the subject of the valet parking perk. But I never used it and really never gave a thought about how it was paid for. The actual removal of the perk was poorly executed and that is the most bothersome aspect to me. No one should drop off their car thinking that valet was free and then be told upon picking up the car that now they have to pay. But we've all read about instances like that. For a long-standing perk like valet parking-, advance notice of its removal should have been given to members.


----------



## SuzanneSLO

MELSMICE said:


> . . .If I have to pay a little more yearly to make mine or someone else's vacation what they expected when they joined, then I'll pay a few pennies/dollars more.  We never bought DVC for it's great monetary value - it was purchased for relaxing, fun, entertaining vacations for our family.



And, of course, each member can still have the option to make their  vacation as luxurious as they want by using valet parking.  The only difference is that it will cost them $12 per night (plus tips) instead of so much per point.

For us, we usually stay an average of 11 nights using our 175 points, so valet parking (without tips) will cost us about $0.75 per point.  Every member's point cost will vary and those who do not valet park will not pay anything.  Nothing wrong with that in my book -- Suzanne


----------



## mopee3

I keep checking back on this thread wondering how long people are going to complain about the removal of a perk they were never promised when they signed the papers.  Well you all are greattttttt...... it has been going on for, lets see about 40 days!!

I wonder if it ought to be made a "sticky" about complaining?

Moe


----------



## disneynutz

mopee3 said:


> I keep checking back on this thread wondering how long people are going to complain about the removal of a perk they were never promised when they signed the papers.  Well you all are greattttttt...... it has been going on for, lets see about 40 days!!
> 
> I wonder if it ought to be made a "sticky" about complaining?
> 
> Moe



To my knowledge, you were never promised that AKV would have animals. How are you going to feel when the animal perk is taken away because Disney feels that it is too expensive and that there aren't enough animal lovers who are Members. 

 Bill


----------



## dmoore22

mopee3 said:


> I keep checking back on this thread wondering how long people are going to complain about the removal of a perk they were never promised when they signed the papers.  Well you all are greattttttt...... it has been going on for, lets see about 40 days!!
> 
> I wonder if it ought to be made a "sticky" about complaining?
> 
> Moe



Anyone for 41 days? Let's keep it going! What's the Guinness record? Opps! I forgot to complain about lossing valet parking. Oh woe is me! I shall shed a tear. Sniff, sniff.


----------



## jdg345

So I just skimmed around because I just found out about this change and we're at about 81 pages.  Has anything been formally announced as of yet?  I was on the dvcmember website today and didn't see anything -- though I can't say I was specifically looking either at the time.

Also, someone mentioned in a previous page that some arrangements were made for BWV (or was it BLT?) based on this change -- can someone post the cliff notes on this please?  



btw, I will be sending my own note to dvcmembersatisfaction.  I am happy to see they continue enhancing my membership without telling me about it.  

EDIT: Just checked dvcmember and saw a wonderful notice about Deevy's Comedic Adventures ... nothing on the perk loss.  They have the tool to communicate these things, but seem to choose not to.  I guess if everyone found out at once, they'd have to deal with more grief all at once.  At least this way, they can spread it around and make it seem like it's not as important.


----------



## mopee3

disneynutz said:


> To my knowledge, you were never promised that AKV would have animals. How are you going to feel when the animal perk is taken away because Disney feels that it is too expensive and that there aren't enough animal lovers who are Members.
> 
> Bill



Animals??  What animals? Was I suppose to get animals somewhere?

Where did my animals go?  Who took them?

Seriously haven't we about chewed this bone to pieces?

Moe

PS. Bill I enjoyed using valet services when I was there during our Oct-Nov trip and I paid for it, well sort of, by using another perk.  The DDE or TIW card.  Really the only reason I bought the card in the first place a year ago.


----------



## jdg345

mopee3 said:


> Animals??  What animals? Was I suppose to get animals somewhere?
> 
> Where did my animals go?  Who took them?
> 
> Seriously haven't we about chewed this bone to pieces?
> 
> Moe
> 
> PS. Bill I enjoyed using valet services when I was there during our Oct-Nov trip and I paid for it, well sort of, by using another perk.  The DDE or TIW card.  Really the only reason I bought the card in the first place a year ago.



I thought you could only use the TIW card to comp Valet Parking if you had an accompanying ADR?  We have a TIW card, how do you use it to comp Valet?  Do you have to show it when you park?


----------



## mopee3

jdg345 said:


> I thought you could only use the TIW card to comp Valet Parking if you had an accompanying ADR?  We have a TIW card, how do you use it to comp Valet?  Do you have to show it when you park?



I really don't know about the "rules", we only used it when we went to dinner.  Pull up, jump out, give them the card, they give you the receipt, and off to dinner we went.  Did they ask about ADR's? No, just took the card info down and gave me the receipt.

Moe


----------



## Chuck S

jdg345 said:


> I thought you could only use the TIW card to comp Valet Parking if you had an accompanying ADR?  We have a TIW card, how do you use it to comp Valet?  Do you have to show it when you park?



We have been asked to show a dining receipt when using the TiW for valet services.


----------



## dmoore22

jdg345 said:


> So I just skimmed around because I just found out about this change and we're at about 81 pages.  Has anything been formally announced as of yet?  I was on the dvcmember website today and didn't see anything -- though I can't say I was specifically looking either at the time.
> 
> Also, someone mentioned in a previous page that some arrangements were made for BWV (or was it BLT?) based on this change -- can someone post the cliff notes on this please?
> 
> 
> 
> btw, I will be sending my own note to dvcmembersatisfaction.  I am happy to see they continue enhancing my membership without telling me about it.
> 
> EDIT: Just checked dvcmember and saw a wonderful notice about Deevy's Comedic Adventures ... nothing on the perk loss.  They have the tool to communicate these things, but seem to choose not to.  I guess if everyone found out at once, they'd have to deal with more grief all at once.  At least this way, they can spread it around and make it seem like it's not as important.



Posted on DVC Member Site News Link:

"*Changes made to valet parking offering*

Complimentary valet parking for Disney Vacation Club Members at Disney Vacation Club Resorts at the Walt Disney World® Resort was discontinued effective October 11, 2009.

Similar to other fee-based services, such as additional housekeeping service or additional room amenities, only those Members who choose to valet park will be charged, instead of increasing the annual dues for all Members to cover the costs.

Self parking will continue to be complimentary at all Disney Vacation Club resorts. For drivers choosing to use the valet service, the cost is $12 a day, effective October 11, 2009. Members and Guests with disabilities will continue to receive complimentary valet parking.

Once paid, the valet parking service can be used for the entire day at any resort without paying the fee again."


----------



## jdg345

Chuck S said:


> We have been asked to show a dining receipt when using the TiW for valet services.



Ahh ... well that makes more sense ... I wonder if they comp it for the day, or just that one instance?  If the former, than as long as you had one ADR per day, then you could valet park for free at any of the resorts.  If the latter, then I suppose it really doesn't matter if you have the TIW card and end up valet parking where you stay.


----------



## jdg345

dmoore22 said:


> Posted on DVC Member Site News Link:
> 
> "*Changes made to valet parking offering*
> 
> Complimentary valet parking for Disney Vacation Club Members at Disney Vacation Club Resorts at the Walt Disney World® Resort was discontinued effective October 11, 2009.
> 
> Similar to other fee-based services, such as additional housekeeping service or additional room amenities, only those Members who choose to valet park will be charged, instead of increasing the annual dues for all Members to cover the costs.
> 
> Self parking will continue to be complimentary at all Disney Vacation Club resorts. For drivers choosing to use the valet service, the cost is $12 a day, effective October 11, 2009. Members and Guests with disabilities will continue to receive complimentary valet parking.
> 
> Once paid, the valet parking service can be used for the entire day at any resort without paying the fee again."



Excellent!  Thank you!


----------



## tjkraz

mopee3 said:


> I really don't know about the "rules", we only used it when we went to dinner.  Pull up, jump out, give them the card, they give you the receipt, and off to dinner we went.  Did they ask about ADR's? No, just took the card info down and gave me the receipt.
> 
> Moe



Assuming that the TiW program has to make some compensatory payment to Valet for each person who uses the parking perk, it would be in valet's interest to be more lax on meal requirement.  As long as they get the TiW card ID, they would get credit for handing the vehicle of at TiW member--with or without an actual ADR.  Better for their bottom line.   

Of course, there would be no guarantee of lax enforcement going in.  If they ask for a receipt and one cannot be provided, I assume they're gonna hit you with the fee.


----------



## Maistre Gracey

jdg345 said:


> Ahh ... well that makes more sense ... I wonder if they comp it for the day, or just that one instance?  If the former, than as long as you had one ADR per day, then you could valet park for free at any of the resorts.  If the latter, then I suppose it really doesn't matter if you have the TIW card and end up valet parking where you stay.


I don't believe you get a valet tag that's good at every resort, but rather a temporary pass for dinner. If that's good for 24 hours, you would need to dine at the resort you're staying at... every night. 

MG


----------



## jdg345

tjkraz said:


> Assuming that the TiW program has to make some compensatory payment to Valet for each person who uses the parking perk, it would be in valet's interest to be more lax on meal requirement.  As long as they get the TiW card ID, they would get credit for handing the vehicle of at TiW member--with or without an actual ADR.  Better for their bottom line.
> 
> Of course, there would be no guarantee of lax enforcement going in.  If they ask for a receipt and one cannot be provided, I assume they're gonna hit you with the fee.



Still, the changes to the DVC Perk give some additional value to the TIW card.  Maybe to address just the example someone posted prior with regards to Disney losing out on dining dollars if people have to start paying for valet.

I still think it would have been nice to be a fly on the wall and see why this decision was really made.  For some reason, I don't buy into the hoopla of an astrological dues hike if they would have continued it.  It seems more likely that Mears and DVC got into a pissing contest, Mears thought they had them pinned, and Disney surprised and walked.  The rather short notice reeks of a breakdown in contract renegotiations.


----------



## jdg345

Maistre Gracey said:


> I don't believe you get a valet tag that's good at every resort, but rather a temporary pass for dinner. If that's good for 24 hours, you would need to dine at the resort you're staying at... every night.
> 
> MG



This would make more sense to me, but would also negate the TIW perk somewhat.  Once you pay for Valet, it's good for the day regardless of the resort.  The big question is do they have a mechanism for comping that one instance, or do they have to comp the day.  So if I stay at AKV and go to dinner at Spoodles, when I come back to AKV can I now Valet free since I they already comped me at BWV?

I would say No, as this would be a tremendous loophole.  Pretty easy to find out.


----------



## Maistre Gracey

I don't see much increased value in the TIW card because of the perk loss. 
There simply isn't much overlap in the benefit. One gave you parking at DVC resorts, the other at dinner. 

MG


----------



## Maistre Gracey

jdg345 said:


> This would make more sense to me, but would also negate the TIW perk somewhat.  Once you pay for Valet, it's good for the day regardless of the resort.  The big question is do they have a mechanism for comping that one instance, or do they have to comp the day.  So if I stay at AKV and go to dinner at Spoodles, when I come back to AKV can I now Valet free since I they already comped me at BWV?
> 
> I would say No, as this would be a tremendous loophole.  Pretty easy to find out.


The free DVC parking was only good at DVC resorts. You didn't get the universal tag like the paying customers did. 

MG


----------



## jdg345

Maistre Gracey said:


> I don't see much increased value in the TIW card because of the perk loss.
> There simply isn't much overlap in the benefit. One gave you parking at DVC resorts, the other at dinner.
> 
> MG



I'll let you know tomorrow if a TIW comp'd valet park extends for the day or just that one instance.  If it extends for the day, then it does indeed add value to the TIW card.  If it doesn't, then I agree completely with your statement.


----------



## DebbieB

jdg345 said:


> Still, the changes to the DVC Perk give some additional value to the TIW card.  Maybe to address just the example someone posted prior with regards to Disney losing out on dining dollars if people have to start paying for valet.
> 
> I still think it would have been nice to be a fly on the wall and see why this decision was really made.  For some reason, I don't buy into the hoopla of an astrological dues hike if they would have continued it.  It seems more likely that Mears and DVC got into a pissing contest, Mears thought they had them pinned, and Disney surprised and walked.  The rather short notice reeks of a breakdown in contract renegotiations.



Astrological dues hike?    Like by Fortune Teller?  

I do agree that they did a poor job in contract negotiation.  A compromise on a reduced rate could have been done.    I might be willing to spring for $6.


----------



## jdg345

DebbieB said:


> Astrological dues hike?    Like by Fortune Teller?



touche!  



> I do agree that they did a poor job in contract negotiation.  A compromise on a reduced rate could have been done.    I might be willing to spring for $6.



Exactly; strange that they went from FREE to $12.  There is so much more going on here than we're being told imo.


----------



## Maistre Gracey

jdg345 said:


> touche!
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly; strange that they went from FREE to $12.  There is so much more going on here than we're being told imo.


Actually, I wonder what DVC was paying on our behalf. I'm sure it was less than full price, especially because we did not get full parking benefits. 
We only got free parking at the DVC resorts. We didn't have free valet at all resorts, so if DVC was paying full price it was foolish. 

MG


----------



## Dean

disneynutz said:


> To my knowledge, you were never promised that AKV would have animals. How are you going to feel when the animal perk is taken away because Disney feels that it is too expensive and that there aren't enough animal lovers who are Members.
> 
> Bill


Per the POS it is specifically noted the animals may not cont to be present going forward and one should not buy assuming this.  I'm sure we would all be disappointed and upset if this were to happen, as we would if the park closed, but those that were informed about their purchase would know it was a possibility and would be able to accept it and move on.  Of course if this were to happen, some would sell (? many) but would be able to get a lower price than with the animals.



jdg345 said:


> This would make more sense to me, but would also negate the TIW perk somewhat.  Once you pay for Valet, it's good for the day regardless of the resort.  The big question is do they have a mechanism for comping that one instance, or do they have to comp the day.  So if I stay at AKV and go to dinner at Spoodles, when I come back to AKV can I now Valet free since I they already comped me at BWV?
> 
> I would say No, as this would be a tremendous loophole.  Pretty easy to find out.


You also get free park parking after 5.  You pay then get reimbursed at Guest Services.  While I don't have the TIW currently, the term of 3 hours has been thrown around a lot.  Given the intention of the perk and current situation, I think it's unreasonable to expect to use this as a de-facto free valet even at the resort in question.  Given you have to show your receipt to avoid the charge, better have dinner and breakfast if one tries.  



jdg345 said:


> I still think it would have been nice to be a fly on the wall and see why this decision was really made.  For some reason, I don't buy into the hoopla of an astrological dues hike if they would have continued it.  It seems more likely that Mears and DVC got into a pissing contest, Mears thought they had them pinned, and Disney surprised and walked.  The rather short notice reeks of a breakdown in contract renegotiations.


We really don't know.  I've posted previously that it's likely that either there was a clause in the contract that kicked in or new contract negotiations.  Either way I agree it was likely interesting.  IF it was contract negotiations, Disney could have taken it back over but you can bet they really didn't want to.  I'm guessing the volume had gone down enough for the paying customers that something had to be done.  Otherwise we really don't know the choices at all, either in the negotiations or in terms of dues increase.  We can only guess at the former and have a reasonable estimation of the latter.


Maistre Gracey said:


> Actually, I wonder what DVC was paying on our behalf. I'm sure it was less than full price, especially because we did not get full parking benefits.
> We only got free parking at the DVC resorts. We didn't have free valet at all resorts, so if DVC was paying full price it was foolish.
> 
> MG


My info, and that of several others in this thread that have actually talked to someone that could communicate real info, is that there was no payment to the contractor for this perk.  That would be make sense given the specifics, this is not an appropriate cost to be shared among all members given the relatively high $$$ amount, minority of members using it and unlikely presence of any volume discount.


----------



## RoutemanDan

I have been a TIW (DDE) card holder for years and have never, ever once been asked for a dining receipt when I valet parked.


----------



## jdg345

Maistre Gracey said:


> Actually, I wonder what DVC was paying on our behalf. I'm sure it was less than full price, especially because we did not get full parking benefits.
> We only got free parking at the DVC resorts. We didn't have free valet at all resorts, so if DVC was paying full price it was foolish.
> 
> MG



FWIW, from what i'm told, DVC wasn't paying anything for this perk.  It was part of the original contract negotiations.  I understand it was a 'loss leader' of sorts for Mears to get the contract.  When it came time to renegotiate, Mears wanted that excluded, DVC wanted to keep it in.  Mears won.


----------



## jdg345

RoutemanDan said:


> I have been a TIW (DDE) card holder for years and have never, ever once been asked for a dining receipt when I valet parked.



I'm going to give this a shot this afternoon and see what happens.  I probably won't know until tomorrow if the $12 charge shows on my bill or not though.

From what I understand, you show the TIW card at dropoff/parking, correct?  Do they ever ask for it again when you pickup your vehicle?


----------



## katydidbug1

On our most recent trip 3 weeks ago, when we went for dinner and used out TiW card, they asked for it when we dropped off the car, and were only asked to see a recipt once, and they barely looked at it.


----------



## RoutemanDan

jdg345 said:


> From what I understand, you show the TIW card at dropoff/parking, correct?  Do they ever ask for it again when you pickup your vehicle?



I always show it to them on dropoff, I was never asked for it on pick up.


----------



## jdg345

Thanks!   

Will keep you posted!


----------



## Dean

jdg345 said:


> Thanks!  :thumbups2
> 
> Will keep you posted!


You should assume you'll have to pay if you leave the car overnight.  The only way I'd do this was if I planned to do it and pay anyway and just hoping for the unexpected benefit otherwise.  I'd love to see that discussion when you pick up the car the next day trying to convince them you shouldn't pay because you ate the night before and have the TIW card.


----------



## Chuck S

Dean said:


> You should assume you'll have to pay if you leave the car overnight.  The only way I'd do this was if I planned to do it and pay anyway and just hoping for the unexpected benefit otherwise.  I'd love to see that discussion when you pick up the car the next day trying to convince them you shouldn't pay because you ate the night before and have the TIW card.



Don't worry, if they see a lot of abuse using the TiW for overnight parking, they'll simply drop that perk, too.  And the abusers will blame Disney, not themselves.


----------



## RoutemanDan

Just to clarify, I have never left my car overnight when using TIW, just for dinner. At most 3-5 hours if we lingered around the resort and chatted with friends. I don't think anyone will get away with using it for overnight stays.


----------



## Chuck S

RoutemanDan said:


> Just to clarify, I have never left my car overnight when using TIW, just for dinner. At most 3-5 hours if we lingered around the resort and chatted with friends. I don't think anyone will get away with using it for overnight stays.



I never said you did.  I certainly expect that they will soon at least be requiring a dated and time stamped dining receipt though, to discourage misuse.


----------



## jdg345

Dean said:


> You should assume you'll have to pay if you leave the car overnight.  The only way I'd do this was if I planned to do it and pay anyway and just hoping for the unexpected benefit otherwise.  I'd love to see that discussion when you pick up the car the next day trying to convince them you shouldn't pay because you ate the night before and have the TIW card.



I think you misunderstand my experiment.  I'm staying at WLV, but have ADR's at BWV.  I plan to use the TIW card to comp the Valet parking at BWV.  When I return to WLV, I will then valet again w/o the card.  The purpose is to determine if the TIW actually comps the $12 Valet Charge, has a special SKU, or is excluded from the system entirely (which would be completely surprising to me).


----------



## jdg345

Chuck S said:


> Don't worry, if they see a lot of abuse using the TiW for overnight parking, they'll simply drop that perk, too.  And the abusers will blame Disney, not themselves.



And if they drop that perk, some could chime into that thread complaining about it with comments like, "That's okay, I never really used that perk anyways.  I'd rather they drop it from the TIW card than raise the price of the card."


----------



## Deb & Bill

jdg345 said:


> And if they drop that perk, some could chime into that thread complaining about it with comments like, "That's okay, I never really used that perk anyways.  I'd rather they drop it from the TIW card than raise the price of the card."



They already did raise the price of the card.  For a second or third time.


----------



## Chuck S

jdg345 said:


> I think you misunderstand my experiment.  I'm staying at WLV, but have ADR's at BWV.  I plan to use the TIW card to comp the Valet parking at BWV.  When I return to WLV, I will then valet again w/o the card.  The purpose is to determine if the TIW actually comps the $12 Valet Charge, has a special SKU, or is excluded from the system entirely (which would be completely surprising to me).



There is no computer or linked system between the valet stands whoing who paid.  You need to show a valet receipt from the first valet to the second to park free for the whole day.

TiW valet parkers don't get a paid parking receipt, as they didn't pay for the service.


----------



## jdg345

Deb & Bill said:


> They already did raise the price of the card.  For a second or third time.



Really?  When?  I'm coming up for renewal in January I think.  What did they raise it to?


----------



## Chuck S

jdg345 said:


> Really?  When?  I'm coming up for renewal in January I think.  What did they raise it to?



It went from $60 to $75 this year for AP holders, and you used to get two cards, one for you and one for spouse.  The spouse card is now an additional $25.

And when first offered to AP holders a couple of years ago, I think it was $55.


----------



## jdg345

Chuck S said:


> It went from $60 to $75 this year for AP holders, and you used to get two cards, one for you and one for spouse.  The spouse card is now an additional $25.
> 
> And when first offered to AP holders a couple of years ago, I think it was $55.



Yah, I think I paid $60 last go around ... it's like you get dinged every time you turn around lately.  Higher costs, less stuff.


----------



## crisi

jdg345 said:


> Yah, I think I paid $60 last go around ... it's like you get dinged every time you turn around lately.  Higher costs, less stuff.



Well, it goes along with that pay cut I took last year.  But I got to keep my job.


----------



## Dean

jdg345 said:


> I think you misunderstand my experiment.  I'm staying at WLV, but have ADR's at BWV.  I plan to use the TIW card to comp the Valet parking at BWV.  When I return to WLV, I will then valet again w/o the card.  The purpose is to determine if the TIW actually comps the $12 Valet Charge, has a special SKU, or is excluded from the system entirely (which would be completely surprising to me).


I bet you have to pay the $12 if you valet overnight, want to wager on it?


----------



## Dean

Chuck S said:


> Don't worry, if they see a lot of abuse using the TiW for overnight parking, they'll simply drop that perk, too.  And the abusers will blame Disney, not themselves.


Actually all they have to do is enforce the rules in place already and given they have financial incentive to do so, I doubt they'll have any problem making sure people pay that should be.  Plus I'd suspect their not especially sensitive to any complaints right now.


----------



## jdg345

Dean said:


> I bet you have to pay the $12 if you valet overnight, want to wager on it?



Nope, sure don't, as I agree with you ... that's why it's an experiment.  

FWIW, so far, no valet charge on my bill for yesterday.  I think I may need to wait for things to process overnight tonight.  I have not pulled my car back out of valet today, so I should technically be billed for today at a minimum.  I will let you know if I see a charge for yesterday.

Very, very strange.  There has to be something to tie things together ... otherwise how would they know not to bill you at the other resorts if you hop around valeting all day?  Unless, of course, they simply cancel out duplicates when they process the batches overnight?


----------



## jdg345

Dean said:


> Actually all they have to do is enforce the rules in place already and given they have financial incentive to do so, I doubt they'll have any problem making sure people pay that should be.  Plus I'd suspect their not especially sensitive to any complaints right now.



They really haven't ever been sensitive to complaints imo.


----------



## Dean

jdg345 said:


> Nope, sure don't, as I agree with you ... that's why it's an experiment.
> 
> FWIW, so far, no valet charge on my bill for yesterday.  I think I may need to wait for things to process overnight tonight.  I have not pulled my car back out of valet today, so I should technically be billed for today at a minimum.  I will let you know if I see a charge for yesterday.
> 
> Very, very strange.  There has to be something to tie things together ... otherwise how would they know not to bill you at the other resorts if you hop around valeting all day?  Unless, of course, they simply cancel out duplicates when they process the batches overnight?


The parking pass was what alerted them in the past.  



jdg345 said:


> They really haven't ever been sensitive to complaints imo.


I think they have been sensitive to valid complaints in the past, but the membership is so me, me, me that they have seen so many unreasonable complaints.  I'm sure this has had some effect in numbing them to any complaints going forward.


----------



## jdg345

Dean said:


> The parking pass was what alerted them in the past.



Not sure what you mean?



> I think they have been sensitive to valid complaints in the past, but the membership is so me, me, me that they have seen so many unreasonable complaints.  I'm sure this has had some effect in numbing them to any complaints going forward.



I would agree with this.  It's pretty funny though as the "me's" change depending on what is at risk.  The same thing that occurred with valet parking occurred with the reservation policy (vs DBD) that occurred with Free Internet that occurred with that policy that shall not be spoken on the DIS.


----------



## Sammie

When you "pay" to valet park you should get a voucher or hang tag showing you have paid and that is used to allow you to park the rest of that day without charge.

If you valet park with KIW you don't pay, therefore you do not get the voucher or hang tag, therefore after dinner if you go back to your resort and use valet you will be charged. 

There would be no reason for them not to, as you don't posses the receipt for paying earlier.


----------



## jdg345

Sammie said:


> When you "pay" to valet park you should get a voucher or hang tag showing you have paid and that is used to allow you to park the rest of that day without charge.
> 
> If you valet park with KIW you don't pay, therefore you do not get the voucher or hang tag, therefore after dinner if you go back to your resort and use valet you will be charged.
> 
> There would be no reason for them not to, as you don't posses the receipt for paying earlier.



So when I pick up my car next, assuming I've been charged, I'll get some sort of voucher I'll need to pass along?  Sounds inefficient.


----------



## Chuck S

jdg345 said:


> So when I pick up my car next, assuming I've been charged, I'll get some sort of voucher I'll need to pass along?  Sounds inefficient.



Inefficient, perhaps. But that is how it works.  I guess it has worked well enough, and is cheaper than installing terminals and tracking programs at the valet desks.


----------



## Maistre Gracey

Don't they still use the color coded Mickey things that dangle from the mirror?

Last year at WL they were able to tell me my valet history for the week, so they do have some capability. 

MG


----------



## Sammie

Maistre Gracey said:


> Don't they still use the color coded Mickey things that dangle from the mirror?
> 
> Last year at WL they were able to tell me my valet history for the week, so they do have some capability.
> 
> MG



I thought so.


----------



## jdg345

Chuck S said:


> Inefficient, perhaps. But that is how it works.  I guess it has worked well enough, and is cheaper than installing terminals and tracking programs at the valet desks.



They have something they scan the barcode against when I drop off the car, so they should have some sort of tracking program.

That said, very strange: I don't have a valet charge for the day I used the TIW card to park at another resort and then valet'd at my 'sleep' resort; however, I do have a charge for the second day at my 'sleep' resort for the day which the car did not move.


----------



## DebbieB

jdg345 said:


> They have something they scan the barcode against when I drop off the car, so they should have some sort of tracking program.
> 
> That said, very strange: I don't have a valet charge for the day I used the TIW card to park at another resort and then valet'd at my 'sleep' resort; however, I do have a charge for the second day at my 'sleep' resort for the day which the car did not move.



Did you leave the car in valet?  If so, you will be charged for each day.


----------



## dmoore22

mopee3 said:


> I keep checking back on this thread wondering how long people are going to complain about the removal of a perk they were never promised when they signed the papers.  Well you all are greattttttt...... it has been going on for, lets see about 40 days!!
> 
> I wonder if it ought to be made a "sticky" about complaining?
> 
> Moe



Day 44 and still counting.


----------



## Tony-NJ

dmoore22 said:


> Day 44 and still counting.


----------



## jdg345

DebbieB said:


> Did you leave the car in valet?  If so, you will be charged for each day.



That's just it ... I wasn't charged for that day ... still not on the bill.


----------



## Maistre Gracey

jdg345 said:


> That's just it ... I wasn't charged for that day ... still not on the bill.


That doesn't surprise me. Yes, you should get charged, but that valet outfit often misses charges, or charges when they shouldn't. 
When Disney outsiurced the valet it went straight downhill, and it was obvious. 

MG


----------



## Mickey'sApprentice

Have you guys noticed that nobody has posted BWV maintenance fees for 2010? Hmm...


----------



## tgropp

I just got back from the Beach Club yesterday. There were less than 35 cars in the valet parking lot at 9 in the morning. I heard lots of people discussing it while there and I also noticed lots of people refusing bellhop service. Bellhop and valet personnel were out there twidling their thumbs with nothing to do....and this at the start of Thanksgiving holidays


----------



## jdg345

Maistre Gracey said:


> That doesn't surprise me. Yes, you should get charged, but that valet outfit often misses charges, or charges when they shouldn't.
> When Disney outsiurced the valet it went straight downhill, and it was obvious.
> 
> MG



I'm going to try again today and see what happens.  Strangely coincidental that the same day I wasn't charged was also the same day I used a TIW card at another resort to comp valet.


----------



## jdg345

tgropp said:


> I just got back from the Beach Club yesterday. There were less than 35 cars in the valet parking lot at 9 in the morning. I heard lots of people discussing it while there and I also noticed lots of people refusing bellhop service. Bellhop and valet personnel were out there twidling their thumbs with nothing to do....and this at the start of Thanksgiving holidays



Strange, according to 'popular opinion', it was a minority of DVC'ers that used this perk.  

BTW, what exactly where they discussing?  The loss of the free valet perk?  Was the refusal of bellhop service a sort of retaliation for the change?  I'm here now and haven't really heard too much on the subject.

The Valet and Bellhop Personnel are going to have a rough holiday if this keeps up.  They make most of their money in tips.  When we used the perk, we would always tip on the way out.  It certainly is strange to see these folks just standing about when they used to be constantly running around before.


----------



## Chuck S

jdg345 said:


> Strange, according to 'popular opinion', it was a minority of DVC'ers that used this perk.



A "minority" of DVC membership is still a lot of members, given membership is over 300,000 people, but still a large number can be a minority of overall DVC guests.  The real question is who should pay for the valet parking.  Those that use it, the entire membership, the contractor who has to employ additonal personnel to provide the perk, or Disney/DVC Marketing?

It would seem that many members feel "anyone but those that actually use it" should pay for it.


----------



## jdg345

Chuck S said:


> A "minority" of DVC membership is still a lot of members, given membership is over 300,000 people, but still a large number can be a minority of overall DVC guests.  The real question is who should pay for the valet parking.  Those that use it, the entire membership, the contractor who has to employ additonal personnel to provide the perk, or Disney/DVC Marketing?
> 
> It would seem that many members feel "anyone but those that actually use it" should pay for it.



If the Valet lots continue to be more empty than full, than I think it would be safe to say that a majority of the Valet traffic was due to DVC membership.  That said, this group could very well be a minority of the overall DVC membership while being a majority of the valet traffic.

I would also say that many members feel "if I don't use it, I shouldn't pay for it".  This extends to: DBD, Walking, Internet in Villa, Pool hopping, transportation, dvcmember online, online checkin, online reservations [eventually], etc.  The problem is that with any group, you cannot make everyone happy and will always have case where you need to support something you don't necessarily use yourself.  Of course, people's vacation habits change, so just because someone doesn't use a perk now doesn't mean they won't want to use it in the future.


----------



## MELSMICE

jdg345 said:


> I would also say that many members feel "if I don't use it, I shouldn't pay for it".  This extends to: DBD, Walking, Internet in Villa, Pool hopping, transportation, dvcmember online, online checkin, online reservations [eventually], etc.  *The problem is that with any group, you cannot make everyone happy and will always have case where you need to support something you don't necessarily use yourself. * Of course, people's vacation habits change, so just because someone doesn't use a perk now doesn't mean they won't want to use it in the future.


Agree 100%.  I think I posted previously that I'm an OKW owner, so I know about all the hype when the slide was going in.  

I knew I was not going to use the slide, but I did not have a negative opinion about it.  It was good for the resort.  I don't use the Internet service, but I think it's something that members should get.  We never pool hop, but it's a great perk for those that do.  We do use valet & I'm bummed that the perk has been taken away.  

In reality I guess I'm paying for some services that others use that I don't!


----------



## Chuck S

jdg345 said:


> If the Valet lots continue to be more empty than full, than I think it would be safe to say that a majority of the Valet traffic was due to DVC membership.  That said, this group could very well be a minority of the overall DVC membership while being a majority of the valet traffic.
> 
> I would also say that many members feel "if I don't use it, I shouldn't pay for it".  This extends to: DBD, Walking, Internet in Villa, Pool hopping, transportation, dvcmember online, online checkin, online reservations [eventually], etc.  The problem is that with any group, you cannot make everyone happy and will always have case where you need to support something you don't necessarily use yourself.  Of course, people's vacation habits change, so just because someone doesn't use a perk now doesn't mean they won't want to use it in the future.



But you have incorrectly listed several different types of things for comparison.  Members do not pay for pool hopping, reservation services are not a "perk" and is a necessary management component for the use of our resorts, thus the only comparable perk you list is Internet, and again, the cost of that services is extremely low compared to valet, as it is not labor intensive, like valet.  For several years DVCers did pay for internet services as they used them, at least until the initial cost of the wiring infrastructure was re-couped.

DVC has said that dues were not paying for the free valet, it was a perk financed either by DVC Marketing, or the contractor (or both), who chooses not to do so any longer.  Thus it would mean adding a new component to dues to continue the "perk."  How much of a cost per point would be too much for those that don't use the perk to absorb? 

Remember, too, that if the perk continued as it was, but was financed by dues at those resorts, they'd be paying for the service for other DVC owners not staying at the resort.  Basically All DVCers would be able to get free parking at the expense of owners that own at valet resorts.  Is that fair to those owners?

Another consideration, if the valet lot is full, but the service is being paid for by the dues, shouldn't all members have the "right" to valet park, whether the lot is full or not...after all, the member is paying for it.


----------



## tjkraz

jdg345 said:


> The problem is that with any group, you cannot make everyone happy and will always have case where you need to support something you don't necessarily use yourself.



True but it's equally irresponsible to blindly ask all members to subsidize resort services without giving due consideration to the overall cost and usage patterns.  

Earlier in this thread I did some back-of-the-napkin math and figured that subsidized valet could easily increase the BWV operating budget by an additional 5%--on top of the 2-4% annual increases already showing up in 2010 dues.  I'm hard-pressed to label that a responsible decision when free self parking remains available at each of the resorts.


----------



## jdg345

Chuck S said:


> But you have incorrectly listed several different types of things for comparison.  Members do not pay for pool hopping, reservation services are not a "perk" and is a necessary management component for the use of our resorts, thus the only comparable perk you list is Internet, and again, the cost of that services is extremely low compared to valet, as it is not labor intensive, like valet.  For several years DVCers did pay for internet services as they used them, at least until the initial cost of the wiring infrastructure was re-couped.



Members pay for pool hopping indirectly; pool upkeep is higher if you allow others who are not staying at your resort to use those facilities.  Reservation services while necessary, don't have to be online.  Many are calling for online services yet it is possible that a majority do not (or would not) use the online portal for reservations or account management.  We all somehow subsidize the website; but, do we all use it?  I also don't know that Internet is that low of a cost, there are many monthly recurring cost centers to deal with, not just for the service but for additional staff, equipment maintenance services, etc.



> DVC has said that dues were not paying for the free valet, it was a perk financed either by DVC Marketing, or the contractor (or both), who chooses not to do so any longer.  Thus it would mean adding a new component to dues to continue the "perk."  How much of a cost per point would be too much for those that don't use the perk to absorb?



Dunno ... but I think DVC should have at least negotiated some sort of discount for DVC members instead of going from FREE to Rack Rate.  Maybe they didn't try, or maybe the valet company wanted nothing to do with the discussions.  We may never know.



> Remember, too, that if the perk continued as it was, but was financed by dues at those resorts, they'd be paying for the service for other DVC owners not staying at the resort.  Basically All DVCers would be able to get free parking at the expense of owners that own at valet resorts.  Is that fair to those owners?



If they were going to do it, it would have to be an across the board thing, not just for those resorts that have valet services.  It would have to include OKW, SSR, etc.  And to answer your question, no, it wouldn't be fair.  Neither is the alternative I've listed.  Such is life, no?  Is it fair that I subsidize the Internet services yet don't even own a computer?  



> Another consideration, if the valet lot is full, but the service is being paid for by the dues, shouldn't all members have the "right" to valet park, whether the lot is full or not...after all, the member is paying for it.



What did they do in the past?  It's been a long time since I've seen the valet lots full.


----------



## jdg345

tjkraz said:


> True but it's equally irresponsible to blindly ask all members to subsidize resort services without giving due consideration to the overall cost and usage patterns.



Oh, I would agree.  But right now I'm not thinking DVC has any sort of track record that would support they perform due dilligence before making these decisions.  For some reason, I doubt they started here with the valet perk.



> Earlier in this thread I did some back-of-the-napkin math and figured that subsidized valet could easily increase the BWV operating budget by an additional 5%--on top of the 2-4% annual increases already showing up in 2010 dues.  I'm hard-pressed to label that a responsible decision when free self parking remains available at each of the resorts.



I don't necessarily think it would be an additional 5%; but then what would be too much?  3%?  2%?  1%?  It's a lot to ask anyone to spend more for something they're not using.  Of course, isn't that what we seem to have today?  Dues have pretty consistently gone up, and the perks and quality have not trended in the same direction.


----------



## needtogomore

jdg345 said:


> it would have to be an across the board thing, not just for those resorts that have valet services.  It would have to include OKW, SSR, etc.  QUOTE]
> 
> this is not true each resort charges dues for its own facilities not others.


----------



## jdg345

needtogomore said:


> jdg345 said:
> 
> 
> 
> it would have to be an across the board thing, not just for those resorts that have valet services.  It would have to include OKW, SSR, etc.  QUOTE]
> 
> this is not true each resort charges dues for its own facilities not others.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm saying if they were to make a paid-for DVC perk, it would have to be paid for by all the membership, not just those resorts that have valet since all members could take advantage of the perk regardless of where they were staying.  I could stay at SSR and Valet at BWV for lunch, for example.  They could easily pool it and break it out by resort as they do this already for other services.
> 
> That said, I'm not suggesting that they would, nor do I think an across the board increase in dues is/was the answer to this debacle.
Click to expand...


----------



## tjkraz

jdg345 said:


> Oh, I would agree.  But right now I'm not thinking DVC has any sort of track record that would support they perform due dilligence before making these decisions.  For some reason, I doubt they started here with the valet perk.



Undoubtedly they have information on usage patterns so they know how much it was being used by members and they know what they dues impact would have been

As I've said before, I'm hard-pressed to buy into the idea that DVC made a reckless decision here.  DVC would have had every right to add the cost to member dues and obligate us to paying millions worth of annual valet parking fees.  The fact that they did not go this route will cost Disney greatly, and suggests that usage data simply did not support subsidizing the resorts service.



> Of course, isn't that what we seem to have today?  Dues have pretty consistently gone up, and the perks and quality have not trended in the same direction.



On that point I wholeheartely disagree.  

We can spend all day pointing to service reductions at Disney parks and restaurants, but I think Disney has done quite well with the resorts.  Admittedly this is in large part due to our dues funding the upkeep of the properties.  

Dues go toward things like CM salaries and benefits, insurance premiums and transportation costs which always seem to be on the rise.  Dues cover room refurbishments and most locations have witnessed nice upgrades in the quality of accommodations in recent years (sofabeds, mattresses, sheets, TVs, patio furniture, iHome clock radios, DVD players, etc.)  

In recent years OKW added the pool slide.  All of the resorts have increased their activity programs with poolside parties, games, scavenger hunts, craft classes, etc.  Most resorts host movies in a public area several times per week.  

As for member perks, they haven't changed noticeably in the 6+ years we have been members.  We gained no-cost Internet and the AP discount and lost the LOS pass discount and now valet parking.  Aside from that, the volume of shopping and dining discounts is largely unchanged (although the exact locations are tweaked periodically.)

Yes dues have increased but I don't see any signs that Disney is simply collecting more and providing less at the resorts.


----------



## crisi

jdg345 said:


> needtogomore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm saying if they were to make a paid-for DVC perk, it would have to be paid for by all the membership, not just those resorts that have valet since all members could take advantage of the perk regardless of where they were staying.  I could stay at SSR and Valet at BWV for lunch, for example.  They could easily pool it and break it out by resort as they do this already for other services.
> 
> That said, I'm not suggesting that they would, nor do I think an across the board increase in dues is/was the answer to this debacle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have my doubts that legally they could do this.
Click to expand...


----------



## jdg345

tjkraz said:


> Undoubtedly they have information on usage patterns so they know how much it was being used by members and they know what they dues impact would have been



I think that this came out of failed contract negotiations.  I don't think they necessarily planned to dump the perk, but were rather strong-armed into making that decision.



> As I've said before, I'm hard-pressed to buy into the idea that DVC made a reckless decision here.  DVC would have had every right to add the cost to member dues and obligate us to paying millions worth of annual valet parking fees.  The fact that they did not go this route will cost Disney greatly, and suggests that usage data simply did not support subsidizing the resorts service.



Just because it worked out doesn't mean it wasn't reckless.  



> On that point I wholeheartely disagree.



We can certainly agree to disagree; it all comes down to one's perspective of value.



> We can spend all day pointing to service reductions at Disney parks and restaurants, but I think Disney has done quite well with the resorts.  Admittedly this is in large part due to our dues funding the upkeep of the properties.
> 
> Dues go toward things like CM salaries and benefits, insurance premiums and transportation costs which always seem to be on the rise.  Dues cover room refurbishments and most locations have witnessed nice upgrades in the quality of accommodations in recent years (sofabeds, mattresses, sheets, TVs, patio furniture, iHome clock radios, DVD players, etc.)



Well, I don't watch TV, rarely sit on the patio, and never use the iHome clock radios or DVD players.  Why should I have to pay for all that.  Nevermind the furniture in good condition that had to be swapped out to make room for these new things.  Leave the old stuff, and my dues alone.  



> In recent years OKW added the pool slide.  All of the resorts have increased their activity programs with poolside parties, games, scavenger hunts, craft classes, etc.  Most resorts host movies in a public area several times per week.



The pool slide was an interesting debate too, was it not?  

And most of the games/crafts/etc incorporate their own fees and/or are paid for by our dues.  Movie hosting is nice, but I'm sure they make a good penny on concessions as well.  



> As for member perks, they haven't changed noticeably in the 6+ years we have been members.  We gained no-cost Internet and the AP discount and lost the LOS pass discount and now valet parking.  Aside from that, the volume of shopping and dining discounts is largely unchanged (although the exact locations are tweaked periodically.)
> 
> Yes dues have increased but I don't see any signs that Disney is simply collecting more and providing less at the resorts.



Economies of scale ...


----------



## Chuck S

jdg345 said:


> Members pay for pool hopping indirectly; pool upkeep is higher if you allow others who are not staying at your resort to use those facilities.  Reservation services while necessary, don't have to be online.  Many are calling for online services yet it is possible that a majority do not (or would not) use the online portal for reservations or account management.  We all somehow subsidize the website; but, do we all use it?  I also don't know that Internet is that low of a cost, there are many monthly recurring cost centers to deal with, not just for the service but for additional staff, equipment maintenance services, etc.



Tell me, how do members at AKV, BLT and BCV pay for pool hopping under your scenario, as those resorts do not allow pool hopping?  And how do members pay for pool hopping at non-DVC resorts?

For reservations, initial internet interactive development is expensive, yes.  But over time, cheap to maintain, as opposed to 7 day per week staffed call centers.  Likely the cost savings in call center staff, and perhaps fewer call center operating hours, will offset the internet reservation development costs in the long run.  Surely you aren't comparing the cost of providing Internet at the resorts to valet services, given that valet requires 8 full time and 2 part time employees, for 24/7 service at 168 operating hours per week.



> Dunno ... but I think DVC should have at least negotiated some sort of discount for DVC members instead of going from FREE to Rack Rate.  Maybe they didn't try, or maybe the valet company wanted nothing to do with the discussions.  We may never know.


 But the point is, who should pay for it now?  And what would stop the contractor from offering a discount, if they felt it was warranted/needed for traffic volume, just as a restaurant offers "Early Bird" or "Senior" discounts to boost traffic in slower parts of the day.



> If they were going to do it, it would have to be an across the board thing, not just for those resorts that have valet services.  It would have to include OKW, SSR, etc.  And to answer your question, no, it wouldn't be fair.  Neither is the alternative I've listed.  Such is life, no?  Is it fair that I subsidize the Internet services yet don't even own a computer?



It would not be legal for OKW and SSR to assume part of the valet operating costs at other resorts.  Dues are based upon the actual operating costs of each resort...that is part of the function of a deeded interest.



> What did they do in the past?  It's been a long time since I've seen the valet lots full.



Irrelevant, as now that dues WOULD be paying for it, and there is a reasonable expectation of it always being available for the members staying at the resort.  When it was a non-dues subsidized perk, they could simply say the lot was full, no valet available.  With a dues subsidy, that may not be legal.  With Internet, it IS available to any member staying on points all the time.


----------



## jdg345

Chuck S said:


> Tell me, how do members at AKV, BLT and BCV pay for pool hopping uder your scenario, as those resorts do not allow pool hopping?  ANd how do members pay for pool hopping at non-DVC resorts?



As I said, indirectly, via higher maintenance and upkeep.



> For reservations, initial internet interactive development is expensive, yes.  But over time, cheap to maintain, as opposed to 7 day per week staffed call centers.  Likely the cost savings in call center staff, and perhaps fewer call center operating hours, will offset the internet reservation development costs in the long run.



You still have to keep most of that staff as there are no guarantees the bulk of the membership can or will use the online booking components.  The initial development is a huge expensive, and I disagree that it is 'cheap' to maintain.  Anything custom is going to require staff to keep it going, not to mention additional hardware requirements, ongoing maintenance and support, etc.



> Surely you aren't comparing the cost of providing Internet at the resorts to valet services, given that valet requires 8 full time and 2 part time employees, for 24/7 service at 168 operatying hours per week.



What could it cost per month?  The bandwidth and infrastructure needs to be available regardless of whether or not it is being used, just as the valets need to stand there regardless of whether or not there is a car to be parked.  Yes, you have more employees on staff for valet, but their hourly rates would be much lower than those of the staff required to maintain the internet components.  Do the valets even make minimum wage with this vendor?  Several companies I've dealt with in the past (albeit years ago) paid less than min because it was a tipped position.



> But the point is, who should pay for it now?  And what would stop the contractor from offering a discount, if they felt it was warrented/needed for traffic volume, just as a restaurant offers "Early Bird" or "Senior" discounts to boost traffic in slower parts of the day.



Why, someone else should pay for it now, of course.  



> It would not be legal for OKW and SSR to assume part of the valet operating costs at other resorts.  Dues are based upon the actual operating costs of each resort...that is part of the function of a deeded interest.



Ahhh ... but this does not need to be part of operational budgets.  It depends on how the contracts between the parties are written.  For that matter, it could be made part of the Transportation component as that is a general pool that is broken up by point allocation at the resorts.

Regardless, I was able to use the perk in the past to valet at non-DVC resorts.  Who paid for that?  



> Irrelevant, as now that dues WOULD be paying for it, and there is a reasonable expectation of it always being available for the members staying at the resort.  When it was a non-dues subsidized perk, they could simply say the lot was full, no valet available.  With a dues subsidy, that may not be legal.  With Internet, it IS available to any member staying on points all the time.



Actually, that's not true.  Internet services have been unavailable quite a few times at The World.  My last visit, in fact, it was down for 3 of the 7 days I was here.


----------



## tjkraz

jdg345 said:


> I think that this came out of failed contract negotiations.  I don't think they necessarily planned to dump the perk, but were rather strong-armed into making that decision.



That may well be true but it wouldn't preclude DVC charging members for subsidized parking.  I doubt that either Parks & Resorts or the valet company would have refused the revenue.  



> Just because it worked out doesn't mean it wasn't reckless.



Just because some members don't like the decision doesn't mean it was improper.  



> We can certainly agree to disagree; it all comes down to one's perspective of value.
> 
> Well, I don't watch TV, rarely sit on the patio, and never use the iHome clock radios or DVD players.  Why should I have to pay for all that.  Nevermind the furniture in good condition that had to be swapped out to make room for these new things.  Leave the old stuff, and my dues alone.
> 
> The pool slide was an interesting debate too, was it not?



You stated that dues have steadily increased "while perks and quality have not trended in the same direction."  I simply illustrated some of the many areas which have driven the dues increases.  

"Perspective of value" is irrelevant when discussing actual dollars and cents.  The higher-quality furnishings and services have higher acquisition costs.   Whether you like the decisions made or not is immaterial--the money was spent and it's pretty easy to point to areas which have improved.  

Additionally we all know that things like wages, employee benefits, property taxes, transportation (gasoline), property insurance are prone to regular increases regardless of what the economy is doing.  Most Disney CMs received raises a couple months ago per the terms of their collective bargaining agreement.  



> And most of the games/crafts/etc incorporate their own fees.  Movie hosting is nice, but I'm sure they make a good penny on concessions as well.



Some activities have minimal fees.  Most do not.  The activity schedule from our most recent trip shows 29 of 35 weekly activities as complimentary.


----------



## jdg345

tjkraz said:


> That may well be true but it wouldn't preclude DVC charging members for subsidized parking.  I doubt that either Parks & Resorts or the valet company would have refused the revenue.



I think that was part of the problem.



> Just because some members don't like the decision doesn't mean it was improper.



Given the option to raise dues 5% or drop the perk, I think most everyone would agree DVC made the proper decision.  How we got to that point and why it came to those two options is a whole different matter.



> You stated that dues have steadily increased "while perks and quality have not trended in the same direction."  I simply illustrated some of the many areas which have driven the dues increases.



But these are areas that may or may not matter to the membership as a whole.



> "Perspective of value" is irrelevant when discussing actual dollars and cents.  The higher-quality furnishings and services have higher acquisition costs.   Whether you like the decisions made or not is immaterial--the money was spent and it's pretty easy to point to areas which have improved.



Well then, if DVC decided to raise dues to provide upgraded valet parking services, then it would be pretty easy to point to that area of improvement where the money was spent, no?  While those furnishings and services have higher acquisition costs, couldn't it be considered by some as reckless that their dues are going up, especially in a poor economy, when they really wanted nothing to do with those upgrades?



> Additionally we all know that things like wages, employee benefits, property taxes, transportation (gasoline), property insurance are prone to regular increases regardless of what the economy is doing.  Most Disney CMs received raises a couple months ago per the terms of their collective bargaining agreement.



And not all of those items fall into the same dues categories.  And I completely disagree that wages and benefits are prone to increase regardless of the economic state.  Many companies are not giving raises, period, and are cutting back benefits such as healthcare, PTO, corporate events, etc.



> Some activities have minimal fees.  Most do not.  The activity schedule from our most recent trip shows 29 of 35 weekly activities as complimentary.



If "Complimentary", then it was likely paid for by our dues.  That doesn't really work out to a 'Free Perk', does it?


----------



## tjkraz

jdg345 said:


> I think that was part of the problem.
> 
> Given the option to raise dues 5% or drop the perk, I think most everyone would agree DVC made the proper decision.  How we got to that point and why it came to those two options is a whole different matter.



...a matter on which we will never have any real clarity.  



> But these are areas that may or may not matter to the membership as a whole.
> 
> Well then, if DVC decided to raise dues to provide upgraded valet parking services, then it would be pretty easy to point to that area of improvement where the money was spent, no?  While those furnishings and services have higher acquisition costs, couldn't it be considered by some as reckless that their dues are going up, especially in a poor economy, when they really wanted nothing to do with those upgrades?



I don't disagree with any of this.  The fact is we signed away all of our rights from the very start.  DVC gets to make these decisions for us...we knew that from Day One.  

Again, I'm not commenting on whether the decisions were entirely proper or how membership feels as a whole.  My only perspective here is that dues are rising because DVC is putting more money into the resorts.  



> And not all of those items fall into the same dues categories.  And I completely disagree that wages and benefits are prone to increase regardless of the economic state.  Many companies are not giving raises, period, and are cutting back benefits such as healthcare, PTO, corporate events, etc.



I don't recall us discussing individual budget categories.  

As to the salary issue, to quote myself:  Most Disney CMs received raises a couple months ago per the terms of their collective bargaining agreement.  Many salaries WILL cost more in 2010 than they did in 2009 or prior regardless of what the economy is doing. 



> If "Complimentary", then it was likely paid for by our dues.  That doesn't really work out to a 'Free Perk', does it?



I never said that it wasn't paid by dues.  These are more examples of resort services which have expanded in the last 3-4 years.


----------



## jdg345




----------



## jdg345

tjkraz said:


> I never said that it wasn't paid by dues.  These are more examples of resort services which have expanded in the last 3-4 years.



And now we get the photopass discount too.  

Of course, that $50 would cover 4 days of Valet Parking.


----------



## MELSMICE

jdg345 - I was going to copy & paste of bunch of your posts, but it's best to just say that I completely agree with everything you've written.  

I especially agree that indirectly all members pay for pool hopping with the additional maintenance that is needed when members do pool hop.


----------



## Deb & Bill

MELSMICE said:


> jdg345 - I was going to copy & paste of bunch of your posts, but it's best to just say that I completely agree with everything you've written.
> 
> I especially agree that indirectly all members pay for pool hopping with the additional maintenance that is needed when members do pool hop.



I'd bet there would be greater maintenance costs for all the illegal pool hoppers than for the legal pool hoppers.  And they don't even pay dues.

Or from the guests who decide to use pool towels instead of paying for additional towels packs because they want a clean towel every time they use one.  And those could be both dues payers and non-payers.


----------



## MELSMICE

Deb & Bill said:


> I'd bet there would be greater maintenance costs for all the illegal pool hoppers than for the legal pool hoppers.  And they don't even pay dues.
> 
> Or from the guests who decide to use pool towels instead of paying for additional towels packs because they want a clean towel every time they use one.  And those could be both dues payers and non-payers.


Yes, but it is still an additional expense.  The other expenses are not going away - people will continue to pool hop & guests will continue to use an abundance of towels.  

Legit pool hoppers are using a service at another resort that could use at the resort they are currently a guest at.


----------



## Chuck S

MELSMICE said:


> Yes, but it is still an additional expense.  The other expenses are not going away - people will continue to pool hop & guests will continue to use an abundance of towels.
> 
> Legit pool hoppers are using a service at another resort that could use at the resort they are currently a guest at.



But wouldn't that balance out?  If DVCers hop to another DVC resort, couldn't you also assume that a similar number of DVCers would hop to their other resort?  Most of the hopping occurs from DVC resorts to non-DVC resorts...wouldn't that _save_ slightly on maintenance?

And again, there is no additonal costs at all at BLT, AKV and BCV as no pool hopping is allowed to those resorts.  It is also dooubtful that many hop _from_ those resorts to other DVC resorts.


----------



## crisi

And I really suspect that it is inevitable that pool hopping disappears entirely - and in the near future.  I'll lay odds that its the next 100 page thread on the DIS DVC board.  Currently both BWV and VWL guests are getting a raw deal, and the Poly pool as well.  Close to the parks, with nearby pools that you can't hop to.  Neither resort has adequate pool chairs for the resort itself.  And we spend enough time griping about hoppers on this board that I have to believe its a common theme in Disney customer service complaints.  ETA:  There are now enough DVC members as well that hopping for a midday pool break from the MK to the Poly pool threatens to stress the pool - or from Epcot to the BW pool.  Back when it was OKW, BWV and VWL and 100,000 members, on any given day DVC hoppers would be a drop.  Now it has the potential to be more than a trickle.


----------



## Deb & Bill

crisi said:


> And I really suspect that it is inevitable that pool hopping disappears entirely - and in the near future.  I'll lay odds that its the next 100 page thread on the DIS DVC board.  Currently both BWV and VWL guests are getting a raw deal, and the Poly pool as well.  Close to the parks, with nearby pools that you can't hop to.  Neither resort has adequate pool chairs for the resort itself.  And we spend enough time griping about hoppers on this board that I have to believe its a common theme in Disney customer service complaints.  ETA:  There are now enough DVC members as well that hopping for a midday pool break from the MK to the Poly pool threatens to stress the pool - or from Epcot to the BW pool.  Back when it was OKW, BWV and VWL and 100,000 members, on any given day DVC hoppers would be a drop.  Now it has the potential to be more than a trickle.



I'd venture a guess to say you are probably correct. Pool hopping will ultimately go away in the near future.


----------



## jdg345

Deb & Bill said:


> I'd bet there would be greater maintenance costs for all the illegal pool hoppers than for the legal pool hoppers.  And they don't even pay dues.
> 
> Or from the guests who decide to use pool towels instead of paying for additional towels packs because they want a clean towel every time they use one.  And those could be both dues payers and non-payers.



I completely agree with his ... let's not forget those that stay at other resorts and then take up the parking spots at OKW and SSR to use the feature pools.  This is especially an issue at SSR.  Many times I have found myself not being able to park at my villa because someone drove over and went to Olivia's or to the pool -- from another resort !!


----------



## jdg345

crisi said:


> And I really suspect that it is inevitable that pool hopping disappears entirely - and in the near future.  I'll lay odds that its the next 100 page thread on the DIS DVC board.  Currently both BWV and VWL guests are getting a raw deal, and the Poly pool as well.  Close to the parks, with nearby pools that you can't hop to.  Neither resort has adequate pool chairs for the resort itself.  And we spend enough time griping about hoppers on this board that I have to believe its a common theme in Disney customer service complaints.  ETA:  There are now enough DVC members as well that hopping for a midday pool break from the MK to the Poly pool threatens to stress the pool - or from Epcot to the BW pool.  Back when it was OKW, BWV and VWL and 100,000 members, on any given day DVC hoppers would be a drop.  Now it has the potential to be more than a trickle.



I would agree with this as well ... I suspect it won't be long before pool hopping is completely banned, especially as the membership continues to grow.  Personally, I find it a PITA to use a pool at another resort, but that's just me.  It's a shame that this perk will likely go away because others refuse to follow the rules.


----------



## jdg345

Happy Thanksgiving All !!!


----------



## tjkraz

MELSMICE said:


> I especially agree that indirectly all members pay for pool hopping with the additional maintenance that is needed when members do pool hop.



I'm not sure that I agree with that.  

We have pool hopped a few times.  In every case, it wasn't as if we swam solely because of the existence of pool hopping--rather it simply provided us with other options.  

On a recent trip we were staying that Treehouse Villas yet used the pools at OKW and POFQ.  If not for pool hopping we would have still swam at SSR.  So *someone *was paying the expense of our pool usage (whatever small amount that might be) regardless of whether we hopped or not.

In fact, you could even argue that pool hopping helps reduce some costs.  When we hopped to POFQ, no DVC member dues were used to defray the cost.  If we had instead stayed at SSR, there (theoretically) would have been some member cost associated with it.  

I can appreciate the sentiment that pool hopping may eventually go away.  Wouldn't surprise me.  But folks have also been predicting its demise for over 5 years now, dating back to before the SSR pool opened.  

Pool hopping may be the perk that costs Disney the least to offer to members.  Fixed costs like lifeguard staffing and pool maintenance are not impacted by pool hopping.  Towels would be used by hoppers but that's a small expense.  And again, if the individuals would instead swim at their host resort pool, the cost still exists.  

And Disney is not ignorant of the fact that some cash guests (and even non-guests) hop regardless of the rules.  Removing the perk would certainly feel like a backhanded slap at members if they made no attempt to police others' abuse of the pool facilities.  

Again, it wouldn't surprise me if they did eliminate hopping.  If they did, I assume the motivation would be that it was getting too complicated with all of the except/but restrictions which have been added to the perk.  However, given that DVC opened both Kidani and BLT this year with additional pool hopping restrictions, yet kept the perk in place, suggests to me that there are no pending plans to discontinue it.


----------



## Sammie

I figure pool hopping will stay until they receive enough complaints about over crowding as they did at SAB, then it might be stopped.


----------



## CarolMN

_*Let's keep the discussion on topic, please. *_

 IIRC, the topic is the discontinued valet parking perk for DVC members.  

If we add pool hopping to this thread, it will never die!


----------



## Dean

jdg345 said:


> If the Valet lots continue to be more empty than full, than I think it would be safe to say that a majority of the Valet traffic was due to DVC membership.  That said, this group could very well be a minority of the overall DVC membership while being a majority of the valet traffic.
> 
> I would also say that many members feel "if I don't use it, I shouldn't pay for it".  This extends to: DBD, Walking, Internet in Villa, Pool hopping, transportation, dvcmember online, online checkin, online reservations [eventually], etc.  The problem is that with any group, you cannot make everyone happy and will always have case where you need to support something you don't necessarily use yourself.  Of course, people's vacation habits change, so just because someone doesn't use a perk now doesn't mean they won't want to use it in the future.


I do believe it was a minority of the membership, and certainly is a minority of the guests staying at DVC at any given time, but it really doesn't matter in this situation.  None of the other areas you bring up make no sense, the only one that is at all comparable is the internet and as I've previously stated, it is still a LOT different in that there IS an economy of scale, more use it and it's cheap; plus it is being subsidized by others.  It really is as simple as whether those that use it is going to pay for the things they chose to use or are they going to ask others to pay for them.  Someone has to pay and there is NO credible reason to pass this charge on to others (no economy of scale, high cost item, easy to target who to charge, etc).  Now hopefully DVC can revisit the issue and negotiate a cheaper fee for this situation but the way things are going it would appear that eliminating valet parking is more likely than going the other way.


----------



## DVCconvert

Dean said:


> .....  None of the other areas you bring up make no sense, .....





Sooo....then you're in complete agreement with jdg345 ?


----------



## Dean

DVCconvert said:


> Sooo....then you're in complete agreement with jdg345 ?


Doubtful unless he feels that valet parking is NOT a reasonable item to spread between all members and that the other items I quoted ARE not only reasonable to average to everyone but unreasonable to do otherwise.  The only questionable one is the internet but given the specifics, it is one that is BEST averaged to everyone.  It's actually even more of a division that has been discussed as ONLY the members at those resorts would be paying for it.  I don't think there's any way to spread any such costs among the other members.  Some of the items that were listed have little or no cost and several are not avoidable without changing the rules for everyone.  Some likely will be curtailed at some point including that I expect changes in reservations to be considered a cancelation and rebooking at some point.


----------



## jdg345

Dean said:


> I do believe it was a minority of the membership, and certainly is a minority of the guests staying at DVC at any given time, but it really doesn't matter in this situation.  None of the other areas you bring up make no sense, the only one that is at all comparable is the internet and as I've previously stated, it is still a LOT different in that there IS an economy of scale, more use it and it's cheap; plus it is being subsidized by others.  It really is as simple as whether those that use it is going to pay for the things they chose to use or are they going to ask others to pay for them.  Someone has to pay and there is NO credible reason to pass this charge on to others (no economy of scale, high cost item, easy to target who to charge, etc). * Now hopefully DVC can revisit the issue and negotiate a cheaper fee for this situation but the way things are going it would appear that eliminating valet parking is more likely than going the other way*.





My guess is that if they do anything positive, it will be a negotiated discount.  If the traffic has fallen off as antecdotal evidence suggests, then DVC members could have been responsible for a large percentage of overall valet customers.  If this is the case, then the valet company may opt for getting some of something versus all of nothing.

I don't know that they'll be able to eliminate valet parking as a whole; but I suppose this is certainly an option if the traffic falls off that drastically.  In the end, I think Disney will still want to provide this service though and I doubt they've ever want to take it back in house.


----------



## Dean

jdg345 said:


> My guess is that if they do anything positive, it will be a negotiated discount.  If the traffic has fallen off as antecdotal evidence suggests, then DVC members could have been responsible for a large percentage of overall valet customers.  If this is the case, then the valet company may opt for getting some of something versus all of nothing.
> 
> I don't know that they'll be able to eliminate valet parking as a whole; but I suppose this is certainly an option if the traffic falls off that drastically.  In the end, I think Disney will still want to provide this service though and I doubt they've ever want to take it back in house.


If, big if, anything positive happens I suspect a minor discount (maybe $2/day) is about the best one can hope for.  The other option, and I think a far less likely one, is to negotiate a package deal for a single contract price as has been suggested on this thread they should have done rather than the change that did occur.  If there is a large enough discount then it may flip over to being reasonable to spread to the membership as a whole.  The contractor may be willing to do that or they may not.  I'm guessing they knew up front the numbers that were DVC and those that were not and made their decisions accordingly.  I'm assuming they made the decision they did tied to a smaller group of employees, likely with more part time people compared to before.  I think the two most likely options are it'll stay pretty much like it is or the valet parking as we know it will be eliminated at some of all of the resorts, esp the DVC resorts.  I'm sure some will say there's no way they can do without valet parking but I don't agree.  They'll have to make some provisions for parking for HC but I don't see that as an unworkable impediment to eliminating valet parking though I'm sure some will disagree.  I suspect it's likely Disney will be faced with the option of elimination or taking it back in house at some point, tough choice.

I also predict the valet parking numbers will ease up over the next few months.  Hopefully they can reduce the size of the valet lots where applicable.  I hope their not tied to the contract or that the contracted number of parking spaces was reduced with the recent change.


----------



## DVCPAT

jdg345 said:


> My guess is that if they do anything positive, it will be a negotiated discount.  If the traffic has fallen off as antecdotal evidence suggests, then DVC members could have been responsible for a large percentage of overall valet customers.  If this is the case, then the valet company may opt for getting some of something versus all of nothing.
> 
> I don't know that they'll be able to eliminate valet parking as a whole; but I suppose this is certainly an option if the traffic falls off that drastically.  In the end, I think Disney will still want to provide this service though and I doubt they've ever want to take it back in house.





I just returned from the VWL and valet parking is dead. I think Disney made a bad business decision canceling free valet. If Disney pays Mears a set contract price based on previous valet traffic, Mears can provide valet service at a fraction of the cost today. I also noticed fewer people using bell services making our bell man very nervous. His exact words were “thank goodness I can sing and dance”. 

Disney provided members free valet to keep them on-site. One Disney CM told me DVC members have been a godsend for business during slow periods. Disney needs to convert the vacant valet parking lots into additional guest parking. With out free valet……the food at Disney hotel restaurants isn’t good enough to walk a mile for. It’s less expensive and more convenient to dine off-site.


----------



## kathrynmtague

I can confirm this is true! I was visiting in early nov for a business conference. I had to pay for valet at bwv! I immediately posted a comment on this board and was shocked that nobody responded! The valet guy said it was been that way since 10/12 I believe. I was very disappointed!


----------



## MELSMICE

DVCPAT said:


> I just returned from the VWL and valet parking is dead. I think Disney made a bad business decision canceling free valet. If Disney pays Mears a set contract price based on previous valet traffic, Mears can provide valet service at a fraction of the cost today. I also noticed fewer people using bell services making our bell man very nervous. His exact words were thank goodness I can sing and dance.
> 
> Disney provided members free valet to keep them on-site. One Disney CM told me DVC members have been a godsend for business during slow periods. Disney needs to convert the vacant valet parking lots into additional guest parking. With out free valetthe food at Disney hotel restaurants isnt good enough to walk a mile for. Its less expensive and more convenient to dine off-site.


What's sad, IMO, is that it might possibly cost the members only a few dollars more in their dues.  

Taking away the perk is obviously causing members to choose not to valet park, thus taking away tips from the valet drivers.  This in turn, is causing them to make less money, which means they will spend less, because you can't spend what you don't make any more.  

And yes, I can pay the $12 plus tips to help these valet CM's myself, but like everyone else, I most likely won't take between $15-$20 additional out of my pocket each time I visit a resort on my vacation.  $5-$6 is a lot different for a tip then the cost of valet on top of the tip. 

Bottom line is, we all pay for something in our dues that we don't necessarily use.  It's always frustrating when something is taken away that was something you did use.  

This is just my opinion, obviously!


----------



## DVCPAT

MELSMICE said:


> What's sad, IMO, is that it might possibly cost the members only a few dollars more in their dues.
> 
> Taking away the perk is obviously causing members to choose not to valet park, thus taking away tips from the valet drivers.  This in turn, is causing them to make less money, which means they will spend less, because you can't spend what you don't make any more.
> 
> And yes, I can pay the $12 plus tips to help these valet CM's myself, but like everyone else, I most likely won't take between $15-$20 additional out of my pocket each time I visit a resort on my vacation.  $5-$6 is a lot different for a tip then the cost of valet on top of the tip.
> 
> Bottom line is, we all pay for something in our dues that we don't necessarily use.  It's always frustrating when something is taken away that was something you did use.
> 
> This is just my opinion, obviously!





Exactly! A perk should be a win/win situation. We get an added guest convenience while Disney gets us to spend more money. Disney purposely intertwines DVC with WDW resorts for operational efficiency. If DVC was a completely separate financial entity, you would have separate check-in, separate transportation, metered utilities in the common areas (so DVC was only responsible for DVC areas). I would bet DVC pays a portion of all utilities (ac, heat & water) for the common area restaurant patrons, common area check-in, common area pathways to transportation maintenance and parking areas.


----------



## Chuck S

DVCPAT said:


> Exactly! A perk should be a win/win situation. We get an added guest convenience while Disney gets us to spend more money. Disney purposely intertwines DVC with WDW resorts for operational efficiency. If DVC was a completely separate financial entity, you would have separate check-in, separate transportation, metered utilities in the common areas (so DVC was only responsible for DVC areas). I would bet DVC pays a portion of all utilities (ac, heat & water) for the common area restaurant patrons, common area check-in, common area pathways to transportation maintenance and parking areas.



One would believe that Disney/DVC would have already run the financial projections before deciding not to continue the funding, and likely they didn't show a projected significant drop off in dining revenue.  Disney makes very few decisions without looking at the finances.


----------



## DVCPAT

Chuck S said:


> One would believe that Disney/DVC would have already run the financial projections before deciding not to continue the funding, and likely they didn't show a projected significant drop off in dining revenue.  Disney makes very few decisions without looking at the finances.



I dont think any projection can predict human behavior or spending habits with 100% accuracy. Thats why businesses experience peaks and valleys. Its OK to make mistakes. Its when you make 3 or 4 in a row that can really hurt you.


----------



## Dean

MELSMICE said:


> What's sad, IMO, is that it might possibly cost the members only a few dollars more in their dues.
> 
> Taking away the perk is obviously causing members to choose not to valet park, thus taking away tips from the valet drivers.  This in turn, is causing them to make less money, which means they will spend less, because you can't spend what you don't make any more.
> 
> And yes, I can pay the $12 plus tips to help these valet CM's myself, but like everyone else, I most likely won't take between $15-$20 additional out of my pocket each time I visit a resort on my vacation.  $5-$6 is a lot different for a tip then the cost of valet on top of the tip.
> 
> Bottom line is, we all pay for something in our dues that we don't necessarily use.  It's always frustrating when something is taken away that was something you did use.
> 
> This is just my opinion, obviously!


With both the new and old set up a given member must decide whether to use it or not.  IMO, 5-10¢ a point (my guess) is a lot to pass on to those that did not use it.  Plus it's likely that ONLY the resorts that actually have valet would have been paying, not all members which likely pushes the 10¢ a point level or more.  While there are items where the costs are shared by all that not everyone uses, there is NOT another item that is comparable to the valet parking that I can think of.  The internet option is by far the closest and there is still a major difference there.  Ultimately to me the question is why would anyone think others should pay their way.  IF there are items that one feels they do not use and the costs should not be shared by all, make that case to DVC.  We've already seen other items (towels, shampoo, etc) go pay to play for extras.  There certainly are other areas that could do so including multiple reservation fees, cancelation fees, banking/borrowing fees, etc.  The question isn't whether to draw the line but WHERE to draw the line.  I wouldn't vote to have the costs shared unless there were a significant economy of scale by doing so and/or there were significant costs in enforcement and my info suggests neither is true in this situation, at least at the present time.

For those that think this should be a shared expense, what rationale would you say to those that don't think so since you'd be trying to convince the majority they should pay for the minorities costs?  I don't think that "it was free before", "everyone pays for things they don't use" or "it's only an extra $15-30 out of your pocket" or similar would convince others.



DVCPAT said:


> Exactly! A perk should be a win/win situation. We get an added guest convenience while Disney gets us to spend more money. Disney purposely intertwines DVC with WDW resorts for operational efficiency. If DVC was a completely separate financial entity, you would have separate check-in, separate transportation, metered utilities in the common areas (so DVC was only responsible for DVC areas). I would bet DVC pays a portion of all utilities (ac, heat & water) for the common area restaurant patrons, common area check-in, common area pathways to transportation maintenance and parking areas.


There are perks that are win/win but they all cost nothing or almost nothing like dining and AP discounts.  Unfortunately this particular perk is AT BEST win/lose with the majority subsidizing the minority if the costs were rolled into dues.  The only question was whether those that used it were going to "lose" by having to pay the costs of whether some that didn't use it were going to lose by subsidizing those that did use it.  The only way to make it win/win would be to negotiate a price that cut the TOTAL cost to around 20-30% of what the costs would have been assuming no change in volume after the price change.  Of course there could be further losses such as a total loss of valet going forward as well which wouldn't surprise me at the DVC resorts in question.

The members at a given resort pay a prorated portion of transportation and other items for that resort only.  If I recall correctly they use a formula that approximates the number of people occupying a given resort for each year and for the mixed use properties, prorate the costs between the DVC and none DVC component.  When a given item also is shared with other resorts, they use the same formula to calculate the costs to each resort.  This all came to the forefront a few years ago with transportation costs for BWV & BCV.


----------



## LindaBabe

I didn't notice my dues went down any when free valet parking was discontinued!  We just stayed at VWL, and we did not use valet, but I can tell you it makes it darn awkward when loading and unloading, because you can't get to the bellman without the valet loading the trolley.  I thought the valet was rude when she discovered we weren't going to valet, only off load.  Also, the (quite empty) valet lot was much bigger than the "stuffed to the gills" self park.


----------



## Chuck S

LindaBabe said:


> I didn't notice my dues went down any when free valet parking was discontinued!  We just stayed at VWL, and we did not use valet, but I can tell you it makes it darn awkward when loading and unloading, because you can't get to the bellman without the valet loading the trolley.  I thought the valet was rude when she discovered we weren't going to valet, only off load.  Also, the (quite empty) valet lot was much bigger than the "stuffed to the gills" self park.



Of course dues went up, resort operating costs (wages, benefits, energy) have gone up.

Dues did not go down because dues had not been subsidizing the valet perk, the cost was born by DVC marketing, Disney or the contractor, who has chosen to no longer bear that cost.  Dues would have risen more to cover the valet cost, had the perk been kept.


----------



## MELSMICE

Dean said:


> With both the new and old set up a given member must decide whether to use it or not.  IMO, 5-10¢ a point (my guess) is a lot to pass on to those that did not use it.  Plus it's likely that ONLY the resorts that actually have valet would have been paying, not all members which likely pushes the 10¢ a point level or more.  While there are items where the costs are shared by all that not everyone uses, there is NOT another item that is comparable to the valet parking that I can think of.  The internet option is by far the closest and there is still a major difference there.  *Ultimately to me the question is why would anyone think others should pay their way.*  IF there are items that one feels they do not use and the costs should not be shared by all, make that case to DVC.  We've already seen other items (towels, shampoo, etc) go pay to play for extras.  There certainly are other areas that could do so including multiple reservation fees, cancelation fees, banking/borrowing fees, etc.  The question isn't whether to draw the line but WHERE to draw the line.  I wouldn't vote to have the costs shared unless there were a significant economy of scale by doing so and/or there were significant costs in enforcement and my info suggests neither is true in this situation, at least at the present time.
> 
> For those that think this should be a shared expense, what rationale would you say to those that don't think so since you'd be trying to *convince the majority they should pay for the minorities costs?  *I don't think that "it was free before", "everyone pays for things they don't use" or "it's only an extra $15-30 out of your pocket" or similar would convince others.
> 
> There are perks that are win/win but they all cost nothing or almost nothing like dining and AP discounts.  Unfortunately this particular perk is AT BEST win/lose with the majority subsidizing the minority if the costs were rolled into dues.  The only question was whether those that used it were going to "lose" by having to pay the costs of whether some that didn't use it were going to lose by subsidizing those that did use it.  The only way to make it win/win would be to negotiate a price that cut the TOTAL cost to around 20-30% of what the costs would have been assuming no change in volume after the price change.  Of course there could be further losses such as a total loss of valet going forward as well which wouldn't surprise me at the DVC resorts in question.
> 
> The members at a given resort pay a prorated portion of transportation and other items for that resort only.  If I recall correctly they use a formula that approximates the number of people occupying a given resort for each year and for the mixed use properties, prorate the costs between the DVC and none DVC component.  When a given item also is shared with other resorts, they use the same formula to calculate the costs to each resort.  This all came to the forefront a few years ago with transportation costs for BWV & BCV.


I, personally, don't look at it as paying someone else's way.  It you choose not to use it, then that's a personal decision.  If I choose to use it, then I have taken advantage of the perk.  I don't use Internet service, but I certainly don't feel that I'm paying for someone else because they do.  It certainly doesn't bother me.  I choose not to utilize this "free" service.  

You really can't say 100% whether the majority wants or does not want the valet service to continue "free of charge".  We can only go by the members on this board that voice their opinion.  

I am an OKW owner.  When I purchased there was no slide, therefore, no maintenance cost or lifeguard costs.  We don't use the slide.  My children are young adults that really don't need lifeguards.  I am paying for this benefit, but at this point am not using it.  At some point I hope to take my grandchildren there & I'm sure they will use the slide & I will also appreciate the lifeguards more & the fact that they are there.  It will come full circle for us.  

We rarely use the free recreation available (ping pong, shuffleboard, etc.) & we never participate in the poolside activities, but I know I pay for these things in my dues.  It's very rare that we "rent" a movie from Community Hall, but every unit has a DVD player.  I certainly don't need one, but I paid for replacement of them from a VHS to a DVD player.  I rarely watch TV when I'm on vacation & could care less what kind of TV is in the units, but I know I'll be paying for replacements to flat screen TV's.  

Really, I'm highly doubtful that there is one person that uses every free or discounted service that is offered to them, yet we are all paying for them in our dues.  They are member benefits & they make your vacations more enjoyable.  By continuing to "tweak" them or take them away does not make members happy.  

And again, I know I can pay out of pocket for valet, but if I'm going to pay additional for something that was once a "free" perk that I used why doesn't someone else have to pay to rent a DVD player if they are going to watch a movie - I don't need that DVD player in my unit.  (just a small example)


----------



## Dean

LindaBabe said:


> I didn't notice my dues went down any when free valet parking was discontinued!  We just stayed at VWL, and we did not use valet, but I can tell you it makes it darn awkward when loading and unloading, because you can't get to the bellman without the valet loading the trolley.  I thought the valet was rude when she discovered we weren't going to valet, only off load.  Also, the (quite empty) valet lot was much bigger than the "stuffed to the gills" self park.


No question they need to adjust the  lots.  The valet was NOT being charged before, it was included free as part of the requisite for the contract initially from what I can gather.  Regardless, I doubt you'd have seen dues go down, only just not up as much going forward.  Not that it really matters whether they go up or down as philosophically it's not an option appropriate to spread to everyone given the current specifics.  No doubt they need to revisit the lots but he problem might be that the number of spaces or lots may be tied to the contract, remember I'm just speculating here.  I'm sure this will change again at some point but I'm convincing myself that one of the more likely options would be removal valet parking altogether.  If not, I'm sure it will be cut back significantly going forward.


----------



## DebbieB

I don't think they will remove it if they want to continue to project the image of a "deluxe" resort.  The DVC's that have valet parking are connected to a "deluxe" resort.   I travel alot for business, every Hilton has valet parking and they charge something like $18 a day.  Most also charge for self-parking, which I would not be surprised is next.     If you are dressed up for a nice dinner, you are not going to want to walk a mile from self-parking.


----------



## Dean

MELSMICE said:


> I, personally, don't look at it as paying someone else's way.  It you choose not to use it, then that's a personal decision.  If I choose to use it, then I have taken advantage of the perk.  I don't use Internet service, but I certainly don't feel that I'm paying for someone else because they do.  It certainly doesn't bother me.  I choose not to utilize this "free" service.
> 
> You really can't say 100% whether the majority wants or does not want the valet service to continue "free of charge".  We can only go by the members on this board that voice their opinion.
> 
> I am an OKW owner.  When I purchased there was no slide, therefore, no maintenance cost or lifeguard costs.  We don't use the slide.  My children are young adults that really don't need lifeguards.  I am paying for this benefit, but at this point am not using it.  At some point I hope to take my grandchildren there & I'm sure they will use the slide & I will also appreciate the lifeguards more & the fact that they are there.  It will come full circle for us.
> 
> We rarely use the free recreation available (ping pong, shuffleboard, etc.) & we never participate in the poolside activities, but I know I pay for these things in my dues.  It's very rare that we "rent" a movie from Community Hall, but every unit has a DVD player.  I certainly don't need one, but I paid for replacement of them from a VHS to a DVD player.  I rarely watch TV when I'm on vacation & could care less what kind of TV is in the units, but I know I'll be paying for replacements to flat screen TV's.
> 
> Really, I'm highly doubtful that there is one person that uses every free or discounted service that is offered to them, yet we are all paying for them in our dues.  They are member benefits & they make your vacations more enjoyable.  By continuing to "tweak" them or take them away does not make members happy.
> 
> And again, I know I can pay out of pocket for valet, but if I'm going to pay additional for something that was once a "free" perk that I used why doesn't someone else have to pay to rent a DVD player if they are going to watch a movie - I don't need that DVD player in my unit.  (just a small example)


You may not look at it as paying someone else's way but that's exactly what it would be, someone has to pay.  These are not free options, there is a cost involved in almost everything and a cost involved in doing pay to play by enforcement or simply to provide the service.  The question then simply becomes what is the cost, how many use it, how easy would it be to enforce pay to play and are there any volume discounts.  One would also consider what the standards are for similar resorts.  In all of these areas sharing costs among all the membership for valet comes down squarely on the side of pay to play.  No one questions whether there are perks that all pay for and not everyone uses but decisions have to be made.  The before and after is that there was not a cost (to DVC or DVD at all) and now there is a cost of $12 per car per day, someone has to pay.  That's a fact, there is no rationalizing that will change that.  The only questions is WHO is going to pay it, those that use it or everyone including those who don't which is a majority of the DVC membership.  Looked at practically there is no currently volume discount, no difficulty in targeting those using it and no real enforcement cost.  IMO, there is NO rational way to justify having others pay for those that use it in this situation.



DebbieB said:


> I don't think they will remove it if they want to continue to project the image of a "deluxe" resort.  The DVC's that have valet parking are connected to a "deluxe" resort.   I travel alot for business, every Hilton has valet parking and they charge something like $18 a day.  Most also charge for self-parking, which I would not be surprised is next.     If you are dressed up for a nice dinner, you are not going to want to walk a mile from self-parking.


Few timeshares have valet parking outside Vegas or if they do, it is often much higher and often mandatory.  As you note, many have a self parking charge that is easily as much as the current charge for valet parking.


----------



## tjkraz

DVCPAT said:


> If Disney pays Mears a set contract price based on previous valet traffic, Mears can provide valet service at a fraction of the cost today.



You're making a pretty big assumption on the nature of the relationship between Disney and the parking vendor.  I can't imagine why Disney would pay the a vendor to operate a revenue-generating operation on Disney property.  That business model makes no sense.  

More likely, either the vendor is paying a fixed fee for the rights to operate the valet parking service or the revenue is shared by both the service provider and Disney according to a pre-determined schedule.  

Certainly Disney (not DVC) has a great deal to lose here.  That fact alone leads me to question exactly how much say they have in the ability to provide free or even discounted valet services to DVC members.  

Disney does surrender some control when they allow outside vendors to operate on property.  Look at things like the Dining Plans and Tables in Wonderland.  Disney cannot obligate restaurants like Raglan Road or Yak & Yeti to participate in either of these programs.  Ultimately each establishment decides whether to participate in the discount dining programs or not.  Similarly, Disney cannot compel the valet parking outfit to provide free or reduced-cost service to DVC members.  



Chuck S said:


> One would believe that Disney/DVC would have already run the financial projections before deciding not to continue the funding, and likely they didn't show a projected significant drop off in dining revenue.  Disney makes very few decisions without looking at the finances.



Not only that but they have years worth of data on valet parking usage at non-DVC resorts like the Poly, Grand Floridian & Yacht Club, plus AKL and Contemporary where free DVC parking was just added months ago.  

At worst they may have underestimated the volume of DVC members who are willing to pay for valet.  But it will take months to evaluate even that statistic as member patterns are certain to change in the coming months.  



MELSMICE said:


> They are member benefits & they make your vacations more enjoyable.  By continuing to "tweak" them or take them away does not make members happy.



Bear in mind that many members are also budget conscious.  Losing benefits appears to be what lowers your satisfaction level but there are thousands of other members whose satisfaction is driven by their annual dues bill.  Go back 3 or 4 years in the forum archive and see how many people were up-in-arms over the OKW pool slide they are now obligated to staff and maintain.  

DVC has to strike a balance between cost, benefit and appropriateness of any perk offered to members.  Some of the decisions are certainly difficult and even unpopular.  But that doesn't make the decisions wrong by an objective measure.  



> And again, I know I can pay out of pocket for valet, but if I'm going to pay additional for something that was once a "free" perk that I used why doesn't someone else have to pay to rent a DVD player if they are going to watch a movie - I don't need that DVD player in my unit.  (just a small example)



There may eventually come a day when DVD players and free movie rentals are not available.  But don't overlook the cost component of the item being discussed.  DVD players probably cost Disney $20 when purchased in bulk.  A single player could last for months or years in a villa room.  The DVDs themselves run about $20-30 (perhaps much less since all they stock are Disney products.)  A resort's DVD procurement budget is probably in the neighborhood of $400-500 per year.  

Compare that to valet parking which is $12 per guest, per day.  Pretty big difference, financially speaking.


----------



## MELSMICE

tjkraz said:


> *Go back 3 or 4 years in the forum archive and see how many people were up-in-arms over the OKW pool slide they are now obligated to staff and maintain.
> *
> DVC has to strike a balance between cost, benefit and appropriateness of any perk offered to members.  Some of the decisions are certainly difficult and even unpopular.  But that doesn't make the decisions wrong by an objective measure.
> 
> There may eventually come a day when DVD players and free movie rentals are not available.  But don't overlook the cost component of the item being discussed.  DVD players probably cost Disney $20 when purchased in bulk.  A single player could last for months or years in a villa room.  The DVDs themselves run about $20-30 (perhaps much less since all they stock are Disney products.)  A resort's DVD procurement budget is probably in the neighborhood of $400-500 per year.
> 
> Compare that to valet parking which is $12 per guest, per day.  Pretty big difference, financially speaking.


I am well aware of the OKW debate about the slide as I am an OKW owner.  I knew the slide would not benefit me, given the age of my kids, etc., however, I didn't object to the slide, even considering the cost factor.  It's all part of the enjoyment package when on vacation, IMO.  

Like I said, the DVD example was a small one.  Bottom line, however, is that there is a cost involved.  Another example is the fitness center.  I rarely, if ever, use it.  I walk outside.  Why should I pay dues to maintain that part of the recreation - why not have a fee to use the fitness center?  

Obviously, you can't please everyone, however, dues will continue to rise over the course of time.  Continuing to take away benefits that people have enjoyed is not good business practice.


----------



## DVCPAT

Dean said:


> There are perks that are win/win but they all cost nothing or almost nothing like dining and AP discounts.  Unfortunately this particular perk is AT BEST win/lose with the majority subsidizing the minority if the costs were rolled into dues.  The only question was whether those that used it were going to "lose" by having to pay the costs of whether some that didn't use it were going to lose by subsidizing those that did use it.  The only way to make it win/win would be to negotiate a price that cut the TOTAL cost to around 20-30% of what the costs would have been assuming no change in volume after the price change.  Of course there could be further losses such as a total loss of valet going forward as well which wouldn't surprise me at the DVC resorts in question.





Why do you think Disney originally offered DVC members free valet parking? Why would they offer such a great convenience to guests (with kitchens) to visit resorts that feature restaurants and gift shops? I think its the same reason Disney builds gift shops at the exit point of theme park rides..to get you to spend money. 

Then again....the elimination of the valet perk might not have anything to do with costs. It could be due to free dining. Why give free valet parking to restaurants that offer free food?


----------



## tjkraz

MELSMICE said:


> I am well aware of the OKW debate about the slide as I am an OKW owner.  I knew the slide would not benefit me, given the age of my kids, etc., however, I didn't object to the slide, even considering the cost factor.  It's all part of the enjoyment package when on vacation, IMO.



Understood.  My only point is that there is another group of owners not nearly as altruistic as you who would be very, very upset if their dues had increased an additional 3-4% (or whatever the amount may be) to fund "free" valet parking for other owners.


----------



## Chuck S

DVCPAT said:


> Why do you think Disney originally offered DVC members free valet parking? Why would they offer such a great convenience to guests (with kitchens) to visit resorts that feature restaurants and gift shops? I think it’s the same reason Disney builds gift shops at the exit point of theme park rides…..to get you to spend money.
> 
> Then again....the elimination of the valet perk might not have anything to do with costs. It could be due to free dining. Why give free valet parking to restaurants that offer free food?



The restaurants are not offering "free food," they are still paid the normal price per meal they would get from the paid DDP.  The "free" DDP is in lieu of other room discounts, like buy 4 get 7.

Nor do I believe it was to "encourage" DVC members to restaurant hop and store hop from resort to resort, or else OKW would have offered valet services to encourage use of Olivia's. 

It was a courtesy perk paid for either through contract agreement, or DVC Marketing. Likely due to increasing labor costs, the valet vendor wanted more per DVC valet use, and DVC marketing decided not to fund it.  And the DVC Board decided not to add a new component to the dues to fund it.


----------



## TLSnell1981

And, it still stinks.


----------



## MELSMICE

tjkraz said:


> Understood.  My only point is that there is another group of owners not nearly as altruistic as you who would be very, very upset if their dues had increased an additional 3-4% (or whatever the amount may be) to fund "free" valet parking for other owners.


Do we know for sure that our dues would have increased this much?  I haven't gone back to reread the thread so I'm not sure.  Did DVD/DVD explain that our dues would have increased had they kept the valet perk?


----------



## SuzanneSLO

MELSMICE said:


> Do we know for sure that our dues would have increased this much?  I haven't gone back to reread the thread so I'm not sure.  Did DVD/DVD explain that our dues would have increased had they kept the valet perk?



I think it is anyone's guess what the total dues woudl go up if valet was still free, but as I haveposted before, each owner can do their own calculation based on the new cost.

Say you use 240 points and stay 5 nights.  Valet parking will now cost you $60.  As a result, the cost per point for this stay goes up $0.25 if you valet park and nothing, if you don't.  Even better, each owner gets to decide whether or not to pay the increased cost!  -- Suzanne


----------



## MELSMICE

SuzanneSLO said:


> I think it is anyone's guess what the total dues woudl go up if valet was still free, but as I haveposted before, each owner can do their own calculation based on the new cost.
> 
> Say you use 240 points and stay 5 nights.  Valet parking will now cost you $60.  As a result, the cost per point for this stay goes up $0.25 if you valet park and nothing, if you don't.  Even better, each owner gets to decide whether or not to pay the increased cost!  -- Suzanne


Yes, but did DVC/DVD confirm that dues would have gone up if free valet would have been continued?


----------



## Maistre Gracey

SuzanneSLO said:


> I think it is anyone's guess what the total dues woudl go up if valet was still free, but as I haveposted before, each owner can do their own calculation based on the new cost.
> 
> Say you use 240 points and stay 5 nights.  Valet parking will now cost you $60.  As a result, the cost per point for this stay goes up $0.25 if you valet park and nothing, if you don't.  Even better, each owner gets to decide whether or not to pay the increased cost!  -- Suzanne


Just to point out..
You should not figure $12/day. That rate entitles you to valet at all Disney resorts that offer valet. 
When valet was free for Members, it only entitled us to park at DVC resorts.

MG


----------



## DebbieB

DVCPAT said:


> Why do you think Disney originally offered DVC members free valet parking? Why would they offer such a great convenience to guests (with kitchens) to visit resorts that feature restaurants and gift shops? I think its the same reason Disney builds gift shops at the exit point of theme park rides..to get you to spend money.
> 
> Then again....the elimination of the valet perk might not have anything to do with costs. It could be due to free dining. Why give free valet parking to restaurants that offer free food?



It used to be free for everyone.    When they started charging, DVC members were exempt at DVC resorts.  So it wasn't really an "added perk" but really an "exemption" from the new charge.


----------



## tjkraz

MELSMICE said:


> Yes, but did DVC/DVD confirm that dues would have gone up if free valet would have been continued?



Yes, they did.



Maistre Gracey said:


> Just to point out..
> You should not figure $12/day. That rate entitles you to valet at all Disney resorts that offer valet.
> When valet was free for Members, it only entitled us to park at DVC resorts.
> 
> MG



That doesn't mean we wouldn't have been charged the full $12 fee going forward.  

In lieu of any evidence to the contrary, I'm inclined to believe they were demanding DVC pay the entire $12 daily fee--or a rate very close to that.  If deep discounts were being offered it would have gone a long way toward justifying the subsidization via annual dues.  Or we may have at least been given a discounted nightly rate (say, $8-10 per vehicle.)


----------



## MELSMICE

tjkraz said:


> Yes, they did.


Do you have a link or anything to that?  I haven't gone back in the thread or done any research on it specifically.


----------



## tjkraz

MELSMICE said:


> Do you have a link or anything to that?  I haven't gone back in the thread or done any research on it specifically.



It's on DVCMember.com under the NEWS menu:



> Complimentary valet parking for Disney Vacation Club Members at Disney Vacation Club Resorts at the Walt Disney World® Resort was discontinued effective October 11, 2009.
> 
> Similar to other fee-based services, such as additional housekeeping service or additional room amenities, only those Members who choose to valet park will be charged, instead of increasing the annual dues for all Members to cover the costs.
> 
> Self parking will continue to be complimentary at all Disney Vacation Club resorts. For drivers choosing to use the valet service, the cost is $12 a day, effective October 11, 2009. Members and Guests with disabilities will continue to receive complimentary valet parking.
> 
> Once paid, the valet parking service can be used for the entire day at any resort without paying the fee again.


----------



## Maistre Gracey

tjkraz said:


> That doesn't mean we wouldn't have been charged the full $12 fee going forward.


True, but if they did I had better get full services in return.

I valet park for three reasons:
1) At the resort I'm staying at (would be covered by DVC).
2) For dinner (covered by TIW).
3) To visit the BW (would be covered by DVC).

So, there is no reason I would need full service, and I would rather see just the DVC resorts for a reduced rate.

MG


----------



## jdg345

DVCPAT said:


> I just returned from the VWL and valet parking is dead. I think Disney made a bad business decision canceling free valet. If Disney pays Mears a set contract price based on previous valet traffic, Mears can provide valet service at a fraction of the cost today. I also noticed fewer people using bell services making our bell man very nervous. His exact words were thank goodness I can sing and dance.
> 
> Disney provided members free valet to keep them on-site. One Disney CM told me DVC members have been a godsend for business during slow periods. Disney needs to convert the vacant valet parking lots into additional guest parking. With out free valetthe food at Disney hotel restaurants isnt good enough to walk a mile for. Its less expensive and more convenient to dine off-site.



Yup, that seems to certainly be the case.  It appears the costs were about to skyrocket and disney did not want to absorb those costs.  Perhaps they felt the reward ratio was simply not enough.

I agree with Dean that if traffic continues to decrease, disney may put themselves back into a position where it's not worth paying the valet company at all.  The question is: Does Disney take it back inhouse at that point (unlikely, imo), or does Mears take the hit in order to get some of something versus all of nothing.


----------



## jdg345

MELSMICE said:


> What's sad, IMO, is that it might possibly cost the members only a few dollars more in their dues.
> 
> Taking away the perk is obviously causing members to choose not to valet park, thus taking away tips from the valet drivers.  This in turn, is causing them to make less money, which means they will spend less, because you can't spend what you don't make any more.
> 
> And yes, I can pay the $12 plus tips to help these valet CM's myself, but like everyone else, I most likely won't take between $15-$20 additional out of my pocket each time I visit a resort on my vacation.  $5-$6 is a lot different for a tip then the cost of valet on top of the tip.
> 
> *Bottom line is, we all pay for something in our dues that we don't necessarily use.  It's always frustrating when something is taken away that was something you did use.  *
> 
> This is just my opinion, obviously!



I agree with this point.  It seems many times when something is taken away that people don't use, they chime in positively with a comment like, "I didn't use it anyways, now I'm glad I don't have to pay for it".  The reality is as you state: we all are paying for stuff we don't necessarily use.  If perks continue to disappear, those folks that were happy about the loss of this perk may not find anyone willing to speak for them when one of 'their' perks gets removed.


----------



## jdg345

Chuck S said:


> One would believe that Disney/DVC would have already run the financial projections before deciding not to continue the funding, and likely they didn't show a projected significant drop off in dining revenue.  Disney makes very few decisions without looking at the finances.



FWIW, my understanding was that this was more of a knee-jerk decision made during the renegotiation of the contract.  I'm not sure how much projecting they actually did with this one (though I agree, most of the time they do weigh decisions out with finance).


----------



## jdg345

Dean said:


> With both the new and old set up a given member must decide whether to use it or not.  IMO, 5-10¢ a point (my guess) is a lot to pass on to those that did not use it.  Plus it's likely that ONLY the resorts that actually have valet would have been paying, not all members which likely pushes the 10¢ a point level or more.  While there are items where the costs are shared by all that not everyone uses, there is NOT another item that is comparable to the valet parking that I can think of.  The internet option is by far the closest and there is still a major difference there.  Ultimately to me the question is why would anyone think others should pay their way.  IF there are items that one feels they do not use and the costs should not be shared by all, make that case to DVC.  We've already seen other items (towels, shampoo, etc) go pay to play for extras.  There certainly are other areas that could do so including multiple reservation fees, cancelation fees, banking/borrowing fees, etc.  The question isn't whether to draw the line but WHERE to draw the line.  I wouldn't vote to have the costs shared unless there were a significant economy of scale by doing so and/or there were significant costs in enforcement and my info suggests neither is true in this situation, at least at the present time.
> 
> For those that think this should be a shared expense, what rationale would you say to those that don't think so since you'd be trying to convince the majority they should pay for the minorities costs?  I don't think that "it was free before", "everyone pays for things they don't use" or "it's only an extra $15-30 out of your pocket" or similar would convince others.
> 
> There are perks that are win/win but they all cost nothing or almost nothing like dining and AP discounts.  Unfortunately this particular perk is AT BEST win/lose with the majority subsidizing the minority if the costs were rolled into dues.  The only question was whether those that used it were going to "lose" by having to pay the costs of whether some that didn't use it were going to lose by subsidizing those that did use it.  The only way to make it win/win would be to negotiate a price that cut the TOTAL cost to around 20-30% of what the costs would have been assuming no change in volume after the price change.  Of course there could be further losses such as a total loss of valet going forward as well which wouldn't surprise me at the DVC resorts in question.
> 
> The members at a given resort pay a prorated portion of transportation and other items for that resort only.  If I recall correctly they use a formula that approximates the number of people occupying a given resort for each year and for the mixed use properties, prorate the costs between the DVC and none DVC component.  When a given item also is shared with other resorts, they use the same formula to calculate the costs to each resort.  This all came to the forefront a few years ago with transportation costs for BWV & BCV.



Well, we all do pay for many of the 'complimentary' member activities.  Sure, some have an additional (usually minor) charge, but quite a few are free as Tim mentioned in a previous post.  Is that next to get cut?  Maybe they pull Internet back out of the mix as well.  

While I agree that it would be a minority of DVC membership that uses valet, I would also say that the majority of valet parkers were DVC members; this seems to be supported by the recent antecdotal evidence.  Like you said, where do you draw the line?


----------



## jdg345

btw, as an update to my experiment:

I used TIW on (3) different days, at two different resorts to Valet Park.  I did not show my TIW card when parking at the resort I'm staying at.  Coincidently (?), when I look at my bill I am only charged the $12 valet fee for the nights where I did not use my TIW card.  How is this possible unless they are tracking this centrally?  By all accounts, I should have been charged the $12 for every day of my stay.

Next time I head out here, I'm going to try to have an ADR for each day so I can use my TIW card and see how it works out.  Worst case I can expect to pay the rate, but so far so good this trip.


----------



## Dean

DVCPAT said:


> Why do you think Disney originally offered DVC members free valet parking? Why would they offer such a great convenience to guests (with kitchens) to visit resorts that feature restaurants and gift shops? I think its the same reason Disney builds gift shops at the exit point of theme park rides..to get you to spend money.
> 
> Then again....the elimination of the valet perk might not have anything to do with costs. It could be due to free dining. Why give free valet parking to restaurants that offer free food?


I chose not to see this as a conspiracy issue but rather the situation changed and a decision had to be made accordingly.  I don't  think you have to look for hidden agenda's.  You'll just drive yourself crazy if you try to read between the lines on every item when the likely explanation is the obvious one.  None of us know all the details either before or now other than the end result.  Remember that valet used to be free for everyone.  I think the more interesting question is why did they cont it free for DVC when they started charging everyone else.  My guess is as a marketing tool but at the time it was all smoke and mirrors since the valet was just another Disney arm.  Then the next interesting question is how were they able to keep it free when they outsourced.  My guess, and it's just that, is that the contractor was desperate enough to get the contract to agree to it but now their not or at least they feel they have the upper hand in such negotiations.  



MELSMICE said:


> Obviously, you can't please everyone, however, dues will continue to rise over the course of time.  Continuing to take away benefits that people have enjoyed is not good business practice.


This is not a business decision per se, it's a timeshare maint fee expenditure decision.  See above.



MELSMICE said:


> Yes, but did DVC/DVD confirm that dues would have gone up if free valet would have been continued?


They have privately to many people but not the numbers as well as what's posted on the website.  Obviously there is a cost else no one would be complaining, what the dues would have ended up really is irrelevant.  Even if due would have gone down it's still not an appropriate item to charge to the entire membership.


----------



## DVCPAT

Dean said:


> I chose not to see this as a conspiracy issue but rather the situation changed and a decision had to be made accordingly.  I don't  think you have to look for hidden agenda's.  You'll just drive yourself crazy if you try to read between the lines on every item when the likely explanation is the obvious one.  None of us know all the details either before or now other than the end result.  Remember that valet used to be free for everyone.  I think the more interesting question is why did they cont it free for DVC when they started charging everyone else.  My guess is as a marketing tool but at the time it was all smoke and mirrors since the valet was just another Disney arm.  Then the next interesting question is how were they able to keep it free when they outsourced.  My guess, and it's just that, is that the contractor was desperate enough to get the contract to agree to it but now their not or at least they feel they have the upper hand in such negotiations..



I dont see it as a conspiracy.., I think the carousel of progress / capitalism is great. I truly want to see Disney make good decisions that benefit both DVC members and the companys future. 

I think Disney kept free valet parking for DVC members because were most likely to travel off site. After the 10th WDW vacation, its not unusual to see what Orlando has to offer. Once Disney outsourced valet services, I feel they lost a tool to keep long term members on-site. If outsourcing valet parking and free dining did cause the loss of free valet parking for DVC members, its interesting how it effects DVC. Time will tell if long term DVC members spend more money off site.


----------



## Dean

jdg345 said:


> I agree with this point.  It seems many times when something is taken away that people don't use, they chime in positively with a comment like, "I didn't use it anyways, now I'm glad I don't have to pay for it".  The reality is as you state: we all are paying for stuff we don't necessarily use.  If perks continue to disappear, those folks that were happy about the loss of this perk may not find anyone willing to speak for them when one of 'their' perks gets removed.


IMO, a resort should look at each one of these options and weigh the positives and negatives of each option individually based on how widely the option is used, any volume savings, the cost and what the cost would be for enforcement (as a partial list).  IMO every option becomes a potential to pay to play based on these factors including banking, borrowing, even housekeeping.  I guess to me I haven't seen any erosion of core benefits, the rest is just fluff, IMO.  



DVCPAT said:


> I dont see it as a conspiracy.., I think the carousel of progress / capitalism is great. I truly want to see Disney make good decisions that benefit both DVC members and the companys future.
> 
> I think Disney kept free valet parking for DVC members because were most likely to travel off site. After the 10th WDW vacation, its not unusual to see what Orlando has to offer. Once Disney outsourced valet services, I feel they lost a tool to keep long term members on-site. If outsourcing valet parking and free dining did cause the loss of free valet parking for DVC members, its interesting how it effects DVC. Time will tell if long term DVC members spend more money off site.


Regardless, I think you're looking for hidden meanings that simply aren't there or at least, are not a significant part of the decision.  IMO it is as simple as somebody has to pay, who is it going to be.  In this situation there really was only one reasonable decision, IMO, pay to play.  Trying to look further for "business decisions" is not necessary in this situation and is making it a lot more complicated than it really is.  And to be honest, I think it is looking for conspiracies whether one wants to label it as such or not.


----------



## MELSMICE

Dean said:


> Even if due would have gone down it's still not an appropriate item to charge to the entire membership.


Then what one thing that not every member takes advantage of would be appropriate to charge the entire membership for?


----------



## Maistre Gracey

melsmice said:


> then what one thing that not every member takes advantage of would be appropriate to charge the entire membership for?


+1

mg


----------



## Dean

MELSMICE said:


> Then what one thing that not every member takes advantage of would be appropriate to charge the entire membership for?


The reason that this is not appropriate includes that it's an expensive item, that it's a relative small % of the guests at a given time (or the membership as a whole), that it's easy to target and not any more expensive to charge than not to.  IMO there are some things that are not currently pay to play that could reasonable be.  Here are a few examples of some of the common items that could be pay to play or included, it's not meant to be all inclusive and I'm sure you can come up with many others.  

Pool - considered by most to be a requisite of a resort, difficult and expensive to monitor and/or charge and used by a larger % of people at least part of the time.  BCV does monitor it at times and does pay to do so.

Exercise room - reasonable to do pay to play from some aspects but likely more expensive to monitor and charge than it's worth unless it's tied to a spa which is monitored anyway though I could think of ways to do so.

Trash and Towel - reasonable to do pay to play but likely a low expense overall with a significant economy of scale.

Internet - cheap, major economy of scale, used by a larger % of people.

DVD's - cheap, staff already in place that monitor it but certainly hard to argue against pay to play for such an item.

Weekly housekeeping - obviously there is a requirement for cleaning every unit but I could easily see DVC charging extra for stays that were shorter than say 3-4 nights or even less than a full week.

The list could go on.  The point is that each resort must DECIDE what's appropriate to include and spread to everyone and what's appropriate to do pay to play.  Conscious decisions must be made based on facts, costs, etc.  There are many items that are currently pay to play including dining, water-craft, fishing excursions, certain activities, park admission, etc.  And MOST of those are actually far more reasonable to include and spread the cost to everyone than is valet parking though I think we would all agree that pay to play is reasonable for all of them as well.  I can think of no valid argument in favor of valet parking included unless a significant volume discount is forthcoming as a result (none is apparent at this time) and I have seen NO arguments that would support having the entire membership or all owners at a given resort pay for the use by a minority.


----------



## MELSMICE

Dean said:


> The reason that this is not appropriate includes that it's an expensive item, that it's a relative small % of the guests at a given time (or the membership as a whole), that it's easy to target and not any more expensive to charge than not to.  IMO there are some things that are not currently pay to play that could reasonable be.  Here are a few examples of some of the common items that could be pay to play or included, it's not meant to be all inclusive and I'm sure you can come up with many others.
> 
> Pool - considered by most to be a requisite of a resort, difficult and expensive to monitor and/or charge and used by a larger % of people at least part of the time.  BCV does monitor it at times and does pay to do so.
> 
> Exercise room - reasonable to do pay to play from some aspects but likely more expensive to monitor and charge than it's worth unless it's tied to a spa which is monitored anyway though I could think of ways to do so.
> 
> Trash and Towel - reasonable to do pay to play but likely a low expense overall with a significant economy of scale.
> 
> Internet - cheap, major economy of scale, used by a larger % of people.
> 
> DVD's - cheap, staff already in place that monitor it but certainly hard to argue against pay to play for such an item.
> 
> Weekly housekeeping - obviously there is a requirement for cleaning every unit but I could easily see DVC charging extra for stays that were shorter than say 3-4 nights or even less than a full week.
> 
> The list could go on.  The point is that each resort must DECIDE what's appropriate to include and spread to everyone and what's appropriate to do pay to play.  Conscious decisions must be made based on facts, costs, etc. *There are many items that are currently pay to play including dining, water-craft, fishing excursions, certain activities, park admission, etc.  And MOST of those are actually far more reasonable to include and spread the cost to everyone than is valet parking *though I think we would all agree that pay to play is reasonable for all of them as well.  I can think of no valid argument in favor of valet parking included unless a significant volume discount is forthcoming as a result (none is apparent at this time) and I have seen NO arguments that would support having the entire membership or all owners at a given resort pay for the use by a minority.


I'm confused by the part of your post that I've bolded.  Are you saying that you think it would be reasonable to have all members pay for others to dine, use water craft & fishing excursions & park admissions?  IMO that would be unreasonable - unless you're saying offer discounts, which they do.  

Offering a discount is not unreasonable at all, especially because I'm sure if there still wasn't a profit made even after the discount then it would not be offered at all.


----------



## CarolMN

Two questions for those who want to keep the free valet parking perk for DVC members:

1.  How can DVC justify raising dues at SSR, HHI, OKW & VB, VGC, et al to provide a perk / service that is not offered at those resorts?  I'm not even sure they legally could.

2.  Why should owners at VWL, BCV, BWV, BLT pay more in dues so that all DVC members can use the valet for free?  It would make more sense to me if it were offered free only to those staying on points at the resort offering it.


----------



## dmoore22

dmoore22 said:


> Day 44 and still counting.



Holy Cow -- It's already day 51 of this thread!!! I can't contain myself!!!!


----------



## dianeschlicht

CarolMN said:


> Two questions for those who want to keep the free valet parking perk for DVC members:
> 
> 1.  How can DVC justify raising dues at SSR, HHI, OKW & VB, VGC, et al to provide a perk / service that is not offered at those resorts?  I'm not even sure they legally could.
> 
> 2.  Why should owners at VWL, BCV, BWV, BLT pay more in dues so that all DVC members can use the valet for free?  It would make more sense to me if it were offered free only to those staying on points at the resort offering it.



I totally agree, Carol!  I also can NOT believe this thread is still going!!!


----------



## CarolMN

dmoore22 said:


> Holy Cow -- It's already day 51 of this thread!!! I can't contain myself!!!!





dianeschlicht said:


> I totally agree, Carol!  I also can NOT believe this thread is still going!!!



It will not die until we stop posting to it, LOL.  I will be interested to see who will get the last word  - it will not be me!!!


----------



## dmoore22

CarolMN said:


> It will not die until we stop posting to it, LOL.  I will be interested to see who will get the last word  - it will not be me!!!



I'm rooting for you!!!


----------



## TLSnell1981

dmoore22 said:


> I'm rooting for you!!!



Don't count me out. I'm not done moanin' and groanin'.

The AP discount and T&T are the only _perks_ left that we use. And, I realllly miss _free_ valet.


----------



## Dean

MELSMICE said:


> I'm confused by the part of your post that I've bolded.  Are you saying that you think it would be reasonable to have all members pay for others to dine, use water craft & fishing excursions & park admissions?  IMO that would be unreasonable - unless you're saying offer discounts, which they do.
> 
> Offering a discount is not unreasonable at all, especially because I'm sure if there still wasn't a profit made even after the discount then it would not be offered at all.


I'm saying you must draw the line somewhere and that there are items CURRENTLY on each side of that line.  All Inclusive resorts often provide many or all of the type of benefits I mentioned.  What I'm really saying it is FAR more reasonable to pay for many of those items that you and I both agree would not be appropriate to include that you re-listed than it is to pay for valet parking though I don't think any of them should be paid for out of dues.


----------



## DVCPAT

Dean said:


> Regardless, I think you're looking for hidden meanings that simply aren't there or at least, are not a significant part of the decision.  IMO it is as simple as somebody has to pay, who is it going to be.  In this situation there really was only one reasonable decision, IMO, pay to play.  Trying to look further for "business decisions" is not necessary in this situation and is making it a lot more complicated than it really is.  And to be honest, I think it is looking for conspiracies whether one wants to label it as such or not.




No conspiracy. Its OK to disagree. It’s more about the decision rational. We had a perk for ten years and all the sudden, some one has to “pay to play”. I’m curious why….whats changed? I tend to question most everything.


----------



## jdg345

DVCPAT said:


> No conspiracy. Its OK to disagree. Its more about the decision rational. We had a perk for ten years and all the sudden, some one has to pay to play. Im curious why.whats changed? I tend to question most everything.



We can look at it as if one of two things happened:

The contract renewed.  When the third parties were bidding to get the contract for Valet from Disney, this particular vendor kept the perk in to entice Disney to chose them.  Now that they're in and it's renegotiation time, they decided to pull it back out.

The other option, simply, is that DVD Marketing decided they weren't going to subsidize this anymore.

It's interesting that this coincided with the increase.  And as Disney has a revenue sharing agreement with the vendor, it's in their best interest to charge for this.

IMO, this was due to economic reasons, Disney figured they could stem some losses and make a few dollars here.  I don't believe Disney can technically 'profit' on Member Dues, so to fund it through Transportation wouldn't have met both of their goals.


----------



## jdg345

Dean said:


> I'm saying you must draw the line somewhere and that there are items CURRENTLY on each side of that line.  All Inclusive resorts often provide many or all of the type of benefits I mentioned.  What I'm really saying it is FAR more reasonable to pay for many of those items that you and I both agree would not be appropriate to include that you re-listed than it is to pay for valet parking though I don't think any of them should be paid for out of dues.



The 'Complimentary' Activities would be very easy to handle as pay to play, yet those are still incorporated into our dues as well.  Is that the next 'perk' to disappear?   

There are many things that are easy to handle as pay to play, Internet, Activities, etc.  It's strange that they would pick Valet and do so as quickly as they did.  There was little to no warning/notification (yet we get those wonderful Deevy emails all the time ).  It reeks of a breakdown in negotiations.


----------



## MELSMICE

CarolMN said:


> Two questions for those who want to keep the free valet parking perk for DVC members:
> 
> 1.  How can DVC justify raising dues at SSR, HHI, OKW & VB, VGC, et al to provide a perk / service that is not offered at those resorts?  I'm not even sure they legally could.
> 
> 2.  Why should owners at VWL, BCV, BWV, BLT pay more in dues so that all DVC members can use the valet for free?  It would make more sense to me if it were offered free only to those staying on points at the resort offering it.


If it's a perk for all DVC members, & a dues increase would have been inevitable to keep the perk then all members dues would need to be raised.  Every member has the right to use the perk.  Whether you choose to use it or not if your option.  

I'm an OKW owner & certainly don't think that owners at VWL, BCV, BWV or BLT should be the only members that would see an increase.  A DVC perk is something that can benefit all members & the cost of that should be shared by all who can take advantage.  



DVCPAT said:


> No conspiracy. Its OK to disagree. Its more about the decision rational. We had a perk for ten years and all the sudden, some one has to pay to play. *Im curious why.whats changed? I tend to question most everything*.


Agreed - there was no real explanation as to what changed - of course, I could have missed it - just that dues would have increased.  



jdg345 said:


> The 'Complimentary' Activities would be very easy to handle as pay to play, yet those are still incorporated into our dues as well.  Is that the next 'perk' to disappear?
> 
> There are many things that are easy to handle as pay to play, Internet, Activities, etc.  It's strange that they would pick Valet and do so as quickly as they did.  There was little to no warning/notification (yet we get those wonderful Deevy emails all the time ).  It reeks of a breakdown in negotiations.


Again, agreed!


----------



## Chuck S

MELSMICE said:


> If it's a perk for all DVC members, & a dues increase would have been inevitable to keep the perk then all members dues would need to be raised.  Every member has the right to use the perk.  Whether you choose to use it or not if your option.
> 
> I'm an OKW owner & certainly don't think that owners at VWL, BCV, BWV or BLT should be the only members that would see an increase.  A DVC perk is something that can benefit all members & the cost of that should be shared by all who can take advantage.


  Except that dues, by law, need to reflect true resort operation cost for the resort at which we own.  That is why the dues vary from resort to resort.  Parking at BWV is not a cost that in any way could be considered an operational cost for OKW.  It would likely be challenged, and won, by members when taken to the FL timeshare board...just as it was challenged when OKW extended the contracts and did not initially provide for lower reserve fund fees for the members that did not extend the contract.  


And remember that internet service WAS pay to play for several years, until the initial investment of wiring the resorts was recouped by the vendor...THEN a lower price was negotiated that made the "free" offering (assume offset by dues) a cost efficient and viable dues option.  Internet is a decreasing cost, valet is labor intensive and a constantly increasing cost.


----------



## dmoore22

While reading these posts I can't help but think of one of the laws of economics right out of the undergrad econ course and John Stuart Mill: "Opportunity Cost" which basically states you must give up something to get something. This comes into play everyday. An example would be the person who has $15 can either buy a CD or a shirt. If he buys the shirt the opportunity cost is the CD and if he buys the CD the opportunity cost is the shirt. Or a person who invests $10,000 in a stock denies herself or himself the interest that could have accrued by leaving the $10,000 in a bank account instead. The opportunity cost of the decision to invest in stock is the value of the interest.

What is the opportunity cost for DVC/DVD in giving up valet parking? At this point in time its not obvious. We've been in DVC long enough to experience the evolving/revolving perks. When we first bought in there were no AP/PAP discounts. Now we have them. With our family of 6 kids I don't know what we would do without that member perk. That perk alone makes up for the loss of valet parking with a little left over.


----------



## minnie-apple-mouse

Chuck S said:


> valet is labor intensive and a constantly increasing cost.



Thanks Chuck, finally someone with facts-could you share the valet costs for DVC members staying at BWV each of the last 5 to 7 years since before and after ME express started? I just wrongly assumed that even with labor costs increasing-far fewer members would be driving cars (because of ME) each year to offset that and actually drive it down. TIA.


----------



## Chuck S

minnie-apple-mouse said:


> Thanks Chuck, finally someone with facts-could you share the valet costs for DVC members staying at BWV each of the last 5 to 7 years since before and after ME express started? I just wrongly assumed that even with labor costs increasing-far fewer members would be driving cars (because of ME) each year to offset that and actually drive it down. TIA.




Remember that there are many set costs, whether 10 cars park, or whether 100 cars park.  Minimum you'd need 8 full time and 2 part time people to provide around the clock valet service at any resort. Add benefits, taxes, accounting costs, etc, and you are looking at a nice chunk of change.  If paid minimum wage under FL law (even considering tips) and benefits you are likely looking at $150K+ per year, whether anyone parks or not.  And if more people park, an employee would need to be added to each shift.

It still boils down to who should pay those costs, the DVC Owners through dues, or the individuals using the service.  *If*, as you surmise, fewer people are driving, then dues would be subsiding a relatively expensive perk for fewer and fewer members.


----------



## minnie-apple-mouse

Chuck S said:


> Remember that there are many set costs, whether 10 cars park, or whether 100 cars park.  Minimum you'd need 8 full time and 2 part time people to provide around the clock valet service at any resort. Add benefits, taxes, accounting costs, etc, and you are looking at a nice chunk of change.  If paid minimum wage under FL law (even considering tips) and benefits you are likely looking at $150K+ per year, whether anyone parks or not.  And if more people park, an employee would need to be added to each shift.
> 
> It still boils down to who should pay those costs, the DVC Owners through dues, or the individuals using the service.  *If*, as you surmise, fewer people are driving, then dues would be subsiding a relatively expensive perk for fewer and fewer members.



Thanks Chuck, was just hoping you could share the yearly costs, but your right-if business is down 90% and it is still costing more it should be dumped.


----------



## Mickey'sApprentice

Magical Express and garden grocer type services probably did cut the number of people renting cars from the airport and parking at Walt Disney World. 

However, I submit that quite a few of the people with cars actually live within driving distance to Walt Disney World, or even live long distances but prefer to drive due to the price of airfare for entire families.

Either way, valet always seemed to have plenty to do before the valet perk ended.


----------



## jdg345

Mickey'sApprentice said:


> Magical Express and garden grocer type services probably did cut the number of people renting cars from the airport and parking at Walt Disney World.
> 
> However, I submit that quite a few of the people with cars actually live within driving distance to Walt Disney World, or even live long distances but prefer to drive due to the price of airfare for entire families.
> 
> *Either way, valet always seemed to have plenty to do before the valet perk ended*.



Agreed, which would lead us to the conclusion that the majority of those that took advantage of valet parking were DVC members.


----------



## MELSMICE

Chuck S said:


> Except that dues, by law, need to reflect true resort operation cost for the resort at which we own.  That is why the dues vary from resort to resort.  Parking at BWV is not a cost that in any way could be considered an operational cost for OKW.  It would likely be challenged, and won, by members when taken to the FL timeshare board...just as it was challenged when OKW extended the contracts and did not initially provide for lower reserve fund fees for the members that did not extend the contract.


Then why do they state that dues would have increased for all members in the information posted below which came from their web-site?  (bolded) 



> It's on DVCMember.com under the NEWS menu:
> 
> Quote:
> Complimentary valet parking for Disney Vacation Club Members at Disney Vacation Club Resorts at the Walt Disney World® Resort was discontinued effective October 11, 2009.
> 
> Similar to other fee-based services, such as additional housekeeping service or additional room amenities, only those Members who choose to valet park will be charged, *instead of increasing the annual dues for all Members to cover the costs.*
> 
> Self parking will continue to be complimentary at all Disney Vacation Club resorts. For drivers choosing to use the valet service, the cost is $12 a day, effective October 11, 2009. Members and Guests with disabilities will continue to receive complimentary valet parking.
> 
> Once paid, the valet parking service can be used for the entire day at any resort without paying the fee again.


----------



## Chuck S

MELSMICE said:


> Then why do they state that dues would have increased for all members in the information posted below which came from their web-site?  (bolded)



Probably because it was self explanatory.

You'll notice they also said that:



> Complimentary valet parking for Disney Vacation Club Members at Disney Vacation Club Resorts at the Walt Disney World® Resort was discontinued effective October 11, 2009.



Rather than: 



> Complimentary valet parking for Disney Vacation Club Members at *Disney's BCV, AKV, VWL, and BLT *at the Walt Disney World® Resort was discontinued effective October 11, 2009.



It was self explanatory, as there never was valet offered at OKW and SSR, even though their wording could imply that had been available at ALL WDW DVC resorts.

After all, if costs were shared between resorts, all the dues would be the same per point, regardless of the resort you own.


----------



## Dean

DVCPAT said:


> No conspiracy. Its OK to disagree. Its more about the decision rational. We had a perk for ten years and all the sudden, some one has to pay to play. Im curious why.whats changed? I tend to question most everything.


This is not about disagreeing per se.  No one argues that we do not have specifics of the negotiations or contracts.  But we do have the ultimate end points of free valet at no cost to both members and Disney before and a real cost of $12/day after that someone has to pay.  IMO how much one was promised during a sales presentation or how long it's been a perk really doesn't mean much in this light.  It wasn't just taken away arbitrarily though it was implemented poorly.  But as I said several times earlier in this thread, if one really wants to know specifics, make a trip down to celebration and meet with DVC.  



jdg345 said:


> The 'Complimentary' Activities would be very easy to handle as pay to play, yet those are still incorporated into our dues as well.  Is that the next 'perk' to disappear?
> 
> There are many things that are easy to handle as pay to play, Internet, Activities, etc.  It's strange that they would pick Valet and do so as quickly as they did.  There was little to no warning/notification (yet we get those wonderful Deevy emails all the time ).  It reeks of a breakdown in negotiations.


Given the financial issues I don't see it strange at all, the strange part to me is that it was ever included.  Many of us have speculated on exactly what happened and why it was implemented so quickly and none of us know why and I have not heard any second hand info that would give any explanation.  My "best guess" is that there was a clause in the contract that kicked in rather than a new contract negotiation but as I said, it's a guess.  Still, IMO, they should have announced it and floated it for a couple of weeks and should have been far more forthcoming as to specifics.  Even if it were reasonable to pass the cost on to members, which is currently is not, it would not have been reasonable to pass it on to all members equally and likely would have only been covered by members at each resort in question.  



minnie-apple-mouse said:


> Thanks Chuck, finally someone with facts-could you share the valet costs for DVC members staying at BWV each of the last 5 to 7 years since before and after ME express started? I just wrongly assumed that even with labor costs increasing-far fewer members would be driving cars (because of ME) each year to offset that and actually drive it down. TIA.


I don't know how they allotted the costs when it was free to all, when it was free to DVC pre ME but done by Disney nor post ME but we do know how the costs were allotted after valet was farmed out.  The cost was eaten by the contractor as a requisite to get the contract.  I did look over the 2003 & 2004 budgets which was pre ME but after valet was being charged to non DVC I believe and could not get a line on any cost that would likely have included valet.  

I can see the rationale for spreading SOME of the cost to other members but the reality is that the cost for those that use valet while not staying at a given resort who own at non valet resorts would be a small fraction of those staying at a given resort.  Owners at a given resort pay for their own fees even if those facilities are used by others and vice versa.  The only way around this would be pay to play and there are resorts that charge extra utility fees or charge to use the AC or charge non members for some parking options but not members.



jdg345 said:


> Agreed, which would lead us to the conclusion that the majority of those that took advantage of valet parking were DVC members.


That's likely true and I don't recall anyone suggesting that DVC members weren't a significant portion of the valet for all resorts in question but it's still a minority of the membership and likely a minority of the guests at a given resort at any one time.  And it will vary by resort, at BWV you'd expect it'd be a large majority of the total cars that use valet, at VWL or BCV not so much but still an important number.  However, unless it's an overwhelming majority of the membership at that resort, I don't think it's relevant to the decision in question unless there is a significant volume discount which does not currently appear to be the case.


----------



## dmoore22

dmoore22 said:


> Holy Cow -- It's already day 51 of this thread!!! I can't contain myself!!!!



Alas, this thread has been surpassed by the "Max Occupancy in DVC Resorts" thread.  RIP Free Valet Parking.


----------



## Erikarate

COMPLAIN

Send them your complaints, until they come for something that affects YOU you sit idly by. Don't take it!  Make it heard that it us unacceptable to pick our pockets on an already expensive trip.

Complain for yourself complain for us that are very affected by this change.

wdw.guest.communications@disneyworld.com

www.dvcmembersatisfactionteam@disneyvacationclub.com


----------



## Erikarate

We hold two contracts with DVC and pay a substantial amount of dues which gets harder and harder to justify the monthly expense.

I think the vast majority will not use the valet service as at $12. per day plus tipping. Thus overtaxing an already strained self park option.

Now I have to look forward to over full self park lots as they were over full before this change and I expect it even harder to find a spot after especially at peak vacation times. Florida rains, carrying grocery bags from distant parking lots ie. Boardwalk which is across the street. Transporting small children to and from the resort....

I had already been thinking about how I had after a trip and adding up what I totally spent my pockets had been picked at every opportunity.


----------



## CarolMN

Erikarate said:


> Send them your complaints, until they come for something that affects YOU you sit idly by. Don't take it! Make it heard that it us unacceptable to pick our pockets on an already expensive trip.
> 
> Complain for yourself complain for us that are very affected by this change.
> 
> wdw.guest.communications@disneyworld.com
> 
> www.dvcmembersatisfactionteam@disneyvacationclub.com



I will not be complaining.  Based on the explanations given, I support the decision to change valet parking to pay-for-play.


----------



## dianeschlicht

Erikarate said:


> COMPLAIN
> 
> Send them your complaints, until they come for something that affects YOU you sit idly by. Don't take it!  Make it heard that it us unacceptable to pick our pockets on an already expensive trip.
> 
> Complain for yourself complain for us that are very affected by this change.
> 
> wdw.guest.communications@disneyworld.com
> 
> www.dvcmembersatisfactionteam@disneyvacationclub.com



I agree with Carol on this one.  No need for me to complain, because even though I always rent a car, I never valet park.  It's just not something I would do, and if I felt I must do it, I'd expect to pay for it.


----------



## Dean

Erikarate said:


> We hold two contracts with DVC and pay a substantial amount of dues which gets harder and harder to justify the monthly expense.
> 
> I think the vast majority will not use the valet service as at $12. per day plus tipping. Thus overtaxing an already strained self park option.
> 
> Now I have to look forward to over full self park lots as they were over full before this change and I expect it even harder to find a spot after especially at peak vacation times. Florida rains, carrying grocery bags from distant parking lots ie. Boardwalk which is across the street. Transporting small children to and from the resort....
> 
> I had already been thinking about how I had after a trip and adding up what I totally spent my pockets had been picked at every opportunity.


Certainly one should complain if they feel it is appropriate to do so ANd those that feel the policy is an appropriate one should let DVC know that as well, as I have.


----------



## Deb & Bill

Erikarate said:


> We hold two contracts with DVC and pay a substantial amount of dues which gets harder and harder to justify the monthly expense.
> 
> I think the vast majority will not use the valet service as at $12. per day plus tipping. Thus overtaxing an already strained self park option.
> 
> Now I have to look forward to over full self park lots as they were over full before this change and I expect it even harder to find a spot after especially at peak vacation times. Florida rains, carrying grocery bags from distant parking lots ie. Boardwalk which is across the street. Transporting small children to and from the resort....
> 
> I had already been thinking about how I had after a trip and adding up what I totally spent my pockets had been picked at every opportunity.



There's nothing to stop you from dropping off the rest of the family with the goods at the door, parking the car and going back to the room. 

The biggest problem I had with the no more free valet was the way it was announced.


----------



## VLee

Deb & Bill said:


> There's nothing to stop you from dropping off the rest of the family with the goods at the door, parking the car and going back to the room.




Unless....you are the single adult, with very small children--too small to be left alone!


----------



## Deb & Bill

VLee said:


> Unless....you are the single adult, with very small children--too small to be left alone!



Then you pay to valet.


----------



## TLSnell1981

I can't wait until the next "perk" is eliminated.  Heck, go ahead and eliminate every last one. The only other one I care about is the discount on APs.

Why should I pay a penny for a perk I don't use? That seems to be the drumbeat for many DVCers. Make it all pay to play.

I can't wait to see how much my MFs go down.


----------



## JimC

Erikarate said:


> We hold two contracts with DVC and pay a substantial amount of dues which gets harder and harder to justify the monthly expense.
> 
> I think the vast majority will not use the valet service as at $12. per day plus tipping. Thus overtaxing an already strained self park option.
> 
> Now I have to look forward to over full self park lots as they were over full before this change and I expect it even harder to find a spot after especially at peak vacation times. Florida rains, carrying grocery bags from distant parking lots ie. Boardwalk which is across the street. Transporting small children to and from the resort....
> 
> I had already been thinking about how I had after a trip and adding up what I totally spent my pockets had been picked at every opportunity.



If the cost of the contracts is hard to justify then maybe you should rethink your vacation spending.  Disney vacations are a luxury, nice to have, but not essential if it places too much strain on your personal finances.


----------



## Dean

TLSnell1981 said:


> I can't wait until the next "perk" is eliminated.  Heck, go ahead and eliminate every last one. The only other one I care about is the discount on APs.
> 
> Why should I pay a penny for a perk I don't use? That seems to be the drumbeat for many DVCers. Make it all pay to play.
> 
> I can't wait to see how much my MFs go down.


Nice attitude, why not start with the AP discount, LOL.  I think it's unlikely that dues would go down as the "perks" cost little to nothing for DVC members other than those inherent to the operation of a resort (pool, exercise, internet etc).  And given that the others must be paid for by someone, a decision has to be made as to who/how it's paid for and whether there are any discounts that might be applicable (volume, etc).


----------



## VLee

Deb & Bill said:


> Then you pay to valet.



Exactly! .... my point.


----------



## DebbieB

I arrived at BWV yesterday.   The self parking was horrendous.  They had the entrance from the main driveway blocked off but no guard at the side entrance.   I went round and round to find a space, finally got one.   We decided to park with the luggage in the car until we found out if our room was ready.  It was, so I got the car to take the luggage up to the door.  Could not find a space after dropping off my friend & the luggage.  Since I was only going to be a few minutes while we took our luggage up, I parked in one of the WDW company spaces, several were empty.   After taking the luggage up, we were back out within 15 minutes to go grocery shopping.  Cars were all over the lot going round and round.    After returning from grocery shopping, I said to the guard at the gate what the deal was with the parking today.   He said lots of people were at ESPN for football games, then he suggested valet parking.   That really ticked me off.   I said to him why should I pay $12 to valet park when non-hotel guests are taking the spaces?    Luckily I found a space pretty quick, if I had to valet park I planned to go in and talk to the manager.   They need to police that main lot better.  There was no sign out front directing people to the overflow and it seemed like cars were just pouring in.


----------



## crisi

Deb & Bill said:


> Then you pay to valet.



Or you drop your stuff off with the bell hop while your kids are in the car, park your car, and you and your kids enter the hotel.  Like you would if you were staying at a WDW resort - or any hotel - where valet parking was not even offered.


----------



## TLSnell1981

Dean said:


> Nice attitude, why not start with the AP discount, LOL.  I think it's unlikely that dues would go down as the "perks" cost little to nothing for DVC members other than those inherent to the operation of a resort (pool, exercise, internet etc).  And given that the others must be paid for by someone, a decision has to be made as to who/how it's paid for and whether there are any discounts that might be applicable (volume, etc).


It seems to be the attitute on this board. If you don't use it...toss it...who cares. Forget the concept of "something for everybody". And, I'm sure those pennies. for the minuscule perks, turn in to $$$. 

BTW, you missed the sarcasm in my previous post. (I thought it was obvious).



crisi said:


> Or you drop your stuff off with the bell hop while your kids are in the car, park your car, and you and your kids enter the hotel.  Like you would if you were staying at a WDW resort - or any hotel - where valet parking was not even offered.



Maybe, you haven't been to BWV when you can't even get to the front door. It was that way when we were there in October. Our driver had to drop us just past the bridge. Cars were abandoned....either, valet wasn't doing their job or everyone was "dropping off" their luggage.

I'm sorry, as an owner or a guest, it's unacceptable.


----------



## Dean

TLSnell1981 said:


> It seems to be the attitute on this board. If you don't use it...toss it...who cares. Forget the concept of "something for everybody". And, I'm sure those pennies. for the minuscule perks, turn in to $$$.
> 
> BTW, you missed the sarcasm in my previous post. (I thought it was obvious).


I didn't miss the sarcasm, I simply thought it was misplaced.  I can't speak for everyone else, my view is that this is something that should be pay to play and asking other people to pay for one's usage is inappropriate in the absence of a significant volume discount that benefits everyone.  


> Maybe, you haven't been to BWV when you can't even get to the front door. It was that way when we were there in October. Our driver had to drop us just past the bridge. Cars were abandoned....either, valet wasn't doing their job or everyone was "dropping off" their luggage.
> 
> I'm sorry, as an owner or a guest, it's unacceptable.


This is a different, and somewhat separate issue.  One I'm sure will be rectified over time as they balance out the valet spaces vs the self parking ones and iron out the changes.


----------



## BenandMorgsMom

We just returned home last night from 10 days at BWV.  I could not agree with you more.  The parking is a NIGHTMARE.  There is no control over who parks in the self parking lot.  They want you to park across the street near Hess?  Are you nuts? We personally saw someone almost get killed crossing that road by someone who plowed through the redlight.  But did you notice how empty the Valet lot is?  Good god.  The kicker is if you looked at your Portable Perks....Free Valet is still listed.  We both had a good laugh over that one.


----------



## TLSnell1981

BenandMorgsMom said:


> We just returned home last night from 10 days at BWV.  I could not agree with you more.  The parking is a NIGHTMARE.  There is no control over who parks in the self parking lot.  They want you to park across the street near Hess?  Are you nuts? We personally saw someone almost get killed crossing that road by someone who plowed through the redlight.  But did you notice how empty the Valet lot is?  Good god.  The kicker is if you looked at your Portable Perks....Free Valet is still listed.  We both had a good laugh over that one.



I guess, this is why this was/is an important (and somewhat reasonable) perk at BWV. It's a unique situation. MO


----------



## meuseman

I definitely agree on the parking problems at BWV.  I just got back from 5 nights with my rental car, and I have to say that if I knew I would be driving back to the resort between 2 and 10pm, I had to think twice about driving or taking the bus. The blockades were up on the entrance drive but there was nothing to stop anyone from pulling in the entrance across from the conference center.

I am a very early riser and saw a number of cast members parking in the main self park lot and the self park lot that is behind the valet lot (which was never more that 1/3 full). If we are not going to have free valet at BWV, control the parking better (maybe with a room key gate).


----------



## Dean

TLSnell1981 said:


> I guess, this is why this was/is an important (and somewhat reasonable) perk at BWV. It's a unique situation. MO


Nothing has changed on availability of parking spaces and while the cost has changed, it has changed for the entire system no matter the choices made.  Thus if one wants to valet, simply valet park.

Parking across the street has always been an option and there are many times when it is a necessity even before this change.  cast members using the lots has always been an issue, I mentioned it many pages ago and suggested they'd need to police that issue better as they will non guests parking in the regular self pay lots.  Things should settle out over a few months.


----------



## TLSnell1981

Dean said:


> Nothing has changed on availability of parking spaces and while the cost has changed, it has changed for the entire system no matter the choices made.  Thus if one wants to valet, simply valet park.



What has changed is the number of guests using valet. That lot is empty and puts a bigger strain on self parking. I wasn't even able to reach the front door AND it doesn't look like it was an isolated incident.


----------



## Sophie's Mom

We just returned from a six day stay at VWL.  The valet lot had no more than 25-30 cars parked in it any one time.  However, the self parking was pretty full and you had to walk fairly far.  I hope if valet parking proves to have fewer customers that they will at least open up part of the valet lots to self parking cars.


----------



## Dean

TLSnell1981 said:


> What has changed is the number of guests using valet. That lot is empty and puts a bigger strain on self parking. I wasn't even able to reach the front door AND it doesn't look like it was an isolated incident.


I think everyone realizes that and we all know it's creating issues at present.  I, for one, expect them to be ironed out over time.


----------



## TLSnell1981

Dean said:


> I think everyone realizes that and we all know it's creating issues at present.  I, for one, expect them to be ironed out over time.



Well, for me? It's no longer worth the money or the hassle to rent a car. We enjoyed dining and shopping at WDW, but don't like the buses. It's much easier to hire a car...drop off and pick up (used to be door to door). We go to AK once and suffer the bus. We now have the majority of our meals in the Villa and skip the shopping. I don't care to haul my purchases on the bus.

Maybe, we are the only ones who have changed our habits. Loss of free valet was the tipping point for us.


----------



## MELSMICE

BenandMorgsMom said:


> We just returned home last night from 10 days at BWV.  I could not agree with you more.  The parking is a NIGHTMARE.  There is no control over who parks in the self parking lot.  They want you to park across the street near Hess?  Are you nuts? We personally saw someone almost get killed crossing that road by someone who plowed through the redlight.  But did you notice how empty the Valet lot is?  Good god.  The kicker is if you looked at your Portable Perks....Free Valet is still listed.  We both had a good laugh over that one.


These thing should have been considered before the change was made.  If you are not going to offer free valet then you have to "patrol" the lots more & you also need security for the additional guests that will be crossing a busy street.  

BWV guests should be parking in the lots closer to the resort & Boardwalk day/evening visitors should be parking in the lot across the street.  It floors me that the "powers that be" did not think there would be an issue with the valet change & did not address this.  Obviously, the only thought was the money & not the guests.  

I'm hoping no one gets seriously hurt crossing the street.  I realize that people cross the street every day without injury, but when you have more people doing it, the chances increase that something will happen.  

I'm disappointed that the people in charge did not put more thought in to other ramifications of this decision - not just a dues increase.


----------



## Golden Rose

They stopped having security check where you're staying in order to park closer to the BW?  When we were there in October, there definitely was an extra security guy "guarding" access to the closer self-park lot.  Only guests staying at the BW could use it.  I wonder if they only did this during F & W...

I think BW is the only WDW resort that really has that much of a problem, and I think they will figure out some sort of solution.  I don't think the solution is likely to include free valet parking for DVC members, but I do think they'll find a way to make parking easier at the BW.   

Honestly, if they just released the valet parking lot to guests staying at the BW only, and made the valets park across the street, it might fix the problem with a minimum of hassle and expense.


----------



## DebbieB

Golden Rose said:


> They stopped having security check where you're staying in order to park closer to the BW?  When we were there in October, there definitely was an extra security guy "guarding" access to the closer self-park lot.  Only guests staying at the BW could use it.  I wonder if they only did this during F & W...



None this weekend.  They did have the poles up on the entrance from the main driveway, forcing you to go around to the side but no guard at the side entrance.   I have not been out there today to see if they opened the main entrance for weekdays.


----------



## Dean

TLSnell1981 said:


> Well, for me? It's no longer worth the money or the hassle to rent a car. We enjoyed dining and shopping at WDW, but don't like the buses. It's much easier to hire a car...drop off and pick up (used to be door to door). We go to AK once and suffer the bus. We now have the majority of our meals in the Villa and skip the shopping. I don't care to haul my purchases on the bus.
> 
> Maybe, we are the only ones who have changed our habits. Loss of free valet was the tipping point for us.


That's certainly your choice and I'm sure there will be others that take that approach as well.  Everyone has to make their own choices based on their personal situation but some have talked about it in terms of hurting Disney and DVC, IMO, that is wishful thinking.



Golden Rose said:


> Honestly, if they just released the valet parking lot to guests staying at the BW only, and made the valets park across the street, it might fix the problem with a minimum of hassle and expense.


I suspect the number of spots is tied to contracts to a degree, hopefully there's an out clause if so or the contract is year to year.  Obviously that's what needs to happen.


----------



## TLSnell1981

Dean said:


> .... but some have talked about it in terms of hurting Disney and DVC, IMO, that is wishful thinking.



Well, if they all spent as much as we did? It would definitely hurt Disney.


----------



## Dean

TLSnell1981 said:


> Well, if they all spent as much as we did? It would definitely hurt Disney.


Unlikely enough to matter and even if so, they'll make it up somewhere else.  Also, most people who say they won't spend as much end up doing so anyway after a couple of trips.  My reference was to those who somehow feel their important enough that if they change their habits specifically to "hurt" Disney that it'll actually be noticed or they'll care.  They'll only care if the overall profits in a given area are hurt and in this situation it won't matter anyway because it's not a general Disney profit question (in spite of what some would like to think) but rather a DVC maint fee cost issue.


----------



## DebbieB

I used the car tonight, the posts are still blocking the main driveway entrance at BWV, had to go around to the side.  No problem finding a space tonight around 9:00pm.


----------



## TLSnell1981

Dean said:


> Unlikely enough to matter and even if so, they'll make it up somewhere else.  Also, most people who say they won't spend as much end up doing so anyway after a couple of trips.



There are several factors that have caused a reduction in our expenditures. The change in the dining menu, the quality of the food. and now...the discontinuation of free valet. It's no longer worth the hassle...the straw that broke the camel's back. 

If Disney doesn't want my money...so be it.


----------



## TheRustyScupper

TLSnell1981 said:


> If Disney doesn't want my money...so be it.



1) I don't understand the statement.
2) If you own DVC, they already have your money and annual dues.
3) If you sell to someone else, Disney still has THEIR money.


----------



## Dean

TLSnell1981 said:


> There are several factors that have caused a reduction in our expenditures. The change in the dining menu, the quality of the food. and now...the discontinuation of free valet. It's no longer worth the hassle...the straw that broke the camel's back.
> 
> If Disney doesn't want my money...so be it.


But that's all irrelevant to the discontinuation of valet IMO and the others have no direct bearing on DVC as a timeshare entity.  It may all be relevant to your personal decision and you should make the best one for you given the circumstances at hand.  As changes happen, DVC may no longer be right for a given member and they should make decisions accordingly as well.  One who buys DVC should do so with it making sense for them assuming certain negative changes including elimination of all perks, increasing fees and a negative reallocation OR be in such a situation that it's worth taking the chance they know could happen.  An example of such a situation would be one that buys a smaller package mainly for the perks, I know of several that have done so in large part for the free valet, PH and AP discount.


----------



## jdg345

Dean said:


> I think everyone realizes that and we all know it's creating issues at present.  I, for one, expect them to be ironed out over time.



This is one of the issues I don't understand.  Many have argued that Disney knew what they were doing here, and this was a well calculated decision and then took all of these things into account and measured and weighed before making this very difficult decision.

If that's all true, then why all this ironing out over time?  If this was all calculated, didn't Disney know these issues would arise and shouldn't they have taken steps to remedy them before/at the change?

IMO, it simply points to this all being knee-jerk and a last minute decision.  Just look at the way it was [not] announced.


----------



## jdg345

TLSnell1981 said:


> Well, for me? It's no longer worth the money or the hassle to rent a car. We enjoyed dining and shopping at WDW, but don't like the buses. It's much easier to hire a car...drop off and pick up (used to be door to door). We go to AK once and suffer the bus. We now have the majority of our meals in the Villa and skip the shopping. I don't care to haul my purchases on the bus.
> 
> Maybe, we are the only ones who have changed our habits. Loss of free valet was the tipping point for us.



Just as an aside, you can typically have your purchases delivered to your resort for free.  Just so you know.  



You are obviously someone that used the perk, and it seems that the majority of valet parkers were DVC members (from antecdotal evidence of lot usage before/after the change).  I wonder what Mears and Disney are going to decide to do?  In the end, it's better to get some of something rather than all of nothing.  The best thing people can do is not valet park and hit them in the only place they care: The pocket.


----------



## jdg345

Dean said:


> That's certainly your choice and I'm sure there will be others that take that approach as well.  Everyone has to make their own choices based on their personal situation but some have talked about it in terms of hurting Disney and DVC, IMO, that is wishful thinking.
> 
> I suspect the number of spots is tied to contracts to a degree, hopefully there's an out clause if so or the contract is year to year.  Obviously that's what needs to happen.



Number of spots and the location of those spots are contracted.


----------



## cj9200

jdg345 said:


> The best thing people can do is not valet park and hit them in the only place they care: The pocket.



I always use valet when staying at Disney.  Not any more.  My tips were generous both when dropping off the car and picking it up.  Hey, it was otherwise free.  I will also make it known to everyone that I am not happy with the cutback.  Will the new policy take away from my future trips?  No, but it doesn't mean I like it.


----------



## DVCPAT

TheRustyScupper said:


> 1) I don't understand the statement.
> 2) If you own DVC, they already have your money and annual dues.
> 3) If you sell to someone else, Disney still has THEIR money.




When I joined DVC, I questioned my guide how Disney benefits from offering me a room at such a reduced rate? He said Disney makes the real money when were on vacation. On site dining, shopping and park tickets are WDW best profit generators. As DVC membership grows, so does our spending. Disney knows DVC member spending contributes to the bottom line. On my recent trip, a cast member said the DVC members were a Godsend during slow periods. In another thread, a poster mentioned DVC member spending was mentioned in a Disney financial report.


----------



## thelionqueen

We also heavily used the free valet perk.  It made our trips so easy and hassle free, it is something that will DEFINITELY be missed, and I am NOT happy about it!!

I understand Disney makes these decisions for MANY reasons I may not be aware of, but this decision affects many of us in ways they are not aware of.  For example, I will now be dining at other DVC restaurants less frequently if at all.  I will be visiting/shopping less as well.  By taking away this perk, they have EASILY forefeited $50-100 PER day from MY FAMILY ALONE in dining/shopping areas.  This amount is a very low estimate, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who dines/shops (or used to now) using the convenient valet perk.  So if you factor in the $15-$20 they are "saving" by taking away this perk vs the $50-100 they are losing by doing it, then multiply that by hundreds (or thousands) of other members who do the same thing, maybe they would take notice.

Either way, I understood when I signed that perks come and go, and I didn't buy my membership because of them.  It is just one that will change our travel habits greatly and I wish they would bring it back (wishful thinking I know)


----------



## DVCPAT

cj9200 said:


> I always use valet when staying at Disney.  Not any more.  My tips were generous both when dropping off the car and picking it up.  Hey, it was otherwise free.  I will also make it known to everyone that I am not happy with the cutback.  Will the new policy take away from my future trips?  No, but it doesn't mean I like it.



I agree….but look at the bright side. This change will save us money. I would easily tip valets $50.00 a week, not any more. When I do go to my car, it’s actually more convenient and a lot less expensive to eat off site. I don’t have to drop my family off at the resort entrance and find a parking spot a mile away. While we’re off site, we usually hit the outlets and spend more money. Disney is removing the convenient golden handcuffs that kept us and our money on site.


----------



## Chuck S

DVCPAT said:


> When I joined DVC, I questioned my guide my guide how Disney benefits from offering me a room at such a reduced rate? He said Disney makes the real money when were on vacation. On site dining, shopping and park tickets are WDW best profit generators. As DVC membership grows, so does our spending. Disney knows DVC member spending contributes to the bottom line. On my recent trip, a cast member said the DVC members were a Godsend during slow periods. In another thread, a poster mentioned DVC member spending was mentioned in a Disney financial report.



As a stockholder, I've never seen a financial report that specifically breaks out DVCer spending vs other resort guest spending, other than the income generated by the initial sale of points.

Seriously, if "free valet" was the only thing that encouraged you to dine and spend $$, the TiW card should be a good option.  You get free valet AND a 20% dining discount on table service restsurants.  Of course, you need to be an AP holder to get the card.


----------



## MELSMICE

Chuck S said:


> As a stockholder, I've never seen a financial report that specifically breaks out DVCer spending vs other resort guest spending, other than the income generated by the initial sale of points.
> 
> Seriously, if "free valet" was the only thing that encouraged you to dine and spend $$, the TiW card should be a good option.  You get free valet AND a 20% dining discount on table service restsurants.  *Of course, you need to be an AP holder to get the card*.


Which is something that also irks me..............you can get a discount if you pay for the card!    And now you have to pay for the 2nd card.    We have AP's & I used to have the card when it was DDE card (I think that was the name).  It was nice, but I was never convinced that it was the great bargain that Disney made it out to be.  

I'm sure if you always eat at Disney restaurants this might be a good deal, but if you eat off-site at more reasonable priced restaurants then it's not so great.  JMO!


----------



## Chuck S

MELSMICE said:


> Which is something that also irks me..............you can get a discount if you pay for the card!    And now you have to pay for the 2nd card.    We have AP's & I used to have the card when it was DDE card (I think that was the name).  It was nice, but I was never convinced that it was the great bargain that Disney made it out to be.
> 
> I'm sure if you always eat at Disney restaurants this might be a good deal, but if you eat off-site at more reasonable priced restaurants then it's not so great.  JMO!



Actually, now that DVCers don;t get free valet, that can be figured into the savings from DDE/TiW, and make it more economical than before.

Also, we travel to WDW 2x per year for 8 to 10 days per trip.  We do eat some meals offsite, but even with two people who have their main table service meal at lunch, the DDE/TiW always saved some money over the course of a year.


----------



## crisi

Chuck S said:


> As a stockholder, I've never seen a financial report that specifically breaks out DVCer spending vs other resort guest spending, other than the income generated by the initial sale of points.
> .



And that's really how Disney benefits - DVCPAT's guide probably doesn't understand the business well.  Disney builds a resort and recovers 100% of its cost of capital, plus a significant profit margin, in 3-5 years by selling the points.  They guarantee themselves pretty full "hotels" - even in down seasons and down years.

I doubt DVC members spend more than the average "three trips in a lifetime" Deluxe guest - but we have near instant ROI on the capital, and after that, we spend relatively consistently.  In a recession, we might spend less, but compared to people without a commitment, we are an almost guarantee to Disney that we will show up - without requiring promotions that cut significantly into their margins.


----------



## MELSMICE

Chuck S said:


> Actually, now that DVCers don;t get free valet, that can be figured into the savings from DDE/TiW, and make it more economical than before.
> 
> Also, we travel to WDW 2x per year for 8 to 10 days per trip.  We do eat some meals offsite, but even with two people who have their main table service meal at lunch, the DDE/TiW always saved some money over the course of a year.


We are a family of 5, so the discount, when we got it was substantial, however, I always have a hard time justifying having to pay for something so I can get a discount.  

Another name for a discount is a coupon - I don't pay for coupons.


----------



## disneynutz

crisi said:


> And that's really how Disney benefits - DVCPAT's guide probably doesn't understand the business well.  Disney builds a resort and recovers 100% of its cost of capital, plus a significant profit margin, in 3-5 years by selling the points.  They guarantee themselves pretty full "hotels" - even in down seasons and down years.
> 
> I doubt DVC members spend more than the average "three trips in a lifetime" Deluxe guest - but we have near instant ROI on the capital, and after that, we spend relatively consistently.  In a recession, we might spend less, but compared to people without a commitment, we are an almost guarantee to Disney that we will show up - without requiring promotions that cut significantly into their margins.



I don't know about others but we seem to spend almost $1000 just on Disney stuff each visit and we visit 2 or 3 times each year. Restaurants, tours, tips, and DDP, it all adds up.

 Bill


----------



## cj9200

DVCPAT said:


> I agree.but look at the bright side. This change will save us money. I would easily tip valets $50.00 a week, not any more. When I do go to my car, its actually more convenient and a lot less expensive to eat off site. I dont have to drop my family off at the resort entrance and find a parking spot a mile away. While were off site, we usually hit the outlets and spend more money. Disney is removing the convenient golden handcuffs that kept us and our money on site.



Good points.  I will make sure to point that out to them on our next trip.


----------



## Dean

jdg345 said:


> This is one of the issues I don't understand.  Many have argued that Disney knew what they were doing here, and this was a well calculated decision and then took all of these things into account and measured and weighed before making this very difficult decision.
> 
> If that's all true, then why all this ironing out over time?  If this was all calculated, didn't Disney know these issues would arise and shouldn't they have taken steps to remedy them before/at the change?
> 
> IMO, it simply points to this all being knee-jerk and a last minute decision.  Just look at the way it was [not] announced.


You haven't seen me argue that this was a calculated move.  My best guess is that it was a fairly short notice, quick decision type of thing based EITHER on a new contract negotiation OR a clause in the existing contract that kicked in.  You've also seen me speculate that it's possible the # of valet spots are tied to the contract (you stated it was), if so, big mistake in conjunction with this move.  You've also seen me state they need to make sure that non guests and employees are not parking in the main lots.  No one has argued that how it was done was OK, only that the overall decision was appropriate in the big picture based on the cost issues at hand.  IMO it was handled poorly, I stated specifically how I would have handled it had it been my decision making certain assumptions based in the info we know, no one seemed to have an issue with my summary in that regard.  

Regardless and no matter all the other issues, it is inappropriate to expect others to pay for my usage.  I believe one needs to make a case of why others should pay for my valet and I've not seen one ounce of reasoning that would support others paying for my usage.  No volume discount, no cost or difficult in enforcement, not an integral part of resort amenities and certainly not that there are other things I don't use that are paid for commonly.  If there are other issues that arise, as there are esp at BWV, then those issues must be dealt with in the all out.



DVCPAT said:


> When I joined DVC, I questioned my guide my guide how Disney benefits from offering me a room at such a reduced rate? He said Disney makes the real money when were on vacation. On site dining, shopping and park tickets are WDW best profit generators. As DVC membership grows, so does our spending. Disney knows DVC member spending contributes to the bottom line. On my recent trip, a cast member said the DVC members were a Godsend during slow periods. In another thread, a poster mentioned DVC member spending was mentioned in a Disney financial report.


I think your view of their "cost" is skewed.  You need to think of it more as a condo than a hotel because they're getting income and passing risk to others and then still getting a fair amount of income over time.  They will make more money on the DVC portion than they would a similar hotel setup with a lot less risk and they still get it back in the future.  Plus they have guaranteed occupancy to shore up other areas such as retail, parks, restaurants, etc.


----------



## Dean

cj9200 said:


> Good points.  I will make sure to point that out to them on our next trip.


Point it out to who?  DVC MS, valet, front desk, others at the pool.  Other than well worded thoughts to middle to upper management at DVC, why waste anyone's time by sliding in low level insults to those that have no control and in some cases, may have been hurt by this change themselves.  Write the letters that one feels appropriate otherwise vote with your feet and wallet as you see fit.  Barb's along the way really aren't necessary are they?


----------



## mopee3

Dean said:


> Point it out to who?  DVC MS, valet, front desk, others at the pool.  Other than well worded thoughts to middle to upper management at DVC, why waste anyone's time by sliding in low level insults to those that have no control and in some cases, may have been hurt by this change themselves.  Write the letters that one feels appropriate otherwise vote with your feet and wallet as you see fit.  Barb's along the way really aren't necessary are they?



Snap, smack, pow, wack um along the side of the head!!

Dean you aren't getting a little tired of this thread are you?

I mean it's only been running along for almost... gasp could it be... Yes 2 MONTHS!

You all have a Merry Christmas.

Moe


----------



## jdg345

cj9200 said:


> I always use valet when staying at Disney.  Not any more.  My tips were generous both when dropping off the car and picking it up.  Hey, it was otherwise free.  I will also make it known to everyone that I am not happy with the cutback.  Will the new policy take away from my future trips?  No, but it doesn't mean I like it.



In the end, I really don't think Disney cares too much about the revenues here.  I think they felt that by no longer subsidizing, it would just be more money in their pocket.  

So far, it's pretty clear that the majority of valet users were DVC owners which means it was generating little/no revenue share.  Mears likely realized this and was trying to get a piece of the pie -- it seems like that may have backfired on them.

IMO, the greatest threat to Disney is that Mears pulls out and they have to take valet in house again.  If it comes to that, valet may just disappear entirely.


----------



## jdg345

Dean said:


> You haven't seen me argue that this was a calculated move.  My best guess is that it was a fairly short notice, quick decision type of thing based EITHER on a new contract negotiation OR a clause in the existing contract that kicked in.  You've also seen me speculate that it's possible the # of valet spots are tied to the contract (you stated it was), if so, big mistake in conjunction with this move.  You've also seen me state they need to make sure that non guests and employees are not parking in the main lots.  No one has argued that how it was done was OK, only that the overall decision was appropriate in the big picture based on the cost issues at hand.  IMO it was handled poorly, I stated specifically how I would have handled it had it been my decision making certain assumptions based in the info we know, no one seemed to have an issue with my summary in that regard.
> 
> Regardless and no matter all the other issues, it is inappropriate to expect others to pay for my usage.  I believe one needs to make a case of why others should pay for my valet and I've not seen one ounce of reasoning that would support others paying for my usage.  No volume discount, no cost or difficult in enforcement, not an integral part of resort amenities and certainly not that there are other things I don't use that are paid for commonly.  If there are other issues that arise, as there are esp at BWV, then those issues must be dealt with in the all out.
> 
> <snip>



And to that end, this decision may end up costing them some money as well.  We ultimately don't know that the subsidy paid was per car or if was based on certain thresholds of usage.  So far they've needed to redo at least one lot and add/shift employees to monitor that lot.  If they end up needing to hire a few people, they may find it may have been cheaper to just keep or re-negotiate the subsidy.

Mears has an option here too ... right now they're seeing their volume plummet, and by contract they need to staff at a certain minimum.  It may be in their best interest to offer a DVC discount on their own.  It wouldn't be free, but I suspect many would use the valet again if there was a hefty discount.  The vendor needs to decide if they want some of something, or continue to get all of nothing.  Of course, politics and ego come into play here, so I don't expect this to happen soon.


----------



## cj9200

Dean said:


> Point it out to who?  DVC MS, valet, front desk, others at the pool.  Other than well worded thoughts to middle to upper management at DVC, why waste anyone's time by sliding in low level insults to those that have no control and in some cases, may have been hurt by this change themselves.  Write the letters that one feels appropriate otherwise vote with your feet and wallet as you see fit.  Barb's along the way really aren't necessary are they?



New to this thread but if you think I am going to take out my displeasure on the valet people that will not be getting tips to pick up or drop off the car, you are mistaken.  They are the ones getting hurt by this.  I imagine some may lose their jobs.  I do not know about you, but after a stay I usually get a feedback form about our visit.  If something is less than magical, I point it out.  They get read.  I also comment on people/things that are extraordinary.  

Yes, I will ask to see a manager to respectfully tell them my thoughts on the policy.  No, they did not make the decision but they are the ones on the ground and I believe it does have an impact.  Will the policy change?  I doubt it but at least they will have my input.


----------



## DVCPAT

crisi said:


> I doubt DVC members spend more than the average "three trips in a lifetime" Deluxe guest .



You think?? Not only do we spend a good amount of money every year, we bring guests (on our points) that spend a good amount of money.


----------



## DVCPAT

Dean said:


> I think your view of their "cost" is skewed.  You need to think of it more as a condo than a hotel because they're getting income and passing risk to others and then still getting a fair amount of income over time.  They will make more money on the DVC portion than they would a similar hotel setup with a lot less risk and they still get it back in the future.  Plus they have guaranteed occupancy to shore up other areas such as retail, parks, restaurants, etc.



You seem to know a lot about timeshares and give posters good advice. If my memory is correct, youve stated that SSR and then BLT would be the last DVC resorts built..Why ???


----------



## MELSMICE

> Originally Posted by crisi
> I doubt DVC members spend more than the average "three trips in a lifetime" Deluxe guest .


I can guarantee that's wrong in our case.  Some years we've been there 4X - spending anywhere between 4-14 days per trip.  That's a lot of money spent at WDW in one year, let alone in a lifetime.


----------



## Chuck S

MELSMICE said:


> I can guarantee that's wrong in our case.  Some years we've been there 4X - spending anywhere between 4-14 days per trip.  That's a lot of money spent at WDW in one year, let alone in a lifetime.



But, while we may spend more $ as individuals, do we really spend more $ per occupied room night?

For instance, a CRO cash room may generate more $ over the course of a year because each person that occupies it is spending like it is a _Once in a Lifetime_ vacation.  Where as with DVC, most are return visitors and I would bet overall spend less per room night on souvenirs and food than a deluxe CRO guest.


----------



## crisi

Chuck S said:


> But, while we may spend more $ as individuals, do we really spend more $ per occupied room night?
> 
> For instance, a CRO cash room may generate more $ over the course of a year because each person that occupies it is spending like it is a _Once in a Lifetime_ vacation.  Where as with DVC, most are return visitors and I would bet overall spend less per room night on souvenirs and food than a deluxe CRO guest.



Bingo, Chuck.  Disney doesn't care too much about what individuals spend over the course of their lifetime.  To them, one person that spends $10k over 21 room nights and 3 people that spend $15k over 21 room nights - the second batch looks like a better deal.

We are a CONSISTENT source of income for Disney.  We are a near immediate return on capital.  DVCers are a great deal - particularly at point of purchase, for Disney.  We are not, however, Disney's highest margin customers per room night - and margin is profit.

I'm not making excuses for Disney, but trying to encourage people to think about it from Disney's point of view.


----------



## DVCPAT

MELSMICE said:


> I can guarantee that's wrong in our case.  Some years we've been there 4X - spending anywhere between 4-14 days per trip.  That's a lot of money spent at WDW in one year, let alone in a lifetime.



We average two WDW vacations per year..my youngest daughters pin collection alone probably totals one deluxe vacation.


----------



## Dean

mopee3 said:


> Snap, smack, pow, wack um along the side of the head!!
> 
> Dean you aren't getting a little tired of this thread are you?
> 
> I mean it's only been running along for almost... gasp could it be... Yes 2 MONTHS!
> 
> You all have a Merry Christmas.
> 
> Moe


Not at all, I prefer these type of threads to many of the others.



jdg345 said:


> And to that end, this decision may end up costing them some money as well.  We ultimately don't know that the subsidy paid was per car or if was based on certain thresholds of usage.  So far they've needed to redo at least one lot and add/shift employees to monitor that lot.  If they end up needing to hire a few people, they may find it may have been cheaper to just keep or re-negotiate the subsidy.
> 
> Mears has an option here too ... right now they're seeing their volume plummet, and by contract they need to staff at a certain minimum.  It may be in their best interest to offer a DVC discount on their own.  It wouldn't be free, but I suspect many would use the valet again if there was a hefty discount.  The vendor needs to decide if they want some of something, or continue to get all of nothing.  Of course, politics and ego come into play here, so I don't expect this to happen soon.


IMO whether this costs Disney in general is of no real consequence as it relates to DVCMC's decision and I think that's one of the issues that many are missing.  This is simply a dues question as far as DVC is concerned.  Certainly Disney and Mears may have other issues to deal with, that is their problem.  As I noted previously, I wouldn't be surprised if they come back with a discount for such a reason or if Mears bolts at some point and Disney has to either do away with valet or take it back in house.  



cj9200 said:


> New to this thread but if you think I am going to take out my displeasure on the valet people that will not be getting tips to pick up or drop off the car, you are mistaken.  They are the ones getting hurt by this.  I imagine some may lose their jobs.  I do not know about you, but after a stay I usually get a feedback form about our visit.  If something is less than magical, I point it out.  They get read.  I also comment on people/things that are extraordinary.
> 
> Yes, I will ask to see a manager to respectfully tell them my thoughts on the policy.  No, they did not make the decision but they are the ones on the ground and I believe it does have an impact.  Will the policy change?  I doubt it but at least they will have my input.


That's good, your message seemed to suggest otherwise.  Actually speaking to a manager will not help either as this is a DVC issue and not really a resort management issue though obviously there is overlap.  



DVCPAT said:


> You seem to know a lot about timeshares and give posters good advice. If my memory is correct, youve stated that SSR and then BLT would be the last DVC resorts built..Why ???


Thank you for the kind words, I always try to help and be as honest as possible.  I don't recall specifically saying that as an absolute (may have, just don't recall it) however I do think DVC is near the end of it's viability as an active sales timeshare entity unless they make major changes in their techniques and expectations plus figure out a way to have viable extension on existing resorts.  I think DVC has basically saturated the market for WDW, shown themselves inept at off property timeshares and shown little interest in other park timeshares including France where they allowed Marriott to build instead of them.  



MELSMICE said:


> I can guarantee that's wrong in our case.  Some years we've been there 4X - spending anywhere between 4-14 days per trip.  That's a lot of money spent at WDW in one year, let alone in a lifetime.


I don't think a given guest experience is really the issue but rather the aggregate.  Plus it doesn't have to be the same guest, they are mostly interchangeable.  I suspect DVC members spend far less per day on average than does the non DVC guest staying on property at a similar level of accommodations.  Thus DVC is a bad investment when they can fill everything and a great investment when times are slow either seasonally or due to other factors including the economy.  It's just like those restaurants that give a bonus for gift certificates.


----------



## TLSnell1981

Chuck S said:


> But, while we may spend more $ as individuals, do we really spend more $ per occupied room night?
> 
> For instance, a CRO cash room may generate more $ over the course of a year because each person that occupies it is spending like it is a _Once in a Lifetime_ vacation.  Where as with DVC, most are return visitors and I would bet overall spend less per room night on souvenirs and food than a deluxe CRO guest.



Frequent and repeat customers matter to most businesses. DVCers fill rooms that would otherwise be empty. Seems like I've read, more than once...we're saving Disney's backside.


----------



## Chuck S

TLSnell1981 said:


> Frequent and repeat customers matter to most businesses. DVCers fill rooms that would otherwise be empty. Seems like I've read, more than once...we're saving Disney's backside.



Sure, the side sales of souvenirs and food by DVCers are income for Disney, not DVC. But evidently not income enough to encourage Disney to subsidize the cost of the perk.  From a DVC standpoint, I really don't see anything to be gained by DVC Marketing underwriting the cost, either.

With DVC, the basic expenses of each resort are paid by dues, whether the room sits empty or not.  With a cash room, Disney is not only out the loss of side sales, but also the operational costs for the resort if a cash room sits idle.

So the question is, will the valet contractor feel enough loss of business to offer members a discount on parking, or lead the contractor to negotiate a substantially discounted subsidy that could be absorbed by dues?


----------



## WebmasterDoc

At the 2009 DVC Annual Meeting today, Jim Lewis commented on the loss of the Valet Parking perk - explaining that the service has always been provided by a 3rd party. That business offered the perk to DVC members but when their renewal contract was recently negotiated, they decided to no longer offer the service for free. Lewis indicated that DVC would be negotiating with them to offer Valet service to members at a discounted rate (but not Free any longer). No mention was made of any timetable for any potential discount.

Stay Tuned.


----------



## TLSnell1981

WebmasterDoc said:


> At the 2009 DVC Annual Meeting today, Jim Lewis commented on the loss of the Valet Parking perk - explaining that the service has always been provided by a 3rd party. That business offered the perk to DVC members but when their renewal contract was recently negotiated, they dscided to no longer offer the service for free. Lewis indicated that DVC would be negotiating with them to offer Valet service to members at a discounted rate (but not Free any longer). No mention was made of any timetable for any potential discount.
> 
> Stay Tuned.



Thanks for the information.

I personally think, a joint effort would benefit all parties. I wonder...how much this has affected the income of the valets?


----------



## Sammie

TLSnell1981 said:


> Thanks for the information.
> 
> I personally think, a joint effort would benefit all parties. I wonder...how much this has affected the income of the valets?



I don't know how much it has affected the income of the valets but it certainly has but some of them in a very nasty mood.

I had a horrible situation occur last week while staying at the BWV due to this change. I was caught in the middle of a very unpleasant situation between valet and bell services. 

I can only hope that DVC will consider some change to this policy.


----------



## crisi

TLSnell1981 said:


> Frequent and repeat customers matter to most businesses. DVCers fill rooms that would otherwise be empty. Seems like I've read, more than once...we're saving Disney's backside.



Ah, but this is the wonderous thing about the timeshare model from Disney's point of view.  A cash customer they upset will just not come back.  But our ability to change our vacation behavior is significantly reduced by our fairly significant spend on our contracts.  In order to get value out of our "investment" in DVC, we need to use our points.  We've gone from being repeat customers to being captured customers.  Its like when WalMart manages to push out other businesses within 30 miles and then raises their prices (which they've been known to do).  

To stop being a captured customer we need to provide them with a replacement captured customer - at no cost to them!  We rent or sell our points - or trade them.


----------



## jdg345

WebmasterDoc said:


> At the 2009 DVC Annual Meeting today, Jim Lewis commented on the loss of the Valet Parking perk - explaining that the service has always been provided by a 3rd party. That business offered the perk to DVC members but when their renewal contract was recently negotiated, they decided to no longer offer the service for free. *Lewis indicated that DVC would be negotiating with them to offer Valet service to members at a discounted rate (but not Free any longer). *No mention was made of any timetable for any potential discount.
> 
> Stay Tuned.



Thanks Doc!  

Bolded the part that sounded familiar to me for some reason.  

Of course, I think it's more Mears looking to negotiate a deal here than DVC.


----------



## tjkraz

TLSnell1981 said:


> I personally think, a joint effort would benefit all parties. I wonder...how much this has affected the income of the valets?



I'm sure it has impacted the valets but they only have their employer to blame.  According to Mr. Lewis, they decided to drop the free service with no discount offered to members.  They should have known that usage would immediately drop and that their employees' tips would suffer.  



Sammie said:


> I can only hope that DVC will consider some change to this policy.



Not sure what DVC can do.  It all depends upon the vendor's willingness to negotiate a discount.


----------



## Sandy321

WebmasterDoc said:


> At the 2009 DVC Annual Meeting today, Jim Lewis commented on the loss of the Valet Parking perk - explaining that the service has always been provided by a 3rd party. That business offered the perk to DVC members but when their renewal contract was recently negotiated, they decided to no longer offer the service for free. Lewis indicated that DVC would be negotiating with them to offer Valet service to members at a discounted rate (but not Free any longer). No mention was made of any timetable for any potential discount.
> 
> Stay Tuned.



The consideration that I had was while the valets themselves made money (with tips) the company itself just saw a loss - full parking lots, no revenue (IF DVC didnt provide $$ for the service,  not sure on that aspect)


----------



## vicki_c

DVCPAT said:


> We average two WDW vacations per year..my youngest daughters pin collection alone probably totals one deluxe vacation.



LOL!  Must be something in the MD water -- I can say the same!


----------



## LIFERBABE

Sandy321 said:


> The consideration that I had was while the valets themselves made money (with tips) the company itself just saw a loss - full parking lots, no revenue (IF DVC didnt provide $$ for the service,  not sure on that aspect)



Exactly!  IMO, the Valets were happy, the company was not.  I think they saw $ signs in DVC and maybe hoped it would be negotiated into a contract and paid with member dues.  

It appears that DVC pulled the rug out and squashed the entire thing leaving the 3rd party in a bad way and members to ante up if they wanted to continue to valet park.

Now DVC can go back to the table and negotiate for a discount perk which will still provide the vendor with more revenue than they are receiving now and a new appreciation for DVC to their bottom line.

I still dont appreciate the way this all went down, but I have a better understanding of the dynamics and attending the meeting yesterday was helpful.


----------



## DVCPAT

WebmasterDoc said:


> At the 2009 DVC Annual Meeting today, Jim Lewis commented on the loss of the Valet Parking perk - explaining that the service has always been provided by a 3rd party.
> Stay Tuned.



I thought Disney subcontracted valet parking to Mears a few years ago. Have they always went to outside contractors for valet service?


----------



## Chuck S

DVCPAT said:


> I thought Disney subcontracted valet parking to Mears a few years ago. Have they always went to outside contractors for valet service?



Even if/when Disney provided the valet services, it was still a third party as far as DVC was concerned.  Disney and DVC are legally seperate entities, and must negotiate between themselves for perks.


----------



## DVCPAT

Chuck S said:


> Even if/when Disney provided the valet services, it was still a third party as far as DVC was concerned.  Disney and DVC are legally seperate entities, and must negotiate between themselves for perks.



Yes, but when Disney subcontracted the service, they lost control. When Disney doesnt have control, they cant do whats beneficial for Disney as a whole. Thats appears why this mess happened.


----------



## Chuck S

DVCPAT said:


> Yes, but when Disney subcontracted the service, they lost control. When Disney doesn’t have control, they can’t do what’s beneficial for Disney as a whole. That’s appears why this mess happened.



Disney could easily take back control if they feel it is in their own best interest to do so.  They didn't have to renew the contract, they could have taken the valet services back into the mouse house.  Believe me, just as with DVC, Disney writes and agrees to contracts that benefit the company overall.  

And financially, it probably _isn't_ best for the mouse to run the valet services and give free valet to DVCers, and more than it is in their best interest to subsidize the services for DVCers.


----------



## dis-happy

Have only read this thread intermittently, so maybe this has already been brought up.  There is a huge assumption that DVC members who were getting free valet parking were also actually tipping every time.  Now I know that no one the DIS would treat a free service as actually free, but is it possible that valet became sick and tired of paying to have enough staff on duty but that the tips from numerous DVC members weren't actually forthcoming?  Just a thought...


----------



## DVCPAT

Chuck S said:


> Disney could easily take back control if they feel it is in their own best interest to do so.  They didn't have to renew the contract, they could have taken the valet services back into the mouse house.  Believe me, just as with DVC, Disney writes and agrees to contracts that benefit the company overall.
> 
> And financially, it probably _isn't_ best for the mouse to run the valet services and give free valet to DVCers, and more than it is in their best interest to subsidize the services for DVCers.



It might be easy to take back control at the end of the contract. Hind sites always 20/20, who knew how this would unfold. Sometimes managers who make decisions are reluctant to make a 180 until after the damage is done. Senior Disney managers invented the wheel, less experienced managers like to Reinvent it.


----------



## DebbieB

dis-happy said:


> Have only read this thread intermittently, so maybe this has already been brought up.  There is a huge assumption that DVC members who were getting free valet parking were also actually tipping every time.  Now I know that no one the DIS would treat a free service as actually free, but is it possible that valet became sick and tired of paying to have enough staff on duty but that the tips from numerous DVC members weren't actually forthcoming?  Just a thought...



It's also a huge assumption that people will be tipping on top of the $12 fee.  I think people would be more generous with the tip if they didn't have to pay $12 first.



DVCPAT said:


> It might be easy to take back control at the end of the contract. Hind sites always 20/20, who knew how this would unfold. Sometimes managers who make decisions are reluctant to make a 180 until after the damage is done. Senior Disney managers invented the wheel, less experienced managers like to Reinvent it.



Disney does not want to take back control unless there are huge problems.   Outsourcing is big in business today.    You just pay a contract price, you don't have to worry about giving the workers benefits, paying for Workers Comp insurance, etc.


----------



## DVCPAT

DebbieB said:


> Disney does not want to take back control unless there are huge problems.   Outsourcing is big in business today.    You just pay a contract price, you don't have to worry about giving the workers benefits, paying for Workers Comp insurance, etc.



Outsourcing is basically saying I cant do my job efficiently. You may simply pay a contract price, but in the end you get a work force who really dont care about your business. Outsourcing is unheard of overseas. I wonder if not worrying is the main reason for the United States is trailing the world in most every industry.


----------



## Sammie

tjkraz said:


> Not sure what DVC can do.  It all depends upon the vendor's willingness to negotiate a discount.





> Lewis indicated that DVC would be negotiating with them to offer Valet service to members at a discounted rate



They can do what JL said they would do, a discounted rate would be great.


----------



## Dean

TLSnell1981 said:


> Thanks for the information.
> 
> I personally think, a joint effort would benefit all parties. I wonder...how much this has affected the income of the valets?


We don't know and any speculation on our part would be random guesses unless someone has truly inside info.  It's likely to reduce their tips and the number of people employed in that capacity with the latter likely being the larger issues.  Not that it impacts the decision on DVC's side, it shouldn't for a subcontractor.



dis-happy said:


> Have only read this thread intermittently, so maybe this has already been brought up.  There is a huge assumption that DVC members who were getting free valet parking were also actually tipping every time.  Now I know that no one the DIS would treat a free service as actually free, but is it possible that valet became sick and tired of paying to have enough staff on duty but that the tips from numerous DVC members weren't actually forthcoming?  Just a thought...


We don't really know but it's unlikely that Mears decided to raise fees by cutting the free DVC with the intent of paying the valet staff more with any extra income.  More likely they either felt the removal would generate more income compared to expenditures OR they were playing chicken with Disney and lost (or a combo).  Hopefully they can negotiate a rate that's low enough to make everyone happy OR they can get a large enough volume discount to return to the "free" service.  It will likely take a couple of years though to settle all of this out.  If, as was reported, the valet spaces are tied to the contract, MEARS can expect that issue on the table next round as well.



DVCPAT said:


> Outsourcing is basically saying I cant do my job efficiently. You may simply pay a contract price, but in the end you get a work force who really dont care about your business. Outsourcing is unheard of overseas. I wonder if not worrying is the main reason for the United States is trailing the world in most every industry.


To a degree but there's more to it than that.  Often outsourcing removes you from a liability standpoint and often it takes issues off your plate and allows you to concentrate on what you do better.  It appears to be very common to oursource valet at resorts from what I've seen.


----------



## MenashaCorp

We are currently staying at BWV and are experiencing the full parking lot problem that worried me before driving down.  Tons of Florida license plates, no parking pass on display, obviously not resort guests.

It may not have been appropriate fodder for the DVC meeting, but I'd love to hear/to have heard BWV/DVC's explanation of why members/resort guests are not given preference for parking. Why have a gated and guarded entrance then let in everyone? Why have parking "passes" at all??

Money, obviously, drives this like everything else.  Big sports weekend; they want all comers to use the BW restaurants, clubs, whatever, but it really sucks (pardon my language) to OWN at a resort and be told "You could always valet" (for $12/day) as the solution for a full parking lot.


Nice to meet you at the DIS seminar yesterday, Doc.


----------



## DebbieB

MenashaCorp said:


> We are currently staying at BWV and are experiencing the full parking lot problem that worried me before driving down.  Tons of Florida license plates, no parking pass on display, obviously not resort guests.
> 
> It may not have been appropriate fodder for the DVC meeting, but I'd love to hear/to have heard BWV/DVC's explanation of why members/resort guests are not given preference for parking. Why have a gated and guarded entrance then let in everyone? Why have parking "passes" at all??
> 
> Money, obviously, drives this like everything else.  Big sports weekend; they want all comers to use the BW restaurants, clubs, whatever, but it really sucks (pardon my language) to OWN at a resort and be told "You could always valet" (for $12/day) as the solution for a full parking lot.
> 
> Nice to meet you at the DIS seminar yesterday, Doc.



I just returned last night from a week at BWV.   We had parking issues last Saturday when we arrived.   After going out for groceries, I mentioned it to the guard when I returned and he said it was due to crowds at ESPN for football games.  He suggested valet parking, which really ticked me off.  I said I'll be darned if I'm paying $12 to park when they are allowing non-hotel guests to take the spaces.   He just threw up his hands.   Luckily, I found a space pretty easy that time (about 5:00pm).   The rest of the week we didn't have a problem.


----------



## BWV Dreamin

DebbieB said:


> I just returned last night from a week at BWV.   We had parking issues last Saturday when we arrived.   After going out for groceries, I mentioned it to the guard when I returned and he said it was due to crowds at ESPN for football games.  He suggested valet parking, which really ticked me off.  I said I'll be darned if I'm paying $12 to park when they are allowing non-hotel guests to take the spaces.   He just threw up his hands.   Luckily, I found a space pretty easy that time (about 5:00pm).   The rest of the week we didn't have a problem.



Do you think it would be worth the time to email member satisfaction about this? I've not been one to do this in the past but as an owner this is directly affecting our membership. maybe it's time I send one? So glad you said something even though it fell on deaf ears.


----------



## DebbieB

BWV Dreamin said:


> Do you think it would be worth the time to email member satisfaction about this? I've not been one to do this in the past but as an owner this is directly affecting our membership. maybe it's time I send one? So glad you said something even though it fell on deaf ears.



I have been thinking about it.   If I could not find a space after returning with the groceries and had to valet, I planned to hunt down the manager but luckily I found a space on the right next to the handicapped.   That was the third time I parked on Saturday.   We parked when we got there, found a space on the first go around.  After we checked in and had lunch (our room was ready), I pulled the car up to the entrance to drop off the luggage with my friend.   When I went to repark the car is when I had issues.  It was probably around 3:00, cars were all over the lot hunting spaces.   After 2 go arounds, I finally just parked in one of the company spaces.  There was only 1 vehicle parked in the 8 or so spaces they had reserved.  I only needed to park for a few minutes while I helped my friend take the luggage up to the room, we then planned to go grocery shopping.   When we went back down to the lot, it was crazy, cars everywhere, probably about 3:30.   I guess people were arrving for the big game that started around 4:00, or were heading to Epcot for CP.   What really bugged me is they had the main entrance from the driveway blocked off but no guard at the side entrance, so what was the point?     They really could use a short term parking area like AKV Kidani has, where you can park while you go in to check-in.


----------



## ArtieMcD

Sorry to be a contrarian here, but I don't understand what all the frustration is about the loss of free valet parking.....     As DVC owners we should be familiar with the fact that nothing we get from DVC is free (especially when we are about to get a particularly big bill to remind us of this fact every year).  

Of course, it's always nice when Disney negotiates on our behalf to provide services and perks to us free of charge.  But as we know, many of them are of course self serving to Disney (Magical Express, access to the dining plan, free internet, etc)...  IE, give us something free that will likely raise revenues elsewhere.   But just like any contracted service the Board of Directors establishes for each of our resorts... They all have expiration dates and subject to change and renegotiation when the deal is up.    

In fact, I am floored that at the annual meeting there was not a motion by Boardwalk owners (arguable the one DVC resort that really needs valet parking)  to ask the board to negotiate a contract for valet parking at the resorts, find out what it would cost in dues to the members, and determine if it's in the best interest for all members to pay for the perk based on actual utilization.   The board can gather the information and present something to the owners to vote on.  Yes, DVD controls the voting representatives but they still must do what is in the best interest of the majority of the owners.  

At the end of the day, if we members need a service to be provided.... We are going to pay for it...   It is not Disney we need to worry about here, it's all of us as members who we must convince of the need... Because a "perk” one member may find desirable, may not be desirable to another member.   The Board of Directors of each resort has to balance the services offers to us an whether there is a real need to burden members with additional dues for "perks".  Heck, I garuntee that if there is some service we as members want Disney to provide bad enough, and we agree to pay for it via dues... Disney would jump at the chance to offer the service... It's garunteed revenue to them. They are virtually assured of having revenue to staff and support the operations of the resorts and DVD itself as long as our condominimums continue to exist.   Case in point... The Saratoga Spring Pool renovation... construction to be completely funded by the owners of SSR. 

I personally have a hard time myself deciding what I feel would be best for the Boardwalk Resort as to whether members should pay for Valet through dues, or via pay per use.    I can see the arguments either way.... Valet is necessary there and a bulk contract would certainly be more economical for all the owners versus the pay per use model.   But why should members who don’t have a vehicle pay for it.       Of course, we pay (and set aside reserves) for the maintenance of the parking lots at the DVC resorts, and I hardly hear complaints from members who say they don't want to pay for this "resort amenity" they do not use.  

In fact, I'd be interested in seeing what the difference in the owner share of maintenance of the parking lot at BWV and other resorts with ample parking (such as BLT or AKV).    I'm betting because the parking lot at BWV is small in comparison, the share of dues for parking maintenance there is smaller in relation to the other resorts.   If this is the case, then I would think the owners at BWV would be in favor of increasing the parking budget to be comparable to the other resorts and either increase the parking availability or sign a contract with a vendor to provide valet services again.


----------



## CarolMN

Just FYI  - Posts #1455-#1459 were moved from the 2009 Annual meeting thread to keep things on topic.


----------



## DebbieB

ArtieMcD said:


> In fact, I'd be interested in seeing what the difference in the owner share of maintenance of the parking lot at BWV and other resorts with ample parking (such as BLT or AKV).    I'm betting because the parking lot at BWV is small in comparison, the share of dues for parking maintenance there is smaller in relation to the other resorts.   If this is the case, then I would think the owners at BWV would be in favor of increasing the parking budget to be comparable to the other resorts and either increase the parking availability or sign a contract with a vendor to provide valet services again.



The issue at BWV is that people other than hotel guests use the parking, not the size of the lot. There are 3 lots. People going to boardwalk restaurants or shops, people going to Epcot, cm's working there are using it.   The members should not have to pay to increase the parking spaces or provide valet services.   There should be a gated parking area reserved for hotel guests.  During food & wine, they put a guard in one section to check parking permits and only allow hotel guests in that area.  That guard was not there last weekend.  If parking spaces run out, people other than hotel guests should be forced to pay for valet or park in the overflow across the street and walk.


----------



## BWV Dreamin

My issue is not about Valet parking per se, it is about the availability of parking for BWV owners. There should be space provided for DVC members staying at the resort, whether it's a separate parking area, or different parking areas for visitors. No, owners should not be footing the bill for additional parking for visitors. If the change in Valet parking is now creating this problem for owners, DVD has a responsibility to correct it.



ArtieMcD said:


> Sorry to be a contrarian here, but I don't understand what all the frustration is about the loss of free valet parking.....     As DVC owners we should be familiar with the fact that nothing we get from DVC is free (especially when we are about to get a particularly big bill to remind us of this fact every year).
> 
> Of course, it's always nice when Disney negotiates on our behalf to provide services and perks to us free of charge.  But as we know, many of them are of course self serving to Disney (Magical Express, access to the dining plan, free internet, etc)...  IE, give us something free that will likely raise revenues elsewhere.   But just like any contracted service the Board of Directors establishes for each of our resorts... They all have expiration dates and subject to change and renegotiation when the deal is up.
> 
> In fact, I am floored that at the annual meeting there was not a motion by Boardwalk owners (arguable the one DVC resort that really needs valet parking)  to ask the board to negotiate a contract for valet parking at the resorts, find out what it would cost in dues to the members, and determine if it's in the best interest for all members to pay for the perk based on actual utilization.   The board can gather the information and present something to the owners to vote on.  Yes, DVD controls the voting representatives but they still must do what is in the best interest of the majority of the owners.
> 
> At the end of the day, if we members need a service to be provided.... We are going to pay for it...   It is not Disney we need to worry about here, it's all of us as members who we must convince of the need... Because a "perk” one member may find desirable, may not be desirable to another member.   The Board of Directors of each resort has to balance the services offers to us an whether there is a real need to burden members with additional dues for "perks".  Heck, I garuntee that if there is some service we as members want Disney to provide bad enough, and we agree to pay for it via dues... Disney would jump at the chance to offer the service... It's garunteed revenue to them. They are virtually assured of having revenue to staff and support the operations of the resorts and DVD itself as long as our condominimums continue to exist.   Case in point... The Saratoga Spring Pool renovation... construction to be completely funded by the owners of SSR.
> 
> I personally have a hard time myself deciding what I feel would be best for the Boardwalk Resort as to whether members should pay for Valet through dues, or via pay per use.    I can see the arguments either way.... Valet is necessary there and a bulk contract would certainly be more economical for all the owners versus the pay per use model.   But why should members who don’t have a vehicle pay for it.       Of course, we pay (and set aside reserves) for the maintenance of the parking lots at the DVC resorts, and I hardly hear complaints from members who say they don't want to pay for this "resort amenity" they do not use.
> 
> In fact, I'd be interested in seeing what the difference in the owner share of maintenance of the parking lot at BWV and other resorts with ample parking (such as BLT or AKV).    I'm betting because the parking lot at BWV is small in comparison, the share of dues for parking maintenance there is smaller in relation to the other resorts.   If this is the case, then I would think the owners at BWV would be in favor of increasing the parking budget to be comparable to the other resorts and either increase the parking availability or sign a contract with a vendor to provide valet services again.


----------



## Chuck S

BWV Dreamin said:


> My issue is not about Valet parking per se, it is about the availability of parking for BWV owners. There should be space provided for DVC members staying at the resort, whether it's a separate parking area, or different parking areas for visitors. No, owners should not be footing the bill for additional parking for visitors. If the change in Valet parking is now creating this problem for owners, DVD has a responsibility to correct it.



I agree, the loss of the free valet parking is a seperate issue from not having enough self-park slots for registered guests.  Although the lack of adequate self parking has become more critical with the loss of the valet perk.

Honestly, if I were a BWV or BWI guest and were forced to pay for valet because non-resort guests were filling the lots, I'd be writing letters or emails.

The guard shack could easily require all registered guest with key cards to use the automated gate, and then manually check arriving guests that have not yet checked in.  Everyone else could be referred to the overflow lot.

During busy seasons, ambulatory guests with ADRs or who are visiting the entertainment/dining venues without being BWV/BWI guests, IMO, should be the ones paying for valet or parking in the auxiliary lot behind Hess.


----------



## crisi

Chuck S said:


> I agree, the loss of the free valet parking is a seperate issue from not having enough self-park slots for registered guests.  Although the lack of adequate self parking has become more critical with the loss of the valet perk.
> 
> Honestly, if I were a BWV or BWI guest and were forced to pay for valet because non-resort guests were filling the lots, I'd be writing letters or emails.
> 
> The guard shack could easily require all registered guest with key cards to use the automated gate, and then manually check arriving guests that have not yet checked in.  Everyone else could be referred to the overflow lot.
> 
> During busy seasons, ambulatory guests with ADRs or who are visiting the entertainment/dining venues without being BWV/BWI guests, IMO, should be the ones paying for valet or parking in the auxiliary lot behind Hess.



Yep.  And while I completely believe that the problem has gotten worse, this has ALWAYS been an issue at BWV - which is a resort that needs to start a "validate, stay or PAY" policy - even over behind Hess.  Too many people visit the Boardwalk for the Epcot entrance, or easy entertainment - and fill up the lots.

(Contemporary seems to be the other resort in NEED of better parking monitoring.  Too easy to walk to the MK and still make it back in the three hour window.)


----------



## ArtieMcD

BWV Dreamin said:


> No, owners should not be footing the bill for additional parking for visitors.



The parking lot is a shared lot, and BWV owners are not paying for the visitors to park there...  The cost of the maintenance of the lot is shared between the owners and Disney based on how the lot is used by the different parties  (IE resort use, DVC user, and commercial tenant use).     Now if Disney is not properly balancing the costs of maintaining the lots and miscalculating the useage percentages between DVC and non-DVC use, thats one thing...       But if now all of a sudden the DVC members need more parking avaliability because the resort association chose not to renew thier bulk valet parking agreement... then we should expect to pay a larger share for the maintenance and use of the parking lots due to the expanded use by DVC members. 



BWV Dreamin said:


> If the change in Valet parking is now creating this problem for owners, DVD has a responsibility to correct it.



Agreed, and the expense for solving the problem will be borne by the owners as always...  This was a problem caused by our own condo association (Which we are members of) and thus our responsibilty (via DVD as our representative) to fix. 



BWV Dreamin said:


> My issue is not about Valet parking per se, it is about the availability of parking for BWV owners. There should be space provided for DVC members staying at the resort, whether it's a separate parking area, or different parking areas for visitors.



Agreed, this is probabaly the best solution here... Set asside some additional self parking areas for resort guests.  Maybe shrink the size of the valet lot since the use of the Valet service is dropping.    Then recalculate the percentage use of the lots, and expense each party accordingly.


----------



## BWV Dreamin

There is no lack of parking for DVC guests and Inn guests. The visitors parking are creating the problem. No, this is not an issue for BWV or BWI to financially provide addtional parking. It is the responsabilities of the resorts to make available parking for their guests with the spaces already deemed for them. Proper enforcement would solve this problem. Any additional costs should be put on guests visiting( cabs, valet parking, etc.) and this is what will happen once enough complaints are made. Enforcement will solve the problem , not increasing our dues to create more parking for visitors.Somehow I get the feeling you are not a BWV owner!



ArtieMcD said:


> The parking lot is a shared lot, and BWV owners are not paying for the visitors to park there...  The cost of the maintenance of the lot is shared between the owners and Disney based on how the lot is used by the different parties  (IE resort use, DVC user, and commercial tenant use).     Now if Disney is not properly balancing the costs of maintaining the lots and miscalculating the useage percentages between DVC and non-DVC use, thats one thing...       But if now all of a sudden the DVC members need more parking avaliability because the resort association chose not to renew thier bulk valet parking agreement... then we should expect to pay a larger share for the maintenance and use of the parking lots due to the expanded use by DVC members.
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed, and the expense for solving the problem will be borne by the owners as always...  This was a problem caused by our own condo association (Which we are members of) and thus our responsibilty (via DVD as our representative) to fix.
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed, this is probabaly the best solution here... Set asside some additional self parking areas for resort guests.  Maybe shrink the size of the valet lot since the use of the Valet service is dropping.    Then recalculate the percentage use of the lots, and expense each party accordingly.


----------



## Deb & Bill

BWV Dreamin said:


> .... Enforcement will solve the problem , not increasing our dues to create more parking for visitors....



And we all know how Disney feels about enforcment.  Only when it doesn't inconvenience a "possibly" paying guest. It's how they reduce complaints.  

But in the case of BW parking, they need to come up with a way to make sure the guests at the resort have a parking place when they need it.


----------



## DebbieB

ArtieMcD said:


> The parking lot is a shared lot, and BWV owners are not paying for the visitors to park there...  The cost of the maintenance of the lot is shared between the owners and Disney based on how the lot is used by the different parties  (IE resort use, DVC user, and commercial tenant use).     Now if Disney is not properly balancing the costs of maintaining the lots and miscalculating the useage percentages between DVC and non-DVC use, thats one thing...       But if now all of a sudden the DVC members need more parking avaliability because the resort association chose not to renew thier bulk valet parking agreement... then we should expect to pay a larger share for the maintenance and use of the parking lots due to the expanded use by DVC members.



It's not all of then sudden.   Parking on the weekends has been an issue at BWV since I first stayed there in 2000.    Last week it was fine during the week, so the issue is not people staying at the resort (both the villas and inn were full last week), it's people visiting on the weekends.     They just need to find a way to make sure hotel guests have spaces.   If members have to contribute to the installation of a key card gate to restricted hotel guest parking, I would be in favor of that.   How much could it cost?


----------



## Brian Noble

> And we all know how Disney feels about enforcment. Only when it doesn't inconvenience a "possibly" paying guest. It's how they reduce complaints.


Exactly so.  The first page of the Disney Guest Services Playbook says: "Don't say 'no' unless you have to."

The solution to this is trivial, though:


> needs to start a "validate, stay or PAY" policy


The surface lots at Disneyland/DTD do this, and it works surprisingly well.


----------



## ArtieMcD

BWV Dreamin said:


> There is no lack of parking for DVC guests and Inn guests.   ...     Any additional costs should be put on guests visiting



Correct... But DVC members also don't pay for the entire parking lot either.   The DVC members have no right to expect to have 100% of the lot for them (if it could be filled up entirely by resort guests).  Nor do DVC members have any right to expect priority over the use of the lot by the commercial tenants (who also pay for their share of the lot). 





BWV Dreamin said:


> Somehow I get the feeling you are not a BWV owner!



Your right, I don't own at BWV...   However I own at other resorts that also have parking lots which are shared between DVC and commercial tenants.... And I know we pay for those parking lots based on our use of them as well as the security gate.   No reason to expect a BWV owner not to have the same responsibility/expectations. 



BWV Dreamin said:


> It is the responsibilities of the resorts to make available parking for their guests with the spaces already deemed for them.



The problem is, there is not a single person on this thread that knows the exact percentage of the maintenance cost of the lots are borne by the DVC resort nor the actual usage percentage of the lots based on parking patterns.     So everyone is just speculating here.     But let’s say for example, DVC is paying for 25% of the costs, then DVC members have no right to expect to have more than 25% of the spaces available to them.   

What we can postulate is, now that DVC members can no longer valet park for free there is now going to be an increased demand by DVC members on the self parking section of the lot.   If this increased demand is higher than the DVC owners are paying for their share of the lot, then the owners should expect to see an increase in maintenance fees for DVCs expanded use of the shared amenity. 





Now I agree that if the case can be made that some of the parking is consumed by those simply taking advantage of the lot for free parking for the parks and not consuming any services at the Boardwalk.  Then yes we should expect Disney security to step up enforcement since these vehicles aren't representing a unit that is subsidizing the expenses of the parking lot.   However we should remember, one perk Disney allows for us owners is the right to park at the theme parks for free in return.   If we really wanted to become aggressive about the parking situation at Disney and only allow people to park in areas where they specifically paid for, well what is the natural conclusion if we go in this direction?

Have we really come to the point where we have to flag off 25% of the parking lot (our whatever the correct percentage is) and police it to only allow DVC cars in there.  Is this really in the owners best interest???


----------



## ArtieMcD

DebbieB said:


> They just need to find a way to make sure hotel guests have spaces.   If members have to contribute to the installation of a key card gate to restricted hotel guest parking, I would be in favor of that.   How much could it cost?



I agree, this would solve the problem.  However one inconvinience I can see in this situation is what if a DVC member has a guest arriving by car to visit them?   How would they access the part of the lot set asside for DVC use when they arrive?


----------



## Chuck S

ArtieMcD said:


> However we should remember, one perk Disney allows for us owners is the right to park at the theme parks for free in return.   If we really wanted to become aggressive about the parking situation at Disney and only allow people to park in areas where they specifically paid for, well what is the natural conclusion if we go in this direction?



Actually, theme park parking is not a DVC perk, it is an onsite perk, available to all onsite guests, including DVC.  I would expect to be treated by Disney as any other onsite guest, especially since their own cash rentals of DVC villas includes this perk.

Nor has anyone here proposed a DVC ONLY lot, only that the closest parking area be available to DVC and cash resort guests.


----------



## DebbieB

ArtieMcD said:


> Correct... But DVC members also don't pay for the entire parking lot either.   The DVC members have no right to expect to have 100% of the lot for them (if it could be filled up entirely by resort guests).  Nor do DVC members have any right to expect priority over the use of the lot by the commercial tenants (who also pay for their share of the lot).



I don't expect a DVC only lot.   I'm suggesting a Boardwalk Inn/Boardwalk Villa guest parking section (not the entire lot).   During Food & Wine they segregate the one lot for hotel guests only on weekends and have a guard checking parking permits.   It might be cheaper installing a gate rather than having to employ a guard.   If it's not a crowded time, they could just leave the gate up and allow everyone to park.



ArtieMcD said:


> What we can postulate is, now that DVC members can no longer valet park for free there is now going to be an increased demand by DVC members on the self parking section of the lot.   If this increased demand is higher than the DVC owners are paying for their share of the lot, then the owners should expect to see an increase in maintenance fees for DVCs expanded use of the shared amenity.



I really don't think alot of members valet parked for their entire stay in the past.  Tip money adds up.  I usually only used it for check-in and check-out.  At check-in, it was nice to just get out of the car, get the luggage and go right into the lobby.   I put it in valet the night before check-out so that we could bring the luggage down and put it right in the car.    The rest of the time I self-parked unless I could not find a space or if it was raining heavy.   It would be interesting to put up a poll, but I don't think that would be allowed since this is the only thread allowed for valet parking.




ArtieMcD said:


> I agree, this would solve the problem.  However one inconvinience I can see in this situation is what if a DVC member has a guest arriving by car to visit them?   How would they access the part of the lot set asside for DVC use when they arrive?



They are not a registered guest, they should park in the public section.


----------



## Chilbert

I just got back to BWV and the parking is extremely scarce, probably due to the lack of a guard at the Self Parking gate.

I thought one way to curtail misuse of the lot would be to put a keycard activated gate at the entrance and exit of the lot.  If you don't have a valid keycard - you can't get in.  If desired, management could also use this system to monitor DVC vs. cash guests in determining apportionment of maintenance costs.


----------



## ArtieMcD

Chuck S said:


> Nor has anyone here proposed a DVC ONLY lot, only that the closest parking area be available to DVC and cash resort guests.



But this is the problem, your assuming that a DVC resort owner is entitled to the closest parking.  The only thing we are entitled to is what our condo docs specifically state....  Does the BWV condo docs specifically state that certain spots on the lot are owned by DVC????  Or is it written that the parking lot is shared and all the commercial elements have an easment over the parking lot like it is for every other resort.     If is not specifially declared that BWV owns X spaces, or the closest parking, then there can be no such expectation.        If it's a shared lot, it's first come first served....  For everyone entitled to be there... Period...


----------



## ArtieMcD

DebbieB said:


> They are not a registered guest, they should park in the public section.



As a DVC owner, we are entitled to have guest visit us when staying at our property.   And the expenses on the wear and tear on the parking lot and spaces for these guest should be bourne by the association.  Of course the assocation can set a rule, and only allow X number of parking spaces per unit based on the unit size (just like a real condo development can assign parking spaces per unit).    But this is not the way the documents are writen today.


----------



## ArtieMcD

Chuck S said:


> Actually, theme park parking is not a DVC perk, it is an onsite perk, available to all onsite guests, including DVC.



Sure... for now... This can change at any time without notice. 



Chuck S said:


> I would expect to be treated by Disney as any other onsite guest, especially since their own cash rentals of DVC villas includes this perk.



I guess this is where we will disagree.   I "expect" to recieve the benefits that are described in our condo documents as we agreed to when signing and accepting the deed to the condominium.     I "enjoy" any additional benefits that Disney offers us as perks, but will not cry too much if we lose these "free" benefits which were really gifts to us during the period they last.

Because of this, I'm ok with the fact we have to share our resort ameneties with nearby tenants.  Becasue 1... I often partake in such nearby activities which is one of the reasons I bought into the resorts I did, and 2.... By allowing our DVC lots to be shared gives us the best argument for Disney to allow us to share thier lots in return.    Remember any wall one erects (physically or virtually) has the effect of blocking people on both sides.


----------



## DVCPAT

ArtieMcD said:


> As a DVC owner, we are entitled to have guest visit us when staying at our property.   And the expenses on the wear and tear on the parking lot and spaces for these guest should be bourne by the association.



I think you might have a solution in search of a problem. Are you sure you want to monitor DVC verses resort guest wear and tear on every aspect of resort use? Disney would have to install monitoring devices and pay someone to sort the data. The list could include transportation, pool use, common area bathrooms, etcI think Disney has a simpler formula using the number of DVC rooms verses resort rooms.


----------



## ArtieMcD

DVCPAT said:


> I think you might have a solution in search of a problem. Are you sure you want to monitor DVC verses resort guest wear and tear on every aspect of resort use? Disney would have to install monitoring devices and pay someone to sort the data. The list could include transportation, pool use, common area bathrooms, etc…I think Disney has a simpler formula using the number of DVC rooms verses resort rooms.



Right, I don't want to see it come to this.   I simply point it out since there are some who believe the BWV parking lot is for the exclusive use of the BWV resort or somehow grants DVC owners preferred parking... It's not... It's a shared resource and if we owners start making a fuss and demand more guaranteed parking... That simple formula Disney uses to allocate expenses will be reviewed, and drive up the cost of the dues.   

That’s the predicament for BWV owners right now.    Get more dedicate parking (and pay for it), negotiate a new bulk valet agreement, or leave the status quo and let those who wish to Valet pay for it on a pay per use situation.


What is clear though is the days of free Valet are over.     This hurts BWV more than other resorts due to the proximity of the parking to the entrance of the resort and the higher amount of competition for spaces due to the higher than normal amenities that day guest want to consume. 

My original post was in the Annual meeting thread, before being moved by the moderator, and my original point was in regards that I'm surprised that even the action to investigate a new valet contract was even something considered at the meeting.   But I guess DVD position is clear... We could have a Valet contract at some cost, but in their opinion is that the owners who would not use the benefit would not want to be subsidizing those that do.


----------



## DebbieB

ArtieMcD said:


> Right, I don't want to see it come to this.   I simply point it out since there are some who believe the BWV parking lot is for the exclusive use of the BWV resort or somehow grants DVC owners preferred parking... It's not... It's a shared resource and if we owners start making a fuss and demand more guaranteed parking... That simple formula Disney uses to allocate expenses will be reviewed, and drive up the cost of the dues.
> 
> Thats the predicament for BWV owners right now.    Get more dedicate parking (and pay for it), negotiate a new bulk valet agreement, or leave the status quo and let those who wish to Valet pay for it on a pay per use situation.



We really don't know how much of the dues is dedicated to the parking lot.  A few years back, a member of this board noticed that BWV dues per point for transportation were twice that of BCV.   The reply from DVC was that there were more non-DVC rooms at BC so they pay less.     BWV has more rooms than BWI, I wouldn't be surprised if DVC dues are paying for more than half the parking lot.    BWV dues are the highest at WDW.


----------



## scot@dvcstore

Sad but I understand Disney is trying to control costs for the DVC Members.


----------



## Figment2

Just got back from a BWV stay and decided to state my 2 cents.   I'm past the fact we have to pay but if I'm a paying customer, I should not have to wait 10-20 minutes to get a receipt for my car. I waited 10 minutes one time and a friend waited 20 minutes.   Staffing is an issue.  I asked one of the valets if they cut staff and was told (these are his words, not mine) "yes, when we lost the DVC contract, they did cut staff."   

BW is not a new resort.  They know the busy times (like Sunday, 12/13, when 300 people were checking out and 300 were checking in - that was the 20 minute wait around 11am).   

I am going to send a complaint letter not about the charge or the staff but the staffing.   

I'd love to know, too, what happened to the lady whose car keys couldn't be found (12/10 around midnight at the Contemporary).    They tore apart the cabinet and she even went into the valet stand to look with no success.  When we were walking to our car I heard her say, "the valet said he's take good care of my car."   Have no idea of what model/make her car was and all I could think of was what if it wasn't one of the valets she gave her car!  I know that has happened here in Chicago.

Cyn


----------



## jdg345

Well, FWIW, I just got back from another few days on property and the TIW card saved me quite a bit.  It seemed as long as I used it at least one time for valet, I was not charged that day.  I was only charged one day for Valet, and it was [coincidentally?] the same day I did not use my TIW card.


----------



## pilferk

Quick question:

When they cut the DVC contract, did they likewise reduce the number of valet spaces?

The answer may be here, somewhere, in this behemoth of a thread, but I've missed it.

It would be interesting if they cut staff...but the valet service did not give up a number of their spaces back to "regular" parking.


----------



## Chuck S

pilferk said:


> Quick question:
> 
> When they cut the DVC contract, did they likewise reduce the number of valet spaces?
> 
> The answer may be here, somewhere, in this behemoth of a thread, but I've missed it.
> 
> It would be interesting if they cut staff...but the valet service did not give up a number of their spaces back to "regular" parking.



I don't think it was a "DVC" contract, as such.  It is a WDW Resorts Contract that alowed for free DVC valet.  It is unlikely that resorts would have cut the valet parking spots simply because the DVC perk was dropped from the contract.


----------



## pilferk

Chuck S said:


> I don't think it was a "DVC" contract, as such.  It is a WDW Resorts Contract that alowed for free DVC valet.  It is unlikely that resorts would have cut the valet parking spots simply because the DVC perk was dropped from the contract.



The contract that provided for free DVC guest use of valet at DVC resorts, then. 

So then...we're now trying to squeeze more people into LESS available "regular" spots, right?  Or, rather, the same number of "regular spots", but we've increased the demand factor, so they are not LESS available.

Because you'd assume (and...yes, I know what assume makes out of u and me) that there would be a noteable drop off of DVC useage, and thus overall useage, of the valet system at the DVC resorts.  I mean, if it's not free, I'd guess there's a lot fewer DVC guests using it.  I'd guess that's mirrored in, if it's true, the reduction of valet staff.  I mean, if it was enough of an impact to drop FTE's, it has to be "noteable", right?

But there's no corresponding drop in "available inventory"?  That's poor logistical planning, at best.  Because all those DVC guests who used to use valet parking, and are not, are going to need "regular" spaces to park in.  Those cars aren't simply going to disappear.  And the most logical place to get them from would be from the valet service....since they obviously now NEED fewer spaces.

I've no real issue with losing the perk.  It's annoying, but if it's in the interest of keeping costs down I can live with it.  The writing was likely on the wall when they outsourced valet.  But I DO have an issue with not planning to deal with ALL the fallout from it.  Especially at resorts like BWV and BCV where parking is already at a premium.


----------



## Chuck S

pilferk said:


> The contract that provided for free DVC guest use of valet at DVC resorts, then.
> 
> So then...we're now trying to squeeze more people into LESS available "regular" spots, right?



Actually, you are trying to self park more cars into the same number of self park spot that were available prior to the change, not less spots. But I understand what you are trying to say.

There should be plenty of self parking available, if, and that is a big *IF*, they give preference to guests actually staying at BWV and BWI, and make those without room key cards valet or park in the auxiliary lot behind the Hess station.    

This could be done by simply allowing the driver of a group to drop the group off up front, then having them park in the auxiliary lot.  Exceptions, of course for those, with handicap plates and placards, who can still valet free or use the H/C parking slots.  The problem is enforcement.


----------



## crisi

pilferk said:


> The contract that provided for free DVC guest use of valet at DVC resorts, then.
> 
> So then...we're now trying to squeeze more people into LESS available "regular" spots, right?  Or, rather, the same number of "regular spots", but we've increased the demand factor, so they are not LESS available.
> 
> Because you'd assume (and...yes, I know what assume makes out of u and me) that there would be a noteable drop off of DVC useage, and thus overall useage, of the valet system at the DVC resorts.  I mean, if it's not free, I'd guess there's a lot fewer DVC guests using it.  I'd guess that's mirrored in, if it's true, the reduction of valet staff.  I mean, if it was enough of an impact to drop FTE's, it has to be "noteable", right?
> 
> But there's no corresponding drop in "available inventory"?  That's poor logistical planning, at best.  Because all those DVC guests who used to use valet parking, and are not, are going to need "regular" spaces to park in.  Those cars aren't simply going to disappear.  And the most logical place to get them from would be from the valet service....since they obviously now NEED fewer spaces.
> 
> I've no real issue with losing the perk.  It's annoying, but if it's in the interest of keeping costs down I can live with it.  The writing was likely on the wall when they outsourced valet.  But I DO have an issue with not planning to deal with ALL the fallout from it.  Especially at resorts like BWV and BCV where parking is already at a premium.




You just needed to get this to 100 pages, right? 

There is speculation upthread that eventually they will rebalance the valet parking spaces for the reported reduction in use.  This apparently hasn't happened at this point in time, may never happen, and its even possible that despite 100 pages, the reduction in use and lack of parking spots has been the perception of people on this board and actually isn't measurable (I doubt this, myself - but it IS possible - and I was trained in the 'confirm your perceptions with measurement' school of business.)


----------



## Dean

pilferk said:


> Quick question:
> 
> When they cut the DVC contract, did they likewise reduce the number of valet spaces?
> 
> The answer may be here, somewhere, in this behemoth of a thread, but I've missed it.
> 
> It would be interesting if they cut staff...but the valet service did not give up a number of their spaces back to "regular" parking.


One person has reported that the number of spaces for valet parking is currently contractual.  We don't know for certain and we don't know the terms or contract length.  Obviously that gives more vehicles into the same number of spaces initially.  There are many ways to compensate for this issue.  You can better police who parks in those spaces that shouldn't including those not staying at the resort and employees, you can (hopefully) recapture some of the valet spaces at some point (? at next contract negotiation), you can re-negotiate the contract due to the affects if the vender is willing and I'm guessing about now they are or will be soon.  In all likelihood this will take a year or two to sort out and will take a combination of the above type approaches to be successful.  Even then, BWV has had times when parking was an issue even before this change so success will always be relative  when discussing parking success.  However, it is my belief that things will be worked out reasonably and that with some reasonable effort, things will be as good or better than before.  I would not be surprised to see a discounted DVC valet parking option paid for by members who use valet.  I doubt we'll see a return to free or nearly so valet though if the vendor gets desperate enough to negotiate a substantial volume discount, it's possible.

I suppose the question is what is the optimal price and volume compared to minimal staffing goals.  The best bang for the buck so to speak.  It may be that those remaining valet employees are the right level of service for the contractor currently.


----------



## granmanh603

Have not followed this thread in weeks but just got back a few days ago from WDW BWV and we(or DSIL) had trouble parking in self park the day we arrived 12/13 at 2 PM no spots had to valet park(but we ate and I remembered the post about the TIW card and we used that for that day)  as a side note at night after fireworks at Epcot the stream of cars out of the self park was steady so I guess they are not checking  room card at all again.  Not really fair to the owners to get the better self park.


----------



## d-r

the portable perks book they gave us at check in last week lists free valet parking, but I didn't try it.


----------



## colonialtinker

granmanh603 said:


> as a side note at night after fireworks at Epcot the stream of cars out of the self park was steady so I guess they are not checking  room card at all again.  Not really fair to the owners to get the better self park.



I agree, we just got back from a standard view room overlooking the self parking area, by 11am each day there were no spaces available.  We also witnessed 1 person getting extremal upset with check in on having no parking spots available for guest.  The valet parking area had very few cars and the handicap parking spaces by the valet parking area were full, plus there were a few cars that had moved the barriers around by the employee gate at the tennis court so they could park.  We noticed there were quite a few empty spaces after 10pm each night and very early in the morning.


----------



## DebbieB

I just completed the online survey for my stay, got the card in the mail today.  I made several comments about the self-parking situation at BWV.   Really the only downside to my stay.


----------



## tgropp

*I truly sympathize with BWV and the parking situation. I have only stayed there once and it is a beautiful resort in an amazing location. I stated my frustations with the loss of valet parking back in the first few pages of this thread lamenting on how WDW was losing its magic etc. with all the cutbacks, nitpicking et all. Fast forward to my visit in November/09. I arrive at BCV at 8 A.M. to pick up my meal plan card and jokingly ask if there are rooms ready. The CM You replied "I will see if I can get you a magical moment" Poof, a 1 BR at 8:15 A.M. Later on that day after going to Toy Story Mania to use a Fast Pass, it was broke down, no ride. Next night I went to Guest Services and showed them the day old fastpass...... they gave me one for that night, but told me not to tell anyone as the wait was 150 minutes. All of a sudden, valet parking does not seem that important. Have a Merry Christmas Everyone!*


----------



## Disneypubgal

tgropp said:


> *I truly sympathize with BWV and the parking situation. I have only stayed there once and it is a beautiful resort in an amazing location. I stated my frustations with the loss of valet parking back in the first few pages of this thread lamenting on how WDW was losing its magic etc. with all the cutbacks, nitpicking et all. Fast forward to my visit in November/09. I arrive at BCV at 8 A.M. to pick up my meal plan card and jokingly ask if there are rooms ready. The CM You replied "I will see if I can get you a magical moment" Poof, a 1 BR at 8:15 A.M. Later on that day after going to Toy Story Mania to use a Fast Pass, it was broke down, no ride. Next night I went to Guest Services and showed them the day old fastpass...... they gave me one for that night, but told me not to tell anyone as the wait was 150 minutes. All of a sudden, valet parking does not seem that important. Have a Merry Christmas Everyone!*




Love it!


----------



## JaneDE

I was one of those uniformed members who came to DW and tried to get my free valet parking at Boardwalk last night. I was surprised to find this perk gone. However, the valet explained to me that if I brought my receipt from dinner to the valet booth, they would wave the fee. I asked him if this was true at other DVC hotels and he said that most of them wil do this. Well, it worked last night but tonight we go to Cape May Cafe for dinner and I willl be interested to see if they will honor the free parking with proof that we ate dinner there. Has anyone else been told this?


----------



## Chuck S

JaneDE said:


> I was one of those uniformed members who came to DW and tried to get my free valet parking at Boardwalk last night. I was surprised to find this perk gone. However, the valet explained to me that if I brought my receipt from dinner to the valet booth, they would wave the fee. I asked him if this was true at other DVC hotels and he said that most of them wil do this. Well, it worked last night but tonight we go to Cape May Cafe for dinner and I willl be interested to see if they will honor the free parking with proof that we ate dinner there. Has anyone else been told this?



That actually is a perk for TiW card holders.  If the valets continue billing out DVC owners to the TiW card (ie if TiW notices a sudden substantial increase without a significant increase in TiW sales) I'd expect that perk to be taken away from the TiW card holders, too, or the cost for TiW to increase yet again. 

If you are an Annual Pass holder, you can purchase a TiW card for $75 per year.  This gives you a 20% discount at almost all Disney owned table service restaurants (including adult beverages) as well as free valet while dining.


----------



## mopee3

pilferk said:


> The contract that provided for free DVC guest use of valet at DVC resorts, then.
> 
> So then...we're now trying to squeeze more people into LESS available "regular" spots, right?  Or, rather, the same number of "regular spots", but we've increased the demand factor, so they are not LESS available.
> 
> Because you'd assume (and...yes, I know what assume makes out of u and me) that there would be a noteable drop off of DVC useage, and thus overall useage, of the valet system at the DVC resorts.  I mean, if it's not free, I'd guess there's a lot fewer DVC guests using it.  I'd guess that's mirrored in, if it's true, the reduction of valet staff.  I mean, if it was enough of an impact to drop FTE's, it has to be "noteable", right?
> 
> But there's no corresponding drop in "available inventory"?  That's poor logistical planning, at best.  Because all those DVC guests who used to use valet parking, and are not, are going to need "regular" spaces to park in.  Those cars aren't simply going to disappear.  And the most logical place to get them from would be from the valet service....since they obviously now NEED fewer spaces.
> 
> I've no real issue with losing the perk.  It's annoying, but if it's in the interest of keeping costs down I can live with it.  The writing was likely on the wall when they outsourced valet.  But I DO have an issue with not planning to deal with ALL the fallout from it.  Especially at resorts like BWV and BCV where parking is already at a premium.


 

Congratulations  !!!! 

You are the first person to post a reply on the 100th page on this tread!!!  For that you get your pick of 
A. Free valet parking if you are there now! or 
B. Free pool hoping pass for all pools in Chicago on January 1, 2010.

Personally I think the last one is the best

Moe


----------



## Onetrue

I never even knew we got free valet with DVC, I have been staying at the Grand all this time and they never told me, just let me pay it each visit!


----------



## Mickey'sApprentice

1500 posts!


----------



## KAT4DISNEY

Onetrue said:


> I never even knew we got free valet with DVC, I have been staying at the Grand all this time and they never told me, just let me pay it each visit!



Free valet was only at DVC resorts.  DVC is brand new to CA and free valet never was available there - even after the Villas opened so don't feel like you missed out on a perk.


----------



## PKS44

There are at least 2 very large threads touching on the Valet parking situation no longer being offered as a free perk. I have tried to find this question and since one of the threads is 100 pages, maybe I missed it.  Here it is.

We are told this is Budget neutral -ie no savings- because the vendor was giving this perk for free.  I realize it is unseemly to question anyone's veracity, but that requires a little more explanation.  I always assumed valet parking was "free" the same way Disney transportation is "free." That is that we pay for it some other way in room rates or dues, whatever.  This does not add up.  

Since when does any business give something away for free?  Apparently the vendor has changed his mind and decided not to do it anymore, for now anyway.  I can understand that part.  What I want to know is whether any one has officially explained why on earth it was ever given away by the vendor in the first place? What was the advantage?  Was it thrown in to get the contract in the first place? Did they hope the extra tips would help their salaried staff stay happy?  There had to be a calculation on the vendor's part to ever have "given it away." What was it?


----------



## Chuck S

PKS44 said:


> There are at least 2 very large threads touching on the Valet parking situation no longer being offered as a free perk. I have tried to find this question and since one of the threads is 100 pages, maybe I missed it.  Here it is.
> 
> We are told this is Budget neutral -ie no savings- because the vendor was giving this perk for free.  I realize it is unseemly to question anyone's veracity, but that requires a little more explanation.  I always assumed valet parking was "free" the same way Disney transportation is "free." That is that we pay for it some other way in room rates or dues, whatever.  This does not add up.
> 
> Since when does any business give something away for free?  Apparently the vendor has changed his mind and decided not to do it anymore, for now anyway.  I can understand that part.  What I want to know is whether any one has officially explained why on earth it was ever given away by the vendor in the first place? What was the advantage?  Was it thrown in to get the contract in the first place? Did they hope the extra tips would help their salaried staff stay happy?  There had to be a calculation on the vendor's part to ever have "given it away." What was it?



Remember that originally the valets were Disney employees, and the outside vendor came into the picture after "free valet" had already been established as a perk.  Likely for the initial contract, the vendor assumed the service "as is" accepting all the perks, including DVC and TiW, that had gone along with it.

When the contract came up for renewal, the vendor likely wated the DVC perk removed, as it was a substantial portion of the free parkers.


----------



## PKS44

Chuck S-
Your answer makes total sense... But has anyone heard that from DVC? I would like to actually hear the official explanation for what has sort of just gone apparently unchallenged and unexplained except by our own conjectures.


----------



## DebbieB

PKS44 said:


> Chuck S-
> Your answer makes total sense... But has anyone heard that from DVC? I would like to actually hear the official explanation for what has sort of just gone apparently unchallenged and unexplained except by our own conjectures.



This is what was reported from the annual meeting:

http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=2347666



> He added comments about the discontinued Valet perk for DVC members. Valet service was "owned" by a third party (not resorrts) who provided the free service to DVC members. When that contract was renegotiated this year, the 3rd party is no longer willing to offer than. Lewis stated that DVC will negotiate with the 3rd party for a possible discount. (It sounds like some discount will be forthcoming - but not a return to "free" in the near future.)


----------



## PKS44

I read that Debbie B, that is what prompted my question.  I realize he said it was not part of the dues, but that is too extraordinary to just accept without my asking for a little explanation.   No business gives something out for "nothing."  I would like to know how that is possible that it was ever "free."  It may be exactly as ChuckS has proposed above...but I don't see why that has never -in all the hair pulling out and pages and pages of discussions of this- ever been confirmed by Disney. or DVC. It is not a proprietary thing.


----------



## Chuck S

PKS44 said:


> I read that Debbie B, that is what prompted my question.  I realize he said it was not part of the dues, but that is too extraordinary to just accept without my asking for a little explanation.   No business gives something out for "nothing."  I would like to know how that is possible that it was ever "free."  It may be exactly as ChuckS has proposed above...but I don't see why that has never -in all the hair pulling out and pages and pages of discussions of this- ever been confirmed by Disney. or DVC. It is not a proprietary thing.



It may not be a propietary thing, but we do have to rely upon the info as passed onto us by the DVC Management.  No company makes all of their contract negotiations and clauses known to their customers or stockholders.


----------



## PKS44

I am sorry to be so skeptical/mistrusting...but a few years back I noticed a large discrepancy in the dues charges per point between BCV and BWV that initially was just blown off as the way it was...only after I asked for a more full explanation did DVC discover they had made an accounting error and had not been including the cost of boats in the dues for BCV, only for BWV.  So my skepticism and desire for an official review is not without reasonable precedence.


----------



## DebbieB

I really don't understand what the difference is at this point.  We're not paying for it now. Dues for 2010 are about a 2% increase, so maybe there was a charge before and there isn't now, that's a lower increase than some previous years.   Even if DVC did kick in a subsidy before, the total was probably low compared to the other items in the budget.    I don't know who you would contact to challenge Jim Lewis' explanation.   They could have offered the service "free" because the valets would benefit from extra tips.   They have to be hurting now, not only from decreased business but I bet the people who are paying the $12 are not as generous with tip amounts.


----------



## Dean

PKS44 said:


> I read that Debbie B, that is what prompted my question.  I realize he said it was not part of the dues, but that is too extraordinary to just accept without my asking for a little explanation.   No business gives something out for "nothing."  I would like to know how that is possible that it was ever "free."  It may be exactly as ChuckS has proposed above...but I don't see why that has never -in all the hair pulling out and pages and pages of discussions of this- ever been confirmed by Disney. or DVC. It is not a proprietary thing.


It has been reported by several that DVC management verbally confirmed that there was no charge for the free valet parking previously.  No one has posted anything at all to contradict that assertion.  Given that the current contract is not with DVC, the contract itself would not be available for inspection.  However, the DVC books themselves would be available for inspection.  It is possible to make an appt with DVC and spend the day with them going over such, to my knowledge, no one has done that or planned that related to this issue.  ASAMOF, I'm only aware of anyone ever doing that in any capacity exactly once.  I don't think there's any reason to truly question the assertion that the re was truly no charge prior and is a charge now.  DVCMC's choice would have been to raise fees consistent with a charge of $12 per day per car, a fee that would have been passed on to each resort independently according to it's own costs in all likelihood.  I don't see any legitimate way to spread it out over the entire membership.


----------



## snappy

You are right, accounting errors are made all the time, believe me I know.

Good for you, PKS44, for scrutinizing the dues computations. Talk about due diligence!!

Which CPA firm audits DVC anyway?

You need to direct your inquiry to the right source though, emails on this subject so far are going nowhere.


----------



## Sammie

PKS44 said:


> Chuck S-
> Your answer makes total sense... But has anyone heard that from DVC? I would like to actually hear the official explanation for what has sort of just gone apparently unchallenged and unexplained except by our own conjectures.



I heard from them and it was exactly as Chuck described. The cost if the free valet was to be continued would have to be passed onto all members and DVC felt that there were not enough members using it, to warrant all paying for it.


----------



## MELSMICE

snappy said:


> You are right, accounting errors are made all the time, believe me I know.
> 
> Good for you, PKS44, for scrutinizing the dues computations. Talk about due diligence!!
> 
> Which CPA firm audits DVC anyway?
> 
> You need to direct your inquiry to the right source though, emails on this subject so far are going nowhere.


I agree.  If something doesn't seem right then it should definitely be questioned.  Errors are made all the time.  



Sammie said:


> I heard from them and it was exactly as Chuck described. The cost if the free valet was to be continued would have to be passed onto all members and DVC felt that there were not enough members using it, to warrant all paying for it.


I have to wonder if they believe that now.........considering the decrease in guests that are using the valet service.


----------



## Dean

snappy said:


> Which CPA firm audits DVC anyway?


I'm not sure who they use for these purposes, they use Myers, Brettholtz & Co for some things.


----------



## Dean

MELSMICE said:


> I have to wonder if they believe that now.........considering the decrease in guests that are using the valet service.


I don't think the numbers were an issue, though it really didn't matter how many were using it as it's still a minority of the membership at any given time or for the year in aggregate.  While Sammie may have been told or hinted at that the number using it came into play, that is not my understanding and doesn't really make sense that it would come into play.


----------



## hakepb

PKS44 said:


> I am sorry to be so skeptical/mistrusting...but a few years back I noticed a large discrepancy in the dues charges per point between BCV and BWV that initially was just blown off as the way it was...only after I asked for a more full explanation did DVC discover they had made an accounting error and had not been including the cost of boats in the dues for BCV, only for BWV.  So my skepticism and desire for an official review is not without reasonable precedence.



I'd assume BWV would remain a little higher than BCV, the lower points standard view result in lower dues recieved per room


----------



## DESTTVL

We live in Celebration and visit the parks/resorts frequently.

This is what we have been told:

1.  If you are staying at a DVC resort using a reservation made by member services your valet parking is included, tips are not.
2.  Valet parking is free for those who have a handicapped tag from any state.
3.  Valet parking is free to those who are visiting the resort for dining at a table service restaurant if you are a Tables in Wonderland participant.  

So the obvious is........use self park at Contemporary or Beach Club or visit a table service restaurant with the TIW card and present your receipt when you pick up your car.  

We have found that we may stop for a bite at a resort before or after an park activity allowing us to dine in a less crowded enviroment, enjoy the park activities without having to stop for a meal and the food tends to be better at the resorts.


----------



## disneynutz

DESTTVL said:


> We live in Celebration and visit the parks/resorts frequently.
> 
> This is what we have been told:
> 
> 1.  If you are staying at a DVC resort using a reservation made by member services your valet parking is included, tips are not.
> 2.  Valet parking is free for those who have a handicapped tag from any state.
> 3.  Valet parking is free to those who are visiting the resort for dining at a table service restaurant if you are a Tables in Wonderland participant.
> 
> So the obvious is........use self park at Contemporary or Beach Club or visit a table service restaurant with the TIW card and present your receipt when you pick up your car.
> 
> We have found that we may stop for a bite at a resort before or after an park activity allowing us to dine in a less crowded enviroment, enjoy the park activities without having to stop for a meal and the food tends to be better at the resorts.



Some of your information is incorrect.

Item #1 is completely incorrect. Valet parking is not included.

Item #3 has a 3 hour limit. 

I expect that Disney will start to enforce their parking policies. A week ago while staying at BLT, Security was taking down vehicle license numbers if a parking permit wasn't displayed. I don't know what they did with the info but they spent many hours walking the parking lot.

 Bill


----------



## Sammie

Dean said:


> I don't think the numbers were an issue, though it really didn't matter how many were using it as it's still a minority of the membership at any given time or for the year in aggregate.  While Sammie may have been told or hinted at that the number using it came into play, that is not my understanding and doesn't really make sense that it would come into play.



I may be confused by what you are saying, do you mean that you don't think members who did not use the free valet would care if their fees were increased to cover the cost of valet parking for others.


----------



## Sammie

disneynutz said:


> Some of your information is incorrect.
> 
> Item #1 is completely incorrect. Valet parking is not included.
> 
> Item #3 has a 3 hour limit.
> 
> I expect that Disney will start to enforce their parking policies. A week ago while staying at BLT, Security was taking down vehicle license numbers if a parking permit wasn't displayed. *I don't know what they did with the info but they spent many hours walking the parking lot.*
> Bill



I think they are gathering info as to how many cars are using the lots that are not resort guests. Gaylord Palms charges you to park in their lots. If you dine, see ICE, shop, you get a voucher for a discount on the parking. I truly think eventually Disney will go to something like this.


----------



## Dean

Sammie said:


> I may be confused by what you are saying, do you mean that you don't think members who did not use the free valet would care if their fees were increased to cover the cost of valet parking for others.


That is not at all related to what I was trying to say so let me try again.  My points were:

That no matter how many people actually used the valet, it was still a minority of the guests at that given time, a minority of the owners at that resort and a minority of all owners.  And that in reality this issue was not a major component of any decision that was made.

That unless it was a significant MAJORITY of the guests at a given time, it would not make sense for DVCMC to roll this charge into the fees in ANY way in the absence of a significant volume discount which my info suggest would not have existed at the time.  That situation may or may not exist going forward.

Sorry to not have been more clear.



Sammie said:


> I think they are gathering info as to how many cars are using the lots that are not resort guests. Gaylord Palms charges you to park in their lots. If you dine, see ICE, shop, you get a voucher for a discount on the parking. I truly think eventually Disney will go to something like this.


As I've noted, I think this is very possible going forward.  Most locations with similarities to what WDW does charge for self parking an amount around what the valet currently is and charge MORE for valet.  LV is the big exception but each hotel group is competing with the others for your $$$ and hoping to get far more out of you than the parking fee would be.


----------



## uncw89

Ok, I haven't read through the thread....but there is definitley no free valet parking for DVC members anymore, right? I'm going to be staying at AKV starting this Sun and I will just park my own car now if they are charging for valet parking.
Thanks!


----------



## tjkraz

Sammie said:


> I think they are gathering info as to how many cars are using the lots that are not resort guests. Gaylord Palms charges you to park in their lots. If you dine, see ICE, shop, you get a voucher for a discount on the parking. I truly think eventually Disney will go to something like this.



Forget the resort lots for a moment...the parking situation at Downtown Disney has been spiraling downward for years now and Disney has yet to do anything about it.  Although it's impossible to quantify, the assertion is that many guests park at DTD and catch a bus from there (or SSR) to avoid Disney parking lot fees.  Between that and the DTD lots getting worse and worse, I can't believe Disney hasn't implemented some sort of fee system.  

I'm still waiting for that shoe to drop before I hold out any hope they will address resort-specific problems.  



uncw89 said:


> Ok, I haven't read through the thread....but there is definitley no free valet parking for DVC members anymore, right? I'm going to be staying at AKV starting this Sun and I will just park my own car now if they are charging for valet parking.
> Thanks!



Correct.  As of right now DVC members must pay the full $12 per day rate to valet park at any resort.  Tables in Wonderland members can valet park for free if they dine at the resort and have a receipt to prove it.


----------



## uncw89

Tim, Thanks for responding so quickly. That is a shame that they took this perk away. Maybe, they will bring it back again someday!


----------



## tjkraz

uncw89 said:


> Tim, Thanks for responding so quickly. That is a shame that they took this perk away. Maybe, they will bring it back again someday!



No problem.

Since you didn't read the thread, the Cliff's Notes version is that the valet parking vendor (which is *not *owned by Disney) was providing the service for free and they made the decision to begin charging DVC members.  Until October '09 members truly paid nothing for the free parking, but a fee being imposed was apparently unavoidable.  

DVC looked at rolling the cost into annual dues but then dues would have gone up even more than they did, and thousands of members who never used valet parking would be paying for it.  At the annual meetings 2-3 weeks ago Jim Lewis stated that they have made some attempts to negotiate a discounted rate for members but nothing has come of it yet.


----------



## Sammie

Dean said:


> That is not at all related to what I was trying to say so let me try again.  My points were:
> 
> That no matter how many people actually used the valet, it was still a minority of the guests at that given time, a minority of the owners at that resort and a minority of all owners.  And that in reality this issue was not a major component of any decision that was made.
> 
> That unless it was a significant MAJORITY of the guests at a given time, it would not make sense for DVCMC to roll this charge into the fees in ANY way in the absence of a significant volume discount which my info suggest would not have existed at the time.  That situation may or may not exist going forward.
> 
> Sorry to not have been more clear.
> 
> As I've noted, I think this is very possible going forward.  Most locations with similarities to what WDW does charge for self parking an amount around what the valet currently is and charge MORE for valet.  LV is the big exception but each hotel group is competing with the others for your $$$ and hoping to get far more out of you than the parking fee would be.



Thanks for the explanation, too much food today has muddled my thinking.


----------



## Duckfan-in-Chicago

disneynutz said:


> Some of your information is incorrect.
> 
> Item #1 is completely incorrect. Valet parking is not included.
> 
> Item #3 has a 3 hour limit.
> 
> I expect that Disney will start to enforce their parking policies. A week ago while staying at BLT, Security was taking down vehicle license numbers if a parking permit wasn't displayed. I don't know what they did with the info but they spent many hours walking the parking lot.
> 
> Bill


Disney has often stormed the lot at the Contemp around Christmas/busy times.  Obviously being walking distance to the MK and having conventions it has unique issues.  What goes on there is no indication of future activities anywhere else.  

I've almost had a cavity search to get into the Contemp parking lot while on the same day shot over to the Poly and had the guard shack be unmanned.

I expect Disney to start enforcing their parking policies when enough people complain about it to where it becomes a major issue or it starts to cost Disney money.  Until then, I expect Disney to do nothing.


----------



## Brian Noble

> Between that and the DTD lots getting worse and worse, I can't believe Disney hasn't implemented some sort of fee system.


They've done this for years at Anaheim's version of the DTD surface lots---free parking for 2-3 hours, and then validation for longer periods if you're spending money with DTD merchants.


----------



## RoutemanDan

disneynutz said:


> Some of your information is incorrect.
> 
> Item #1 is completely incorrect. Valet parking is not included.
> 
> *Item #3 has a 3 hour limit. *
> 
> I expect that Disney will start to enforce their parking policies. A week ago while staying at BLT, Security was taking down vehicle license numbers if a parking permit wasn't displayed. I don't know what they did with the info but they spent many hours walking the parking lot.
> 
> Bill



Never, ever since I've been going to WDW has anyone ever told me there is a 3 hour limit when using valet parking. That is a crock made up by dis users. I use valet all the time, even have told them I may be longer and they DON'T CARE. 

I repeat, if you are using valet, *THEY DON'T CARE* how long you are parked there.

Why does that constantly get repeated as fact around here? Maybe some people don't want a great secret let out to everyone.


----------



## perdidobay

disneynutz said:


> Some of your information is incorrect.
> 
> 
> Item #3 has a 3 hour limit.
> 
> Bill



On the information sheet WDW gave me when I bought my TIW card, nowhere does it mention a 3 hour time limit for free parking when dining at a resort with the card.
It only says:

"Resort valet services is complimentary to members. This privilege will only be extended to one vehicle per membership card with a dining receipt at the Valet Stand upon retrieving your vehicle."


----------



## disneynutz

perdidobay said:


> On the information sheet WDW gave me when I bought my TIW card, nowhere does it mention a 3 hour time limit for free parking when dining at a resort with the card.
> It only says:
> 
> "Resort valet services is complimentary to members. This privilege will only be extended to one vehicle per membership card with a dining receipt at the Valet Stand upon retrieving your vehicle."



That may be so, but when we used our card a couple of weeks ago, we found a 3 hour pass on our dash when we picked up our car. 

 Bill


----------



## Brian Noble

> Never, ever since I've been going to WDW has anyone ever told me there is a 3 hour limit when using valet parking.


Sometimes, you are given a three-hour limit when you self-park at a resort at which you are not a registered guest.  I was given such a limit at CR several years ago, but my experience is that even that isn't very common.  When you valet park, you are generally allowed to stay as long as you like, though there can be exceptions if the lots are unusually full.


----------



## crisi

hakepb said:


> I'd assume BWV would remain a little higher than BCV, the lower points standard view result in lower dues recieved per room



Someone did the math, and when you factor in the fact that Standard View rooms take so few points - the discrepency is almost all taken care of.

Transportation costs for BWVs are a lot higher - that has to do with how Disney allocates bus funding.  It seems like they charge each resort - regardless of size a single fee.  So Y&BC, a resort with more rooms, gets charged the same as BW with fewer rooms.  Then the resorts allocate their total transportation costs back to DVC proportionally - Y&BC is a huge resort, but BCV is small.  BWV/BWI is a largish resort - but BWV is half the resort.  So BWV pays half the transportation fees for BWV/BWI and BCV pays something like 20% of Y&BCs.


----------



## Deb & Bill

disneynutz said:


> That may be so, but when we used our card a couple of weeks ago, we found a 3 hour pass on our dash when we picked up our car.
> 
> Bill



We had the same thing at GF last time we used TIW there for dinner.


----------



## Mary Lou in Ohio

DebbieB said:


> If this is true, there darn well better be a space for me in the self park at BWV when I stay there.  There have been times I've gone round and round and just gave up and valet parked.



I have been away from these boards for quite awhile.  Yesterday I went to Boardwalk to have lunch with my daughter who was in town for a conference.  I showed my DVC card at the gate and the guard told me that I would have to self-park ACROSS THE STREET and if I wanted to use the valet it was $12.  We turned around and went to Downtown Disney to eat instead.  I must say I was quite ticked that I couldn't even self-park at my "home" resort AND that they did not offer any type of shuttle from the parking lot across the street.  Would there have been a place for me to self-park if I was checking in?  I hope so, as I will be staying there in March and neither option of parking across the street or paying $12/night is acceptable to me.

Mary Lou


----------



## tjkraz

Mary Lou in Ohio said:


> I have been away from these boards for quite awhile.  Yesterday I went to Boardwalk to have lunch with my daughter who was in town for a conference.  I showed my DVC card at the gate and the guard told me that I would have to self-park ACROSS THE STREET and if I wanted to use the valet it was $12.  We turned around and went to Downtown Disney to eat instead.  I must say I was quite ticked that I couldn't even self-park at my "home" resort AND that they did not offer any type of shuttle from the parking lot across the street.



A shuttle would be a waste of money, IMO.  Assuming it's the lot they typically use for overflow (other side of Epcot Resorts Blvd), the walk is barely longer than the distance from the other self-park lot.  

From the lot you are familiar with, you walk across a bridge and up to the resorts.  

From the alternate lot you cross the street and walk in front of the conference center.  It really isn't noticeably further, in my opinion.  Honestly unless you hit DTD on a slow day, you probably had to walk much further from the parking lot there to your final destination.  



> Would there have been a place for me to self-park if I was checking in?  I hope so, as I will be staying there in March and neither option of parking across the street or paying $12/night is acceptable to me.



That's why there are re-routing non-guest traffic--so that actual resort guests have first priority on available parking.


----------



## Dean

Mary Lou in Ohio said:


> I have been away from these boards for quite awhile.  Yesterday I went to Boardwalk to have lunch with my daughter who was in town for a conference.  I showed my DVC card at the gate and the guard told me that I would have to self-park ACROSS THE STREET and if I wanted to use the valet it was $12.  We turned around and went to Downtown Disney to eat instead.  I must say I was quite ticked that I couldn't even self-park at my "home" resort AND that they did not offer any type of shuttle from the parking lot across the street.  Would there have been a place for me to self-park if I was checking in?  I hope so, as I will be staying there in March and neither option of parking across the street or paying $12/night is acceptable to me.
> 
> Mary Lou


Since we do not get day use privileges, home resort doesn't really matter unless you're staying there.  I know that in the past members have been able to valet park or park for meals, but the loss of free valet parking has put more pressure on the self parking areas.  Across the street is appropriate for this situation.


----------



## DebbieB

Mary Lou in Ohio said:


> I have been away from these boards for quite awhile.  Yesterday I went to Boardwalk to have lunch with my daughter who was in town for a conference.  I showed my DVC card at the gate and the guard told me that I would have to self-park ACROSS THE STREET and if I wanted to use the valet it was $12.  We turned around and went to Downtown Disney to eat instead.  I must say I was quite ticked that I couldn't even self-park at my "home" resort AND that they did not offer any type of shuttle from the parking lot across the street.  Would there have been a place for me to self-park if I was checking in?  I hope so, as I will be staying there in March and neither option of parking across the street or paying $12/night is acceptable to me.
> 
> Mary Lou



If they are holding the closer spaces to those staying at BWI/BWV, I am happy to hear this.    If it was already full from people going to Epcot, that's not good news.


----------



## BWV Dreamin

DebbieB said:


> If they are holding the closer spaces to those staying at BWI/BWV, I am happy to hear this. If it was already full from people going to Epcot, that's not good news.


 Your going to BWV soon? Please report back your valet experience, I am very interested to hear your info.


----------



## DebbieB

BWV Dreamin said:


> Your going to BWV soon? Please report back your valet experience, I am very interested to hear your info.



No, I was there the beginning of December.   I did post a report somewhere on this thread, we had major issues finding a space when we arrived on Saturday afternoon.   The rest of the week was OK.

I don't have another trip until the last week of October.


----------



## LisaS

Mary Lou in Ohio said:


> Yesterday I went to Boardwalk to have lunch with my daughter who was in town for a conference.  I showed my DVC card at the gate and the guard told me that I would have to self-park ACROSS THE STREET and if I wanted to use the valet it was $12.


Just an FYI: If you have a TIW card you still get free valet parking when you are dining at a resort that offers valet service. You need to show the valet your restaurant receipt and TIW card when you pick up your car.


----------



## scooter14

We just got back from a nice stay at the Beach Club Villas.

I can say, with all certainty, that there is no more free valet parking at the resorts for DVC Members.

If you're staying at the resort you have to self park or pay $12.00 a day for Valet.

If you visit another resort to poolhop, eat at a restaurant, etc, you have to pay for valet parking.

If you have the Tables in Wonderland card and you are visiting a resort for a dining reservation your valet parking is free.

Regular parking at a theme park is also still free for DVC members.

The valet person at the front desk of Wilderness Lodge and the DVC rep inside confirmed "no more free valet for DVC". They cited that Disney has now renegotiated the valet service contract and free parking for DVC members was not included in that contract.

(Wired internet in DVC rooms is free for DVC members, and free wireless is offered in most hotal lobbies though).


----------



## CarolMN

scooter14 said:


> ....(snip)........Regular parking at a theme park is also still free for DVC members........



This isn't true, but it is a common misconception.  Annual pass-holders get free parking at the theme parks, even if they are not staying on site.  DVC members do not.

Anyone who stays at an on-site WDW resort, including the on site DVC resorts, gets free parking at the theme parks.

If you are not staying at one of the on site resorts, you pay to park at the theme parks.  Your DVC membership by itself, does not entitle you to free parking at the theme parks.


----------



## TravelinGal

scooter14 said:


> If you visit another resort to poolhop, eat at a restaurant, etc, you have to pay for valet parking.



Are you saying that if you already paid to valet at one resort they no longer use that same amount toward any other resort ON THE SAME DAY?  That has always been the case with valet - for anyone not just DVC related.

We have done that quite a few times - 

example:
*valet parked @ Contemporary for breakfast  - paid the $
*valet parked @ the Grand Floridan for dinner - showed the receipt from that morning - no charge for parking that night.
*valet parked @ Boardwalk to go to Jellyrolls after the GF dinner - showed same receipt from the morning - no charge for parking then either.


----------



## Pattiwig

... neither option of parking across the street or paying $12/night is acceptable to me.

Mary Lou[/QUOTE]

I agree and see it as another way Disney is nickle and diming those of us who believe in their product enough to buy into it.  It is happening more and more, the longer you have owned, the more you see the perks you are loosing.  It really is disappointing.


----------



## DeeDeeDis

I think its sad they dont allow dvc members to valet park, that was one perk we took advantage of.  I do have the ToW Card and we used that last October.  

I hope next time DVC (Disney) renegotiates their Valet Parking Contract they consider reinstating this perk


----------



## Chuck S

DeeDeeDis said:


> I think its sad they dont allow dvc members to valet park, that was one perk we took advantage of.  I do have the ToW Card and we used that last October.
> 
> I hope next time DVC (Disney) renegotiates their Valet Parking Contract they consider reinstating this perk



DVC does not directly negotiate the valet contract.  It is negotiated between  Disney Resorts and the contractor.  And apparently, the contractor no longer wanted to give DVC free parking...simple as that.  Perhaps the contractor did not feel it was in their best interest to give away their product without compensation from DVC.  And such compensation would come from dues.


----------



## Paging Tom Morrow




----------



## Dean

Pattiwig said:


> ... neither option of parking across the street or paying $12/night is acceptable to me.
> 
> Mary Lou



I agree and see it as another way Disney is nickle and diming those of us who believe in their product enough to buy into it.  It is happening more and more, the longer you have owned, the more you see the perks you are loosing.  It really is disappointing.[/QUOTE]Then don't visit the resorts that use this system like BWV and GF unless staying there.  I feel they can better fine tune the self parking but to me, that means directing people across the street that are not staying there and are not valet parking.



DeeDeeDis said:


> I think its sad they dont allow dvc members to valet park, that was one perk we took advantage of.  I do have the ToW Card and we used that last October.
> 
> I hope next time DVC (Disney) renegotiates their Valet Parking Contract they consider reinstating this perk


They do allow it, you just have to pay the costs that are incurred to do this.


----------



## CMOORE185

Paging Tom Morrow said:


>


----------



## KAT4DISNEY

I thought I would post my recent parking experience at BWV this past week.  It was a very last minute (ie, called 3 hours before I checked in) for a 1 night stay.  I'm not terribly familiar with BWV having stayed there once and used valet at that time since we had my mother along who uses a wheelchair.  I was arriving around 5PM on a Wednesday.  

Since I didn't quite understand the parking lots I decided to pull up to the entrance to see where my room ended up being and check in before parking .  The valet personnel allowed me to leave my car there but they wanted the keys while I ran in.  When I came out they retrieved the keys for me.  My impression (by the palm held out) is that they also were waiting for a tip.  Parking was no problem - plenty of spots but wow - that's a bit of a hike!  

I was able to compare the experience to CR/BLT just the next day when I moved over there.  The gate guard directed me to the front lobby of the CR.  Valet personnel immediately directed me to a spot right by the door and did not require my keys.  Very friendly about it while BWV had been much more begrudging the parking during check-in.  Perhaps  b/c CR had a very short time with DVC free valet and thus isn't feeling the difference to the same degree.  Seems a little odd though since the valet is contracted by the same company.  Parking at BLT was a better experience.


----------



## Chuck S

KAT4DISNEY said:


> I thought I would post my recent parking experience at BWV this past week.  It was a very last minute (ie, called 3 hours before I checked in) for a 1 night stay.  I'm not terribly familiar with BWV having stayed there once and used valet at that time since we had my mother along who uses a wheelchair.  I was arriving around 5PM on a Wednesday.
> 
> Since I didn't quite understand the parking lots I decided to pull up to the entrance to see where my room ended up being and check in before parking .  The valet personnel allowed me to leave my car there but they wanted the keys while I ran in.  When I came out they retrieved the keys for me.  My impression (by the palm held out) is that they also were waiting for a tip.  Parking was no problem - plenty of spots but wow - that's a bit of a hike!
> 
> I was able to compare the experience to CR/BLT just the next day when I moved over there.  The gate guard directed me to the front lobby of the CR.  Valet personnel immediately directed me to a spot right by the door and did not require my keys.  Very friendly about it while BWV had been much more begrudging the parking during check-in.  Perhaps  b/c CR had a very short time with DVC free valet and thus isn't feeling the difference to the same degree.  Seems a little odd though since the valet is contracted by the same company.  Parking at BLT was a better experience.



From you post, I am assuming you left your car parked along, or near, the main drive area at BWV and BLT.  I'm actually surprised they allowed you to leave your car at all without valet parking it.  At OKW you can not leave your car in that area, you have to park it in the lot prior to checking in, and OKW doesn't even offer valet.  

But the area at BWV should remain clear for taxis, limos,  DME and those that do choose to valet park.


----------



## DVCPAT

KAT4DISNEY said:


> I was able to compare the experience to CR/BLT just the next day when I moved over there.  The gate guard directed me to the front lobby of the CR.  Valet personnel immediately directed me to a spot right by the door and did not require my keys.  Very friendly about it while BWV had been much more begrudging the parking during check-in.  Perhaps  b/c CR had a very short time with DVC free valet and thus isn't feeling the difference to the same degree.  Seems a little odd though since the valet is contracted by the same company.  Parking at BLT was a better experience.



BLT parking is the best. The resorts small foot print and the designated loading/unloading area is perfect for handling your own bags. I used the free valet so often, I would borrow one dollar bills from my wife and kids for tips. Since DVC eliminated free valet, I don’t use any Disney services and save a lot of money.

Looking back at all the DVC vacations our family has taken since 1998, I wasted a lot of money on services I didn’t really need.


----------



## LisaS

They did a nice job at Kidani also. They created a short-term parking area that you can use while checking in and the under-building parking is very handy.

On our stay there last week, I noticed there were never more than 10 cars in the valet lot any time we passed by. Given the ease of parking near your room in the under-building lot, I wondered if maybe valet wasn't used much at Kidani even before the policy change but a CM told me that since the change the number of cars being valet parked has dropped by more than 75%.


----------



## jagson

As stated above Disney Resorts (DR) negotiate with the contractor re: valet parking.  Maybe, just  maybe, they could open negotiations with other contractors that might be more favorable towards free valet parking for DVC members.  DVC should standup for its members' perks, and intervene with DR on our behalf.


----------



## Dean

jagson said:


> DVC should standup for its members' perks, and intervene with DR on our behalf.


I've said this many times but I don't expect it would change anything in this instance.  IF they get a backbone in the area of perks realize that standing up means taking a stand.  That includes being willing to walk away from options that are truly overpriced.  Members would likely get better value on exchange options but lose some of the options which might include DCL, some non DVC disney resorts, etc.  Just yelling and screaming isn't going to get it done, there has to be a real potential loss to the other side to actually make this work.


----------



## toocherie

KAT4DISNEY said:


> I thought I would post my recent parking experience at BWV this past week.  It was a very last minute (ie, called 3 hours before I checked in) for a 1 night stay.  I'm not terribly familiar with BWV having stayed there once and used valet at that time since we had my mother along who uses a wheelchair.  I was arriving around 5PM on a Wednesday.
> 
> Since I didn't quite understand the parking lots I decided to pull up to the entrance to see where my room ended up being and check in before parking .  The valet personnel allowed me to leave my car there but they wanted the keys while I ran in.  When I came out they retrieved the keys for me.  My impression (by the palm held out) is that they also were waiting for a tip.  Parking was no problem - plenty of spots but wow - that's a bit of a hike!
> 
> I was able to compare the experience to CR/BLT just the next day when I moved over there.  The gate guard directed me to the front lobby of the CR.  Valet personnel immediately directed me to a spot right by the door and did not require my keys.  Very friendly about it while BWV had been much more begrudging the parking during check-in.  Perhaps  b/c CR had a very short time with DVC free valet and thus isn't feeling the difference to the same degree.  Seems a little odd though since the valet is contracted by the same company.  Parking at BLT was a better experience.



Kathy:  just a note--if you had had your mother in the wheelchair with you then valet parking is supposed to be 'free' (other than tips of course).



Chuck S said:


> From you post, I am assuming you left your car parked along, or near, the main drive area at BWV and BLT.  I'm actually surprised they allowed you to leave your car at all without valet parking it.  At OKW you can not leave your car in that area, you have to park it in the lot prior to checking in, and OKW doesn't even offer valet.
> 
> But the area at BWV should remain clear for taxis, limos,  DME and those that do choose to valet park.



When I was there in November they would let people park at the front to check-in.  It also "appeared" to me that cars were being pulled around and left for people who had valet'd and had called to have their cars brought around.


----------



## KAT4DISNEY

Chuck S said:


> From you post, I am assuming you left your car parked along, or near, the main drive area at BWV and BLT.  I'm actually surprised they allowed you to leave your car at all without valet parking it.  At OKW you can not leave your car in that area, you have to park it in the lot prior to checking in, and OKW doesn't even offer valet.
> 
> But the area at BWV should remain clear for taxis, limos,  DME and those that do choose to valet park.



They had me park the car in the wider area that is just before the porte cochere starts.  Plenty of room to do so without interfering with anything at both resorts.  At BLT they had those of us checking in park vertically just past the porte cochere.  Pretty standard fare for checking in at most hotels and was handled by both resorts.  BWV just kept encouraging valet for me while CR did not. 

Also isn't the front of a hotel available for anyone who is arriving and leaving the resort - not designated only for those arriving by a certain method?  I'm afraid I don't understand why one method would be treated differently although a hotel has the right to do as they wish.  It would be one of the poorest first impressions though.

I know that OKW has parking spaces that are much closer to check-in than BWV or BLT would be.  Are no spaces designated for check-in?  That would make complete sense IMO in a set-up like OKW and SSR where you are going to park by your room and need to get your key before doing so.



toocherie said:


> Kathy:  just a note--if you had had your mother in the wheelchair with you then valet parking is supposed to be 'free' (other than tips of course).



Thanks Cheryl - yes, we were provided free valet in Nov.  

Regarding BWV parking.  Is the lot to the left as you are driving up to BWV for valet only?  I glanced at that lot and saw some blocked off but didn't pull in to see if everything was.  It certainly was empty though.


----------



## toocherie

KAT4DISNEY said:


> Thanks Cheryl - yes, we were provided free valet in Nov.
> 
> Regarding BWV parking.  Is the lot to the left as you are driving up to BWV for valet only?  I glanced at that lot and saw some blocked off but didn't pull in to see if everything was.  It certainly was empty though.



I thought some of it was available for self-parking--I know I saw people walking from there (at least the part on the other side of the "bridge")


----------



## KAT4DISNEY

toocherie said:


> I thought some of it was available for self-parking--I know I saw people walking from there (at least the part on the other side of the "bridge")



OK - that's what it looked like but I wasn't certain.  There were plenty of spots in the lot on the right so I didn't have to look over there but I was wondering for future reference.  Thanks!


----------



## Duckfan-in-Chicago

KAT4DISNEY said:


> Regarding BWV parking.  Is the lot to the left as you are driving up to BWV for valet only?  I glanced at that lot and saw some blocked off but didn't pull in to see if everything was.  It certainly was empty though.



If you make a sharp left right after the guard shack, there is a short drive that splits the lot on the left side of the entrance road.  The biggert lot created by this split is the valet lot(right side of the split because the valet should have priority over the guests to the closest spots when half the time they drive one car to park and pick up another)  The smaller is a self-park that is usually less crowded than the other one.  At least it usually was up till this change.


----------



## Dean

Duckfan-in-Chicago said:


> If you make a sharp left right after the guard shack, there is a short drive that splits the lot on the left side of the entrance road.  The biggert lot created by this split is the valet lot(right side of the split because the valet should have priority over the guests to the closest spots when half the time they drive one car to park and pick up another)  The smaller is a self-park that is usually less crowded than the other one.  At least it usually was up till this change.


The self parking lot there is actually quite large if the entire thing is open, it's just somewhat spread out tracking all the way back from just past the guard gate to the tennis courts.  Someone did say recently that they were using this area for employee parking and gave the impression it wasn't open for self parking, at least for that one time.


----------



## Disney*All-Stars*

According to what I've read in Disney Files, DVC members are no longer going to get free valet parking at DVC resorts.  Has any gotten upset over this?  I sure am.  That was the best perk and now my way of getting around (to and from resort, etc) is going to change a bit.  I am sorry for the valet parkers because I didn't mind tipping them.  The reason for this change is to not raise member dues according to the article.  Well, I would go for the slight increase because valet parking for a one week stay will now cost $84.00.  I don't think the increase would be or should be that much.  I think Disney is looking for a way to make some money just like the airlines with their luggage and extra room charges.


----------



## tjkraz

There is an extensive thread on the subject which started back in October when the perk was removed.

The gist is that neither members nor Disney were paying for free valet up to this point.  Valet parking services are outsourced and operated by a non-Disney entity.  Until now they had been providing the service entirely for free.

When the contract came up for renewal they refused to allow the free parking.  

DVC looked at rolling the cost up in member dues but ultimately determined it was a benefit better paid for by those who are actually using the service rather than all members sharing the cost.  

Some of us have held out hope that the valet vendor would at least offer a discount to DVC members given the volume of traffic they have lost, but so far that hasn't happened.  

There really isn't much DVC could do other than forcing all of us to pay for valet whether we use it or not.  Someone has to pay the bill.


----------



## ORD2KOA

tjkraz said:


> The gist is that neither members nor Disney were paying for free valet up to this point. Valet parking services are outsourced and operated by a non-Disney entity.


 

Am I the only one who thinks this makes no sense whatsoever? (I'm not saying your post doesn't make sense.) Could the vendor possibly be paying lower wages than Disney itself? Sheesh.


----------



## Tara

ORD2KOA said:


> _*Originally Posted by tjkraz*
> 
> The gist is that neither members nor Disney were paying for free valet up to this point. Valet parking services are outsourced and operated by a non-Disney entity._
> 
> Am I the only one who thinks this makes no sense whatsoever? (I'm not saying your post doesn't make sense.) Could the vendor possibly be paying lower wages than Disney itself? Sheesh.



I'm not following your question in relation to the post you quoted...what does the vendor wage have to do with it? 

Yes, I think what tjkraz posted does make a lot of sense, and so does the decision to discontinue free valet parking. I wish it were still free as I've been an active user of the service, but I understand why it isn't now. I figure I'd pay for it one way or the other - through dues or through direct payment anyway. (And I continue to valet park and pay for it since the rule changed.)


----------



## Dean

Disney*All-Stars* said:


> According to what I've read in Disney Files, DVC members are no longer going to get free valet parking at DVC resorts.  Has any gotten upset over this?  I sure am.  That was the best perk and now my way of getting around (to and from resort, etc) is going to change a bit.  I am sorry for the valet parkers because I didn't mind tipping them.  The reason for this change is to not raise member dues according to the article.  Well, I would go for the slight increase because valet parking for a one week stay will now cost $84.00.  I don't think the increase would be or should be that much.  I think Disney is looking for a way to make some money just like the airlines with their luggage and extra room charges.


The problem is that the increase would be that much and for no other reason but to reduce the costs of a relative few.  Basically you'd take the full price of the valet parking and divide it by the total members (points) AT THAT RESORT.  Thus you'd have other members directly subsidizing the perk.  There is not another perk or usage item at DVC that I can think of that is comparable.  The internet would be the closest comparable option but it is CHEAP and there is a significant savings to the total cost by having it spread over the entire membership, the exercise room is the other somewhat comparable option.  There are also other options that some don't use but we all pay for (pool, etc) but non as definable and easy to decide who to charge and how as valet parking.  IF they can negotiate a significant savings with the contractor, I hope they do so.  Even then it shouldn't be spread among other members unless there is a significant bottom line savings in doing so.  IMO there are criteria that should be met for any perk to be paid for by the membership as a whole.  These include considerations of a cheaper OVERALL cost by doing so (economy of scale), an option that a significant number of people use, an option that is difficult to separate who to charge and who not to (like pools) and items that are considered park of the basics at a similar resort.  DVC has always drawn a line between what is included and pay to play.  On one end you've got the All Inclusive type options like dining, water sports, etc and closer to the line you've got the daily housekeeping, towel packs, etc.  Ultimately the resort and system must look at the options and decide what's reasonable to just roll in to the fees vs having those that use an option pay for it.



ORD2KOA said:


> Am I the only one who thinks this makes no sense whatsoever? (I'm not saying your post doesn't make sense.) Could the vendor possibly be paying lower wages than Disney itself? Sheesh.


The contractor kept this option in place to get the bid originally, Disney and DVC were not paying money to the contractor for this option.  Thus the price went from 0 to $12 per car per day for either DVC or the member to pay.


----------



## Hopefully

Disney*All-Stars* said:


> According to what I've read in Disney Files, DVC members are no longer going to get free valet parking at DVC resorts.  Has any gotten upset over this?  I sure am.  That was the best perk and now my way of getting around (to and from resort, etc) is going to change a bit.  I am sorry for the valet parkers because I didn't mind tipping them.  The reason for this change is to not raise member dues according to the article.  Well, I would go for the slight increase because valet parking for a one week stay will now cost $84.00.  I don't think the increase would be or should be that much.  I think Disney is looking for a way to make some money just like the airlines with their luggage and extra room charges.



I would NOT go for the "slight increase" referred to by the OP since I never use valet parking. While I am sorry for those who lost a frequently used perk, I think this is a fair decision


----------



## CarolAnnC

Up


----------



## ORD2KOA

Tara said:


> I'm not following your question in relation to the post you quoted...what does the vendor wage have to do with it?
> 
> Yes, I think what tjkraz posted does make a lot of sense, and so does the decision to discontinue free valet parking. I wish it were still free as I've been an active user of the service, but I understand why it isn't now. I figure I'd pay for it one way or the other - through dues or through direct payment anyway. (And I continue to valet park and pay for it since the rule changed.)


 
I understand why it was pulled as a perk and I wasn't questioning tjkraz's post.  It just seems absolutely ridiculous to me that they would outsource the parking to another company to begin with.


----------



## crisi

ORD2KOA said:


> I understand why it was pulled as a perk and I wasn't questioning tjkraz's post.  It just seems absolutely ridiculous to me that they would outsource the parking to another company to begin with.



But it isn't.  The risk is on the vendor if the usage patterns change (which is what I suspect happened - the original contract was signed in a better economy where more cash guests used valet - when the economy tanked, the vendor wasn't breaking even on their staffing commitment for just cash guests - but they were parking all these DVC guests for FREE!).  The vendor contracts to provide the valet.  Disney doesn't have to worry about insurance for the valets, or valet service profitability - that becomes the vendor's problem.

Disney has a pretty good reputation for how they treat their employees.  Outsourcing anything allows them to have a vendor who has less employee overhead (i.e. doesn't pay as much, offers fewer benefits), while Disney maintains its reputation.


----------



## tgropp

Hopefully said:


> I would NOT go for the "slight increase" referred to by the OP since I never use valet parking. While I am sorry for those who lost a frequently used perk, I think this is a fair decision



How about another fair decision. NO more free internet in the rooms.....discounted annual passes.....as a matter of fact any other freebies that I do not use. I think that this would be a fair decision.


----------



## snowbunny

tgropp said:


> How about another fair decision. NO more free internet in the rooms.....discounted annual passes.....as a matter of fact any other freebies that I do not use. I think that this would be a fair decision.


 
While I'll miss the valet perk, these are completely different things. Free internet does not cost bupkis (that's why it's free at the Super 8 and every other budget chain), nor does a discounted annual pass involve money out of pocket for DVC.


----------



## Mickey'sApprentice

If you let me have free valet...I promise I won't use the fitness center.

Think about that one.


----------



## Maistre Gracey

Mickey'sApprentice said:


> If you let me have free valet...I promise I won't use the fitness center.
> 
> Think about that one.




MG


----------



## Chuck S

Mickey'sApprentice said:


> If you let me have free valet...I promise I won't use the fitness center.
> 
> Think about that one.



Fitness centers are becoming a common, and expected, amenity in average hotels, like Hampton Inn and Comfort Inn,  As is free internet, but not valet parking.

And the one-time cost to provide a few execise machines is nothing compared to funding at least 3 employees per shift, 3 shifts a day, 7 days a week.  24x7x3=504 employee hours per week, plus benefits, unemployment insurance, workmens comp, overhead...you're easily looking at $250K per year per resort.


----------



## Maistre Gracey

Chuck S said:


> Fitness centers are becoming a common, and expected, amenity in average hotels, like Hampton Inn and Comfort Inn,  As is free internet, but not valet parking.
> 
> And the one-time cost to provide a few execise machines is nothing compared to funding at least 3 employees per shift, 3 shifts a day, 7 days a week.  24x7x3=504 employee hours per week, plus benefits, unemployment insurance, workmens comp, overhead...you're easily looking at $250K per year per resort.


Exercise equipment is not a one time expense.. Commercial grade machines are usually updated every few years. In addition, it costs money to maintain them, and staff the facility.
A commercial machine is easily $5000.

Insurance for a gym/fitness room?? You can bet it's not cheap.

MG


----------



## Brian Noble

Trying to draw circles around some things, but not others, as "expected" doesn't seem to be very useful.

The bottom line is that anything not specifically spelled out as granted to purchasers in the POS can be taken away at any time.  That includes the AP discount, fitness centers (unless they are part of the declared condominium), and free internet.  As with all such decisions, whether they are or are not taken away will boil down to what's deemed (by Disney) to be best for Disney and its bottom line.


----------



## Maistre Gracey

Brian Noble said:


> Trying to draw circles around some things, but not others, as "expected" doesn't seem to be very useful.
> 
> The bottom line is that anything not specifically spelled out as granted to purchasers in the POS can be taken away at any time.  That includes the AP discount, fitness centers (unless they are part of the declared condominium), and free internet.  As with all such decisions, whether they are or are not taken away will boil down to what's deemed (by Disney) to be best for Disney and its bottom line.


The issue isn't whether or not it's "legal", but rather whether or not we are happy about it and rather see dues increase to maintain it.

MG


----------



## Dean

Brian Noble said:


> Trying to draw circles around some things, but not others, as "expected" doesn't seem to be very useful.
> 
> The bottom line is that anything not specifically spelled out as granted to purchasers in the POS can be taken away at any time.  That includes the AP discount, fitness centers (unless they are part of the declared condominium), and free internet.  As with all such decisions, whether they are or are not taken away will boil down to what's deemed (by Disney) to be best for Disney and its bottom line.


I'd agree to a point Brian but in this situation it really doesn't get to that point.  It's simply a decision by the Management company of what is and what is not appropriate costs to share between members vs what is appropriate to do pay to play. 



Maistre Gracey said:


> The issue isn't whether or not it's "legal", but rather whether or not we are happy about it and rather see dues increase to maintain it.
> 
> MG


 In terms of this former perk and assuming no further negotiations that alter the landscape, there is not one valid reason I can think of to share the costs across all members.  The only reason I've seen put forth in support of having everyone pay for this perk for the relative few simply boils down to the fact that some want the perk but want others to supplement their stays.  That there might be other perks that could be done pay to play that others don't use doesn't change that.





Maistre Gracey said:


> Exercise equipment is not a one time expense.. Commercial grade machines are usually updated every few years. In addition, it costs money to maintain them, and staff the facility.
> A commercial machine is easily $5000.
> 
> Insurance for a gym/fitness room?? You can bet it's not cheap.
> 
> MG


There's still a major cost difference between the 2.  I could certainly see that there is a cost to the fitness facilities and that it is also likely used by a relative minority.  However, as has been pointed out, there is a certain amount of expectation that a resort have this option, as there is a pool.  Plus there would be additional costs to make the fitness facilities pay to play in terms of front desk usage, dedicated personnel and the like.  It's likely the option would be to do away with those facilities rather than make them pay to play if a choice had to be made.  IMO it's a valid discussion whether we have fitness facilities and whether they be pay to play but it has nothing to do with the reasonableness of the various decisions regarding the valet parking options or any other resort components or perks.  Each option should be addressed on it's own merits taking into account how many people use it, whether there is a volume discount or price break if done across the membership, costs associated with either option and the expectations of the masses as it pertains to the perception of a resort.  Valet parking comes out on the short end of each and every component when considering spreading it across the entire membership.  Even then it wouldn't be the entire membership but only those that have valet parking options.


----------



## crisi

Are Disney's fitness centers staffed?  Most hotel fitness centers are not, in my experience, but I walk so much at Disney I've never bothered to run there.


----------



## BWV Dreamin

crisi said:


> Are Disney's fitness centers staffed? Most hotel fitness centers are not, in my experience, but I walk so much at Disney I've never bothered to run there.


 At BWV, it was the last time we were there (2008). At Vero Beach, no. So maybe it depends on the fitness center.


----------



## Anal Annie

Maistre Gracey said:


> The issue isn't whether or not it's "legal", but rather whether or not we are happy about it and rather see dues increase to maintain it.
> 
> MG



Oh for crying out loud.  This is the horse that just won't die isn't it!?

As someone who ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS uses DME I would NOT like to see MY dues go up so that someone else can drive and let someone else parking their freaking car for them.  

Just park it yourself and move on already people!


----------



## Dean

crisi said:


> Are Disney's fitness centers staffed?  Most hotel fitness centers are not, in my experience, but I walk so much at Disney I've never bothered to run there.


Not usually but they would likely have to staff them for all hours if done pay to play OR they would have to work out a controlled access system which would require other personnel costs.  Thus there would be added costs to do pay to play that I doubt could even be covered by the incomes generated.  That's why I speculated that the choice was between having the facilities or not rather than who pays for it.


----------



## Deb & Bill

Anal Annie said:


> ...As someone who ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS uses DME I would NOT like to see MY dues go up so that someone else can drive and let someone else parking their freaking car for them.  ...



I just hope my dues aren't paying for your DME.  Someone has to pay for it.


----------



## CarolMN

Deb & Bill said:


> I just hope my dues aren't paying for your DME.  Someone has to pay for it.


ME is a service that all the WDW on-site resorts offer, just like transportation to and from the parks & DD.  While I do not know for sure, it makes sense that the resorts fund those bus/monorail & boat transportation services.   And thus, I'm sure a portion of our dues are funding ME for the DVC resorts just as they fund the the other transportation services.


----------



## Maistre Gracey

Anal Annie said:


> Oh for crying out loud.  This is the horse that just won't die isn't it!?
> 
> As someone who ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS uses DME I would NOT like to see MY dues go up so that someone else can drive and let someone else parking their freaking car for them.
> 
> Just park it yourself and move on already people!


Sorry to upset you..
May I suggest that if you don't want to read this thread, don't open it. 
That technique works great for me with subjects I don't want to read. 

MG


----------



## Anal Annie

CarolMN said:


> ME is a service that all the WDW on-site resorts offer, just like transportation to and from the parks & DD.  While I do not know for sure, it makes sense that the resorts fund those bus/monorail & boat transportation services.   And thus, I'm sure a portion of our dues are funding ME for the DVC resorts just as they fund the the other transportation services.



I agree.  ME is a service that is available to everyone staying onsite without discrimination for which property you are staying at or whether it's for cash or on points.  It is free to all and it saves many families the additional cost of renting a car.  There are also some reservations at DVC resorts which are made on cash too.  I like that ME is colorblind to cash vs points and doesn't care if you're going to POP or to the Poly.  And FWIW we used the bus transportation way back when it was a Mears transfer that we had to pay for.  It was still cheaper than renting a car and for some of us on a budget the value it provides is unbeatable.   

I am not above parking my own little self if I DID have a car with me.  In fact, I would prefer it.  I just don't get the fuss.


----------



## Anal Annie

Maistre Gracey said:


> Sorry to upset you..
> May I suggest that if you don't want to read this thread, don't open it.
> That technique works great for me with subjects I don't want to read.
> 
> MG



I have been following this thread since the beginning and for the most part just read it.   But I just still can't believe some people are still harping over such a thing.    I will however read (and post) on any thread I want - but thank you very much for your suggestion tho.

(PS) shouldn't you be practicing for your Chip 'N Dales dance routine right now?


----------



## Maistre Gracey

Anal Annie said:


> I have been following this thread since the beginning and for the most part just read it.   But I just still can't believe some people are still harping over such a thing.    I will however read (and post) on any thread I want - but thank you very much for your suggestion tho.
> 
> (PS) shouldn't you be practicing for your Chip 'N Dales dance routine right now?


Fine, but if you choose to read the thread, you shouldn't berate somebody for posting on it. 

PS- I paid for my DVC with singles... 

MG


----------



## Brian Noble

> I paid for my DVC with singles



Then you need to find a higher-class club, MG.  You should be at least getting $20s in the VIP room.

I suspect (but don't know) that the resorts themselves do not pay for ME as a direct expense, because it is a loss-leader for the resort as a whole.  ME's goal is to create a captive audience that must spend every available minute and dollar of vacation time and money with the Mouse.  I am guessing that the per-cap numbers in Foods and Merchandise went up enough to more than offset the costs of running ME, else Disney would be charging for it by now.  Room rates certainly didn't spike up commensurate with the value of the transfers when it was introduced---not even close.

Edited: It's also possible that the resorts got a boost in RevPAR when it was introduced, by allowing Disney to offer fewer and less generous discounts because of the value of the transfers, but I don't recall that happening in any obvious way either, nor do I recall a statement in the Annual report about RevPAR jumping, but might not have been looking for it.  They were already at ~90% occupancy, give or take, so it wasn't just to fill rooms, but it might have been to fill rooms at a higher effective rate.

Edited again: now that I think about it, there might be enough information in the annual reports to answer this question.  They do report percentage changes in guest spending in both Resorts and Parks, so a spike in either would tell us where the ME profits accrue.


----------



## bumbershoot

crisi said:


> But it isn't.  The risk is on the vendor if the usage patterns change (which is what I suspect happened - the original contract was signed in a better economy where more cash guests used valet - when the economy tanked, the vendor wasn't breaking even on their staffing commitment for just cash guests - but they were parking all these DVC guests for FREE!).



That's the first time I've ever come close to understanding the whole "DVC valet parking" was entirely free from the vendor issue.  Thank you, Crisi!  Even if you're not totally correct with what you suspect (though it sounds reasonable), it was helpful to me.


----------



## Dano1182

Is it true that we no longer get free valet parking??

I thought this was a great perk.

Particulary when returning to DVC after a long day with the kids drop car at front door and carry them in .

Now I hear it will be 12 a day plus tips.
adds up to 60 bucks extra foe our next trip.
WHat will we lose next??


----------



## Happy Birthday Cat

Dano1182 said:


> Is it true that we no longer get free valet parking??



It is gone.  I liked it too but have adjusted my parking habits.  Here is a link to a lot of thoughts on the topic:

http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=2305423

HBC


----------



## Dano1182

I guess I am way behind on this.
I wonder if we will be charged for towels next


----------



## Chuck S

Dano1182 said:


> I guess I am way behind on this.
> I wonder if we will be charged for towels next



We are charged for towels...at least we were supposed to be charged for towels.  The rooms are cleaned when we arrive, then fresh towels on day 4 (or full cleaning if 8 nights or more).  If you need more towels, they are supposed to be $6 a pack of 4 bath towels/2 hand towels/4wash cloths and a mat.

It's been that way for years and years.


----------



## Anal Annie

Maistre Gracey said:


> Fine, but if you choose to read the thread, you shouldn't berate somebody for posting on it.
> 
> PS- I paid for my DVC with singles...
> 
> MG



Berate: To rebuke or scold harshly.

Scold: To reprimand or criticize harshly.

I really don't think I did either of those.   I didn't scold you.  All I said initally was that I can't believe this thread is still going - since OCTOBER no less!!  Good grief.  Over parking for crying out loud.  It's a done deal.  Can't we all move on?  It just amazes me that it's THAT big of deal to SOOOOOO many people.  I don't get it that's all.   It's parking.  I just don't see the fuss - it's a luxury and and I personally don't feel that all members should subsidize the cost if not all members USE it and am not bothered by the idea that my dues won't have to go up to pay for someone else to let someone park their car for them. 

Maybe they should've made it an option to go with certain ressies...like the extra benefits concierge guests get.  I'm OK with that if somebody wants to use an extra 2 more points per day to have it available or something.  I mean it's their points if they want to use them that way.  So to review MY opinion.  Dues for valet parking = no.  Cash for valet parking = yes and Points to valet park = yes.

Oh, and please don't respond to me again.  This is just my little 'ole opinion.  I don't think it's worth getting my panties in wad or my blood pressure up.  I am OVER it.  I am moving on.  Adios.  Ya'll enjoy the indigestion you're getting over it..  I'm gonna go find something else to fret over.


----------



## Tara

Dano1182 said:


> I guess I am way behind on this.
> I wonder if we will be charged for towels next



The fact is that your dues are already paying for general upkeep and things like towels. They were not previously paying for valet parking and when the vendor decided to discontinue the discount, DVC chose not to continue it by passing along the price to all members in the form of higher dues.


----------



## bumbershoot

Anal Annie said:


> It's a done deal.  Can't we all move on?  It just amazes me that it's THAT big of deal to SOOOOOO many people.  I don't get it that's all.



It's probably still going on because they only *just* announced it in the Disney Files mag.  So people who aren't usually on, or hadn't been on, the Dis, and hadn't used their points in awhile (or who had but perhaps took ME last time), are just now finding out about it.

Gotta give everyone a chance to find out about it, which is going to take some time.


----------



## Tara

Anal Annie said:


> Berate: To rebuke or scold harshly.
> 
> Scold: To reprimand or criticize harshly.
> 
> I really don't think I did either of those.   I didn't scold you.  All I said initally was that I can't believe this thread is still going - since OCTOBER no less!!  Good grief.  Over parking for crying out loud.  It's a done deal.  Can't we all move on?  It just amazes me that it's THAT big of deal to SOOOOOO many people.  I don't get it that's all.   It's parking.  I just don't see the fuss - it's a luxury and and I personally don't feel that all members should subsidize the cost if not all members USE it and am not bothered by the idea that my dues won't have to go up to pay for someone else to let someone park their car for them.
> 
> Maybe they should've made it an option to go with certain ressies...like the extra benefits concierge guests get.  I'm OK with that if somebody wants to use an extra 2 more points per day to have it available or something.  I mean it's their points if they want to use them that way.  So to review MY opinion.  Dues for valet parking = no.  Cash for valet parking = yes and Points to valet park = yes.
> 
> Oh, and please don't respond to me again.  This is just my little 'ole opinion.  I don't think it's worth getting my panties in wad or my blood pressure up.  I am OVER it.  I am moving on.  Adios.  Ya'll enjoy the indigestion you're getting over it..  I'm gonna go find something else to fret over.



Personally, I agree that it's surprising this thread is still going. Just an indication that some people feel strongly, though. BUT what I will say is that you shouldn't post to a thread and then expect people to not respond to you. That's not how discussion boards work. 



Anal Annie said:


> Oh for crying out loud. This is the horse that just won't die isn't it!?
> 
> As someone who ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS uses DME I would NOT like to see MY dues go up so that someone else can drive and let someone else parking their freaking car for them.



By the same token, why should I have any portion of my dues cover ME when I NEVER, NEVER, NEVER use it? I could say "I don't want to see my dues go up for someone who is too freaking cheap to rent a car." But that wouldn't be very fair, would it? Yet it's basically the same argument you are making.

I don't think dues should cover valet parking, either, for the record.


----------



## Dean

Tara said:


> By the same token, why should I have any portion of my dues cover ME when I NEVER, NEVER, NEVER use it? I could say "I don't want to see my dues go up for someone who is too freaking cheap to rent a car." But that wouldn't be very fair, would it? Yet it's basically the same argument you are making.
> 
> I don't think dues should cover valet parking, either, for the record.


IMO it's inappropriate to ask others to cover my fees, period.  For something to be covered I should be able to make a case for inclusion of that option that makes sense to most people that don't use the option and/or establish that most people do use a given options and see it as a valuable component of their resort.  Or I should be able to establish that there is a substantial economy of scale and that enough people use a given option to justify it at that cost level.  The other area includes things that most people would consider part of a resort and things that cost more trouble than it would be worth to worry about.  I can't imagine being selfish enough to say others should pay more simply because I want to pay less for anything.  ME may or may not meet the test in this context but valet parking certainly doesn't at this time.  Internet does both on the volume and economy of scale front.  Pools meet the test on both the usual component of a resort and cost to police fronts.


----------



## disneynutz

We are at BWV's and I decided to try and find out more info about the Valet changes.

Based on talking to employees at BWI and the DVC here is what I have put together. 

Prior to out sourcing the Valet service, There was an agreement between the DVC and the Disney Valets not to charge DVC Members. It is unclear if our dues paying for transportation subsidized the Valets for members but I suspect that they did receive some type of compensation.

Disney decided to out source the Valet service to Bags Inc. due to increasing wage costs and liability exposure. The Bags contract included free DVC Valet service but the DVC funds stopped because Bags is a outside company and not a Disney company.

The Bags employees who park your car and unload your car don't receive many tips, published tipping etiquette dictates that tips are paid when you pick up your car, not when you drop it off. The Bags employees put your luggage in the luggage room where a Disney Bell Services person picks up your luggage and delivers it to your room. The reason that you need to be present in your room is for tipping purposes.

When the new contract came due between Disney and Bags, Bags needed to remove the free DVC Valet clause because their employees weren't receiving many tips and they needed to increase their salaries to reduce employee turn over.

Disney was aware of the change months in advance, but decided to play dumb and remove the perk. I don't fault them for removing the perk but their no notice policy for DVC changes is getting old.

 Bill


----------



## dmoore22

Anal Annie said:


> Berate: To rebuke or scold harshly.
> 
> Scold: To reprimand or criticize harshly.
> 
> I really don't think I did either of those.   I didn't scold you.  All I said initally was that I can't believe this thread is still going - since OCTOBER no less!!  Good grief.  Over parking for crying out loud.  It's a done deal.  Can't we all move on?  It just amazes me that it's THAT big of deal to SOOOOOO many people.  I don't get it that's all.   It's parking.  I just don't see the fuss - it's a luxury and and I personally don't feel that all members should subsidize the cost if not all members USE it and am not bothered by the idea that my dues won't have to go up to pay for someone else to let someone park their car for them.
> 
> Maybe they should've made it an option to go with certain ressies...like the extra benefits concierge guests get.  I'm OK with that if somebody wants to use an extra 2 more points per day to have it available or something.  I mean it's their points if they want to use them that way.  So to review MY opinion.  Dues for valet parking = no.  Cash for valet parking = yes and Points to valet park = yes.
> 
> Oh, and please don't respond to me again.  This is just my little 'ole opinion.  I don't think it's worth getting my panties in wad or my blood pressure up.  I am OVER it.  I am moving on.  Adios.  Ya'll enjoy the indigestion you're getting over it..  I'm gonna go find something else to fret over.



I like the way you think. We've never used the valet parking since we purchased DVC nearly 10 years ago. On the whole the DVC perks are still much better than they were when we purchased our points. Like you I feel this thread has outlived its use life.


----------



## KAT4DISNEY

disneynutz said:


> The Bags employees who park your car and unload your car don't receive many tips, published tipping etiquette dictates that tips are paid when you pick up your car, not when you drop it off. The Bags employees put your luggage in the luggage room where a Disney Bell Services person picks up your luggage and delivers it to your room. The reason that you need to be present in your room is for tipping purposes.
> 
> When the new contract came due between Disney and Bags, Bags needed to remove the free DVC Valet clause because their employees weren't receiving many tips and they needed to increase their salaries to reduce employee turn over.



I'm a little confused by this Bill - isn't it the Bags company that always deal with the valet - ie, they are the one's that go and get your car also so they would be getting the standard accepted tip at time of car retrieval?

And anything dealing with luggage will be remaining the same so it doesn't seem applicable to valet.  The Bags people still won't be getting tips from that - whether that's right or wrong that needed to be worked about between Bags and Disney.  The problem would be that I don't think Disney could legally have any say in how tips are divided.  

What you were told seems like a story that was told to place blame upon DVC and/or Disney.  It still seems like Bags wanted to cut costs which would most likely mean reduced employees.  The only way they could do that was to cut out the free valet useage that probably required some additional employees.  Reducing the opportunity for tips seems counter intuitive to increasing an employees salary.


----------



## jekjones1558

Am I misunderstanding or have people not been tipping extra when the Bags valets unload baggage?  Although I dislike the new system because it means tipping twice for luggage handling (once to Bags valets, then again to Bell Services), I wouldn't dream of not tipping the valets who unload luggage.


----------



## Maistre Gracey

jekjones1558 said:


> Am I misunderstanding or have people not been tipping extra when the Bags valets unload baggage?  Although I dislike the new system because it means tipping twice for luggage handling (once to Bags valets, then again to Bell Services), I wouldn't dream of not tipping the valets who unload luggage.


I also tip both. Sometimes three times...
If my room isn't ready I end up tipping the valet, bell services when my stuff goes to storage, and then bell services again when they bring my stuff to the room. I could leave my stuff in the car so bell only has to handle things once, but the wife doesn't want stuff (such as her make-up) baking in the hot car. I must admit, I usually have my Sam Adams I don't want left in the car either.

MG


----------



## Maistre Gracey

jekjones1558 said:


> Am I misunderstanding or have people not been tipping extra when the Bags valets unload baggage?  Although I dislike the new system because it means tipping twice for luggage handling (once to Bags valets, then again to Bell Services), I wouldn't dream of not tipping the valets who unload luggage.


Just reread your post.. I think we are saying the same thing.

MG


----------



## KAT4DISNEY

jekjones1558 said:


> Am I misunderstanding or have people not been tipping extra when the Bags valets unload baggage?  Although I dislike the new system because it means tipping twice for luggage handling (once to Bags valets, then again to Bell Services), I wouldn't dream of not tipping the valets who unload luggage.



I don't understand why a guest would feel that they have to other than the fact that a tip is discretionary so you should always feel comfortable in doing as you wish.  

We do not unless there's a special situation or some extraordinary measure taken- although DH did once at VWL b/c of an extra beer or two.   First, that is not industry standard to tip twice for having your luggage taken to your room and I don't think it should be any different at Disney.  Second, it's not appropriate for a guest to even know that the business is outsourced and have to learn whether or not one group of people is receiving tips or if one is keeping it all to themselves.  To a guest everything should be seemless.

IF Bags has a problem with the agreement they have worked out then it is their responsibility to look out for their employees - not to have the guests compensate.  Frankly I wouldn't even know it was outsourced except for these boards and it wouldn't even cross my mind to tip differently anyway.


----------



## Dean

disneynutz said:


> WDisney was aware of the change months in advance, but decided to play dumb and remove the perk. I don't fault them for removing the perk but their no notice policy for DVC changes is getting old.


That Disney knew doesn't automatically mean that DVC was appropriately aware of what was going to happen.  They may have known but it's just as likely that the people you were talking to aren't up to speed on the specifics either.


----------



## Paging Tom Morrow




----------



## crisi

jekjones1558 said:


> Am I misunderstanding or have people not been tipping extra when the Bags valets unload baggage?  Although I dislike the new system because it means tipping twice for luggage handling (once to Bags valets, then again to Bell Services), I wouldn't dream of not tipping the valets who unload luggage.



As much as almost everyone on the DISBoards confesses to a pathological need to overtip (at least when talking about tipping on the internet) the sad reality is that a LOT of people don't tip at all.  Or certainly don't tip sufficiently to create a living wage.  And when Disney is handing off the luggage several times, a reasonable assumption by many guests is that they tip once, and that tips for the shift are pooled.  I shouldn't have to get out my stack of ones three times to get my luggage to my room.

Also, everyone should take the rumors they hear from the staff with a generous grain of salt.  I'm currently in a project at work where I'm working with our senior executive staff, then moving to implement about eight levels down in the organizational structure.  Eight levels down they don't have any clue what we knew when, why decisions were make, what the legal ramifications are.  Its funny to listen to the guys at the bottom talk about the whys, when I've been involved in the whys.  They are so far off is sad, and you can watch the growth of the rumors - but "need to know" keeps me from being able to correct them.  Hearing about the change from the valet - or even the hotel manager - is going to be about as accurate as the guesses on here.


----------



## MELSMICE

crisi said:


> Hearing about the change from the valet - or even the hotel manager - is going to be about as accurate as the guesses on here.


Probably the most intelligent thing said on this thread!!!!


----------



## BWV Dreamin

We usually always just take our bags up to the room ourselves.We travel mostly with carry-ons. If you really want to see a situation where you are tipping everytime you turn  around, try going to NYC!!!!!!


----------



## linney94

BWV Dreamin said:


> We usually always just take our bags up to the room ourselves.We travel mostly with carry-ons. If you really want to see a situation where you are tipping everytime you turn  around, try going to NYC!!!!!!




This made me smile! We stayed at the Waldorf Astoria many years ago and my FIRST introduction to being asked on the check to tip the restaurant manager as well as the server and his assistant!! We didn't!! I think we were much more brave back then!!! The servers 20% was enough.


----------



## Glamis

Anal Annie said:


> I just don't see the fuss - it's a luxury and and I personally don't feel that all members should subsidize the cost if not all members USE it and am not bothered by the idea that my dues won't have to go up to pay for someone else to let someone park their car for them.



Then get rid of free Magical Express and lower my dues. I never use that perk, and I know it is expensive as heck. Then all you folks who fly rather than drive can spend $100 on your nice free trip from the airport and back.

Don't like it so much when its "your" perk, eh?




Anal Annie said:


> Oh, and please don't respond to me again.  This is just my little 'ole opinion.



While this wasn't said to me, I have to say this: If you don't want people to respond, don't post your "little 'ole opinion" on a message board. 

Of course, I have a feeling - given your choice of username - you must be really new to the internet. I dare you to plug your username into a google image search. 

One of the MANY problems with this is that some of the resorts were clearly made with the free valet parking for DVC members in mind. Some of the parking lots are really far from the resort. 

The lack of valet parking is obviously not a big deal at all at places like OKW or SSR. But it is a pretty big deal at the Wilderness Lodge, Beach Club, and places like that.

This is a really lame change, and frankly, it disturbs me to see perks erode slowly over time.


----------



## Dean

Glamis said:


> Then get rid of free Magical Express and lower my dues. I never use that perk, and I know it is expensive as heck. Then all you folks who fly rather than drive can spend $100 on your nice free trip from the airport and back.
> 
> Don't like it so much when its "your" perk, eh?


This is not an issue of which perk one uses but one of reasonable and cost.  It would be unreasonable to spread the cost of such a program across the membership at a given resort given the current specifics (full price, limited overall usage, easy to define who & easy to convey those charges).  And it is unreasonable to expect others to pay for one's personal usage of ANY type, for anything, unless one can also make the case that there is a sufficient benefit to the group at large, significant cost to enforcement that outweighs pay to pay, significant difficulty in defining those who use it or a sufficient economy of scale such as occurs with the internet option.


----------



## tgropp

I put in a suggestion to member services that instead of a discount on AP's, discounts at certain restaurants, free movie rentals, magical express, free internet  and other perks, just give DVC members a credit of $50-100.00 and let people spend it on whatever perk they want, including valet parking. Still no answer yet.


----------



## Tara

tgropp said:


> I put in a suggestion to member services that instead of a discount on AP's, discounts at certain restaurants, free movie rentals, magical express, free internet  and other perks, just give DVC members a credit of $50-100.00 and let people spend it on whatever perk they want, including valet parking. Still no answer yet.



Are you kidding? My family saves $300 on APs a year, $10 per night on internet, and who knows what on food...$50-$100 is chump change! I sure hope they don't get any ideas like that.


----------



## wendypooh

tgropp said:


> I put in a suggestion to member services that instead of a discount on AP's, discounts at certain restaurants, free movie rentals, magical express, free internet  and other perks, just give DVC members a credit of $50-100.00 and let people spend it on whatever perk they want, including valet parking. Still no answer yet.



?? Is this a joke?  I sure hope so!



Tara said:


> Are you kidding? My family saves $300 on APs a year, $10 per night on internet, and who knows what on food...$50-$100 is chump change! I sure hope they don't get any ideas like that.



I agree............. we save a LOT more on AP's than the OP's idea......... I don't get it?


----------



## Dean

tgropp said:


> I put in a suggestion to member services that instead of a discount on AP's, discounts at certain restaurants, free movie rentals, magical express, free internet  and other perks, just give DVC members a credit of $50-100.00 and let people spend it on whatever perk they want, including valet parking. Still no answer yet.


I think  you're making the incorrect assumption that those perks cost DVC, they don't.  The discounts cost nothing, the internet almost nothing, the movies have a small cost but more in terms of personnel than anything else.  If you did away with ALL current perks you'd likely have no more than $15-20 per member savings.  It certainly wouldn't compensate for the costs of the valet parking at $12 per car per day.  Also, only the members who owned at a given resort would pay for it rather than the membership as a whole.


----------



## Chuck S

tgropp said:


> I put in a suggestion to member services that instead of a discount on AP's, discounts at certain restaurants, free movie rentals, magical express, free internet  and other perks, just give DVC members a credit of $50-100.00 and let people spend it on whatever perk they want, including valet parking. Still no answer yet.



Once again, it seems people do not understand discount perks.  Discounts on APs and dining are NOT member funded, so where would the money for this credit come from to "give" to members?  They are granted by the business to DVC members to encourage us to buy a product.

Just like an early bird senior dinner special at a restaurant is designed to create business during a slow time of day.  A discount is designed with specific results in mind.  If the valet parking contractor thinks they need more business, they are free to give a discounted rate to DVC Members, not funded by dues.  If the contractor is happy with the current level of parking income, there is no reason for them to give a discount, and certainly no reason for dues to fund a full price perk from dues.


----------



## Tara

chuck s said:


> once again, it seems people do not understand discount perks.  Discounts on aps and dining are not member funded, so where would the money for this credit come from "give" to members?  They are granted by the business to dvc members to encourage us to buy a product.
> 
> Just like an early bird senior dinner special at a restaurant is designed to create business during a slow time of day.  A discount is designed with specific results in mind.  If the valet parking contractor thinks they need more business, they are free to give a discounted rate to dvc members, not funded by dues.  If the contractor is happy with the current level of parking income, there is no reason for them to give a discount, and certainly no reason for dues to fund a full price perk from dues.



exactly!


----------



## Glamis

Dean said:


> This is not an issue of which perk one uses but one of reasonable and cost.



Magical Express costs a ton more than free valet parking. If this issue is cost, then ME would have been one of the first to go. 

This is an issue of DVC/Disney knowing what they can get away with to grind out more profit for themselves, and making us bear the burden. That's what I don't like. Frankly, its something I have seen erode Disney World in general over the last 10 years. It is something that worries and concerns me greatly.



Dean said:


> It would be unreasonable to spread the cost of such a program across the membership at a given resort given the current specifics (full price, limited overall usage, easy to define who & easy to convey those charges).  And it is unreasonable to expect others to pay for one's personal usage of ANY type, for anything, unless one can also make the case that there is a sufficient benefit to the group at large, significant cost to enforcement that outweighs pay to pay, significant difficulty in defining those who use it or a sufficient economy of scale such as occurs with the internet option.



So again, get rid of the Magical Express then. Make people pay for it. I never use it. Why should my dues subsidize people who use it? A small percentage of DVC owners use it and yet it costs a lot.

Disney created this problem with the way they handle valet parking. They should have negotiated the perk in whenever they outsourced it. Its not like they don't have any leverage.

And as I already noted: some resorts have HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE parking. This was ameliorated by the fact that at least valet parking was free.

NOTE: I am not actually advocating the removal of the ME perk. I mention that because it is monstrously expensive, it is used by a tiny percentage of DVC owners, and I imagine those who use it sure as heck wouldn't be "just fine with it" were it removed.


----------



## Chuck S

Glamis said:


> Magical Express costs a ton more than free valet parking.
> 
> 
> 
> So again, get rid of the Magical Express then. Make people pay for it. I never use it. Why should my dues subsidize people who use it? A small percentage of DVC owners use it and yet it costs a lot.
> 
> Disney created this problem with the way they handle valet parking. They should have negotiated the perk in whenever they outsourced it. Its not like they don't have any leverage.
> 
> And as I already noted: some resorts have HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE parking. This was ameliorated by the fact that at least valet parking was free.
> 
> NOTE: I am not actually advocating the removal of the ME perk. I mention that because it is monstrously expensive, it is used by a tiny percentage of DVC owners, and I imagine those who use it sure as heck wouldn't be "just fine with it" were it removed.



While I drive to WDW, and have never used Magical Express, I think a much higher percentage of overall membership uses ME than ever used free valet.

We also do not know exactly how ME is funded.  If it is resort funded, the the cost is split at the shared resorts, like BWV/BWI, so overall, probably less of an impact on dues than funding valet.  At least I didn't notice a huge increase in dues at OKW for ME, and it is a large, freestanding, fully sold DCV resort that doesn't split transportation costs with a cash resort.  So I do wonder how ME is funded, and where it is reflected in the budget.


----------



## Glamis

Dean said:


> I think  you're making the incorrect assumption that those perks cost DVC, they don't.  The discounts cost nothing, the internet almost nothing, the movies have a small cost but more in terms of personnel than anything else.  If you did away with ALL current perks you'd likely have no more than $15-20 per member savings.  It certainly wouldn't compensate for the costs of the valet parking at $12 per car per day.  Also, only the members who owned at a given resort would pay for it rather than the membership as a whole.



Well said.

And don't get me started on the internet. The fact that they ripped people off on that for so long is something I am still quite bitter about.


----------



## Glamis

Chuck S said:


> While I drive to WDW, and have never used Magical Express, I think a much higher percentage of overall membership uses ME than ever used free valet.
> 
> We also do not know exactly how ME is funded.  If it is resort funded, the the cost is split at the shared resorts, like BWV/BWI, so overall, probably less of an impact on dues than funding valet.



Just to be clear, I said a lot less people use ME than those who use it, which means the majority is paying for something expensive for the benefit of a small minority. I did not say more people used valet than ME.

Furthermore, I'd find it almost impossible to believe that ME is less expensive of a perk than free valet. Furthermore, I must again stress that Disney could have easily negotiated it in if the company wanted to win the contract. Whoever wins the contract gets to charge that absolutely asinine rip off price of $12 to everyone else on top of tips.


----------



## Chuck S

Glamis said:


> Just to be clear, I said a lot less people use ME than those who use it, which means the majority is paying for something expensive for the benefit of a small minority. I did not say more people used valet than ME.
> 
> Furthermore, I'd find it almost impossible to believe that ME is less expensive of a perk than free valet. Furthermore, I must again stress that Disney could have easily negotiated it in if the company wanted to win the contract. Whoever wins the contract gets to charge that absolutely asinine rip off price of $12 to everyone else on top of tips.



I'd hardly estimate a small minority of guests use ME.  I think it is a relativly large percentage of guests, still a minority, but not a small minority.  And again, we don't know exactly how it is funded.

If 3 out of 4 cars at BWV/BWI that were valet parked were DVCers, then that means the contractor made $3 per car, and would need additional employees to cover the the extra cars.  Tips don't go into the employers pocket, they need to pay a set wage per hour of $4.23.  Plus accounting costs, taxes, benefits and insurance.  I can see why the contractor wanted to discontinue the free perk.


----------



## Sammie

You have to remember though that Disney and DVC are not one and the same. Considering concierge guests pay for valet I am surprised DVC got it for free as long as they did.


----------



## Tara

Glamis said:


> Whoever wins the contract gets to charge that absolutely asinine rip off price of $12 to everyone else on top of tips.



Now I've agreed with your other post here fully, but on this bit, we differ. Valet parking at Disney is one of the great deals of travel in general.


----------



## Glamis

Tara said:


> Now I've agreed with your other post here fully, but on this bit, we differ. Valet parking at Disney is one of the great deals of travel in general.



$12 per day plus tips for valet parking on property we own? That's the worst deal ever. 

And again, I must stress, some resorts were clearly designed with the perk in mind as parking is really far from the resort. 



Chuck S said:


> If 3 out of 4 cars at BWV/BWI that were valet parked were DVCers, then that means the contractor made $3 per car, and would need additional employees to cover the the extra cars.  Tips don't go into the employers pocket, they need to pay a set wage per hour of $4.23.  Plus accounting costs, taxes, benefits and insurance.  I can see why the contractor wanted to discontinue the free perk.



Then go with a contractor who wanted the easy business more. 

Plenty of valet companies make money on a lot less than $3 per car.


----------



## Dean

Glamis said:


> Magical Express costs a ton more than free valet parking. If this issue is cost, then ME would have been one of the first to go.
> 
> This is an issue of DVC/Disney knowing what they can get away with to grind out more profit for themselves, and making us bear the burden. That's what I don't like. Frankly, its something I have seen erode Disney World in general over the last 10 years. It is something that worries and concerns me greatly.


We don't know what ME costs are passed on to DVC, the cost of the program itself are irrelevant to this discussion, only what it costs DVC and only then as a point of reference.  ME, like any other option, needs to be evaluated on it's own merit and a decision made somewhat independent of the valet question.  It could be that both could be evaluated and not make the cut or only one or the other would continue in such a consideration.  This is not Disney getting away with anything but rather DVCMC making a decision about a specific issue that went from free to $12 per day per car. The choices they had was to either raise dues so others would directly pay for the usage of those that did use it OR to do pay to play.  Given those choices, there really is only ONE choice IMO.  





> So again, get rid of the Magical Express then. Make people pay for it. I never use it. Why should my dues subsidize people who use it? A small percentage of DVC owners use it and yet it costs a lot.
> 
> Disney created this problem with the way they handle valet parking. They should have negotiated the perk in whenever they outsourced it. Its not like they don't have any leverage.
> 
> And as I already noted: some resorts have HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE parking. This was ameliorated by the fact that at least valet parking was free.
> 
> NOTE: I am not actually advocating the removal of the ME perk. I mention that because it is monstrously expensive, it is used by a tiny percentage of DVC owners, and I imagine those who use it sure as heck wouldn't be "just fine with it" were it removed.


Again, it's an independent issue and it appears that only a relatively small percentage of the costs may be passed on to DVC.  It's certainly fair to advocate evaluation of the option on the same terms one would use for the free valet parking.  The other big difference with ME is there is a significant economy of scale that is not seen with valet parking.  Now if DVC could negotiate a great rate that was predicated on the perk being open to everyone, a different decision might be appropriate.  Something like $12 per day pay to play or the equivalent of say $3 per car per day if it were open to all.  But even at $1 a day, it would be inappropriate to spread those costs to everyone UNLESS the agreement required the universal availability to get a discount.

The bottom line in this case is simply who's going to pay for something that only a small percent of people use, where each group can be easily identified, and where enforcement is simple.  IMO, it is as simple as whether those that use it pay or they ask everyone to pay for their usage.  There is not a single situation when it's appropriate for one member to ask another member to pay for their usage.  There are certainly many situations where it's appropriate for the system to spread costs among all members.


----------



## Dean

Glamis said:


> $12 per day plus tips for valet parking on property we own? That's the worst deal ever.
> 
> And again, I must stress, some resorts were clearly designed with the perk in mind as parking is really far from the resort.


Comparatively speaking, valet parking at Disney is cheaper than most.  Heck a lot of places that are somewhat comparable and allow self parking charge $12 or more to do so.  It's not that $12 a day is cheap but it's not bad taken in context.


----------



## linney94

Just a thought! What if....... whenever points are bought the member receives the "perks" that are current ALWAYS!!!!!!!This way there would be no unhappy members as the supposedly level playing field would be just that!That member would receive the usual membership card with appropiate "perks" attached and would just need to have it swiped whenever! Hey presto-I'm a 16 year along the line member-and deeply regret "ALL" of the MANY "PERKS!!!" we have said goodbye to-which were part of the buying decision at the time.We love owning, BUT are also VERY SAD that IMHO the product we purchased and the ethos of 1994 is a completly different animal now!!


----------



## Dean

linney94 said:


> Just a thought! What if....... whenever points are bought the member receives the "perks" that are current ALWAYS!!!!!!!This way there would be no unhappy members as the supposedly level playing field would be just that!That member would receive the usual membership card with appropiate "perks" attached and would just need to have it swiped whenever! Hey presto-I'm a 16 year along the line member-and deeply regret "ALL" of the MANY "PERKS!!!" we have said goodbye to-which were part of the buying decision at the time.We love owning, BUT are also VERY SAD that IMHO the product we purchased and the ethos of 1994 is a completly different animal now!!


Actually every member gets the perks that were guaranteed at the time of purchase subject to the legal rules that apply.  Perks cannot be guaranteed going forward, there's really no way other than to give no perks at all.  Even many of the things in the POS and related info will change over time and for many it will be for the negative.  Banking/borrowing may go away at some point for example.  We too have been members for 16 years and excluding the free passes (which weren't perks in the true sense), I'd say the body of benefits now is as good as it's ever been overall.


----------



## linney94

Dean said:


> Actually every member gets the perks that were guaranteed at the time of purchase subject to the legal rules that apply.  Perks cannot be guaranteed going forward, there's really no way other than to give no perks at all.  Even many of the things in the POS and related info will change over time and for many it will be for the negative.  Banking/borrowing may go away at some point for example.  We too have been members for 16 years and excluding the free passes (which weren't perks in the true sense), I'd say the body of benefits now is as good as it's ever been overall.



It's always good to share opinions. We will have to agree to disagree. I  will miss valet parking without any doubt.We use it every single day of our stay,and will continue to do so and part with the $12.


----------



## tgropp

wendypooh said:


> ?? Is this a joke?  I sure hope so!
> 
> I agree............. we save a LOT more on AP's than the OP's idea......... I don't get it?



  Yes. Sorry, but my comedy routine must be a bit rusty.


----------



## Dean

linney94 said:


> It's always good to share opinions. We will have to agree to disagree. I  will miss valet parking without any doubt.We use it every single day of our stay,and will continue to do so and part with the $12.


That things should not change for the buyer from the minute they purchase even including perks that are not legally based?  We definitely disagree on that one, even the ones that are legally based can change.


----------



## Chuck S

linney94 said:


> Just a thought! What if....... whenever points are bought the member receives the "perks" that are current ALWAYS!!!!!!!This way there would be no unhappy members as the supposedly level playing field would be just that!That member would receive the usual membership card with appropiate "perks" attached and would just need to have it swiped whenever! Hey presto-I'm a 16 year along the line member-and deeply regret "ALL" of the MANY "PERKS!!!" we have said goodbye to-which were part of the buying decision at the time.We love owning, BUT are also VERY SAD that IMHO the product we purchased and the ethos of 1994 is a completly different animal now!!



Many of the discount perks are offered by a non-Disney operated business.  For instance, Fulton's occasionally offers a 30% discount to members.  Are you actually saying, that in order for Fulton's to offer that perk, it should need to be a PERMANENT perk for members that purchase during the time period that they offer it?  If that is what you are saying, perks would disappear completely before any business would commit to a permanent discount.

Are you saying that if you purchased DVC during the time that the DDP included tip and appetizer for $38, that the price should never increase and it should always include tip and appetizer.  If that were true, DDP would never have been made available to DVC at all.


----------



## Deb & Bill

We didn't use the free valet parking often, but it was helpful at VWL (we have only stayed at BWV once and won't stay there again). I was just in New Orleans last week - stayed at a hotel in the French Quarter on business.  Valet parking was $30 a day and there was no self parking anywhere close by.  If you did find self parking it was about $24 a day. 

I'll be going to Atlanta next week, again on business.  This time no car, but if I did have a car, valet parking would again be $30 a night.  

So while I hate to pay for valet parking unless my employer is reimbursing me, $12 isn't really all that bad.


----------



## DebbieB

Dean said:


> That things should not change for the buyer from the minute they purchase even including perks that are not legally based?  We definitely disagree on that one, even the ones that are legally based can change.



That idea could also work against the member.   My favorite perk is the $100 AP discount.  That was not there when I bought.  So if perks had to remain the same as the time purchased, I would not have that.

Valet was free for everyone when I bought, so it was not listed as a DVC perk.


----------



## Tara

linney94 said:


> Just a thought! What if....... whenever points are bought the member receives the "perks" that are current ALWAYS!!!!!!!This way there would be no unhappy members as the supposedly level playing field would be just that!



No unhappy members??!!!?? I'm sorry, but that's never, ever going to happen. People tend to want not what the got, but anything they perceive as better. You ever watch what happens when incentives change right after someone buys in? And just how much do you think it would cost to administer every type of perk and keep up with who gets what? Sorry, I don't want my dues going up to allegedly "level the playing field" and I don't think differing perks make it level anyway.


----------



## crisi

I'm 90% sure that Disney funds ME as a marketing expense and not out of an operations budget.  That keeps their gross profit margin high, and puts the expenses in SG&A.  SG&A expenses are considered by the financial community as more "disposable" and easily cut, where CoGS isn't.  So that would make their income statement look a lot better.  If that is where it is, it won't show up in our dues (and we are functionally "free riders" on the marketing for the resorts).

They could be funding it out of operations, but I really doubt they would.  I suspect when they tire of it as a marketing expense they'll start charging for it.  Right now, it continues to keep people on property and away from spending their dollars at Universal.


----------



## Tara

crisi said:


> They could be funding it out of operations, but I really doubt they would.  I suspect when they tire of it as a marketing expense they'll start charging for it.  Right now, it continues to keep people on property and away from spending their dollars at Universal.



Which is precisely why they'd never choose to cut it over cutting free valet to DVC members (assuming free valet actually cost them money). Free valet doesn't really MAKE them any money. ME keeps money inside the gates.


----------



## NewDCLGuy

Chuck S said:


> We also do not know exactly how ME is funded.


 I've got no complaints about the perks we do and don't get. Disappointments maybe, but no complaints. 

However, I do think it ridiculous we aren't told how our money is spent by the company we hire to run the resorts for us. If we are paying for ME, it shouldn't be a secret.


----------



## linney94

Chuck S said:


> Many of the discount perks are offered by a non-Disney operated business.  For instance, Fulton's occasionally offers a 30% discount to members.  Are you actually saying, that in order for Fulton's to offer that perk, it should need to be a PERMANENT perk for members that purchase during the time period that they offer it?  If that is what you are saying, perks would disappear completely before any business would commit to a permanent discount.
> 
> Are you saying that if you purchased DVC during the time that the DDP included tip and appetizer for $38, that the price should never increase and it should always include tip and appetizer.  If that were true, DDP would never have been made available to DVC at all.



Gosh, I have obviously aroused deep feelings! Actually,on reflection,my reference to "perks" was misguided. When we joined in 1994 we enjoyed;free valet parking;full clean on points quicker than now,and on trash and tidy day the beds were changed!;towels replenished whenever we needed;unreserved pool hopping-seasons or specific pools;we also had the option of calling for extra coffee,tea ect. which actually we thought was def. a step too far and should need to be paid for!,but none the less it was available to others-we are never looking for a free ride! I could go on but feel sure you get my gist.These are what I was refering to in my earlier post,and having read the curt replies realised my mistake in considering them perks.Non the less they have disapperared and detract from the "Disney" experience for us. Lastly, pool hopping for us is BIG. Having used Disney hotels and then DVC for 30 odd years now, we seldom-if ever-go into the parks. Our time at WDW and DC is spent lazing by the pools,shopping,and using the resort restaurants in the evening.We therefore miss the variety of pools with the constant limitations impossed by DVC. From our observations at Christmas when we have NEVER seen a pool that is anywhere near capacity(far too cold) we wonder why!! it's restricted.P.S. never have never will want or need DDP.


----------



## tjkraz

Glamis said:


> $12 per day plus tips for valet parking on property we own? That's the worst deal ever.



$12 is the fee for the service provided...not for use of the land.  There is land available for member use with upkeep funded by member dues.  It's called self parking.  

As for the value, Universal hotels charge guests $15 per day for self parking and $25 per day for valet.  In metropolitan areas you'll pay far more than $12 per day for either self parking or valet.  



> Then go with a contractor who wanted the easy business more.



When you're giving away the service for free, it isn't called "business", it's called a hand-out.  

Why would any company settle for an average of $3 per car when they could earn $12 per vehicle?

Perhaps they would have been willing to continue the free service if DVC members were good tippers.  That way at least the staff could receive additional compensation.  Unfortunately most valet parking attendants will tell you that--as a whole--DVC members are notoriously poor tippers.  Apparently in the minds of many, "free parking" means no out of pocket expense whatsoever.  Too bad.


----------



## Chuck S

linney94 said:


> Gosh, I have obviously aroused deep feelings! Actually,on reflection,my reference to "perks" was misguided. When we joined in 1994 we enjoyed;free valet parking;full clean on points quicker than now,and on trash and tidy day the beds were changed!;towels replenished whenever we needed;unreserved pool hopping-seasons or specific pools;we also had the option of calling for extra coffee,tea ect. which actually we thought was def. a step too far and should need to be paid for!,but none the less it was available to others-we are never looking for a free ride! I could go on but feel sure you get my gist.These are what I was refering to in my earlier post,and having read the curt replies realised my mistake in considering them perks.Non the less they have disapperared and detract from the "Disney" experience for us. Lastly, pool hopping for us is BIG. Having used Disney hotels and then DVC for 30 odd years now, we seldom-if ever-go into the parks. Our time at WDW and DC is spent lazing by the pools,shopping,and using the resort restaurants in the evening.We therefore miss the variety of pools with the constant limitations impossed by DVC. From our observations at Christmas when we have NEVER seen a pool that is anywhere near capacity(far too cold) we wonder why!! it's restricted.P.S. never have never will want or need DDP.



Why do you beleive that the holiday pool hopping restrictions are imposed by DVC?  Even the original SAB and AKV restriction would have been imposed by Disney Resorts, as AKV did not have a DVC component when the AKV restriction was originally imposed.  I would venture to guess they are imposed by Disney Resorts.  DVC would have no particular interest in imposing pool hopping restriction to cash resorts, like the Poly or Grand Floridian, but Disney Resorts would. DVC resorts were never actually designed to allow pool hopping, as our contracts state that use of the recreational facilities is not granted to members by virtue of our ownership (ie no unlimited day use for lcoal area owners), but by virtue of our staying at the resort.  I'm actually a little surprised pool hopping is still offered at all, given modern security concerns.

I don't think we were ever supposed to actually receive fresh sheets on Trash & Tidy day, sometimes we would, sometimes we would not, it varied. Otherwise there would have been no point in specifically  designating it as anything other than a full housekeeping day.

While you may not like losing the the free valet perk, it really is hard to complain about losing something that was granted as a courtesy by an outside vendor and not funded by dues.  Remember that if it is eventually dues funded, that SSR, OKW and offsite owners would likely not pay into the funding...as dues are tied to actual operational expenses at a particular resort.  I doubt they could legally justify owners that do not have the service at their home resort paying into it.  It certainly could no be considered a resort expense or even a common management item at resorts that don;t offer the service.


----------



## Dean

DebbieB said:


> That idea could also work against the member.   My favorite perk is the $100 AP discount.  That was not there when I bought.  So if perks had to remain the same as the time purchased, I would not have that.
> 
> Valet was free for everyone when I bought, so it was not listed as a DVC perk.


Not only would it likely mean no access to any possible future perks as you might see if DVC had VIP plans, as Chuck pointed out, it'd almost certainly mean the end of any such perks that were not contractual because it would be impossible to guarantee such perks going forward.



NewDCLGuy said:


> I've got no complaints about the perks we do and don't get. Disappointments maybe, but no complaints.
> 
> However, I do think it ridiculous we aren't told how our money is spent by the company we hire to run the resorts for us. If we are paying for ME, it shouldn't be a secret.


You are entitled to the info that DVCMC spends but not anything else including the resort budgets or DVC and this includes exchange contracts.  Often you must present yourself in person with an appointment to get much of the info.  I'm not very knowledgeable about how ME is paid but my recollection is there was a % of the expense that was passed on to resort management including in the transportation realm but not all, that it was essentially a shared expense.  Hopefully someone knows for sure and can be more specific about this exact issue.



linney94 said:


> Gosh, I have obviously aroused deep feelings! Actually,on reflection,my reference to "perks" was misguided. When we joined in 1994 we enjoyed;free valet parking;full clean on points quicker than now,and on trash and tidy day the beds were changed!;towels replenished whenever we needed;unreserved pool hopping-seasons or specific pools;we also had the option of calling for extra coffee,tea ect. which actually we thought was def. a step too far and should need to be paid for!,but none the less it was available to others-we are never looking for a free ride! I could go on but feel sure you get my gist.These are what I was refering to in my earlier post,and having read the curt replies realised my mistake in considering them perks.Non the less they have disapperared and detract from the "Disney" experience for us. Lastly, pool hopping for us is BIG. Having used Disney hotels and then DVC for 30 odd years now, we seldom-if ever-go into the parks. Our time at WDW and DC is spent lazing by the pools,shopping,and using the resort restaurants in the evening.We therefore miss the variety of pools with the constant limitations impossed by DVC. From our observations at Christmas when we have NEVER seen a pool that is anywhere near capacity(far too cold) we wonder why!! it's restricted.P.S. never have never will want or need DDP.


IF you've been a member 16 years, there were no DVC resorts with valet parking when you joined.  This didn't come along until 1996 with BWV.  At the time ALL valet parking at Disney resorts was free if I understand correctly, this changed for every one else where they had to pay some time ago.   Also, the full cleaning on points was the same other than the relative timing for a stay 8 nights or longer.

Certainly there have been changes.  No more special check in desk for members, no more cloth colored napkins, print shower curtains, etc.  None of these are really material issues but more emotional ones, IMO.  While there have ben changes, the basics are still really the same, home resort priority, banking options (minor variations), etc.  You should expect PH to become more and more restricted and to eventually be eliminated.


----------



## linney94

Chuck S said:


> Why do you beleive that the holiday pool hopping restrictions are imposed by DVC?  Even the original SAB and AKV restriction would have been imposed by Disney Resorts, as AKV did not have a DVC component when the AKV restriction was originally imposed.  I would venture to guess they are imposed by Disney Resorts.  DVC would have no particular interest in imposing pool hopping restriction to cash resorts, like the Poly or Grand Floridian, but Disney Resorts would. DVC resorts were never actually designed to allow pool hopping, as our contracts state that use of the recreational facilities is not granted to members by virtue of our ownership (ie no unlimited day use for lcoal area owners), but by virtue of our staying at the resort.  I'm actually a little surprised pool hopping is still offered at all, given modern security concerns.
> 
> I don't think we were ever supposed to actually receive fresh sheets on Trash & Tidy day, sometimes we would, sometimes we would not, it varied. Otherwise there would have been no point in specifically  designating it as anything other than a full housekeeping day.
> 
> While you may not like losing the the free valet perk, it really is hard to complain about losing something that was granted as a courtesy by an outside vendor and not funded by dues.  Remember that if it is eventually dues funded, that SSR, OKW and offsite owners would likely not pay into the funding...as dues are tied to actual operational expenses at a particular resort.  I doubt they could legally justify owners that do not have the service at their home resort paying into it.  It certainly could no be considered a resort expense or even a common management item at resorts that don;t offer the service.



Why would I not beleive that "pool hopping" restrictions were imposed by DVC? I certianly do not have or need your obvious in depth knowledge, I was merely joing in on discussion, as a DVC member with a personal opinion of how my holiday experience is changing.As for security questions-all Disney resort/hotels are to my knowledge fully open to the guests that are using the parks!-of course NOT the POOLS-and as such they are able to wander within the hotels,restaurants,gift shops ect. ect.The valet parking issue, again,how would I know that this was a "courtesy" from the resort? and not from DVC?Reading these last few replies I am now thinking that we come from very different corners. We purchased   DVC  to continue to experience great holidays with and without our extended family for many years to come.We have mostly achieved this,but the small print in the huge "offering Statement" would never have been a huge priority of ours.We trust anything that has Disney involved! I will now begin to "Plough" through it! Thank-you.


----------



## linney94

Dean said:


> Not only would it likely mean no access to any possible future perks as you might see if DVC had VIP plans, as Chuck pointed out, it'd almost certainly mean the end of any such perks that were not contractual because it would be impossible to guarantee such perks going forward.
> 
> You are entitled to the info that DVCMC spends but not anything else including the resort budgets or DVC and this includes exchange contracts.  Often you must present yourself in person with an appointment to get much of the info.  I'm not very knowledgeable about how ME is paid but my recollection is there was a % of the expense that was passed on to resort management including in the transportation realm but not all, that it was essentially a shared expense.  Hopefully someone knows for sure and can be more specific about this exact issue.
> 
> IF you've been a member 16 years, there were no DVC resorts with valet parking when you joined.  This didn't come along until 1996 with BWV.  At the time ALL valet parking at Disney resorts was free if I understand correctly, this changed for every one else where they had to pay some time ago.   Also, the full cleaning on points was the same other than the relative timing for a stay 8 nights or longer.
> 
> Certainly there have been changes.  No more special check in desk for members, no more cloth colored napkins, print shower curtains, etc.  None of these are really material issues but more emotional ones, IMO.  While there have ben changes, the basics are still really the same, home resort priority, banking options (minor variations), etc.  You should expect PH to become more and more restricted and to eventually be eliminated.



Just noted the emphasis on "IF".  I apologise for forgetting that 16 years ago that we could not valet park until 1996.When we began using our points we always had a minimum stay of 14 nights-air travel involved-and full clean and trash and tidy windows were different.We now use our points differently and as such  rather than wait for full clean pay to have this done.DVC member since 1994!


----------



## Dean

linney94 said:


> Just noted the emphasis on "IF".  I apologise for forgetting that 16 years ago that we could not valet park until 1996.When we began using our points we always had a minimum stay of 14 nights-air travel involved-and full clean and trash and tidy windows were different.We now use our points differently and as such  rather than wait for full clean pay to have this done.DVC member since 1994!


IIRC, the only real difference in the housekeeping and trash/towel was the relative timing, not the frequency or number of nights required.  T/T was a more robust service early on and was called Trash & Tidy.



linney94 said:


> Why would I not beleive that "pool hopping" restrictions were imposed by DVC? I certianly do not have or need your obvious in depth knowledge, I was merely joing in on discussion, as a DVC member with a personal opinion of how my holiday experience is changing.As for security questions-all Disney resort/hotels are to my knowledge fully open to the guests that are using the parks!-of course NOT the POOLS-and as such they are able to wander within the hotels,restaurants,gift shops ect. ect.The valet parking issue, again,how would I know that this was a "courtesy" from the resort? and not from DVC?Reading these last few replies I am now thinking that we come from very different corners. We purchased   DVC  to continue to experience great holidays with and without our extended family for many years to come.We have mostly achieved this,but the small print in the huge "offering Statement" would never have been a huge priority of ours.We trust anything that has Disney involved! I will now begin to "Plough" through it! Thank-you.


The PH was restricted based on the volume/capacity for BC/YC  and for the high demand times and based on minimizing the number people floating around the resort at AKL that were not staying there from a pool and general experience POV.  Ultimately the notification of the members, and the enforcement and management to a degree, falls to DVC.  I'm sure there were discussion/negotiations that likely included removing all PH as a one option.  My interpretation has always been that the restrictions were DVC's way of trying to save the program rather than a DVC initiated reduction of PH.  If any new resorts are built at the deluxe resorts, I suspect PH will not be included and that the entire resort would be removed as a PH option.  You really should read the POS, it's actually best to do so before buying.  

While buying a timeshare constitutes a certain amount of trust even if you read and understand all the legal offerings, just going on trust alone is a risky approach.  If nothing else your view of what the expectations are and the companies view of what they're providing may be different.

As for the expectation that DVC should have told you it was a free courtesy, there was no need for several reasons.  It didn't matter until the issue came up with this round of valet negotiations.  I'm sure you knew, or should have known, that the options/perks not provided for legally could go away at any time on a whim.  Even the portions controlled legally can all change, MOST without member input.

I know people who assumed everything told to them by the timeshare company was true, that it was complete and that it could not change.  The timeshare sales people call them .....sucker, patsy, an easy mark, etc.


----------



## DVCPAT

Dean said:


> As for the expectation that DVC should have told you it was a free courtesy, there was no need for several reasons.  It didn't matter until the issue came up with this round of valet negotiations.  I'm sure you knew, or should have known, that the options/perks not provided for legally could go away at any time on a whim.  Even the portions controlled legally can all change, MOST without member input.
> 
> I know people who assumed everything told to them by the timeshare company was true, that it was complete and that it could not change.  The timeshare sales people call them .....sucker, patsy, an easy mark, etc.



Do you think the guests vacationing at WDW were suckers when they awoke the following morning after the policy change and charged a $12.00 valet fee? I know notifying members is not in the agreement and would have cost money, but it seems Disneys view of customers has changed over the years.


----------



## Dean

DVCPAT said:


> Do you think the guests vacationing at WDW were suckers when they awoke the following morning after the policy change and charged a $12.00 valet fee? I know notifying members is not in the agreement and would have cost money, but it seems Disneys view of customers has changed over the years.


If they met the specific criteria I presented above, maybe so.  However, I'm clearly on record in this thread as stating that's not the way I would have done it.  I went on to say that I felt DVC should have handled it better in notification and should have considered a SHORT period where they did pay for it in transition, maybe 2 weeks.


----------



## Chuck S

linney94 said:


> Just noted the emphasis on "IF".  I apologise for forgetting that 16 years ago that we could not valet park until 1996.When we began using our points we always had a minimum stay of 14 nights-air travel involved-and full clean and trash and tidy windows were different.We now use our points differently and as such  rather than wait for full clean pay to have this done.DVC member since 1994!



DVC Member since 1992.  The housekeeping windows have always been every 4 days, whether for Trash & Towel or Full cleaning.  The only change that may have occurred was giving the full cleaning at 4 days when staying 8 nights or more, it may have been a Trash & Tidy and then the full cleaning.  But, as Dean notes,  the interval has always been 4 days.  They did used to tidy a bit more, some housekeepers still do if they have the time, but fresh sheets were not a normal part of the Trash & Tidy service.  IIRC, they simply used to make the beds, and maybe run the vacuum a little, which they no longer regularly do on T&T day.


----------



## Glamis

Dean said:


> ME, like any other option, needs to be evaluated on it's own merit and a decision made somewhat independent of the valet question.



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.



Dean said:


> This is not Disney getting away with anything but rather DVCMC making a decision about a specific issue that went from free to $12 per day per car.



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.



Dean said:


> The choices they had was to either raise dues so others would directly pay for the usage of those that did use it OR to do pay to play.  Given those choices, there really is only ONE choice IMO.



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.




Dean said:


> The bottom line in this case is simply who's going to pay for something that only a small percent of people use,



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.


----------



## Glamis

Deb & Bill said:


> I was just in New Orleans last week - stayed at a hotel in the French Quarter on business.  Valet parking was $30 a day and there was no self parking anywhere close by.  If you did find self parking it was about $24 a day.



Did you pay tens of thousands of dollars, and another few hundred/thousand dollars a year to own part of that hotel?

If not, then this really isn't comparable.


----------



## Glamis

tjkraz said:


> Why would any company settle for an average of $3 per car when they could earn $12 per vehicle?



When the alternative is $0 per car because you don't have the contract in the first place.



tjkraz said:


> Unfortunately most valet parking attendants will tell you that--as a whole--DVC members are notoriously poor tippers.



Is there any factual data to back this up? There isn't a group of tipped employees anywhere that doesn't complain ENDLESSLY about tips. Everyone's a bad tipper to a tipped employee who thinks every other customer should be Bill Gates stuffing $100 bills into everyone's pockets.


----------



## Chuck S

Glamis said:


> 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.
> 
> 
> 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.
> 
> 
> 
> 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.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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.



Except that free valet was never funded by dues, it was funded by the contractor.  Before that, it was funded by Disney as valet was free for *all* Resort guests.  So the onsite cash guests lost the perk before DVC did.

ME may, or may not, be funded by dues.  As dues didn't take a large hike when ME was introduced, I think ME may not be dues funded, either.  If it is dues funded, I have no problem going to "pay to play" with ME for DVCers.  But I suspect it is easier to just provide ME, as some folks would simply rent a discounted cash room at a value for their arrival and departure day, then have luggage services transfer the luggage between resorts to use free ME, just as some have done to get "free" dining.

Again, if the contractor feels he is making $ by not funding DVC Parking, why would he choose to do so?  Evidently his balance sheet looks OK, or they could have immediately started offering a discounted rate to DVCers, and avoided a lot of this flack.  Probably because the savings incurred by not having the additional employees more than outstripped any possible return on offering a substantial discount.  

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.


----------



## DaveH

I find some of this interesting. We bought at VWL in 2001. I was of the under standing that we were paying for valet in our dues. I thought it was part of the shared expenses for the hotel. I am not sure if they had started charging for valet yet at WL. I know before DVC valet was free for resort guests. I am assuming(I know bad thing) Magical Express is built into the transportation budgets of all resorts like the busses. I think DVC as whole is causing allot of hard feelings in the membership with the poor way they announce anything but sales for buying new points. I also notice that Disney as a whole not just DVC is this way. We are empty nesters and it is just the 2 of us. Before ME we used town cars, now use ME. If ME stops soon or start charging, depending on the cost we will go back to town cars. We would be at least be disappointed but not a deal breaker. I have used valet with rental cars and the couple of times we drove to WDW.


----------



## Simba's Mom

Chuck S said:


> Except that free valet was never funded by dues, it was funded by the contractor.
> 
> Again, if the contractor feels he is making $ by not funding DVC Parking, why would he choose to do so?  Evidently his balance sheet looks OK, or they could have immediately started offering a discounted rate to DVCers, and avoided a lot of this flack.



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.


----------



## Chuck S

Simba's Mom said:


> 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

Chuck S said:


> 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

Glamis said:


> 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

Chuck S said:


> 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

Dean said:


> 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.




Dean said:


> 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

Glamis said:


> 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

Glamis said:


> 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

Chuck S said:


> 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.




Chuck S said:


> 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.



Chuck S said:


> 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. 



Chuck S said:


> 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.



Chuck S said:


> 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

Dean said:


> 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.



Dean said:


> 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.



Dean said:


> 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.



Dean said:


> 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. 




Dean said:


> 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.



Dean said:


> 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.



Dean said:


> 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.




Dean said:


> 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

Glamis said:


> 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

Glamis said:


> 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

Glamis said:


> 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

ReneeQ said:


> 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

Dean said:


> 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.




Dean said:


> 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.





Dean said:


> 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?




Dean said:


> 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.



Dean said:


> 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

crisi said:


> 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

Chuck S said:


> 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.




Chuck S said:


> 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.



Chuck S said:


> 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.



Chuck S said:


> 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?




Chuck S said:


> 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

Glamis said:


> 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.


----------



## WebmasterDoc

Glamis said:


> ...
> 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. *



Where you stay is absolutely your choice. It is NOT that you can't stay a resort because free valet is not offered. You can stay there - you are just choosing NOT to stay there. The overall value is something only you can value. If you feel you have lost value, that is your decision and yours alone.



> Imagine if tomorrow they announced you could ONLY stay at your home base and 1 or 2 other places.



That is absolutely possible - and could be changed by the owners at any DVC resort without Disney's involvement. DVC members do have the option of replacing DVC as the managing entity for their resort is they wish - and doing so would immediately remove that resort from the DVC family of resorts. That is something well within the realm of the owners at that resort. (NOT a likely situation IMO, but possible.) Those owners would then be free to hire new management for their resort or to even have a Property Owners Association (POA) manage themselves. They could then contract for all services and perks themselves.

I'd imagine that negotiating with Disney for transportation, housekeeping, textile services (laundry), maintenance, landscaping, front desk ... and perks, would be a real challenge. Of course. those owners would then have no other exchange options with other DVC resorts, no DME, package delivery, etc. - but they would be free to package whatever perks they wanted for their membership. They could also negotiate with RCI or II or any of the other timeshare exchange programs so that those owners would have some exchange opportunities. Keep in mind that this ability already exists and is outlined in the POS documents. So, even though we were all sold DVC memberships with the understanding that DVC would be managing the resorts, the framework was already spelled out where DVC could be replaced by a vote of the owners at ANY resort - without regard to what any individual was promised before purchase. The POS is an interesting document.

It is certainly possible that a member could be restricted to stay only at his/her own resort with no outside exchange opportunity.

The POS is an interesting document, indeed. Be careful what you wish for ...


----------



## dianeschlicht

Chuck S said:


> 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?



I agree with Chuck.  Why should they give us anything just because we bought a timeshare???  Frankly, I'm happy with just the AP discount.  As I see, it that is a plus plus for both Disney AND DVC members.  We get the discount, they keep us coming to the parks.  They really don't need anything beyond that.  

As for valet...I do not NEED to park valet.  There are always non-pay options when I stay at resorts that offer valet.


----------



## dianeschlicht

WebmasterDoc said:


> Where you stay is absolutely your choice. It is NOT that you can't stay a resort because free valet is not offered. You can stay there - you are just choosing NOT to stay there. The overall value is something only you can value. If you feel you have lost value, that is your decision and yours alone.
> 
> 
> 
> That is absolutely possible - and could be changed by the owners at any DVC resort without Disney's involvement. DVC members do have the option of replacing DVC as the managing entity for their resort is they wish - and doing so would immediately remove that resort from the DVC family of resorts. That is something well within the realm of the owners at that resort. (NOT a likely situation IMO, but possible.) Those owners would then be free to hire new management for their resort or to even have a Property Owners Association (POA) manage themselves. They could then contract for all services and perks themselves.
> 
> I'd imagine that negotiating with Disney for transportation, housekeeping, textile services (laundry), maintenance, landscaping, front desk ... and perks, would be a real challenge. Of course. those owners would then have no other exchange options with other DVC resorts, no DME, package delivery, etc. - but they would be free to package whatever perks they wanted for their membership. They could also negotiate with RCI or II or any of the other timeshare exchange programs so that those owners would have some exchange opportunities. Keep in mind that this ability already exists and is outlined in the POS documents. So, even though we were all sold DVC memberships with the understanding that DVC would be managing the resorts, the framework was already spelled out where DVC could be replaced by a vote of the owners at ANY resort - without regard to what any individual was promised before purchase. The POS is an interesting document.
> 
> It is certainly possible that a member could be restricted to stay only at his/her own resort with no outside exchange opportunity.
> 
> The POS is an interesting document, indeed. Be careful what you wish for ...



In reality, that is what those who own the Fairfield property have.  On site, but their own "perks".


----------



## crisi

Glamis said:


> 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.



Perhaps you could go back and read the thread where we itemized out the business reality of providing valet parking?

You obviously aren't happy.  Sell your points.  You bought understanding the program was something it wasn't.


----------



## Chuck S

Glamis said:


> 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.



There is certainly at least a central office and bookeeping staff to maintain.  Florida law requires that tipped employees are paid a minimum wage that is NOT offset by tips.  It is a lower wage than non-tipped employees, but it is not an insignificant amount... over $4 an hour.  Nor does the business itself benefit from tips, tips do not pay the overhead, income from operations pays that.  Parking cars free does not generate income.



> 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.



You are obviously very unhappy, not only with DVC, but also the Disney company as a whole, as many of the perceived problems you mention are not DVC related in any way.  If I were that unhappy with my purchase, and with Disney, I would sell my DVC and not visit the parks as a cash guest.  There are other parks out there, why spend $$ and time with one that makes you so unhappy?


----------



## DebbieB

Glamis said:


> 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.



I own at BWV and stay there most of the time.  I previously used valet for convenience at check-in and check-out but the rest of the time used the self-park.   There have been issues on weekends not being able to find a space but I would never not stay there because of it.    It's not that far to the lot.   If someone has a disability, they can still get free valet.


----------



## Simba's Mom

Am I correct that they gave us free valet parking for approximately 12 years (from the time BWV opened) until recently, then suddenly decided it was no longer profitable?  But it was for 12 years?


----------



## Chuck S

Simba's Mom said:


> Am I correct that they gave us free valet parking for approximately 12 years (from the time BWV opened) until recently, then suddenly decided it was no longer profitable?  But it was for 12 years?



Not exactly.  When valet service was first introduced, valet services were provided by Disney, not a contractor, and was free to all onsite guests.  Disney eventually began charging non-DVC guests, but continued to provide the freebie to DVC, those with disabilities, and DDE/TiW card holders (if dining).  When they contracted out the valet services, the contractor continued to do so, likely to "get his foot in the door" looking towards future profitability.  Upon renewal of the contract, the contractor no longer offered the perk to DVC, and quite likely Disney does not want the valet CMs back under their own corporate umbrella, paying wages, taxes, unemployment insurance and benefits in what, for Disney, was not a profit center. In those years there have been cost increases, both in required wages, and certainly in benefit packages, like health insurance, to where the cost could no longer be absorbed to offer the free perk.

Notice that the DDE/TiW card price has increased from $50 or so for AP holder to $75, so TiW my be funding the parking perk at an agreed upon base price.

DVC does not want to fund the perk through dues, and evidently Marketing or other divisions have  no desire to fund it for DVC Members.


----------



## Simba's Mom

Chuck S said:


> Not exactly.  When valet service was first introduced, valet services were provided by Disney, not a contractor, and was free to all onsite guests.  Disney eventually began charging non-DVC guests, but continued to provide the freebie to DVC, those with disabilities, and DDE/TiW card holders (if dining).  When they contracted out the valet services, the contractor continued to do so, likely to "get his foot in the door" looking towards future profitability.  Upon renewal of the contract, the contractor no longer offered the perk to DVC, and quite likely Disney does not want the valet CMs back under their own corporate umbrella, paying wages, taxes, unemployment insurance and benefits in what, for Disney, was not a profit center. In those years there have been cost increases, both in required wages, and certainly in benefit packages, like health insurance, to where the cost could no longer be absorbed to offer the free perk.
> 
> Notice that the DDE/TiW card price has increased from $50 or so for AP holder to $75, so TiW my be funding the parking perk at an agreed upon base price.
> 
> DVC does not want to fund the perk through dues, and evidently Marketing or other divisions have  no desire to fund it for DVC Members.



Aha, now I think I understand.  Thanks, this has puzzled me more than made me mad (what makes me mad is only that we never even knew this perk existed until it didn't!).  I appreciate the answers.


----------



## Glamis

WebmasterDoc said:


> Where you stay is absolutely your choice. It is NOT that you can't stay a resort because free valet is not offered. You can stay there - you are just choosing NOT to stay there. The overall value is something only you can value. If you feel you have lost value, that is your decision and yours alone.



This is a luxury item. Everything is a factor of choice. The fact remains, they significantly lowered the value of my ownership because many resorts are now off limits because the parking is so horrible. 





WebmasterDoc said:


> The POS is an interesting document, indeed. Be careful what you wish for ...



I'm not wishing for it whatsoever. Part of why DVC costs a lot more than other timeshares is the faith you have in Disney as a company that they won't pull such crap.

But if we roll over and let them consistently erode benefits, lower the quality of staff, lower the quality of the parks, etc. they will continue to push as far as they can get to squeeze every dime of profits out of us as possible.


----------



## Glamis

crisi said:


> Perhaps you could go back and read the thread where we itemized out the business reality of providing valet parking?



That's nice. It is still an extremely cheap business to run so I'm not sure what your point is.

Compare it to running a restaurant or a steel mill perhaps.


----------



## Glamis

Simba's Mom said:


> Am I correct that they gave us free valet parking for approximately 12 years (from the time BWV opened) until recently, then suddenly decided it was no longer profitable?  But it was for 12 years?



Pretty much.

Basically, some propeller-head accountant somewhere wanted a promotion, saw a way to squeeze out some profits, and pushed through this idea.

They will continue to find more ways to trim benefits and lower quality of service if we just roll over and say "its ok, I'm just glad you let me pay you thousands of dollars a year to come see Mickey."


----------



## Chuck S

Glamis said:


> That's nice. It is still an extremely cheap business to run so I'm not sure what your point is.
> 
> Compare it to running a restaurant or a steel mill perhaps.



Why should any contractor, no matter how much the service cost, provide that service for free because you purchased a timeshare?  You purchased the timeshare from Disney/DVC NOT the valet contractor.  Disney/DVC no longer operates the valet service.

It is the same as expecting Blockbuster to give you free movie rentals because you bought a timeshare from Marriott.

Again, as unhappy as you seem to be with Disney as a whole, including DVC...it is obvious it is no longer of value to *you* personally...no longer a relaxing, desirable vacation destination for you.  Wouldn't it be better to sell the membership, get most of your money back and move on to vacation venues you would enjoy more?

Personally, I still enjoy Disney, I still find OKW an enjoyable destination.  I still find value in my DVC ownership, as do most owners.  When/if I no longer want to vacation there, I'll either use the RCI trade options or sell.




Glamis said:


> This is a luxury item. Everything is a factor of choice. The fact remains, they significantly lowered the value of my ownership because many resorts are now off limits because the parking is so horrible.



Why is the resort "off limits?"  The self-parking itself hasn't changed, nor has the valet.  You simply have to pay for the services you receive now.  Access to the resorts is the same as always, only now there is a service charge.


----------



## Brian Noble

I think we're at the troll-feeding stage.

Glamis thinks it's horrible.  S/he will not be convinced otherwise.  The rest of the known universe seems to have accepted it for what it is.  Impasse.

Glamis: if you really want to stay in one of those other resorts so badly, cough up the $12/day plus tips.  It's a drop in the bucket of the total cost of a DVC trip.  If you can't see your way to that point, well, the POS never guaranteed you the ability to stay at those resorts.


----------



## dianeschlicht

Brian Noble said:


> I think we're at the troll-feeding stage.
> 
> Glamis thinks it's horrible.  S/he will not be convinced otherwise.  The rest of the known universe seems to have accepted it for what it is.  Impasse.
> 
> Glamis: if you really want to stay in one of those other resorts so badly, cough up the $12/day plus tips.  It's a drop in the bucket of the total cost of a DVC trip.  If you can't see your way to that point, well, the POS never guaranteed you the ability to stay at those resorts.


----------



## tgropp

Brian Noble said:


> I think we're at the troll-feeding stage.
> 
> Glamis thinks it's horrible.  S/he will not be convinced otherwise.  The rest of the known universe seems to have accepted it for what it is.  Impasse.
> 
> Glamis: if you really want to stay in one of those other resorts so badly, cough up the $12/day plus tips.  It's a drop in the bucket of the total cost of a DVC trip.  If you can't see your way to that point, well, the POS never guaranteed you the ability to stay at those resorts.



*No, I am sure that if you took a poll (PLEASE DONT), you would find that people have not accepted it, they are just tolerating it. When people think of Disney, they think of that company going the extra mile, because lets face it, Disney is not a cheap vacation and DVC is a lot more money than other timeshares, including the dues which seem to be skyrocketing. I am still very happy with my DVC purchase, but I am very worried about Disney itself. If I had a crystal ball and could see the Disney corporation 20 years from now. I don't think that I would like what I would see. JMHO..... But its Still the happiest place on earth.*


----------



## tjkraz

tgropp said:


> *...DVC is a lot more money than other timeshares, including the dues which seem to be skyrocketing.*



I'm not sure how applicable the word "skyrocketing" might be.  With VERY few exceptions (like unplanned maintenance at Hilton Head), dues are steadily increasing at a 2-4% clip.  That's to be expected as employee wages and benefits cost more, fuel prices fluctuate, utilities, etc.  

Nevertheless, since you think DVC costs a lot more than other timeshares, I'd be curious to see some detail on that POV.  How do DVC annual dues compare to other timeshares in the central Florida area?


----------



## Dean

tgropp said:


> *DVC is a lot more money than other timeshares, including the dues which seem to be skyrocketing.*


In general DVC is not more (or dramatically more) than most timeshares retail and there are many that are significantly more than DVC.  DVC often is more than most resale because DVC is more liquid from a sales standpoint and has more intrinsic value than many, but not all, timeshares.  Dues are high, generally around 20-30% higher than other comparable timeshares, but the yearly increases has been reasonable.  However, it is still the SAME timeshare system we all bought into with MINOR changes over the years.  I realize some of those minor changes are/were important to some, but from an overall system standpoint, they were all minor.


----------



## SuzanneSLO

tgropp said:


> *No, I am sure that if you took a poll (PLEASE DONT), you would find that people have not accepted it, they are just tolerating it. When people think of Disney, they think of that company going the extra mile, because lets face it, Disney is not a cheap vacation and DVC is a lot more money than other timeshares, including the dues which seem to be skyrocketing. I am still very happy with my DVC purchase, but I am very worried about Disney itself. If I had a crystal ball and could see the Disney corporation 20 years from now. I don't think that I would like what I would see. JMHO..... But its Still the happiest place on earth.*



Whatever pre-conceptions most people have about a trip to DL or WDW, it rarely includes a feeling that things will be free or even cheap!  Valet parking is still available, so there has not been any decline in service, it is just that it now costs oop, currently $12 per day.  As already noted in previously posts, this price is less than many other resorts charge and is the same amount charged to any person using the service at the WDW resorts.

For us, it means when we stay at our home resort of BWV we wil be less likely to use valet parking.  For us, however, it doesn't mean I am going to stop taking trips to WDW.  I still find owning DVC and travelling to WDW to be a good vacation value, even if I have to pay for valet.  -- Suzanne


----------



## dianeschlicht

SuzanneSLO said:


> Whatever pre-conceptions most people have about a trip to DL or WDW, it rarely includes a feeling that things will be free or even cheap!  Valet parking is still available, so there has not been any decline in service, it is just that it now costs oop, currently $12 per day.  As already noted in previously posts, this price is less than many other resorts charge and is the same amount charged to any person using the service at the WDW resorts.
> 
> For us, it means when we stay at our home resort of BWV we wil be less likely to use valet parking.  For us, however, it doesn't mean I am going to stop taking trips to WDW.  I still find owning DVC and travelling to WDW to be a good vacation value, even if I have to pay for valet.  -- Suzanne



How dare you react with a common sense answer!


----------



## BEASLYBOO

I bought into a timeshare, I didn't buy into DVC for the free valet parking or the discounted AP's. I don't even buy AP's (As a FLA resident I buy the weekly pass) and I seldom valet park, so do I begrudge every person who can take advantage of the AP discount and every person who used valet parking, no.  By the same token when the party's over, after 12 years of free valet parking, the perk is gone.  You still have what you purchased, a timeshare, and whether it's a Disney timeshare or not, they are in the business of making money, they aren't making friends, nor do they need to buy our affections by giving us free dining etc., they already have us and our money.  

In the end, when the timeshare no longer suits our vacation needs, we'll sell but it won't have anything to do with what discount I do or don't get from Olivia's or because I now need valet parking and it's no longer free.  Contractually, Disney hasn't taken away anything that can be legitimately fought for and/or won in a court of law!

I always got a ham at Christmas from my company.  Times got tough, no ham this year, but I still have my job.  By the way, same way went my Christmas bonus.  Did I take the job for the free ham every year, no; Am I peived that I no longer get the ham, a little disapointed maybe ( a bit more about the X-Mas bonus). It was a *free* perk that I *happily* received for many years, but now I have to buy my own ham.  The ham and the bonus were not promised to me as part of the job.

Get over it and if you can't because the lack of free valet parking is such an issue for you, then maybe it's time to sell and get out!


----------



## dis-happy

Glamis said:


> because many resorts are now off limits because the parking is so horrible.




Our self park experiences:

SSR and OKW (where you stay) park in front of units more or less.  However, they are less convenient for getting around to the main part of the resort, having to use either internal bus or car.

BCV: parking is right there!  Closer to self park than valet park and walk from the front of the resort.

BWV: We unload, park, and pretty much leave our car all week.  So easy to walk to both Epcot and DHS.  We usually bus over to MK.  So our only car trips are to AK.  If you stay in the standard rooms and exit by the tennis courts it's a very reasonable walk to the car lot from there.

BLT: will be staying there for the first time this summer.  Expect to use the monorail for the most part.

AK: Jambo house: stayed here, can't remember where parking is but it didn't imprint on my mind as being a big deal.  Haven't stayed at Kidani yet.

VWL: the first row is closer to the villas than the rest of self-parking is to the regular resort.  Plus, the walk is really pretty!


With TIW you get free valet for meals; if special needs you still get free valet.  I honestly can't foresee a time when we would need to valet otherwise.


----------



## tgropp

tjkraz said:


> I'm not sure how applicable the word "skyrocketing" might be.  With VERY few exceptions (like unplanned maintenance at Hilton Head), dues are steadily increasing at a 2-4% clip.  That's to be expected as employee wages and benefits cost more, fuel prices fluctuate, utilities, etc.
> 
> Nevertheless, since you think DVC costs a lot more than other timeshares, I'd be curious to see some detail on that POV.  How do DVC annual dues compare to other timeshares in the central Florida area?





*A good example might be the Marriott Beachplace Towers in Fort Lauderdale or the Marriott Ocean Pointe in West Palm Beach. Both beautiful luxury resorts with a location to die for.. Now say a 7 day stay at in Feb-Apr, their dues are approx $900-$1,000 per year. At   WLV during that time frame the points would be 352, at $5.00 and change per point....would work out to Approx $1,800.00 in maintenance fees. This is the only timeshare that I could compare it to. But it is considerably more. This is my last post on this topic. I understand why people are upset with this scenario. Even though valet parking was the only perk that I used, I just hope that the annual passes, ME and other perks dont disappear for other people. As I have stated before, I love the value of my DVC and it still is "the happiest place on earth"  !!!*


----------



## LisaS

dis-happy said:


> AK: Jambo house: stayed here, can't remember where parking is but it didn't imprint on my mind as being a big deal.  Haven't stayed at Kidani yet.


At Jambo, the lot is out in front of the main entrance. The walk isn't bad at all, especially if you find a spot at the upper end of the lot (the end closest to the building).

At Kidani, the parking is on ground level under the building. Given the long hallways there, it's quite possible that you will have a much shorter walk to retrieve your car yourself from the self parking lot than to walk all the way to the lobby to retrieve a car that has been valet parked. The valet parking area is out in the open so on a hot summer day the self parked cars will stay cooler since they will be sitting in the shade under the building.


----------



## tjkraz

tgropp said:


> *A good example might be the Marriott Beachplace Towers in Fort Lauderdale or the Marriott Ocean Pointe in West Palm Beach. Both beautiful luxury resorts with a location to die for.. Now say a 7 day stay at in Feb-Apr, their dues are approx $900-$1,000 per year. At   WLV during that time frame the points would be 352, at $5.00 and change per point....would work out to Approx $1,800.00 in maintenance fees. This is the only timeshare that I could compare it to. But it is considerably more. *



Of course the devil is in the details...

How does the cost compare in other seasons and unit sizes?  

How do we account for differences in amenities and services provided by each resort?  DVC members get free round-trip transportation to Orlando International.  Other timeshares charge parking and valet fees. At least one of the hotels you mentioned charges $14 per day for self-parking.  Some charge for Internet service.  Some charge to use workout facilities.  DVC's Trash and Towel service is an offering that most other timeshares do not replicate.  

Our DVC dues include charges for theme park transportation, which we all knew we would be funding.  Some DVC resorts have unique features like the animal savanna at AKV and expansive pool complexes.   

How do property tax rates (over which DVC has no control) compare to other locations?  How do refurbishment budgets vary between DVC and others?  

Dean previously stated that DVC dues run 20-30% higher than others.  That seems like a reasonable figure to me.  Of that a good 10% goes right to theme park transportation.  

It's fair to expect more when we are paying more.  But we also have to be astute enough to recognize what we are getting for our dollar.  With all due respect to Marriott, their 20-story towers don't hold a candle to the highly themed environments Disney has created at resorts like the BoardWalk and Wilderness Lodge.  We owners must pay to maintain those environments--both in terms of the physical structure and the surrounding landscaping.  When other timeshares are charging parking fees, Internet fees, resort service fees, and have minimal facilities for guest shopping, dining and recreation--including rectangular pools with no slide, kids' play area or theming--of course their published dues will be lower.


----------



## Mickey'sApprentice

tgropp said:


> *A good example might be the Marriott Beachplace Towers in Fort Lauderdale or the Marriott Ocean Pointe in West Palm Beach. Both beautiful luxury resorts with a location to die for.. Now say a 7 day stay at in Feb-Apr, their dues are approx $900-$1,000 per year. At   WLV during that time frame the points would be 352, at $5.00 and change per point....would work out to Approx $1,800.00 in maintenance fees. This is the only timeshare that I could compare it to. But it is considerably more. This is my last post on this topic. I understand why people are upset with this scenario. Even though valet parking was the only perk that I used, I just hope that the annual passes, ME and other perks dont disappear for other people. As I have stated before, I love the value of my DVC and it still is "the happiest place on earth"  !!!*



This post does not clearly give me enough information or does not express the information in a manner in which I understand. Are you saying that in comparing apples to apples Disney's maintenance fees are double? What are the hotel rental rates in West Palm Beach for the same time, and what are the Disney rental rates for the same period. Are they higher? lower? about the same? 

My 5 night stays at BWV studio in January usually cost me between $300 and $500 in maintenance fees. A deluxe Disney hotel in the same time period is at least $250/night, and an Epcot Resort Deluxe hotel (BWI or Y&BC) are always in excess of $325/night.  For me, DVC is a great deal. I vacation almost exclusively at WDW and want to stay on-property. I've never considered going to West Palm Beach, but have vacationed in Destin, Fl. and Orange Beach, Al. (I would much rather be in Disney!)

I have read in the past that Disney sets its prices to be comparable to the top resort destinations throughout the world, and not to the prices of other amusement parks.  

In my 4 years of ownership, I have never felt like the increase in dues were excessive. IF I had more points, I might feel a greater pinch. 

Perhaps you would feel more comfortable with an off-property timeshare, or in renting an All-Star vacation home as you are clearly interested in enjoying a larger villa.

Dues would have to increase by at least 5% per year for a few years for me to consider the word skyrocketing. As an economist, I must say that I am surprised that our dues have stayed as steady as they have over the past 2 years.


----------



## dis-happy

LisaS said:


> At Jambo, the lot is out in front of the main entrance. The walk isn't bad at all, especially if you find a spot at the upper end of the lot (the end closest to the building).
> 
> At Kidani, the parking is on ground level under the building. Given the long hallways there, it's quite possible that you will have a much shorter walk to retrieve your car yourself from the self parking lot than to walk all the way to the lobby to retrieve a car that has been valet parked. The valet parking area is out in the open so on a hot summer day the self parked cars will stay cooler since they will be sitting in the shade under the building.



Thank you, my friend and AKV expert!!

We would love to stay at Kidani some time; the underground parking at hot-hot-hot Florida in summer sounds like a dream come true.  Possibly closer than valet is nice to know.

It just goes to show you......experience all the self-parking at DVC resorts first, before complaining how much farther it is than valet.


----------



## crisi

tgropp said:


> *No, I am sure that if you took a poll (PLEASE DONT), you would find that people have not accepted it, they are just tolerating it. When people think of Disney, they think of that company going the extra mile, because lets face it, Disney is not a cheap vacation and DVC is a lot more money than other timeshares, including the dues which seem to be skyrocketing. I am still very happy with my DVC purchase, but I am very worried about Disney itself. If I had a crystal ball and could see the Disney corporation 20 years from now. I don't think that I would like what I would see. JMHO..... But its Still the happiest place on earth.*



I think if you ask around here during a purchase phase to compare DVC to other timeshares, you'll be told by MOST people that DVC is a "good value" but not a cheap option.  There are plenty of nice timeshares in the Orlando area that are cheaper - both for buy in and dues.  But they aren't "on property" and we are paying a premium for that.

Any time we aren't happy to pay that premium, we are free to leave the system.  And if you didn't understand you were going to pay a premium to have an on-site timeshare - well, caveat emptor.  Likewise, if you didn't understand that perks come and go - like valet, well, did you read your contract or did you just blindly trust in a mega corporation to always sprinkle you in pixie dust?

I'm sorry if anyone has lost their faith in Santa Claus over the loss of valet parking.  But "faith, trust and pixie dust" is a work of fiction - not something you should believe when handing a corporation a five figure check.

And in the end, it really depends - does the system, as it exists in reality now - provide enough value for you to stay.  If the answer is yes, stay.  If its no, sell.  We'd all LIKE things to be different...but we really only have the power of staying or selling.


----------



## dis-happy

There's someone that does it openly on the ABD board....not sure why that would be creepy.  The posts I've seen were to help clarify details.  Also, I assume that concerns that generate a lot of postings would be cataloged and sent back up the chain to aid in changes.  I always assumed the outcry re. studio mugs helped them to decide to reverse that bad idea (if not directly from the postings then via the cry to rally complaints directly to DVC).


----------



## PBB

dis-happy said:


> There's someone that does it openly on the ABD board....not sure why that would be creepy.  The posts I've seen were to help clarify details.  Also, I assume that concerns that generate a lot of postings would be cataloged and sent back up the chain to aid in changes.  I always assumed the outcry re. studio mugs helped them to decide to reverse that bad idea (if not directly from the postings then via the cry to rally complaints directly to DVC).



Sorry, I did not finish the post properly.....I meant to say if they did it anonymously it would be creep.  If they do it openly.  All the medication that I take for my back surgeries sometimes causes me to not type what I am thinking for vice versa....


----------



## dis-happy

I'll give you creepy.  But honestly I think every single major company monitors web traffic in one form of another re. their product.  

Hope your back starts to feel better!!!


----------



## crisi

PBB said:


> Good Point........If they do it openly I have no problem with that.  I know a lot of campaigns were doing it.  Too many posts came out the same as 10 people would post the same talking points.
> 
> If they do it to inform sure.....but just to thwart opinion.   Different story in my book.  It just looks creepy is all.



Well, when you have evidence that they are doing it anonymously and officially, let us know.  That would be creepy. 

A bunch of us have been having variations on this same conversation for YEARS. ("Disney is a business, they'll make business based decisions...buy what you were contracted for...expect things to change over time...if you aren't getting your value, its time to sell.")   We all start to sound alike.  But I'm pretty sure none of us work for Disney.

P.S.  It would be nice if we did, we'd get the CM discounts....


----------



## PBB

dis-happy said:


> I'll give you creepy.  But honestly I think every single major company monitors web traffic in one form of another re. their product.
> 
> Hope your back starts to feel better!!!



Thanks alot.  They just implanted a morphine pump under my right rib.  This pumps morphine to my spinal canal.  It takes about 6 months to balance it out.  Downside......No Mission to Space or Rollercoasters in my future.....well maybe space mountain refurb once....LOL


----------



## janelli1

i actualy worked for the contracted valet company ..and in regards to DVC parking not being free anymore its because DISNEY decided that , not the contracted company . TRUST me their is virtualy NO say when it comes to anything . its all DISNEY's doing .


----------



## snappy

Interesting info. . .


----------



## Chuck S

janelli1 said:


> i actualy worked for the contracted valet company ..and in regards to DVC parking not being free anymore its because DISNEY decided that , not the contracted company . TRUST me their is virtualy NO say when it comes to anything . its all DISNEY's doing .



Possible, but a logical reason that DISNEY would have an interest as to whether the contractor offers a discount or free service is....?  I mean, surely Disney does not control the prices at shops not owned by them.  It is like saying a landlord controls the prices that a shop in the mall can charge.

Especially considering it would likely slightly boost DVC sales in a bad economy.  How would it be in Disney's interest to do so?


----------



## DVCPAT

crisi said:


> I'm sorry if anyone has lost their faith in Santa Claus over the loss of valet parking.  But "faith, trust and pixie dust" is a work of fiction - not something you should believe when handing a corporation a five figure check.
> 
> And in the end, it really depends - does the system, as it exists in reality now - provide enough value for you to stay.  If the answer is yes, stay.  If its no, sell.  We'd all LIKE things to be different...but we really only have the power of staying or selling.



How would you feel if Disney contracted Mears to provide all DVC bus and boat transportation due to better efficiency? Disney would no longer be responsible for maintenance, payroll, insurance, etc.  Then approx. one year later, Disney removes transportation costs from our dues and calls it a member enhancement. The following year while youre on vacation, you wake up and head to the MK bus and learn you have to pay $12.00 per person.  Other Orlando transportation services would charge much more, so that wouldnt be unreasonable.


----------



## DVCPAT

Chuck S said:


> Possible, but a logical reason that DISNEY would have an interest as to whether the contractor offers a discount or free service is....?  I mean, surely Disney does not control the prices at shops not owned by them.  It is like saying a landlord controls the prices that a shop in the mall can charge.?



I stopped in a retail store unaware it was on Disney property to purchase a lottery ticket. The cashier told me Disney doesnt allow gambling products to be sold. Disney wouldnt have purchased all the land if they didnt want control of the inner workings.


----------



## NewDCLGuy

Chuck S said:


> Why should any contractor, no matter how much the service cost, provide that service for free because you purchased a timeshare?  You purchased the timeshare from Disney/DVC NOT the valet contractor.  Disney/DVC no longer operates the valet service.


 But Disney does set the rules. Look, I can easily accept the loss of free valet. But I can't accept the buck-passing some are doing for Disney.

Do we honestly think the contractor was voluntarily giving away free parking out of the goodness of it's heart. And then the contractor woke up one day and decided to long longer offer it?

The only reason for the contractor to offer free parking to DVC member is Disney required it. Then when Disney renegotiated the deal, Disney removed the requirement. The only reason to remove the requirement was to get a better deal from the contractor. 

Giving away free valet parking to DVC members costs Disney money. Doesn't matter of Disney is providing the parking, or if it's done through a contractor. Having the contractor between Disney and the customer makes the cost harder to see, but it's still there. Disney made a decision to stop paying that cost. Fine, that's their business. 

But let's stop pretending this wasn't Disney's decision.


----------



## Chuck S

DVCPAT said:


> How would you feel if Disney contracted Mears to provide all DVC bus and boat transportation due to better efficiency? Disney would no longer be responsible for maintenance, payroll, insurance, etc.  Then approx. one year later, Disney removes transportation costs from our dues and calls it a member enhancement. The following year while you’re on vacation, you wake up and head to the MK bus and learn you have to pay $12.00 per person.  Other Orlando transportation services would charge much more, so that wouldn’t be unreasonable.



You realize they could close the parks completely, and all we'd have is the resorts.  Or that each individual DVC resort could be managed by an outside enity and no longer part of DVC as a whole.

DME is Mears contracted, so it is certainly possible.  But there is also the consideration of how MANY members, (the vast majority of membership) it would affect as opposed to a valet perk.  Also realize that Transportation is funded several different ways, not entirely by dues.  A portion of every multi day park ticket goes to transportation. This is not true of valet parking services. And DVC could possibly negotiate a discounted rate.   I would hope most folks knew that going in, or at least read the documents during the time period they had to rescind.

It still boils down to whether you feel DVC continues to fill your overall vacation needs for what you pay.  It is, at it's core, a timeshare, nothing more, nothing less...and if your vacation habits change, or you no longer feel there is any value in the use of your ownership....like any other timeshare, it would be time to sell.


----------



## NewDCLGuy

Chuck S said:


> Possible, but a logical reason that DISNEY would have an interest as to whether the contractor offers a discount or free service is....?  I mean, surely Disney does not control the prices at shops not owned by them.  It is like saying a landlord controls the prices that a shop in the mall can charge.
> 
> Especially considering it would likely slightly boost DVC sales in a bad economy.  How would it be in Disney's interest to do so?


 The argument isn't that 

- Disney required the contractor to stop offering the freebie. It's

- Disney stopped requiring the contractor to offer the freebie.


----------



## NewDCLGuy

Dean said:


> Irrelevant as verbal promises or discussions have no legal basis.


 Just to be nit-picky, verbal promises and discussion can be legally enforceable. Through they are near meaningless from a practical standpoint.


----------



## Chuck S

NewDCLGuy said:


> But Disney does set the rules. Look, I can easily accept the loss of free valet. But I can't accept the buck-passing some are doing for Disney.
> 
> Do we honestly think the contractor was voluntarily giving away free parking out of the goodness of it's heart. And then the contractor woke up one day and decided to long longer offer it?
> 
> The only reason for the contractor to offer free parking to DVC member is Disney required it. Then when Disney renegotiated the deal, Disney removed the requirement. The only reason to remove the requirement was to get a better deal from the contractor.
> 
> Giving away free valet parking to DVC members costs Disney money. Doesn't matter of Disney is providing the parking, or if it's done through a contractor. Having the contractor between Disney and the customer makes the cost harder to see, but it's still there. Disney made a decision to stop paying that cost. Fine, that's their business.
> 
> But let's stop pretending this wasn't Disney's decision.



I don't think it was _directly_ Disney's decision.  For instance, the contract _may_ call for Disney to receive $X for each car parked by the contractor. Many commercial leases call for rent increases if the business occupying the space exceeds $x in gross.  But it is the contractors decision on how to fund  that amount.  

The contractor could choose to fund it, and still offer DVC free parking, without reimbursement from dues though it would not be a wise business decision.

And DVC also continues to have the option of funding it through increased dues.  Disney also has the option of funding it in full, if they choose.  But the point is, someone has to pay for it...and if no business chooses to fund it, it then falls upon the individual member to decide to either fund it and pay the fee, or not use the service.  Businesses rarely fund freebies and discounts without a verifiable offset, usually a direct increase in sales/profit.  What is unfair about that?

Just like when a store offers a sale of "buy 2 get 1 free", they will be making more overall profit than if they offered 1/3 off the price of a single item, because they require you to by two at full price.  How would a business verify/justify additional income through a free parking perk for DVC?  They don't make us spend more $$ to use it, unlike the TiW perk, we weren't required to buy a Table Service meal at that resort which would show an immediate return on the free perk, and it is extremely unlikely that a free valet perk would actually lead people to buy more points than they need or could use, it is?  I mean, really...can you see someone saying,  "Honey, let's buy 50 _more_ points because we get free valet parking at Beach Club!"

Unless the resort restaurants at the DVC resorts have seen a dramatic decrease in sales, there really is no way to justify free valet parking from a business standpoint.


----------



## NewDCLGuy

Chuck S said:


> extremely unlikely that a free valet perk would actually lead people to buy more points than they need or could use, it is?  I mean, really...can you see someone saying,  "Honey, let's buy 50 _more_ points because we get free valet parking at Beach Club!


 I don't think free valet leads people to buy more points than they need, but it's one more factor that leads somebody to buy DVC (vs CRO or offsite timeshare). At some point, Disney felt the additional sales weren't enough to justify the cost. So they ditched it, no longer requiring the contractor to offer free parking and getting a better deal from them.


----------



## Chuck S

NewDCLGuy said:


> I don't think free valet leads people to buy more points than they need, but it's one more factor that leads somebody to buy DVC (vs CRO or offsite timeshare). At some point, Disney felt the additional sales weren't enough to justify the cost. So they ditched it, no longer requiring the contractor to offer free parking and getting a better deal from them.



But a continuing perk needs to see continuing verifiable results, no matter which business is offering the perk.


----------



## NewDCLGuy

Chuck S said:


> But a continuing perk needs to see continuing verifiable results, no matter which business is offering the perk.


 We completely agree there. The only question is who was offering the perk. Was it Disney, who insisted the contractor offer it? Or the contractor, who offered it out of the goodness of their heart?


----------



## Chuck S

NewDCLGuy said:


> We completely agree there. The only question is who was offering the perk. Was it Disney, who insisted the contractor offer it? Or the contractor, who offered it out of the goodness of their heart?



Does it really matter?  No matter which entity was funding it, they have chosen to do so no longer. If Disney had made it a requirement of the original contract, and has chosen not to do so with the contract extension, or if the contractor funded it and has decided not to, the net outcome is the same for DVCers.  Now, if dues had been funding it previously, then DVCers could make a good argument to continue it, other wise, not really.


----------



## Sammie

> But Disney does set the rules. Look, I can easily accept the loss of free valet. But I can't accept the buck-passing some are doing for Disney.
> 
> Do we honestly think the contractor was voluntarily giving away free parking out of the goodness of it's heart. And then the contractor woke up one day and decided to long longer offer it?
> 
> The only reason for the contractor to offer free parking to DVC member is Disney required it. Then when Disney renegotiated the deal, Disney removed the requirement. The only reason to remove the requirement was to get a better deal from the contractor.
> 
> Giving away free valet parking to DVC members costs Disney money. Doesn't matter of Disney is providing the parking, or if it's done through a contractor. Having the contractor between Disney and the customer makes the cost harder to see, but it's still there. Disney made a decision to stop paying that cost. Fine, that's their business.
> 
> But let's stop pretending this wasn't Disney's decision.



I don't think anyone is pretending anything. 

When Mears took over valet I do think they agreed to cover the cost of DVC free valet until the next contract. For one think I seem to remember Mears took over in the middle of fiscal year for Disney. At that time Mears had no reference to use as to the cost to them for this perk. I think they were possibly caught off guard as to how many people really use it and wanted a period of evaluation. As to whether Mears offered it as a good will gesture to secure this deal or Disney required it of them really does not matter. 

After this period they realized it was an expense they were not willing to cover and passed it to Disney. Disney was not willing to cover it for DVC and DVC would have passed it the members to pay for out of the dues. 

I have no problem with Disney not wanting to cover it, they don't provide it free for their own resorts why pay it for DVC. 

As to DVC not wanting to pick up the cost, I was told they simply did not feel this was fair to the members that never used it and especially to those members at SSR and OKW where there is no valet offered. 

I know from talking to valet staff at a couple of DVC resorts that some members are horrible about tipping since it was free and the valets said they were glad for it to end. 

Even though we used the service, I had no problem with the decision to end the free valet, but did think DVC did a horrible job of communicating the change to members.


----------



## Dean

NewDCLGuy said:


> Just to be nit-picky, verbal promises and discussion can be legally enforceable. Through they are near meaningless from a practical standpoint.


If they can be proven which is almost impossible and depending on the other information.  In this case you specifically sign that verbal representations are not binding and only those in writing are.

As to who orchestrated the demise of the valet, it really doesn't matter who suggested it, the reasons and market forces remain the same.  Speculation is that there were contract negotiations and that the contracted company brought up the free group.  It would not surprise me if Disney or even DVC made the suggestion to drop it in that context of needing to keep the contract price lower per the negotiations.  I'm surprised it survived the initial round intact as it doesn't make business sense to contract in such a way.


----------



## jagson

Just a thought, don't know if its been brought up, but DVC should announce the various offers, ie free valet parking, as a limited time offer, to avoid members' expectations that these are "forever perks".


----------



## Dean

jagson said:


> Just a thought, don't know if its been brought up, but DVC should announce the various offers, ie free valet parking, as a limited time offer, to avoid members' expectations that these are "forever perks".


I believe all of the listings for the perks includes a disclaimer.  The POS clearly deliniates what/how things can change.  While they don't remind you at every turn, in essence, they do this already.


----------



## DVCPAT

Chuck S said:


> You realize they could close the parks completely, and all we'd have is the resorts.  Or that each individual DVC resort could be managed by an outside enity and no longer part of DVC as a whole.
> 
> DME is Mears contracted, so it is certainly possible.  But there is also the consideration of how MANY members, (the vast majority of membership) it would affect as opposed to a valet perk.  Also realize that Transportation is funded several different ways, not entirely by dues.  A portion of every multi day park ticket goes to transportation. This is not true of valet parking services. And DVC could possibly negotiate a discounted rate.   I would hope most folks knew that going in, or at least read the documents during the time period they had to rescind.
> 
> It still boils down to whether you feel DVC continues to fill your overall vacation needs for what you pay.  It is, at it's core, a timeshare, nothing more, nothing less...and if your vacation habits change, or you no longer feel there is any value in the use of your ownership....like any other timeshare, it would be time to sell.





True, and if it happened, some people would criticize those who complain and tell them they really dont understand big business. When I sell, Ill have no regrets. DVC has been a great deal and Ive taken many vacations in WDW at its peak of customer service. I bought in at $57.00 a point and will see a small profit in the sale. The loss of valet by itself isnt the main issue. Its the outsourcing of front line workers and decline in quality and service. 

Its sad if you know the Walt Disney story. I know hes dead and has been dead for some time, but his philosophy was successful back then and still is today. Its a shame the company that has his name attached to its buildings doesnt subscribe to it. The term "plusing was coined by Walt Disney and simply means to continuosly tweak and strive for perfection. I guess the new philosophy is were a timeshare, nothing more, nothing less.


----------



## crisi

You mean Walt Disney, Union Buster?  Who fought against giving credits to his animators on his films?  The one who cooperated with HUAC?  

Walt Disney was a businessman.  A very good one.


----------



## tjkraz

crisi said:


> Walt Disney was a businessman.  A very good one.



Amen to that. 

Walt is the guy who set up a separate shell company (WED) outside of Walt Disney Productions and routed some of their most valuable theme park innoventions through that entity. WDP shareholders--including his brother Roy--had no ownership. Walt ultimately made tens-of-millions for himself by selling WED to WDP.  Roy got the shaft. 

Walt was also the man who gave his designers and builders only a year to create and open Disneyland. Is it any wonder that the opening was such a disaster?  But Walt had to start selling those tickets...


----------



## Chuck S

Walt Disney, and how he ran Walt Disney Productions is not the topic of this thread.  You are welcome to start such a discussion on the DIS Community board, if you wish, it would be an interesting discussion, given the responses posted here.  But please return this thread to the topic of valet parking.

Thanks.


----------



## tiggerguy2000

I have to say that I loved the free valet which I used on most trips in the last 10 plus years.I have never liked the three tip process that they use when pulling up to the front door (1 loads the cart,1 parks the car and 1 delivers the bags).While they keep stripping us of perks and restructuring the wording so they could change point value we should be able to change our part of ownership.Are we owners?
I might be wrong but it looks like we lost more then they gave since taking away the free park passes.The more members we have the less we have and the closer we are to the regular resort guests.I think part of why we all became members was because of the perks that seperated us from regular guests.

tiggerguy


----------



## Chuck S

tiggerguy2000 said:


> I have to say that I loved the free valet which I used on most trips in the last 10 plus years.I have never liked the three tip process that they use when pulling up to the front door (1 loads the cart,1 parks the car and 1 delivers the bags).While they keep stripping us of perks and *restructuring the wording so they could change point value *we should be able to change our part of ownership.Are we owners?
> I might be wrong but it looks like we lost more then they gave since taking away the free park passes.The more members we have the less we have and the closer we are to the regular resort guests.I think part of why we all became members was because of the perks that seperated us from regular guests.
> 
> tiggerguy



What are you referring to in the part I bolded?  If you are referring to the ability to reallocate the point charts, the ability for DVC to do has been in the POS since day one.  There was a reallocation in 1996 at OKW.  You don't remember it, as according to your signature, you've been a member since 2000.

Also the free park passes ended before you purchased, as the program ended December 31, 1999, and was only valid for contracts purchased before early to mid 1996.


----------



## TLSnell1981

We are going to be staying at BWV next week. This will be our first visit, with a car, since the decision to discontinue free valet. Grrr...


----------



## Dano1182

We had always used and enjoyed the valet parking perk.(Yes we tipped both ways)
This year we self parked at BWV the self parking lot was jammed and the valet lot was almost empty.
clearly many people are not using valet.
They should enlarge the self parking lot and make it closer to BWV.


----------



## MrShiny

We just got back and saw something interesting.  We went to valet at BoardWalk (we were eating at Kouzzina - which was surprisingly so-so), and the valet immediately stressed it was $12, but that if we were dining with Tables in Wonderland (we were) and showed our receipt, it was free.    Good for me, because I had forgotten that perk!


----------



## Dano1182

So if I am a meber who will be spending money at BWV for 5 days it is 12 bucks
However if I am eating one meal it is free??


----------



## Chuck S

Dano1182 said:


> So if I am a meber who will be spending money at BWV for 5 days it is 12 bucks
> However if I am eating one meal it is free??



Not necessarily.  Diners do not receive free valet unless they *also* have the TiW card, a card for which they paid $75 to $100.  In a way, they pre-paid for the parking privilege.


----------



## FormerValetGuy

Sammie said:


> I don't think anyone is pretending anything.
> 
> When Mears took over valet I do think they agreed to cover the cost of DVC free valet until the next contract. For one think I seem to remember Mears took over in the middle of fiscal year for Disney. At that time Mears had no reference to use as to the cost to them for this perk. I think they were possibly caught off guard as to how many people really use it and wanted a period of evaluation. As to whether Mears offered it as a good will gesture to secure this deal or Disney required it of them really does not matter.
> 
> After this period they realized it was an expense they were not willing to cover and passed it to Disney. Disney was not willing to cover it for DVC and DVC would have passed it the members to pay for out of the dues.
> 
> I have no problem with Disney not wanting to cover it, they don't provide it free for their own resorts why pay it for DVC.
> 
> As to DVC not wanting to pick up the cost, I was told they simply did not feel this was fair to the members that never used it and especially to those members at SSR and OKW where there is no valet offered.
> 
> I know from talking to valet staff at a couple of DVC resorts that some members are horrible about tipping since it was free and the valets said they were glad for it to end.
> 
> Even though we used the service, I had no problem with the decision to end the free valet, but did think DVC did a horrible job of communicating the change to members.



For one, as a veteran, you really didnt know much about the valet outsourcing.  I used to work as a valet supervisor for the company who took over the Disney Valet.  The Company's name is City Nights (parent company), with divisions such as BAGS, CARS, etc.  They not only have the valet at the deluxe resorts, but the bell services at All-Star and Pop Century.  Mears is the transportation company that controls the outsourced  Magical Express and handles all of Disney's cab contracts, not the company that handles the valet duties.  Craig Matter, CEO of City Nights arranged for the contract to include free handicapped parking, as well as DDE/TIW (which the contract for that changed also) for all resorts, as well as carrying on free parking for gold football Disney execs.  The DVC valet was only good at hotels with DVC lodging, which makes sense so that people who visit timeshares they OWN, will have free parking.  We used to get all kinds of cheap, non-tipping guests who were DVC members, to visit our non-dvc hotel.  They would complain constantly about not recieving free parking, when in their contracts, it explained that only DVC hotels would offer the free valet.  Time after time we would have to offer the free valet to these rude and unruly guests, who would not calm down until given free parking that they didnt deserve.

I am sure Mateer let the DVC parking thing go as a way to secure the contract from Disney, as the contract was a short 3 year contract in order for Disney to feel out City Nights and vice-versa.  Mateer just wanted to get his foot in the door, knowing that once Disney invested money into the valet (new equipment, computerized valet input, etc), he would be able to negotiate a better deal later on.  There is no way Disney would get rid of his company after investing the time, effort and money they did.

Mateer's company BAGS is also the company that runs the Resort Airline Check services, the little desks that you can check bags at before you board the Magical Express.

You folks think the old $10 charge, then $12 charge is high for valet?  My current hotel charges $13 for SELF PARKING, and $20 for valet.  At least Disney still has the free self-parking option.

Hope this information might have cleared up some stuff for you guys here on the board and will help in the future.


----------



## Deb & Bill

FormerValetGuy said:


> ....  We used to get all kinds of cheap, non-tipping guests who were DVC members, to visit our non-dvc hotel.  They would complain constantly about not recieving free parking, when in their contracts, it explained that only DVC hotels would offer the free valet.  Time after time we would have to offer the free valet to these rude and unruly guests, who would not calm down until given free parking that they didnt deserve.....



Yep, we all know this type of DVC member.  We hear them all the time when they check in, when they check out, when they dine, when they do nearly anything at WDW.  I just don't understand why anyone caters to their rudeness.  Let them write a letter - and pay for their valet service.


----------



## Dean

FormerValetGuy said:


> For one, as a veteran, you really didnt know much about the valet outsourcing.  I used to work as a valet supervisor for the company who took over the Disney Valet.  The Company's name is City Nights (parent company), with divisions such as BAGS, CARS, etc.  They not only have the valet at the deluxe resorts, but the bell services at All-Star and Pop Century.  Mears is the transportation company that controls the outsourced  Magical Express and handles all of Disney's cab contracts, not the company that handles the valet duties.  Craig Matter, CEO of City Nights arranged for the contract to include free handicapped parking, as well as DDE/TIW (which the contract for that changed also) for all resorts, as well as carrying on free parking for gold football Disney execs.  The DVC valet was only good at hotels with DVC lodging, which makes sense so that people who visit timeshares they OWN, will have free parking.  We used to get all kinds of cheap, non-tipping guests who were DVC members, to visit our non-dvc hotel.  They would complain constantly about not recieving free parking, when in their contracts, it explained that only DVC hotels would offer the free valet.  Time after time we would have to offer the free valet to these rude and unruly guests, who would not calm down until given free parking that they didnt deserve.
> 
> I am sure Mateer let the DVC parking thing go as a way to secure the contract from Disney, as the contract was a short 3 year contract in order for Disney to feel out City Nights and vice-versa.  Mateer just wanted to get his foot in the door, knowing that once Disney invested money into the valet (new equipment, computerized valet input, etc), he would be able to negotiate a better deal later on.  There is no way Disney would get rid of his company after investing the time, effort and money they did.
> 
> Mateer's company BAGS is also the company that runs the Resort Airline Check services, the little desks that you can check bags at before you board the Magical Express.
> 
> You folks think the old $10 charge, then $12 charge is high for valet?  My current hotel charges $13 for SELF PARKING, and $20 for valet.  At least Disney still has the free self-parking option.
> 
> Hope this information might have cleared up some stuff for you guys here on the board and will help in the future.


I would agree overall, nice post.  A couple of minor issues though.  One that the valet parking was never a contractual issue but merely something added by DVC with the specified ability to remove it at any time.  Unfortunately I think DVC has more than it's fair share of those with the entitlement attitude as well as those that have invested a fair amount of money in a product they didn't truly understand.



tiggerguy2000 said:


> I have to say that I loved the free valet which I used on most trips in the last 10 plus years.I have never liked the three tip process that they use when pulling up to the front door (1 loads the cart,1 parks the car and 1 delivers the bags).While they keep stripping us of perks and restructuring the wording so they could change point value we should be able to change our part of ownership.Are we owners?
> I might be wrong but it looks like we lost more then they gave since taking away the free park passes.The more members we have the less we have and the closer we are to the regular resort guests.I think part of why we all became members was because of the perks that seperated us from regular guests.
> 
> tiggerguy


There really isn't a 3 tip process other than in the mind of some members.  The industry standard is to tip the valet on pick up of the vehicle and at the final destination of the bags each direction (room on arrival, car on departure).  It is then up to the various segments to decide how they "divide" up any tips.  For some this is pooling tips, for others it's rotating turns to be in a position to receive tips.  Some chose to do more or differently but there is no expectation to do so.


----------



## jekjones1558

Dean said:


> There really isn't a 3 tip process other than in the mind of some members.  The industry standard is to tip the valet on pick up of the vehicle and at the final destination of the bags each direction (room on arrival, car on departure).  It is then up to the various segments to decide how they "divide" up any tips.  For some this is pooling tips, for others it's rotating turns to be in a position to receive tips.  Some chose to do more or differently but there is no expectation to do so.



I wish that a current valet or bell person at a DVC resort would post regarding how or if tips are pooled.  It just doesn't seem likely to me that valets (non-Disney employees) and bell staff (Disney employees) would split tips.  Until I hear otherwise from one of the workers, I will assume that tips are not shared and I will tip the valets who unload my luggage from my car and then tip the bell person who delivers my luggage.  I would rather that only bell services handled my luggage, but that is not how it works.


----------



## FormerValetGuy

jekjones1558 said:


> I wish that a current valet or bell person at a DVC resort would post regarding how or if tips are pooled.  It just doesn't seem likely to me that valets (non-Disney employees) and bell staff (Disney employees) would split tips.  Until I hear otherwise from one of the workers, I will assume that tips are not shared and I will tip the valets who unload my luggage from my car and then tip the bell person who delivers my luggage.  I would rather that only bell services handled my luggage, but that is not how it works.



We used to pool tips between the valets only, not the bell services.  Bell services at most of the hotels is still run by Disney, and those cast members go in a rotation, and are allowed to keep their own tips.  I find it nuts if I unload two carts of luggage, but you wont tip the valet who did all the loading, but tip only the guy who brought it up.  

Once someone touches your luggage, it is polite to tip them for the help.  Dont ask for the help if you're not going to show some sort of gratuity.  

It's a two tip process, since the valets pool thier tips.  You're not tipping the guy who parks your car and the guy who unloads your luggage separately, the tip you give is split between them.  One tip for bags unloaded/car parked, and one tip for the bellman who delivers your bags.  It's not a crazy concept, and if it is for you, maybe you need to stay at a Holiday Inn Express, HAHA LOL sorry I had to add that.


----------



## jekjones1558

FormerValetGuy said:


> We used to pool tips between the valets only, not the bell services.  Bell services at most of the hotels is still run by Disney, and those cast members go in a rotation, and are allowed to keep their own tips.  I find it nuts if I unload two carts of luggage, but you wont tip the valet who did all the loading, but tip only the guy who brought it up.
> 
> Once someone touches your luggage, it is polite to tip them for the help.  Dont ask for the help if you're not going to show some sort of gratuity.
> 
> It's a two tip process, since the valets pool thier tips.  You're not tipping the guy who parks your car and the guy who unloads your luggage separately, the tip you give is split between them.  One tip for bags unloaded/car parked, and one tip for the bellman who delivers your bags.  It's not a crazy concept, and if it is for you, maybe you need to stay at a Holiday Inn Express, HAHA LOL sorry I had to add that.



I suspected that this is the way it works so I will continue to tip twice to be fair to the workers.  I will also continue to wish that one person could unload AND deliver my luggage so that one tip would be enough.  Sorry, I had to add that.


----------



## Dean

jekjones1558 said:


> I wish that a current valet or bell person at a DVC resort would post regarding how or if tips are pooled.  It just doesn't seem likely to me that valets (non-Disney employees) and bell staff (Disney employees) would split tips.  Until I hear otherwise from one of the workers, I will assume that tips are not shared and I will tip the valets who unload my luggage from my car and then tip the bell person who delivers my luggage.  I would rather that only bell services handled my luggage, but that is not how it works.


IMO it's irrelevant.  My point was there are standards and there are ways for tips to be pooled.  How they do it or whether they do it is really up to the system, it's their responsibility to work it out.  



FormerValetGuy said:


> We used to pool tips between the valets only, not the bell services.  Bell services at most of the hotels is still run by Disney, and those cast members go in a rotation, and are allowed to keep their own tips.  I find it nuts if I unload two carts of luggage, but you wont tip the valet who did all the loading, but tip only the guy who brought it up.
> 
> Once someone touches your luggage, it is polite to tip them for the help.  Dont ask for the help if you're not going to show some sort of gratuity.
> 
> It's a two tip process, since the valets pool thier tips.  You're not tipping the guy who parks your car and the guy who unloads your luggage separately, the tip you give is split between them.  One tip for bags unloaded/car parked, and one tip for the bellman who delivers your bags.  It's not a crazy concept, and if it is for you, maybe you need to stay at a Holiday Inn Express, HAHA LOL sorry I had to add that.


It is a 2 tip process, at the rooms for bags and pick up for the car.  As I noted, there are national standards of how to tip for valet and bell services.  Do an internet search and you can find a dozen sites all saying essentially the same thing but given your past experiences I'm sure you know what they are without looking and know what I've posted to be those standards.  If one feels the valet group deserves more because they are doing more and the bell services less because they are doing less, it's easy to handle within those guidelines.  However, I don't really want their help, I don't want others touching my stuff if I have the choice. However, it's sometimes hard to avoid if you pull up to the front and they grab your things before you can say so.  Personally I'd prefer DVC take the approach that many timeshare have, provide a few carts and no personnel, which is what VB has.


----------

