Polynesian DVC Disappointment

[DisDadDVC]

I don't think 3 categories is unreasonable. As a guest, I care more about guests generally getting what they pay for than what makes it easiest for Disney. (I make that argument at my own work as well, where I regularly advocate doing the right thing for the user versus what's "easiest" for us internally.)

Oh, I agree that I would rather have more booking categories. But remember, the better something is for us, the worse it is for Disney...

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

I don't think 3 categories is unreasonable. As a guest, I care more about guests generally getting what they pay for than what makes it easiest for Disney. (I make that argument at my own work as well, where I regularly advocate doing the right thing for the user versus what's "easiest" for us internally.)

Actually it makes no difference to Disney. They've sold the points and that's where they really make their money. It would make a difference to owners as I mentioned above. Smaller categories mean harder to book which may be fine for some people if it means guaranteeing a certain view. But it also could mean that some owners have to book a night in a parking lot view, a couple in a lakeview and then a couple in a standard view. I think many would be unhappy with that too.

 

[kungaloosh22]

Actually it makes no difference to Disney. They've sold the points and that's where they really make their money. It would make a difference to owners as I mentioned above. Smaller categories mean harder to book which may be fine for some people if it means guaranteeing a certain view. But it also could mean that some owners have to book a night in a parking lot view, a couple in a lakeview and then a couple in a standard view. I think many would be unhappy with that too.

I guess an extra category would make it a bit harder to book a single category, especially for a longer stay or if you book late. It's a trade-off I'd happily make (view is important to us and my expectations are low when booking DVC late anyway) but yeah, YMMV.

 

[Sammie]

There are actually 24 Lake View studios on the third floor. In addition, one of studios (Villa #3024) is an Handicap Accessible villa.

As previously posted, only 40.71% of PVB's total points inventory has been declared for the DVC inventory. This means that on any given Use Day no more than 40.71% of PVB's total residential space can be booked using DVC points. However, its virtually impossible to determine how this limit impacts members' ability to book specific villas. The Reciprocal Use Clause that applies to all DVC villas lets DVC members access inventory that has not yet been declared in exchange for letting DVD access the DVC inventory. In theory, members might be able to book all 72 Lake View studios, or they could be limited to a much smaller number.

You are right I missed counted, there are 24 and according to Tikiman pages maps, 3 are handicap accessible.

 

[DougEMG]

I don't think 3 categories is unreasonable. As a guest, I care more about guests generally getting what they pay for than what makes it easiest for Disney. (I make that argument at my own work as well, where I regularly advocate doing the right thing for the user versus what's "easiest" for us internally.)

I agree. BWV has 3 different view categories, standard, pool/garden and boardwalk and I think that works out well.

 

[Dean]

Make sure you send this to DVC Member satisfaction through the website.
I am thinking that enough people complain that DVC will change the designation of those "lake view" rooms to garden view.

Either simply change their label or reallocate raising the standard view points. This was a predictable situation, one that was talked about before the resort opened. Anyone buying there should know that requests are not guaranteed and that DVC doesn't put much effort into them. They should also know that there are limitations as to the view. In general in the timeshare industry view is used very loosely and actual view doesn't measure up to what a label might suggest. For example, the VB Inn rooms on the ocean only have ocean views from the higher floors.

But they CAN guarantee a higher floor room, that is my point.

I did not have unreasonable expectations. The point I am making is Disney knows what percentage of requests they get for higher floors for the lagoon view bookings. If the number of requests is below the number of rooms available then I should have gotten the higher floor room. If on the other hand Disney is consistently getting more requests for higher floor rooms than the number of rooms they have available, I feel it is reasonable for them to provide a booking category for higher floor rooms.

They could but they are not. IMO you did have unreasonable expectations and the ability to know the risks and situation before the resort opened and I'm presuming, before you bought in. I was reading your OP and kept expecting them to offer to move you for the cleaning charge which would have been appropriate in this situation. Hopefully things will go better going forward.

Oh, I agree that I would rather have more booking categories. But remember, the better something is for us, the worse it is for Disney...

And it's not better for members either as it fragments the inventory and likely would raise the points of the higher category rooms.

 

[LisaS]

And it's not better for members either as it fragments the inventory and likely would raise the points of the higher category rooms.

That is what happened at AKV when they reclassified some of the Savanna View rooms to Standard View. The cost to book a Savanna View 1BR went up in just about every season to compensate for the rooms that were moved down in price. The rooms they reclassified should never have been Savanna View in the first place. It would have been better to classify them as Standard View from the beginning rather than subject some members to a disappointing stay and then create a problem for others who bought enough points to book Savanna View only to have the price go up.

 

[dizfan]

Actually it makes no difference to Disney. They've sold the points and that's where they really make their money. It would make a difference to owners as I mentioned above. Smaller categories mean harder to book which may be fine for some people if it means guaranteeing a certain view. But it also could mean that some owners have to book a night in a parking lot view, a couple in a lakeview and then a couple in a standard view. I think many would be unhappy with that too.

To a certain extent, it may actually be better for Disney. If people knew they would get a 2nd/3rd floor view, some will certainly consider it worth owning a fixed week.

Similarly, if they introduced a true standard view (parking lot view) for lower points, it likely increases demand. As evidence, look at AKV, BWV, and BLT standard view popularity. People complain that they have to book in early September and walk their reservation if they want late October.

OKW HH, BWV standard view and boardwalk view, AKV Concierge and standard view, etc are all examples where it makes owning more important because there is limited supply for high demand.

It does mean there may be slighly more openings (night here/there).
However, I'm in the category that believe limited supply helps Disney enough that it would be a wise decision.

Oddly enough, PVB may be the most extreme treatment of point options. Say it's 4 million points, only 3 room categories. BLT is just under 6 million points for 14 booking options (studio, 1BR, 2BR LO, 2BR Ded) standard, lake, theme park view...plus GV lake and GV theme park. VGF is even more extreme...about 2.5 million points for 10 booking options (studio, 1BR, 2BR LO, 2BR Ded) standard view, lake view plus the GVs.

I guess the question is whether spreading the points around to more booking options hurt the other resorts? I see why people think it's better to have fewer categories, but it would also be better to sell only a week's vacation like other timeshares. Much easier on the system if you only sell fixed weeks. I'll take a 100 flavor ice cream shoppe over a 3 flavor ice cream shoppe any day.

PROS and CONS.

 

[disneynutz]

To a certain extent, it may actually be better for Disney. If people knew they would get a 2nd/3rd floor view, some will certainly consider it worth owning a fixed week.

Similarly, if they introduced a true standard view (parking lot view) for lower points, it likely increases demand. As evidence, look at AKV, BWV, and BLT standard view popularity. People complain that they have to book in early September and walk their reservation if they want late October.

OKW HH, BWV standard view and boardwalk view, AKV Concierge and standard view, etc are all examples where it makes owning more important because there is limited supply for high demand.

It does mean there may be slighly more openings (night here/there).
However, I'm in the category that believe limited supply helps Disney enough that it would be a wise decision.

Oddly enough, PVB may be the most extreme treatment of point options. Say it's 4 million points, only 3 room categories. BLT is just under 6 million points for 14 booking options (studio, 1BR, 2BR LO, 2BR Ded) standard, lake, theme park view...plus GV lake and GV theme park. VGF is even more extreme...about 2.5 million points for 10 booking options (studio, 1BR, 2BR LO, 2BR Ded) standard view, lake view plus the GVs.

I guess the question is whether spreading the points around to more booking options hurt the other resorts? I see why people think it's better to have fewer categories, but it would also be better to sell only a week's vacation like other timeshares. Much easier on the system if you only sell fixed weeks. I'll take a 100 flavor ice cream shoppe over a 3 flavor ice cream shoppe any day.

PROS and CONS.

But I only like the 3 flavors of ice cream and the bigger stores charge more.

Bill

 

[dcfromva]

I agree. BWV has 3 different view categories, standard, pool/garden and boardwalk and I think that works out well.

I agree that the system at BWV works well currently. But, they didn't start out with a BWV view booking category. Folks used to camp out in the lobby (and other extreme tactics) in order to get a BWV room.

But, an unintended consequence that folks might not be thinking about with having multiple room categories is how this would work with the Wait List (as it is currently set up). Having multiple views might mean availability in another room view category than the 2 you selected to WL.... (Of course, on the other hand there may be some folks who wouldn't want anything but a top floor--in which case it would work out well for them. )

 

[disneynutz]

I agree that the system at BWV works well currently. But, they didn't start out with a BWV view booking category. Folks used to camp out in the lobby (and other extreme tactics) in order to get a BWV room.

But, an unintended consequence that folks might not be thinking about with having multiple room categories is how this would work with the Wait List (as it is currently set up). Having multiple views might mean availability in another room view category than the 2 you selected to WL.... (Of course, on the other hand there may be some folks who wouldn't want anything but a top floor--in which case it would work out well for them. )

Excellent point!

Bill

 

[Dean]

That is what happened at AKV when they reclassified some of the Savanna View rooms to Standard View. The cost to book a Savanna View 1BR went up in just about every season to compensate for the rooms that were moved down in price. The rooms they reclassified should never have been Savanna View in the first place. It would have been better to classify them as Standard View from the beginning rather than subject some members to a disappointing stay and then create a problem for others who bought enough points to book Savanna View only to have the price go up.

Once it's fully open and declared adding an additional booking category wouldn't be that much of an issue though a connecting room category could be problematic. But it would raise some of the points and it still wouldn't please a lot of those who might be dissatisfied now. It'd also add another group that were upset because of the higher points. You'd likely have less standard AND less LV OR you'd simply have a different grouping with the same points (like BWV BW view). I actually think there are some things they can do and likely some they should do but wanted to make sure those reading considered the law of unintended consequences.

 

[supersnoop]

Adding a new category could also mess with existing fixed-week contracts.

 

[DougEMG]

Normally I book BWV standard view, why because I'm cheap with points and could care less about the view. But when I do occasionally book a view room, I want that view and would be pissed off if I didn't get it. I'm pretty sure that most people booking the "good" view categories do it expressly for the room and it should be Disney's responsibility to class the rooms correctly. After all they are suppose to be managing the resort for the owners benefit not theirs.

 

[Dean]

Adding a new category could also mess with existing fixed-week contracts.

Probably not, at least not with the numbers they've limited it to and certainly not with the number actually sold. For it to be an issue from the fixed owners perspective, you'd have to end up with enough fixed week owners to saturate a given view and have spillover. What it would do would be to reduced the inventory in that grouping for non fixed week points reservations. I haven't seen the legal paperwork on the fixed week resorts but I'm willing to bet there's a clause giving them the right to remove or change the views similar to the maximum reallocation clause. In a sense DVC has created a separate DVC component with a crossover option. Think of the fixed week owners as owning a separate timeshare within the same resort but one that they have the ability to convert to the other system if they want. And like similar other systems (Marriott Trust, weeks & Destination owners come to mind) the points owners ONLY have access to the fixed week inventory IF the fixed week owner so chooses. For Marriott, Weeks owners have no access to Trust inventory directly and trust owners only have access to weeks inventory directly. Weeks owners who have ENROLLED in the Destinations program (paying the applicable fee) have access directly to fixed inventory and indirectly to Trust inventory. Trust owners have access directly only to Trust inventory and indirectly to a subset of weeks inventory. Who has the upper hand depends on the size of each inventory but all else equal, Trust owners in Marriott have the better position for reservations but weeks owners have it better from a request priority standpoint. For DVC, the fixed week owners clearly have the trump position.

 

[wdrl]

You are right I missed counted, there are 24 and according to Tikiman pages maps, 3 are handicap accessible.

Although its not officially stated in any of the documentation, it appears that PVB's Handicap Accessible villas have a swinging patio door rather than a sliding patio door. I went back and reviewed the Moorea floorplans that were included in PVB's Master Declaration. There is only one villa (#3024) on the Lake View side of the third floor that shows a swinging patio door.

Perhaps there are some HA villas with sliding patio doors, or perhaps the floorplans are not accurate. But it looks to me that there is only one Lake View HA villa on the third floor.

 

[CarolMN]

To expand upon Dean's posts, if Disney had just called those 72 lake view rooms, "Lake Side", most members (eventually) would not have the expectation of a particular view. Of course there would still be disappointment, but that is the nature of the requests.

I prefer fewer number of booking categories over multiple. It makes for a more efficient system, more waitlist success and thus a lower cost to administer.

 

[DougK]

With all due respect, that's what you're not seeing. You DID have unreasonable expectations. They CAN guarantee a higher floor, but they didn't in your case correct? When you booked your stay you REQUESTED this, but they never guaranteed it. You wanted a better view, don't you think most people wanted a higher floor as well? That's why they weren't available.

Yes, it would be nice if they threw some magic your way, but they didn't. I can see being bummed out this happened, but I don't think Disney is to blame, it's just the circumstances.

Once again I just want to say to everyone on here that I understand room requests are not guaranteed. I am just saying if Disney is getting more of a specific request on a consistent basis (in this case, higher floor) than they can handle they should change the booking categories so that the consistently requested view is bookable. And if they are not getting too many requests of that type then they should accommodate the ones who request it.

 

[DougK]

Sure, they could make the 3rd floor a booking category and guarantee it but that comes with more issues for a small number of rooms mostly with stranded days here and there. For example I was originally surprised that they were not doing TPV at VGC but I'm now thankful they didn't because booking would have been made that much more difficult. Consider that you're ahead of the game because you know the 1st floor views do not equal the 3rd floor and can determine if the odds of getting the 1st floor is worth the points required for LV vs SV.

So I disagree it's completely reasonable to make the top floor a booking category. If it was it would likely only be owners there that would get it most times of the year, but perhaps that's your wish? You might find though that you couldn't even get that category though if it was because it would be fairly limited and probably far more popular if the top floor was guaranteed.

Yes but if it was a category and I couldn't get it at least I wouldn't be spending more points for a view that I can't see.

 

[DougK]

They could go a VERY long way to making everyone happy with 3 views. Standard parking lot view, garden view (including 1st floor Moorea), and lake view (upper 2 floors of Moorea and possibly a handful of Tokelau rooms).

yes!