2027 Points Charts Predictions

[Sandisw]

IIRC, CFW no longer uses the “unit” term. They now use “phase” with the declarations.

All contracts are no longer assigned a specific unit/phase.

Correct because you are simply buying a RTU plan for any inventory in the trust that is activated into your specific plan.

This is another reason why I can see them putting LSL into the trust and selling it that way vs leasehold condo.

Even if it is not combined with CFW, the flexibility that DVD has within that model is much better.

For example, no more needing to RoFR specific units to create a set of points to sell.

Point reallocations across the entire resort and even multiple resorts in the same plan.

FL 718, the condo regulations don’t apply.

Now, all the resorts added inventory in phases too so that phrase is not new, but what they do is simply “activate” new inventory and state the points that go with it.

 

[DoubleBaconBLT]

It "can" be. It can also be on the curve of the BLT that faces Space Mountain and the water there.

Some of my favorite views in any of the resorts though are at BLT, the ones that truly face the lake. Lovely in the morning while drinking coffee.

As for "cheapest," I'll happily pay the difference here for Preferred view. But I'm really hit and miss on many other of the upgraded view categories in terms of their value. For example over in Poly, unless you're on the third floor of Moorea, I'm not sure the upgraded view is much better than what you get in Tokelau. (Admittedly better than anything in Pago.). When people book for the view, I think a lot of them have that one perfect view in their heads--and that one perfect view is there, but also a bunch of other rooms in the same booking category with less-than-perfect views. And in PIT studios, many many less than perfect views. So there's two elements: (1) is the extra cost of the view worth it and (2) if it is, how lucky will I be in the crapshoot of rooms when they are dealt out.

My first stay at Poly, I got 3017 Moorea and it was *AMAZING*. We watched the fireworks show twice from our balcony, and just absolutely loved it.

That said, my next Poly stay is booked for a resort view, mostly to save points.

 

[DoubleBaconBLT]

Correct because you are simply buying a RTU plan for any inventory in the trust that is activated into your specific plan.

This is another reason why I can see them putting LSL into the trust and selling it that way vs leasehold condo.

Even if it is not combined with CFW, the flexibility that DVD has within that model is much better.

For example, no more needing to RoFR specific units to create a set of points to sell.

Point reallocations across the entire resort and even multiple resorts in the same plan.

FL 718, the condo regulations don’t apply.

Now, all the resorts added inventory in phases too so that phrase is not new, but what they do is simply “activate” new inventory and state the points that go with it.

It just feels so sketchy to me that they could use the trust to dilute the value of points if they wanted to. To me, that would be a deal breaker. 50 years is a long time.

 

[Brian Noble]

Lots of things are possible. Many things won't happen. I put "change the points allocated to a resort property" in that category---and I'm pretty cynical when it comes to the Mouse. I think splitting a resort's point charts into home/non-home is more likely (the ability to do this has been in the documents from the start) and even that's probably not going to happen. And I believe this even though DVC has already violated the constant-points-per-unit requirement at several resorts.

To put it another way: There are a lot of things that an happen that will reduce the value of my DVC ownership to me. This is on the list, but there are a lot of things higher on the list---for example, having a severe long-term health issue that makes it harder for me to travel.

 

[Add-On-Itis]

Lots of things are possible. Many things won't happen. I put "change the points allocated to a resort property" in that category---and I'm pretty cynical when it comes to the Mouse. I think splitting a resort's point charts into home/non-home is more likely (the ability to do this has been in the documents from the start) and even that's probably not going to happen. And I believe this even though DVC has already violated the constant-points-per-unit requirement at several resorts.

To put it another way: There are a lot of things that an happen that will reduce the value of my DVC ownership to me. This is on the list, but there are a lot of things higher on the list---for example, having a severe long-term health issue that makes it harder for me to travel.

Care to explain more about home/non-home point chart and how it works?

I agree with DoubleBaconBLT the Trust model is a downgrade for consumers point of view.

 

[Brian Noble]

Technically, when you book a non-home resort, you are converting Home Resort Vacation Points to DVC Vacation Points. The governing documents allow DVC to publish different point values for the same night using DVC Vacation Points compared to using Home Resort Vacation Points.

I don't think this will ever happen. But it has been allowed from the beginning.

While it's true that the trust is slighlty less atractive (for now), the practical difference is negligible from my point of view, and I don't expect that to change materially.

The governing documents also allow DVC to charge a booking fee when using DVC Vacation Points at certain resorts (I think Aulani
is in this category), and while I think that is more likely than a Home/DVC Point split, it still is unlikely to happen.

 

[airjay75]

I think the trust restrictions/possibilities are more than likely to go the same way as the RIV/CFW/VDH resale restrictions. Yes, those of us very ensconced in the details of DVC will feel inclined to shy away from it, at least until we stay there. But, for those people who stay at LSL and decide they just love it and want to "stay magical year after year" won't give a second thought to it. Unless and until Disney ever decides to significantly change the product, those potential changes will have minimal to no effect on would be purchasers of LSL - they will remain theoretical possibilities that people on places like these forums debate. And, if any changes are ever made, you can bet money that they will be changes intended to make purchases of direct points more and not less attractive.

 

[Sandisw]

It just feels so sketchy to me that they could use the trust to dilute the value of points if they wanted to. To me, that would be a deal breaker. 50 years is a long time.

I get it and anyone buying should at least have an idea.

But, I also believe that even if they go the trust route…and I am 90% leaning they will…they still have to have a product that sells.

I would be surprised to see the extremes but if they decide to add different component sites into the same RTU plan, then owners at least need to be aware.

I’m 60/40 when it comes to LSL being put with CFW in the same RTU plan.

And, if they decided to make an inbetween booking window for trust vs non trust properties it could be seems as worth it.

Maybe not now, but take 2042. All that inventory from BCV, BWV and BRV can be transferred into the trust as is…and then be sold under RTU before any refurbs were done and then it stay as part of BVTC for continued 7 month bookings for direct or grandfathered resale points.

We shall see.

 

[TDK44]

Very curious to see when these are released if we’ll have a clue on the AKV refurb.

Will be looking out for “Sleeps 5” in the studios to see if they added the pull down sleeper into those units.

 

[Sandisw]

Very curious to see when these are released if we’ll have a clue on the AKV refurb.

Will be looking out for “Sleeps 5” in the studios to see if they added the pull down sleeper into those units.

They didn’t increase it at SSR studios when they did the rehab so I’d be surprised if they changed it at AKV.

 

[TDK44]

They didn’t increase it at SSR studios when they did the rehab so I’d be surprised if they changed it at AKV.

I just more meant we may have an answer on whether or not they're including the pull down sleeper like in other studio refurbs vs. those they did not (like SSR). You're probably right that they won't, but still holding out hope they do.

My point was more that we won't have to wait for someone to stay in the room to get that answer, as I assume they'd update the 2027 points chart to reflect the change (if they are in fact adding them in).

 

[Hubalorian]

They didn’t increase it at SSR studios when they did the rehab so I’d be surprised if they changed it at AKV.

They also didn’t increase the size for studios or 1 Br at CCV, they had both stay at 4. I would lean they aren’t making changes at AKV

 

[muppets3d]

The resort that I feel like is most out of balance is RIV, I feel like increasing resort view would be a nightmare for them but preferred view is really too high for what it is, so I don't know what they can really do tbh. I guess they just have to live with it.

 

[disneylandtour]

Just a question, is it possible to add a fourth category to some of the PIT rooms, which would half solve the problems? DUO already uses "premium" instead of "theme park view." Something like that, for some of the regular studios, might help manage expectations. The problem is that they've promised a view of something specific (a theme park). What a "premium" view is pretty vague, which actually might help. For me, though, after my second stay in the tower, I'm much happier in the longhouses again. I'll be there in January. Those are my favorite places to stay on property.

 

[Cfabar1]

The view types at PIT were a cash grab. They can rename them whatever they’d like, but unless owners complain louder, I don’t see them moving down the view types point cost,

 

[Tatebeck]

The resort that I feel like is most out of balance is RIV, I feel like increasing resort view would be a nightmare for them but preferred view is really too high for what it is, so I don't know what they can really do tbh. I guess they just have to live with it.

I actually like what they did at RIV. The resort view isn't too expensive, just the preferred view takes a large jump. I feel this benefits owners, at the expense of those trading in. It gives a cheaper option and a premium option for a substantial point difference over the course of a stay. So owners there can get a cheaper option if they wish or a more expensive option. If the two categories were close in point cost (and the avg cost of a room stayed the same), there would be less of a reason to own there. Right now owners can get a cheaper option, and those trading in will be left with the higher point cost rooms. I am okay with that

I do agree with everyone else that Poly took it too far and their upcharges for views (and the rooms that they consider TP/Pref view) are just completely out of whack. The cheap option is already very high cost and then the huge upcharges AND overpromised views? Ouch

 

[Girlstar30]

I actually like what they did at RIV. The resort view isn't too expensive, just the preferred view takes a large jump. I feel this benefits owners, at the expense of those trading in. It gives a cheaper option and a premium option for a substantial point difference over the course of a stay. So owners there can get a cheaper option if they wish or a more expensive option. If the two categories were close in point cost (and the avg cost of a room stayed the same), there would be less of a reason to own there.

I do agree with everyone else that Poly took it too far and their upcharges for views (and the rooms that they consider TP/Pref view) are just completely out of whack. The cheap option is already very high cost and then the huge upcharges? Ouch

I love the riv ones because I prefer the resort view which is a cheaper cost!

 

[muppets3d]

I actually like what they did at RIV. The resort view isn't too expensive, just the preferred view takes a large jump. I feel this benefits owners, at the expense of those trading in. It gives a cheaper option and a premium option for a substantial point difference over the course of a stay. So owners there can get a cheaper option if they wish or a more expensive option. If the two categories were close in point cost (and the avg cost of a room stayed the same), there would be less of a reason to own there. Right now owners can get a cheaper option, and those trading in will be left with the higher point cost rooms. I am okay with that

I do agree with everyone else that Poly took it too far and their upcharges for views (and the rooms that they consider TP/Pref view) are just completely out of whack. The cheap option is already very high cost and then the huge upcharges AND overpromised views? Ouch

Even if the points premium for preferred view were 10% less, that's still a savings that would benefit owners. As you mentioned resort view availability is very limited at 7 months, particularly for the studios. Part of that is probably because neither view is that great and the preferred view premium is just too high. The demand for all room types and views should be as even as possible, and that's just not the case at Riviera right now.

The points premium for AKV savanna view is nowhere near as high as Riviera. And there you have an actual view that's worth looking at, not just a pool or a brown pond.

 

[eticketplease]

I actually like what they did at RIV. The resort view isn't too expensive, just the preferred view takes a large jump. I feel this benefits owners, at the expense of those trading in. It gives a cheaper option and a premium option for a substantial point difference over the course of a stay. So owners there can get a cheaper option if they wish or a more expensive option. If the two categories were close in point cost (and the avg cost of a room stayed the same), there would be less of a reason to own there. Right now owners can get a cheaper option, and those trading in will be left with the higher point cost rooms. I am okay with that

They did a very similar thing with BWV. Looking at studios the point spread is about 4 points for preferred vs resort/standard compared to RIV's 5 points. It certainly is incentive to own at BWV but it also creates a lot of walking since there are 2 preferred types and the one has a significantly less number of rooms for the same cost as the others. I wonder how much walking there will be once RIV is fully sold out and more RIV Resales hit the market.

 

[Tatebeck]

Even if the points premium for preferred view were 10% less, that's still a savings that would benefit owners. As you mentioned resort view availability is very limited at 7 months, particularly for the studios. Part of that is probably because neither view is that great and the preferred view premium is just too high. The demand for all room types and views should be as even as possible, and that's just not the case at Riviera right now.

The points premium for AKV savanna view is nowhere near as high as Riviera. And there you have an actual view that's worth looking at, not just a pool or a brown pond.

It wouldn't actually be a net savings for the average owner since most owners at most resorts book the cheapest views at a higher rate than the more expensive view. It would be a net increase of points used for a stay for actual RIV owners. I would not be for that.

There are 0 resorts that have the point charts balanced so that all room types and views book evenly. It's possible (theoretically), but it would take massive changes, increasing the cost of studios by a lot and decreasing the cost of 1BRs

In comparing to AK, the standard view rooms at AK are also a lot cheaper than the standard rooms at RIV. I would love if they changed RIV's point chart to match AKs and lowered both the preferred view AND standard view, but that is never going to happen. You just can't easily compare across resorts like that. BWV Boardwalk view is a much better view (IMO the best on property), and much cheaper than most other rooms across property too.