7 month/11 month rule

[LorieDisneyLover]

Just wondering if the 7 month/11 month 'rule' can ever be changed by Disney, or is that one of those non-negotiable items of the contract forevermore.

I'm a firm believer in buying where you want to stay -- and honestly wouldn't mind if they changed the 7 months to something more like 4 months.

We purchased enough points to do our annual summer trip to BLT -- with a few points leftover to bank for either larger vacations once in a while or a smaller vacation for just myself and husband now that we are almost empty nester. In trying to plan a small trip just for the two of us even 5 or 6 months out availability has been limited to SSR or OKW -- two places I really don't want to stay. Thinking if the 7 month opening up to everyone was changed to a smaller window if it wouldn't be easier to get into your home resort for shorter planned trips?

Thoughts from the experts?

 

[kenspidey]

Just wondering if the 7 month/11 month 'rule' can ever be changed by Disney, or is that one of those non-negotiable items of the contract forevermore. I'm a firm believer in buying where you want to stay -- and honestly wouldn't mind if they changed the 7 months to something more like 4 months. We purchased enough points to do our annual summer trip to BLT -- with a few points leftover to bank for either larger vacations once in a while or a smaller vacation for just myself and husband now that we are almost empty nester. In trying to plan a small trip just for the two of us even 5 or 6 months out availability has been limited to SSR or OKW -- two places I really don't want to stay. Thinking if the 7 month opening up to everyone was changed to a smaller window if it wouldn't be easier to get into your home resort for shorter planned trips? Thoughts from the experts?

I highly doubt this will ever change... The long reservation window suits Disney well. Are they allowed to change it? Sure.

 

[DebbieB]

Just wondering if the 7 month/11 month 'rule' can ever be changed by Disney, or is that one of those non-negotiable items of the contract forevermore.

I'm a firm believer in buying where you want to stay -- and honestly wouldn't mind if they changed the 7 months to something more like 4 months.

We purchased enough points to do our annual summer trip to BLT -- with a few points leftover to bank for either larger vacations once in a while or a smaller vacation for just myself and husband now that we are almost empty nester. In trying to plan a small trip just for the two of us even 5 or 6 months out availability has been limited to SSR or OKW -- two places I really don't want to stay. Thinking if the 7 month opening up to everyone was changed to a smaller window if it wouldn't be easier to get into your home resort for shorter planned trips?

Thoughts from the experts?

All that is in the contract is a 1 month home priority window. So they could make it 11 months home/10 months other.

 

[DizBub]

In trying to plan a small trip just for the two of us even 5 or 6 months out availability has been limited to SSR or OKW -- two places I really don't want to stay.

That's the deal. At least you CAN find availability 5 or 6 months out. We have run into this quite a bit but after staying at OKW and SSR we have learned to love them. So it's a win-win for us.

Sure we want to stay at BLT, BVC and BWV so I book the 1st 2 at 11 months. Then life happens and we have to cancel and reschedule. I'm just glad to get something. There's always the waitlist.

 

[LorieDisneyLover]

That's the deal. At least you CAN find availability 5 or 6 months out. We have run into this quite a bit but after staying at OKW and SSR we have learned to love them. So it's a win-win for us.

Sure we want to stay at BLT, BVC and BWV so I book the 1st 2 at 11 months. Then life happens and we have to cancel and reschedule. I'm just glad to get something. There's always the waitlist.

True, but I could have saved $20/30 a point and purchased at SSR/OKW if I knew that would be my only options for short stays.

 

[Msmithmd]

True, but I could have saved $20/30 a point and purchased at SSR/OKW if I knew that would be my only options for short stays.

I doubt that Disney will shorten the seven month window until maybe the last two years of RTU for any given property. Disney knows that with this short of a notice members would run into a lot more trouble booking time off work, having purchased flights already, etcetera.

Any prospective buyer better be aware that inside of seven months all points are equal. If you don't intend to use the eleven month window, then I would agree that buying anything over the least expensive resort is wasting your money.

On the other hand, buyers of the least expensive resorts love folks who purchase at VGF or Aulani and then try to book at five months. After all, it is "their rooms" that the earlier bookers are staying in...

 

[supersnoop]

True, but I could have saved $20/30 a point and purchased at SSR/OKW if I knew that would be my only options for short stays.

If you knew you'd be booking less than seven months out, then, yes, you should have focused on price per point when you purchased. The home resort advantage is of no value less than seven months out.

 

[drusba]

The official documents provide the 11/7 rule can change but you must always have at least a 1 month home resort advantage. It has not been changed in the past and likely will not be changed in the future because from DVD's viewpoint the current 11/7 rule works quite well. Moreover, shortening the 7 month period, such as to 4 months, could result in member outrage because creating that short of a period before one could confirm a reservation would significantly reduce one's chances to get low cost airfare or rental cars, restaurant reservations, or high demand events at WDW..

 

[Holly Quinlan]

Thank you for asking/answering this I've been wondering this as well.

 

[DizBub]

True, but I could have saved $20/30 a point and purchased at SSR/OKW if I knew that would be my only options for short stays.

Same here since we bought at BLT and BCV but we knew there would be limited availability inside of 7 months.

I agree that owning SSR and trying your luck at 7 months is a good strategy but if you don't want to stay there it's not money well spent. Had we known how much we enjoy both SSR and OKW we would have bought there instead and saved a ton.

 

[disneynutz]

The official documents provide the 11/7 rule can change but you must always have at least a 1 month home resort advantage. It has not been changed in the past and likely will not be changed in the future because from DVD's viewpoint the current 11/7 rule works quite well. Moreover, shortening the 7 month period, such as to 4 months, could result in member outrage because creating that short of a period before one could confirm a reservation would significantly reduce one's chances to get low cost airfare or rental cars, restaurant reservations, or high demand events at WDW..

Do you really think that Disney cares much about what owners think? They seem to do what they want if it benefits Disney. Outraged owners can sell their interests if they don't like the changes, sell low enough and Disney ROFR's. Either way someone else buy's the contract and DVC marches on.

Bill

 

[LorieDisneyLover]

Thanks for all the replies and insight.

I agree that Disney does what is best for their bottom line … and really, I don't expect anything else.

I went into buying DVC knowing we had to plan well in advance (even with cash reservations we've made for many many years we always booked 7 or more months in advance in order to get the resort we wanted at a discount rate, etc.).

It's just my husband keeps thinking we should add more points for those spur of the moment trips and my thinking is that DVC just isn't for that type of thing -- we'd do better with cash reservations since we really do prefer monorail resorts.

 

[eliza61]

It's also very seasonal, for example we generally visit wdw during late August which seems to be a very low season for dvc members. I've never had any issue getting into other resorts (my home is BCV). We've snagged WL, AKL and BLT all at the 7 month mark.
I'm hopping to get a 2 bedroom at Boardwalk for this August when the window opens up in January.

 

[JimMIA]

Do you really think that Disney cares much about what owners think? They seem to do what they want if it benefits Disney. Outraged owners can sell their interests if they don't like the changes, sell low enough and Disney ROFR's. Either way someone else buy's the contract and DVC marches on.

Bill

Yes, they care -- at least to the degree of not fixing something that isn't broken. Why deal with owner outrage if you don't have to, or if you gain nothing from a change?

 

[JimMIA]

It's just my husband keeps thinking we should add more points for those spur of the moment trips and my thinking is that DVC just isn't for that type of thing -- we'd do better with cash reservations since we really do prefer monorail resorts.

I think the key to spur of the moment trips is attitude. If you will be upset when you don't get spur of the moment, then you're just being unrealistic.

However, if you approach it as a situation where if we get it, great -- if not, oh well, that's a different attitude. You almost certainly will NOT get VGF or Poly, but BLT is a large resort and you might get lucky there.

We live just 4 hours away, and one of my daughters got New Years Eve eek two years in a row at the last minute. And I mean last minute -- after Christmas, and in one case I think only the day before!

Certainly nobody should buy DVC, or any other timeshare, to use for last minute trips. That's just silly. But if you are satisfied whenever good fortune smiles on you...

 

[disneynutz]

Yes, they care -- at least to the degree of not fixing something that isn't broken. Why deal with owner outrage if you don't have to, or if you gain nothing from a change?

That is why I stated that it has to benefit Disney. Increasing the points required to THV stays didn't benefit the owners. Charging $95 for booking non DVC stays didn't benefit owners. I don't know that switching from Interval International to RCI has benefited the owners. Restricting resale bookings didn't benefit the owners.

All of these things could of caused owner outrage but DVC marches on.

Bill

 

[Dean]

Just wondering if the 7 month/11 month 'rule' can ever be changed by Disney, or is that one of those non-negotiable items of the contract forevermore.

I'm a firm believer in buying where you want to stay -- and honestly wouldn't mind if they changed the 7 months to something more like 4 months.

We purchased enough points to do our annual summer trip to BLT -- with a few points leftover to bank for either larger vacations once in a while or a smaller vacation for just myself and husband now that we are almost empty nester. In trying to plan a small trip just for the two of us even 5 or 6 months out availability has been limited to SSR or OKW -- two places I really don't want to stay. Thinking if the 7 month opening up to everyone was changed to a smaller window if it wouldn't be easier to get into your home resort for shorter planned trips?

Thoughts from the experts?

I doubt it will be changed but IF it is, the change would almost certainly be to reduce the home resort window, not increase it. As soon as they don't have a high demand resort to sell and say they do the FW project, this option will be on the table because it would be easier to sell a lower demand resort if they had reduced the home resort priority.

All that is in the contract is a 1 month home priority window. So they could make it 11 months home/10 months other.

It was originally 11/10 in the OKW paperwork but changed by the time it was truly applicable for BWV, HH & VB.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

That is why I stated that it has to benefit Disney. Increasing the points required to THV stays didn't benefit the owners. Charging $95 for booking non DVC stays didn't benefit owners. I don't know that switching from Interval International to RCI has benefited the owners. Restricting resale bookings didn't benefit the owners. All of these things could of caused owner outrage but DVC marches on. Bill

I'd disagree about the THV point change. By adjusting it has made people consider less points and 2 bedrooms vs more points and 3 bedrooms and thus made it not such a high demand option and thus available longer. It really isn't great to have categories that are virtually impossible to book. I believe it's DVCs responsibility to owners to even out demand.

But other things you mention were more for DVCs benefit rather than owners.

 

[Dean]

That is why I stated that it has to benefit Disney. Increasing the points required to THV stays didn't benefit the owners. Charging $95 for booking non DVC stays didn't benefit owners. I don't know that switching from Interval International to RCI has benefited the owners. Restricting resale bookings didn't benefit the owners.

All of these things could of caused owner outrage but DVC marches on.

Bill

IMO they should have made the THV a separate resort then everyone would be happy except maybe the THV owners as the dues increased but at least they'd be paying their own way and have exclusive access to what they intended to buy. As for II vs RCI, I'm not sure I agree that it was a bad move. While I personally like II better, I believe it was a lateral move for DVC. The reason I say that is that on paper II has better resorts, that's mostly because of Westin and Marriott. Both of these, esp marriott, had little real availability within II for DVC owners and hold their deposits for other members there. So when you look at actual availability to DVC members, I think they're fairly comparable. RCI also is a better fit for DVC because of the points system and while RCI requires more long term planning, it allows more chances for the DVC members that do plan to be successful. I still believe that DVC could ramp up the BVTC and liaison with Marriott, Wyndham, Hilton, Hyatt and the like and become the instant top exchange company.

I do believe there are some benefits to certain owners based not the resale restrictions. For new owners, it forces them to think about the real cost and value of those other options and highlights how bad of a deal they are. For current owners, they've limited the pool of points that could be exchanged and potentially increase the value over time due to the lower competition and lower volume of cash rooms needed to keep the system running. The only real negative I can think of is if one goes to resale and I don't believe anyone should buy in planning to resale later.

 

[JimMIA]

Charging $95 for booking non DVC stays didn't benefit owners.

I don't know about ALL non-DVC options, but the $95 RCI exchange fee is certainly a benefit to DVC owners. For most RCI transactions, the fee is about $200. DVC effectively collects half of that from DVC owners exchanging out and the other $95 from the RCI member coming in with their $95 "because we can" fee for absolutely nothing. DVC members using RCI are getting half-price exchange fees.

I don't know that switching from Interval International to RCI has benefited the owners.

I think it's hard to say, and probably depends on one's perspective. It is often said that II offered better "quality." But if, as Dean says, there was little real availability, what difference does quality make if you can't get it? Certainly RCI offers far more resorts in far more locations than II did, especially with the recent BIG increase in the number of RCI resorts available to DVC owners.

The only true measure of the value of RCI seems to be the number of DVC owners who use it. I don't have any stats (maybe Dean does), but my sense from anecdotal information from the TUG Sightings board and other boards is that a LOT of people are successfully exchanging INTO DVC. Despite what many think, DVC is really quite "gettable" through RCI. That can't happen unless DVC owners exchange out.