Anyone else disappointed with booking lately??

[tjkraz]

Does DVC have an obligation to reallocate point charges at POLY if the Bungalows do not rent at their current price requirements? Let's say that only 75% of the bungalows are reserved on points but studios are near 100%, this creates an imbalance in the system since those unused bungalow points are most likely being used at other resorts taking away that availability.

I'm inclined to say that yes, DVC has fiduciary responsibility to balance the points charts relative to member demand.

However, this thread has already addressed time periods like early-December and October/fall which have grown increasingly skewed over the years with no modifications made by Disney. I've given up guessing whether or not DVC will make adjustments to compensate.

 

[ziravan]

Does DVC have an obligation to reallocate point charges at POLY if the Bungalows do not rent at their current price requirements? Let's say that only 75% of the bungalows are reserved on points but studios are near 100%, this creates an imbalance in the system since those unused bungalow points are most likely being used at other resorts taking away that availability. At some point would DVC not have to move the point requirement down for the bungalows (thus up for the studios) to ensure a better utilization rate? If not then DVC could theoretically offer a "super grand villa" at every new resort that cost 500 points a night just to increase total points to sell at a resort. This would be done with the understanding that the room would never really book, but allowing DVC to sell more points for a resort. In no way do I think they would actually do this but it is just an example.

DVC has an obligation to operate in the best interest of owners.

Close to 90% of Poly owners are only buying enough points to stay in studios. If DVC lowers the cost of bungalows by increasing the cost of studios, that would not be in the best interest of the vast majority of Poly owners.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

The CRO/breakage element of this discussion also mystifies me. So there aren't enough DVC owners willing to spend points there, but there are ample cash guests ready and willing to spend $3000 per night for a bungalow?

Well, since dues pay the maintenance on these units and the points are sold whether the units are full or not, you have to consider the cash rental largely profit. So even if they only sell 1 in 3 nights, that's still profit as end result.

 

[ziravan]

There are 42 Grand Villas in those three locations.

My problem with this discussion is that it always seems to be rooted in: "*I* don't see the value in using points for a bungalow so clearly nobody else is doing it."

For 25 years, DVC has had high-priced niche accommodations. For 25 years, people have paid premium points to stay at the Grand Floridian or Bay Lake Tower when cheaper options like OKW and SSR existed. For 25 years, nobody ever cared a bit about occupancy level of those Grand Villas. I've yet to see a single post from someone who monitored Grand Villa availability and posted theories about how vacancies are negatively impacting the system.

That said, I think a greater threat to Poly Bungalow occupancy is looming now that Copper Creek will have more economical cabins.

Nevertheless, it seems foolish to apply our own personal bias to the bungalows. Especially when considering that those rooms represent a fraction-of-one-percent of all DVC units. Doesn't take many owners wanting that high-end, once-in-a-lifetime, VIP experience to fill (or nearly fill) those bungalows nightly.



The CRO/breakage element of this discussion also mystifies me. So there aren't enough DVC owners willing to spend points there, but there are ample cash guests ready and willing to spend $3000 per night for a bungalow?

You point out the problem here: Bungalow/GVs are 1% of rooms in the DVC system but 5% of Poly rooms - but more importantly 25% of Poly points. There are no other type of accommodations to eat into that percentage.

For example, we've discussed here and in other threads that 1brs being twice the cost of studios seems out of whack but that higher cost for 1BRs balances somewhat more the cost of GVs in the overall scheme of things at a GV resort. Even CCV has that kind of balancing mechanism for its cabins.

I do not make the argument that because I do not want to stay in a bungalow, then nobody would. I make the argument that the vast majority of Poly owners aren't buying enough points to routinely stay in Bungalows.

Even if every single bungalow is always booked on points, they won't nearly all be Poly points. And this is germaine to the current discussion: availability at 7 months.

Because Poly is oversold on Bungalows as a percentage of points vs clear buyer's intent based on size of contracts, it will be bungalows that are available in much greater supply than studios at Poly at 7 months.

That'll be great for SSR owners wanting to have a special anniversary stay as a one off trip. It won't do much to satiate demand for near park studios during Fall Frenzy at 7 months.

We've discussed the concept here that the availability of new rooms grows in direct proportion with the numbers of new owners. But so far as studios are concerned, that's not true here. At Poly, the number of new owners in the market to book studios will be greater than the number of studios. That means, at 7 months during Fall Frenzy, there'll probably be more Poly owners vying for rooms elsewhere than other owners being able to score studio rooms at Poly. On balance, Poly will end up exacerbating the current trend of fierce demand at 7 months, especially during Fall Frenzy.

As to $3000 for CRO, I wouldn't expect anybody to pay that. The higher the rack rate, the better the discount. In any case, DVC has far more latitude to vary pricing to fill rooms on the cash side. Even at charging $1200/night, the Bungalows as breakage is a great deal for DVC. But even that misses the point: the approximately 1 million points being sold for approximately $155 after incentives ($155,000,000.00) that the bungalows enable is the point.

If DVC were cynical about it, and I would be if I were them, then every point they get in exchange for cruises, etc., would be exchanged into studios. If I were them, I'd let Bungalows come to me as breakage only. To the extent that would hold true, that would also serve to tie up studio availability prior to the 7 month window.

 

[drusba]

PVB currently does not have any real reservation problem for studios. It has not yet had any issues at 11 months out like VGF has had. Studios have usually been open at 7 months out from mid-Jan to late Sep. During DVC's high demand season from late Sept to marathon weekend in Jan, it is annually seeing more and more days fill before 7 months out as more of Poly gets sold but it is still easier to get than studios at BWV, BCV, BLT, VGF or BRV. PVB has the protection of numbers, 360 studios.

The bungalows have been filling at just a little quicker pace than the SSR GVs, which have the slowest fill rate of all GVs but still fill faster than SSR 2BRs. During this slow DVC demand time of year, the bungalows have been open in 2017 for over a majority of the dates from mid-Jan though mid-May at 30 days out, and many dates have been open even at 1 day out, e.g., today is April 18 and April 19 through 22, 28 through 30, May 1 through 11 and 14 through 19 are still open, but that kind of pattern is somewhat quicker than SSR GVs, and the bungalows are seeing several dates fill in the high demand season from late Sep to marathon weekend in Jan.

My sense is that PVB owners may be increasing the 7 month demand at other resorts, particularly for studios, but it has little to nothing to do with lack of availability of studios at PVB but instead with PVB owners seeing that studios elsewhere are less point costly and thus definitely worth trying if you want to try a different resort. As to actually filling bungalows, Disney gets a lot more dates for those than other rooms beyond breakage, and is having some, but not any outstanding, success in renting them. However, from Disney's perspective, it is a win win situation -- it gets to use the bungalows as an advertising vehicle, it gets a lot of open dates to rent at 60 days out and rents some of those, and it has no loss if not rented because the members pay for the maintenance and utilities through dues.

 

[tjkraz]

I do not make the argument that because I do not want to stay in a bungalow, then nobody would. I make the argument that the vast majority of Poly owners aren't buying enough points to routinely stay in Bungalows.

And I would argue that the same has happened to every resort to varying degrees.

Did enough people buy SSR to routinely stay in Grand Villas? Or BWV owners wanting to stay in Garden View rooms? Or VGF buyers staying in 1B villas? Or Aulani owners for the ocean view?

Even if every single bungalow is always booked on points, they won't nearly all be Poly points. And this is germaine to the current discussion: availability at 7 months.

Again, nothing new. Most resorts routinely have availability at 7 months which owners use to maneuver to a preferred destination.

Because Poly is oversold on Bungalows as a percentage of points vs clear buyer's intent based on size of contracts, it will be bungalows that are available in much greater supply than studios at Poly at 7 months.

No argument there. Odds are similarly slim of getting a BLT or BWV Standard View room at 7 months. To use your words, those resorts are "oversold" in relation to demand for Lake View / Garden View.

To address the CRO / cash topic, it's worth pointing out that 10+ years ago the DVC point system was heavily biased toward weekday stays with Friday and Saturday nights costing around twice as much as Sun - Thurs. If ever there was a self-serving setup, it would seem to be that. The cheap weekday points were a great selling tool for DVC, while many owners ended up paying cash for their weekend nights.

Disney could have maintained a "we have your money so we don't care" attitude which many ascribe to them. Weekend nights would continue to flood into CRO/breakage as owners either avoided weekends or happily paid cash for those nights.

Instead Disney rebalanced the points and fixed the problem.

Do I think the Bungalows are overpriced? It's very possible. But I don't have enough information to judge how it compares to similar imbalances in demand which undoubtedly exist at every DVC property. And I definitely don't buy into the idea that DVC promotes imbalances in the system to suit their own interests via CRO. DVC's primary goal is to sell points. Maintaining unreasonable prices on certain units and promoting owner booking frustration does not improve the quality (reputation) of the program.

 

[ziravan]

PVB currently does not have any real reservation problem for studios. It has not yet had any issues at 11 months out like VGF has had. Studios have usually been open at 7 months out from mid-Jan to late Sep. During DVC's high demand season from late Sept to marathon weekend in Jan, it is annually seeing more and more days fill before 7 months out as more of Poly gets sold but it is still easier to get than studios at BWV, BCV, BLT, VGF or BRV. PVB has the protection of numbers, 360 studios.

The bungalows have been filling at just a little quicker pace than the SSR GVs, which have the slowest fill rate of all GVs but are still fill faster to fill than SSR 2BRs. During this slow DVC demand time of year, the bungalows have been open in 2017 for over a majority of the dates from mid-Jan though mid-May at 30 days out, and many dates have been open even at 1 day out, e.g., today is April 18 and April 19 through 22, 28 through 30, May 1 through 11 and 14 through 19 are still open, but that kind of pattern is somewhat quicker than SSR GVs, and the bungalows are seeing several dates fill in the high demand season from late Sep to marathon weekend in Jan.

My sense is that PVB owners may be increasing the 7 month demand at other resorts, particularly for studios, but it has little to nothing to do with lack of availability of studios at PVB but instead with PVB owners seeing that studios elsewhere are less point costly and thus definitely worth trying if you want to try a different resort. As to actually filling bungalows, Disney gets a lot more dates than other rooms beyond breakage, an dis having some but not any outstanding success in renting them. However, from Dinsey's perspective, it is a win win situation -- it gets to use the bungalows as an advertising vehicle, it gets a lot of open dates to rent at 60 days out and rents some of those, and it has not loss because the members pay for the maintenance and utilities through dues.

Poly owners might indeed look at other resorts for cheaper points per night stays. But as the highest point per night units in DVC, that's a one way street. Other DVC owners will want to stay at Poly, but certainly not because it's cheaper to do so.

But that will also serve to skew demand, especially during Fall Frenzy. To the extent owners are trading out for cheaper points, that's going to be much more reflected with bungalow availability or studio availability off season.

Dates are already booking up at Poly during Fall Frenzy before 7 months and there are more rooms than owners while still for sale. Add in that almost every rented point is being used during Fall Frenzy (why pay a premium for Poly points to use them in Feb?)

Between intrinsic owner demand and rental demand, there will not be much studio availability at Poly at 7 months during Fall Frenzy.

But as you note, there may be quite a bit of demand for Poly owners looking for cheaper stays elsewhere during that same window.

And this is my point. Poly is set up in such a way that it'll aggravate the hunt for Fall Frenzy studios at 7 months, not abate it.

The OP expresses concern that availability is getting worse at 7 months and the OP's example was an attempt to reserve a Fall Frenzy (Oct) room less than 7 months out.

The problem the OP highlights will only get worse over time and Poly will only add to that problem.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

I don't think that it's the studios at PVB that contribute to the problem. It's the over-priced bungalows. They inflate the overall number of points that will eventually be sold. A quick look at the RAT this morning showed only scattered nights where the bungalows are fully booked. Not very many owners across DVC have a sufficient number of points to book more than a couple of nights there annually. Nor do many desire to use their points that way. When PVB is finally sold out, those empty bungalows will represent points that are either going unused or being used to book elsewhere inside the 7-month window. IMO, it's only going to get more difficult to book last-minute trips as DVD continues to flood DVC with new owners and renting between the 11-7 month dates becomes more mainstream.

I think there was some misunderstanding of my post as I wasn't indicating any problem per se that Poly presents with availability - I was adding my thought to what lisaviolet had mentioned about a DVC resort with studios only still getting complaints which someone else thought would solve their problems of not getting the room they wanted a month or two out from check in. PVB was not the home run that DVD apparently thought it would be as far as sales from anecdotal evidence - there are still people that want 1 and 2BR's. But for years now studios book up much faster than any other accommodations so it seems fairly apparent that the allocations they decide to do at resorts is somewhere in between what they have historically done and what they did with the all studio PVB (and few overpriced 2BR's).

I'm still waiting to see where the bungalows really settle in and what effect they have, if any.

 

[ziravan]

I think there was some misunderstanding of my post as I wasn't indicating any problem per se that Poly presents with availability - I was adding my thought to what lisaviolet had mentioned about a DVC resort with studios only still getting complaints which someone else thought would solve their problems of not getting the room they wanted a month or two out from check in. PVB was not the home run that DVD apparently thought it would be as far as sales from anecdotal evidence - there are still people that want 1 and 2BR's. But for years now studios book up much faster than any other accommodations so it seems fairly apparent that the allocations they decide to do at resorts is somewhere in between what they have historically done and what they did with the all studio PVB (and few overpriced 2BR's).

I'm still waiting to see where the bungalows really settle in and what effect they have, if any.

It was quite telling for VP Potrock in his CCV construction video to stress, "We've heard our members say loud and clear that they want diversity in accommodations."

 

[tjkraz]

The OP expresses concern that availability is getting worse at 7 months and the OP's example was an attempt to reserve a Fall Frenzy (Oct) room less than 7 months out.

The problem the OP highlights will only get worse over time and Poly will only add to that problem.

There are two components to that conclusion: Demand for fall dates and demand for Studio villas. DVC could easily make an impact on the seasonal uptick by adjusting the point charts. Charging more points for every night will stretch the existing villas further.

As for the volume of Studio villas, Poly would seem to have helped the system as a whole. Looking at other resorts, the Beach Club only has 23% of its 3 million points in Studio rooms. Old Key West has 18% of its 7.7 million points in Studios. Grand Floridian has less than 17% of its points in Studios.

Meanwhile Poly has 75% of its points in Studios, 3-4 times the volume of other resorts.

Do more people buy Poly to stay in Studios? Sure. But there are also people who bought Poly just because it was the only thing offered. There are owners who plan to regularly use points at other resorts for 1 and 2 bedroom villas.

Meanwhile, I wouldn't be surprised if Studio demand for resorts like BCV and VGF is at least twice the number of rooms available, particularly with the extra bed being added to many during the recent refurbs.

You can't arbitrarily assume that 90% of Poly owners bought points for Studio stays without acknowledging that for other resorts the number could be 40%, or 50% or 60%...any of which would put them far more out of balance than the Poly.

 

[ziravan]

There are two components to that conclusion: Demand for fall dates and demand for Studio villas. DVC could easily make an impact on the seasonal uptick by adjusting the point charts. Charging more points for every night will stretch the existing villas further.

As for the volume of Studio villas, Poly would seem to have helped the system as a whole. Looking at other resorts, the Beach Club only has 23% of its 3 million points in Studio rooms. Old Key West has 18% of its 7.7 million points in Studios. Grand Floridian has less than 17% of its points in Studios.

Meanwhile Poly has 75% of its points in Studios, 3-4 times the volume of other resorts.

Do more people buy Poly to stay in Studios? Sure. But there are also people who bought Poly just because it was the only thing offered. There are owners who plan to regularly use points at other resorts for 1 and 2 bedroom villas.

Meanwhile, I wouldn't be surprised if Studio demand for resorts like BCV and VGF is at least twice the number of rooms available, particularly with the extra bed being added to many during the recent refurbs.

You can't arbitrarily assume that 90% of Poly owners bought points for Studio stays without acknowledging that for other resorts the number could be 40%, or 50% or 60%...any of which would put them far more out of balance than the Poly.

I agree with this.

But even if other resorts are more out of balance as a percentage, Poly's problem is compounded by a lack of other options.

I'm not arbitrarily assuming that 90% bought Poly for Poly studios, rather I'm assuming that 90% DIDN'T buy to routinely stay in bungalows; they don't have the points for it.

To a lesser degree, most Poly owners also don't have points for 2BRs, or even 1BRs elsewhere. Those aren't offered at Poly to peg points at, and the points are too much per point to buy more than planned needs.

If you bought enough points for a 1BR at BWV, you can probably make 1 BRs work anywhere. Nobody is buying enough points for a 1BR at Poly. They're all buying just enough for their only realistic option at that price: studios.

Now. Poly is high enough cost per night to almost get a 1BR at places like OKW and BWV stnd, so those would be in play for the number of points most people own (if they can get them at 7 months).

I think a fair amount of Poly owners will in fact be looking elsewhere for cheaper options. Let's face it, we're all point hoarders. I used Poly points to book that 2BR BLT TPV for Fall. Why? It was less than half the cost of a bungalow for essentially the same experience (view, location, size).

The skew to Fall Frenzy, the lack of other options, rental preference skewed for Fall, and the smaller generally size of Poly contracts all suggest to me that Poly will be a difficult 7th month booking during Fall Frenzy. And to the degree Poly owners ARE looking to book out during that time, Poly will place more pressure on the 7 month window on Fall bookings generally.

That's not as opposed to other properties - for various and similar reasons most are also net drains on Fall Frenzy. The problem started before Poly. I think many ppl see 360 near park studios and think that's going to at least feed somewhat into 7 month demand. I started this line of thought based on a comment that at least Poly would add near park studio rooms at 7 months.

For Fall Frenzy, I doubt it.

 

[Dean]

Does DVC have an obligation to reallocate point charges at POLY if the Bungalows do not rent at their current price requirements? Let's say that only 75% of the bungalows are reserved on points but studios are near 100%, this creates an imbalance in the system since those unused bungalow points are most likely being used at other resorts taking away that availability. At some point would DVC not have to move the point requirement down for the bungalows (thus up for the studios) to ensure a better utilization rate? If not then DVC could theoretically offer a "super grand villa" at every new resort that cost 500 points a night just to increase total points to sell at a resort. This would be done with the understanding that the room would never really book, but allowing DVC to sell more points for a resort. In no way do I think they would actually do this but it is just an example.

As I read the info yes. First, they have the requirement to operate in the best interest of the membership as a whole and evening out demand to a degree fits that bill. Second the resort POS's I've seen say they can and the multi site POS has stronger wording, I think they use the worse "shall" IIRC. Obviously they'd need to have sufficient information to know that it's truly needed and this takes time to develop after any other change.

 

[LAX]

DVC has an obligation to operate in the best interest of owners.

Close to 90% of Poly owners are only buying enough points to stay in studios. If DVC lowers the cost of bungalows by increasing the cost of studios, that would not be in the best interest of the vast majority of Poly owners.

In theory, every time DVD makes a point allocation, there will be some owners that benefit and others that don't. There may even be some that would experience a negative impact. If that's the case, how can a point allocation ever occur since there will always be some owners where the change won't be in their best interest?

LAX

 

[crisi]

The skew to Fall Frenzy, the lack of other options, rental preference skewed for Fall, and the smaller generally size of Poly contracts all suggest to me that Poly will be a difficult 7th month booking during Fall Frenzy. And to the degree Poly owners ARE looking to book out during that time, Poly will place more pressure on the 7 month window on Fall bookings generally.

I think renting happens in Fall, but I doubt its skewed to Fall. People want to go to Disney year round, and people's points are good year round. Renting out your points during Fall Frenzy is a little bit of a pain - expectations on the part of the renters are pretty high regarding availability - and they are worth just as much in easy to book August, February and May. And while a lot of renters know to line up an owner at eleven months for that time of year, not all do (nor are all owners ready to rent eleven months out). I suspect Fall Frenzy is member driven - and particularly with the Epcot resorts. People simply have bought those resorts resale in order to stay there during the Fall months.

I also suspect that if Fall Frenzy at the Epcot resorts gets much worse, even fewer owners will choose to rent during that time, unless David and the rest of the brokers start charging a premium.

 

[ziravan]

I think renting happens in Fall, but I doubt its skewed to Fall. People want to go to Disney year round, and people's points are good year round. Renting out your points during Fall Frenzy is a little bit of a pain - expectations on the part of the renters are pretty high regarding availability - and they are worth just as much in easy to book August, February and May. And while a lot of renters know to line up an owner at eleven months for that time of year, not all do (nor are all owners ready to rent eleven months out). I suspect Fall Frenzy is member driven - and particularly with the Epcot resorts. People simply have bought those resorts resale in order to stay there during the Fall months.

I also suspect that if Fall Frenzy at the Epcot resorts gets much worse, even fewer owners will choose to rent during that time, unless David and the rest of the brokers start charging a premium.

The more in tune a renter is to how the system works, the more aware of the 11 month window they are for booking. The ones looking to rent at 11 months aren't typically looking to rent AKV in June.

Renting covers the whole spectrum of needs but the renters who'll jump at 11 months tend to be much more savvy and as a result, much more inclined to book along same trends as members, for the same reasons.

For the sake of this discussion, your average renter seeking a reservation at less than 7 months isn't affecting availability right at 7 months.

My experience is people seeking out reservations at 11 months do so because of personal experience with difficulties in the past securing a reservation closer in and to the extent that is true, it's for the same type of reservations that drive members to book at the 11 month window. Honestly, my experience tends to be two kinds of rent seekers: people looking to book near park resorts at 11 months and people looking to book near park resorts at 2 months.

 

[crisi]

The more in tune a renter is to how the system works, the more aware of the 11 month window they are for booking. The ones looking to rent at 11 months aren't typically looking to rent AKV in June.

Renting covers the whole spectrum of needs but the renters who'll jump at 11 months tend to be much more savvy and as a result, much more inclined to book along same trends as members, for the same reasons.

For the sake of this discussion, your average renter seeking a reservation at less than 7 months isn't affecting availability right at 7 months.

My experience is people seeking out reservations at 11 months do so because of personal experience with difficulties in the past securing a reservation closer in and to the extent that is true, it's for the same type of reservations that drive members to book at the 11 month window. Honestly, my experience tends to be two kinds of rent seekers: people looking to book near park resorts at 11 months and people looking to book near park resorts at 2 months.

Right, but renters have to find owners - owners aren't picking times to look for renters based off the availability of renters, they decide to list points and list them year round - maybe taking their own use year into account, which means year round. Because they know they'll find a renter for March, they aren't saying "I should find a renter in September so I can rent my points in October." In fact, I suspect some of the opposite may be happening - not listing your points for rental from September - November so you don't have to deal with an eleven month fall booking when you can do a Spring/Summer/Winter booking with ease.

That could change if the supply/demand equation changes, but right now, I really suspect rentals are even throughout the year because that's how points for rent enter the system.

There isn't any reason for me as an owner to list points more than eleven months out. There really isn't any reason for me as an owner to list points more than ten months out and during slow times of year. I get paid the same, and I delay my rental decision that much longer.

 

[ziravan]

Right, but renters have to find owners - owners aren't picking times to look for renters based off the availability of renters, they decide to list points and list them year round - maybe taking their own use year into account, which means year round. Because they know they'll find a renter for March, they aren't saying "I should find a renter in September so I can rent my points in October." In fact, I suspect some of the opposite may be happening - not listing your points for rental from September - November so you don't have to deal with an eleven month fall booking when you can do a Spring/Summer/Winter booking with ease.

That could change if the supply/demand equation changes, but right now, I really suspect rentals are even throughout the year because that's how points for rent enter the system.

There isn't any reason for me as an owner to list points more than eleven months out. There really isn't any reason for me as an owner to list points more than ten months out and during slow times of year. I get paid the same, and I delay my rental decision that much longer.

I need to be careful how to say this because I don't want to step on this board. This board only allows owners to post for rent. Others have different policies.

If a renter is looking for an owner, Davids is geared to match points from the renters need perspective. So are other places.

A renter savvy enough to exploit the 11 month window can easily find an owner to match his needs.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

In theory, every time DVD makes a point allocation, there will be some owners that benefit and others that don't. There may even be some that would experience a negative impact. If that's the case, how can a point allocation ever occur since there will always be some owners where the change won't be in their best interest?

LAX

While owners who were negatively affected would argue otherwise I'm sure, DVCs responsibility to the membership is not to guarantee that each and every owner always has the ability to go for the exact same number of nights at the exact same time thru out their ownership - except for those who purchased fixed weeks. In this regard DVC has already shown they are able to and will make the changes necessary when they shifted points from weekends to weekdays and did a little other shifting between room categories. IMO it's part of owning a points based tomeshare. Flexible but it may have to be adjusted based upon unpredictable shifts in useage.

 

[jerseyduke]

DVC has an obligation to operate in the best interest of owners.

Close to 90% of Poly owners are only buying enough points to stay in studios. If DVC lowers the cost of bungalows by increasing the cost of studios, that would not be in the best interest of the vast majority of Poly owners.

Where did you get the 90% number? (I would assume it is probably close to accurate). However, PVB is about 4 million points, 3 million of which are the studios (75%)...so 90% of the purchasers compete for 75% of the rooms.

Being outnumbered like 360 to 20, they could only realistically raise the studios at the PVB 1 point per night. To do that, they would have to drop the Bungalows 18 points. they would have to drop the bungalows 36 points a night to add 2...and I doubt that that is going to happen.

Also the rental agencies make it harder to get rooms on short notice. I know people who have discovered the magical savings of renting a DVC room instead of paying cash, and they probably will not pay cash again unless they have to.

 

[CMNJ]

In theory, every time DVD makes a point allocation, there will be some owners that benefit and others that don't. There may even be some that would experience a negative impact. If that's the case, how can a point allocation ever occur since there will always be some owners where the change won't be in their best interest?
LAX

While owners who were negatively affected would argue otherwise I'm sure, DVCs responsibility to the membership is not to guarantee that each and every owner always has the ability to go for the exact same number of nights at the exact same time thru out their ownership - except for those who purchased fixed weeks. In this regard DVC has already shown they are able to and will make the changes necessary when they shifted points from weekends to weekdays and did a little other shifting between room categories. IMO it's part of owning a points based tomeshare. Flexible but it may have to be adjusted based upon unpredictable shifts in useage.

I agree with Kat

Didn't they also reallocate the the tree house villas as well after they were sold? Also they just created the two SSR categories so now people who bought with the intention of always requesting to stay in the springs/confess park have to pay more now. Any reallocation will have "winners" and "losers". DVC is just supposed to act in the best interest of the resort's owners as a whole.