Anyone else getting a little annoyed?

[tjkraz]

This argument has been stated many many times. The problem with the argument is that DVC is holding reservation times / days that are not spoken for with these "traded, swapped or owned points".

Imagine if you were to call at 11 months and hold a bunch of days at peak use times of the year for DVC members with all the points you had (some people have a bunch). On top of that you are holding these reservations for "potential renters" not actual planned vacations. You then decide over time that you no longer want those dates and give them up right before any penalties would kick-in.

You effectively block out others by speculating whether or not you will rent out these dates or use those dates. That is unfair and Disney is starting to actively track that and has threatened to stop that practice; that is for everybody except Disney.

Disney should treat their points just like everybody else who is not Disney. They have them, nobody is arguing that. They should however not be allowed to block off rooms for Cash or potential other vacation swaps (DCL, RCI or whatever) until they have an actual customer requesting those dates. Only at that time is when Disney should be allowed to check availability like everybody else who is an owner. Also those reservations would have to fall under the very same 11 / 7 rules we as owners need to abide by.
There should never be cash available reservations when people with points are told there is no availability, if all owners had the saem rules applied to them.

That is what would be fair.

However, Disney controls and leverages "their points" under far more questionable and ambiguous "rules" than the ones they impose on the general DVC Owner population. Not sure where my cotnract allowed that, but Disney seems to think their points are controlled by other rules.

And BTW we do not, have not and don’t foresee ever renting out any of our points, so this is in no way a post defending renters.

I see what you are saying but respectfully disagree.

Remember that one of the biggest factors in any timeshare trade is the trading power of the units involved. DVC is willing to accept XXX points (whatever the value may be) from a member in return for booking something like a Disney cruise. DVC then turns those points into rooms which are made available to CRO. The idea is that the CRO bookings will ultimately cover the cost of the cruise.

You are suggesting that DVC members be given first shot at ALL rooms and cash bookings would then come from whatever is left over when the dust settles. If that were the case, CRO cash bookings would have a much lower success rate and DVC would be forced to demand even more points from members when booking those non-DVC destinations.

The same is true for deposits into RCI which DVC controls. If the units deposited with RCI as a result of our trades were only the undesirable leftovers once members have booked, DVC members would not have nearly as great trading power within RCI.

If there were evidence that DVC was cherry-picking the most profitable weeks and resorts for RCI deposits or CRO inventory, then I would agree that DVC was acting improperly. But availability via CRO suggests that Disney is pretty fair in spreading that availability among all of the resorts and weeks.

If you reduce the quality of rooms made available to CRO and RCI, members will ultimately pay the price in the form of higher trading prices and reduced success.

 

[Anthony1971]

I am a self admitted tasteless person.
I turned down staying at BLT BCV or AKL to stay at one of those huge non themmed condo style resorts.
Oh I own at one as well! and if I got a good enough deal on BLT points I would gladly buy them and rarely stay there as the MF make it a good deal.
I however would have stayed at WL had it been available.

 

[mom of princessx2]

I am not sure why Disney built the largest DVC resort with no main “draw”.

BLT is close the MK and on the monorail
WLV have a strong theme, close to MK
BCV close to Epcot & DHS, SAB
BWV close to Epcot & DHS, Boardwalk
AKV close to AK, savannah views, concierge
OKW has low points, bigger rooms, 2 beds in studio

What is the draw to SSR? DTD? Seems like a weak draw to me.

I couldn't disagree more. The draw for us to buy DVC was golf and spa. I didn't even think of DTD as a reason to purchase at SSR.

 

[Anthony1971]

I am not sure why Disney built the largest DVC resort with no main “draw”.

What is the draw to SSR? DTD? Seems like a weak draw to me.

With the money Disney is investing in DTD????
By the previous large number of dinning options and stores --now they are adding more-- it would seem DTD is HUGE draw.

 

[theww228]

I am a self admitted tasteless person.
I turned down staying at BLT BCV or AKL to stay at one of those huge non themmed condo style resorts.
Oh I own at one as well! and if I got a good enough deal on BLT points I would gladly buy them and rarely stay there as the MF make it a good deal.
I however would have stayed at WL had it been available.

I am not saying there is no draw to SSR and for some people there will be a very strong draw. However, most people go to Disney for the theme parks. The number of people who have a strong draw for SSR would most likely be less the volume of rooms. Everybody like something different... some people are ga ga about BLT, for me it looks like a hospital. I feel like I should walk into BLT and ask, "Which way to the X-ray department?"

I love VWL and so I bought there. Others do not like VWL and that is fine with me. Different strokes for different folks. My point is that the percentage of guest that are ga ga over SSR is most likely less than other resorts (BCV, BLT, AKV).

 

[zev]

The plain fact is that SSR is the 800 pound gorilla in the room.

Its Good to be the King of the Swingers Man!!! I always wanted to be a Silverback!! (yes i know Louie is not a gorilla but gotta love him)

I bought at SSR because it was the big ape. Figured it was the best way of getting a room on property even during the busy times and low dues. Big fan of PI & DTD as well (then of course they closed Adventures and the other clubs, those *^$&^)! DTD still has plenty of other things to do, and SSR is right next door. Did I mention the low dues! It is also easy to get off property from SSR and stock up on supplies. Then THV opened, did not know of that plan when I bought. Already it is booked all the time.....must be from all the non SSR owners. The more I get to know SSR the better it is!! Lots of options by itself!! It should get even better as the landscaping matures and fills in the expanse of the place. I might have to join the OKW folks who are downplaying how good that resort is..... Go buy or stay at some other resort suits me fine! Now if they would just move the darn sales center to someplace else. Did I mention the low dues yet.

 

[Brian Noble]

You can boil this whole thread down into three pretty simple observations. You can't blame SSR folks about booking at your home resort, because you have the home resort priority period at your disposal. And, blaming SSR folks from booking "your space" at resorts other than your home resort sure sounds like a pot-kettle situation to me. If, for some reason, you can't plan ahead far enough to take advantage of your home resort preference and/or you don't like your home resort, that's not not the fault of those evil SSR folk.

This might not be pleasant, but it is the reality of the situation.

 

[Jeanine3kids]

I bought at SSR and never stay there because its not a resort for me and my family when I was buying DVC I told my guide I wasn't into SSR amd he said to me quote on quote "Oh you never have to stay here if you don't want to just switch at 7 months" and that is what I have been doing for the last 4 years and never have a problem. So if you folks have a problem with SSR owners switching over just give DVC Headquarters a call and tell the guides to change there sales pitch.

 

[Chuck S]

This argument has been stated many many times. The problem with the argument is that DVC is holding reservation times / days that are not spoken for with these "traded, swapped or owned points".

Imagine if you were to call at 11 months and hold a bunch of days at peak use times of the year for DVC members with all the points you had (some people have a bunch). On top of that you are holding these reservations for "potential renters" not actual planned vacations. You then decide over time that you no longer want those dates and give them up right before any penalties would kick-in.

You effectively block out others by speculating whether or not you will rent out these dates or use those dates. That is unfair and Disney is starting to actively track that and has threatened to stop that practice; that is for everybody except Disney.

Disney should treat their points just like everybody else who is not Disney. They have them, nobody is arguing that. They should however not be allowed to block off rooms for Cash or potential other vacation swaps (DCL, RCI or whatever) until they have an actual customer requesting those dates. Only at that time is when Disney should be allowed to check availability like everybody else who is an owner. Also those reservations would have to fall under the very same 11 / 7 rules we as owners need to abide by.
There should never be cash available reservations when people with points are told there is no availability, if all owners had the saem rules applied to them.

That is what would be fair.

However, Disney controls and leverages "their points" under far more questionable and ambiguous "rules" than the ones they impose on the general DVC Owner population. Not sure where my cotnract allowed that, but Disney seems to think their points are controlled by other rules.

And BTW we do not, have not and don’t foresee ever renting out any of our points, so this is in no way a post defending renters.

Disney has a ton of historical data on trades, and uses that data to estimate the number of rooms needed. If they waited until an actual trade to a Disney Resort or Cruise was made before offering the exchanged room for cash, especially since some people trade out within a few weeks of travel, I see two possibilities...there are no DVC rooms available to submit for the trade or the room doesn't have enough time to rent for cash, and dues will either increase to cover the trade cost, or trading will be discontinued.

Plus, as many points as Disney/DVC owns at the resorts, many of those reserved room would fall within the 11 month window for those resorts. They have a ton of OKW and SSR points acquired over the years through ROFR. Plus they likely have defaulted points that were repo-ed, as well.

 

[TagsMissy]

Whatever. I have gone over this enough times so that if you don't get it by now I am wasting my time. I still see SSR people defending themselves too which boggles the mind.

.


I don't own at SSR, I am however checking out SSR for a few days. I am not defending SSR; I just don't see how SSR is to blame? Or in actuality any resort owner. Every resort owner has the same rules so I don't see any advantage to anybody other than the 11 month-just before the 7 month free for all for owners at their home resort-- from that 7 month time it's anybody's game; if you are lucky to get what you want then awesome, otherwise try your luck elsewhere but don't blame one group or another for doing what you do -- that's the only thing I don't get.

 

[jfinke]

With the money Disney is investing in DTD????
By the previous large number of dinning options and stores --now they are adding more-- it would seem DTD is HUGE draw.

I disagree. With the closure of PI, my desire to stay at SSR, which I own, has diminished greatly.

However, in my experience, every WDW visit is a different experience and the crowd levels at the parks influence my enjoyment level far more than which DVC resort I am staying at.

 

[Anthony1971]

I am not saying there is no draw to SSR and for some people there will be a very strong draw. However, most people go to Disney for the theme parks. The number of people who have a strong draw for SSR would most likely be less the volume of rooms. Everybody like something different... some people are ga ga about BLT, for me it looks like a hospital. I feel like I should walk into BLT and ask, "Which way to the X-ray department?"

I love VWL and so I bought there. Others do not like VWL and that is fine with me. Different strokes for different folks. My point is that the percentage of guest that are ga ga over SSR is most likely less than other resorts (BCV, BLT, AKV).

I agree about BLT but I would stay there if I spent more time in the MK--which I may have to do in the next few years-- and even that is to far with a cranky child
I would disagree to say there is less of a percentage of people who own SSR that stay at different resort then people who own at any other resort--there is just more SSR owners....
As has been stated this will get worse no matter what resort Disney opens the owners will want to stay at different resorts period. I think there are very few if any who stay at the same resort every trip to Disney...

 

[Sammie]

Originally Posted by theww228
I am not saying there is no draw to SSR and for some people there will be a very strong draw. However, most people go to Disney for the theme parks.

you are absolutely correct, but something I think some miss, is the "s" on theme parks, there are 4 parks, and 2 water parks and SSR and OKW are very centrally located to "all" the parks not just one or two.

That is the main draw to us for SSR and OKW, central location to "everything" at WDW including Downtown Disney.

 

[Anthony1971]

I disagree. With the closure of PI, my desire to stay at SSR, which I own, has diminished greatly.

However, in my experience, every WDW visit is a different experience and the crowd levels at the parks influence my enjoyment level far more than which DVC resort I am staying at.

I miss PI but also have outgrown it...
Now like most in my age and having children group we like to eat as we can no longer drink all night
We do not spend our life in the parks been there many times and will be going to them for many years to come and even in the parks dinning is a huge part of Disney. we enjoy the resort and dinning options at them or near them and by far SSR and OKW offer the best options that are close to the resorts and do not require park admission. I also feel there are many dinning options at DTD that are far better than what is in the parks.

 

[Anthony1971]

you are absolutely correct, but something I think some miss, is the "s" on theme parks, there are 4 parks, and 2 water parks and SSR and OKW are very centrally located to "all" the parks not just one or two.

That is the main draw to us for SSR and OKW, central location to "everything" at WDW including Downtown Disney.

I 100% agree.....
the bus ride never seems to long to anywhere.
but I like to keep this secret
At every other resort there was always a few parks or DTD that seemed to take way to long....

 

[wdrl]

I have no data on size of contracts, the number of home resorts owned by my fellow DVCers, or the frequency of split stays, or whether these factors have changed over time. But I wonder if a greater number of 25 to 50 point contracts and owners having multiple resorts can impact the availability of accommodations?

My guide told me that he has had numerous requests from DVC owners who wanted to add on a small 25 point contract for BLT. He pointed out that 25 points wouldn't reserve much at BLT, but that did not dissuade some from buying a small contract. They told my guide that by banking their points they can get two or three nights at BLT, and then move to their other home resort for the duration of their stay.

I wonder whether these small contracts, some as little as 25 points, have let more people own multiple home resorts. As such, there are more owners who can book at the 11-month window. I believe that even though small contracts can only book short 2 or 3 day stays, these small reservations "eat up" a booking month, making it much more difficult for another owner to fit in a continuous stay of 7 days or longer. I also wonder whether owners are much more willing to split their stays between resorts.

Maybe these factors are contributing to reservations becoming more difficult to make at the 7-month window.

Of course, maybe the number of small contracts, the number of multiple home resort owners, and the number of split stays have remained stable over the last 10 years. So there is no way to prove my hypothesis. But I just wondering whether changes in these factors can effect accommodation availability.

P.S. - Please don't interpret my posting that I am opposed to small contracts, multiple home resorts, or split stays. Far from it. I'd love to own more points and at more resorts. And we should all know of the advantages of having small point contracts for resale purposes. I wouldn't want to be an OctoMom, but maybe, just maybe, I wouldn't mind being known as Mr. OctoResort.

 

[TDC Nala]

I disagree. With the closure of PI, my desire to stay at SSR, which I own, has diminished greatly

Me too. Fortunately I do not own very many points there.

They've opened a new restaurant in DTD now - and it does not take the dining plan. How many guests are on the dining plan? Lots. So DTD even with new restaurants will not appeal to them - any new restaurant opening there will not be run by Disney and will likely not accept the dining plan.

 

[Monorail Purple&Gold]

What I am saying is that research should be done to find out why they don't want to stay there and fix the problem or make additional incentives to make staying there more appealing.

Watch what you wish for...DVC may just start making us trade out to stay at non-home resorts (and they can do that).

Some folks buy in through Disney to take advantage of financing options...and for a while SSR was the big push. So I'm sure a lot of folks (SSR owners) stay at SSR "when they have to" because of this. I've seen a number of posters here who boast of never having stayed at their home resort of SSR.

Can't speak for others, but I see the 11 month and 7 month windows for what they are, and remain realistic about making ressies under 7 months (which I've done, took what was available, and was fine because I didn't book sooner).

 

[MrsNick]

Me too. Fortunately I do not own very many points there.

They've opened a new restaurant in DTD now - and it does not take the dining plan. How many guests are on the dining plan? Lots. So DTD even with new restaurants will not appeal to them - any new restaurant opening there will not be run by Disney and will likely not accept the dining plan.

Actually, I see it as a plus if many of the DTD restaurants don't accept the dining plan. Easier for me to get an ADR

 

[Chuck S]

Actually, I see it as a plus if many of the DTD restaurants don't accept the dining plan. Easier for me to get an ADR

I agree, hopefully they will be good quality restaurants, and not a chain that uses pre-seasoned foods to which we have allergies (like the Landry's chains.) Pre-seasoned foods and seasoning packets have taken RFC, Yak & Yeti and T-Rex off our list of places we can eat.