Booking Frustration!

[Sandisw]

Right but I read that with the last couple of years they extended the dates out, so that they are renting “breakage” that is not actually “breakage.” The amount they are now renting out is far beyond any minuscule amount they pass onto dvc.

We have no idea what rooms are breakage, what rooms are those booked with their own points, and what rooms are there because of trades.

It is impossible to say they are taking more rooms than allowed. Technically, per the rules, they can take every room not booked at 60 days

But they don’t do that because I can see rooms still there for my trip in 6 weeks.

As noted, they can anticipate what could be left and offer those. All within the rules.

 

[The Jackal]

We have no idea what rooms are breakage, what rooms are those booked with their own points, and what rooms are there because of trades.

It is impossible to say they are taking more rooms than allowed. Technically, per the rules, they can take every room not booked at 60 days

But they don’t do that because I can see rooms still there for my trip in 6 weeks.

As noted, they can anticipate what could be left and offer those. All within the rules.

If they took all the rooms at 60 days points in holding could never be used. That would trigger a lawsuit. So technically the rules allow it, but they would pay dearly if they did.

 

[newlife]

Not sure if this is true but I heard that DVC holds back a certain number of rooms and sells them for cash. if this is true then certain times of the year like holidays and special events like food and wine shouldn’t this practice be stopped to allow Dvc owners to get a reservation that usually is hard to get.

Again i ,may be wrong but sometimes when I’m at a Dvc resort that i had difficulty obtaining a reservation for and seeing the resort appearing fairly empty it just makes me wonder.

 

[JETSDAD]

Not sure if this is true but I heard that DVC holds back a certain number of rooms and sells them for cash. if this is true then certain times of the year like holidays and special events like food and wine shouldn’t this practice be stopped to allow Dvc owners to get a reservation that usually is hard to get.

Again i ,may be wrong but sometimes when I’m at a Dvc resort that i had difficulty obtaining a reservation for and seeing the resort appearing fairly empty it just makes me wonder.

They own points and are supposed to compete for reservations just like anyone else. How exactly that plays out in reality can be debated but they wouldn't be blocked from using their points during high demand times.

 

[newlife]

They own points and are supposed to compete for reservations just like anyone else. How exactly that plays out in reality can be debated but they wouldn't be blocked from using their points during high demand times.

I totally understand what you are saying.
i own at SSR and Poly. Shouldn’t as an owner i have priority over cash paying customers. After all i already paid well in advance for this privilege. Just wondering why it is so difficult sometimes to at least have a choice of where i want to stay. I know about the 11 month window for my resorts and the 7 month for others. This is where my frustration starts. Booking BCV or copper creek, is usually asking for massive amounts of pixie dust

 

[JETSDAD]

I totally understand what you are saying.
i own at SSR and Poly. Shouldn’t as an owner i have priority over cash paying customers. After all i already paid well in advance for this privilege. Just wondering why it is so difficult sometimes to at least have a choice of where i want to stay. I know about the 11 month window for my resorts and the 7 month for others. This is where my frustration starts. Booking BCV or copper creek, is usually asking for massive amounts of pixie dust

As an owner you can book at 11 months and rent out the reservation as well....that's essentially the same as what DVC does. Neither should have priority over the other because both are just using their points and it should just be whoever books first gets it.

 

[Sandisw]

If they took all the rooms at 60 days points in holding could never be used. That would trigger a lawsuit. So technically the rules allow it, but they would pay dearly if they did.

I should have been more clear...they can take them to sell for cash, but can recall those qualified as "breakage" if need be. Might require those to call, etc. The point was more to address the implication that rooms for cash must be DVC breaking the rules to create more breakage when we have no idea when we see cash rooms where they came from.

In terms of holding, there are going to be plenty of times when owners can't use them due to lack of rooms. But, the rules of the game are that rooms can and do get sold to cash guests at 60 days and we owners agree to that.

 

[we"reofftoneverland]

As an owner you can book at 11 months and rent out the reservation as well....that's essentially the same as what DVC does. Neither should have priority over the other because both are just using their points and it should just be whoever books first gets it.

Not the same! Disney is using our points and calling it breakage. I’m fine with breakage. But actual breakage. It’s not cool that they use some trumped up algorithm to determine that these points will go unused when we all know that there are lots of people who book or change reservations within 90days.

 

[Sandisw]

Not the same! Disney is using our points and calling it breakage. I’m fine with breakage. But actual breakage. It’s not cool that they use some trumped up algorithm to determine that these points will go unused when we all know that there are lots of people who book or change reservations within 90days.

Disney owns a lot of their own points and can book many rooms that way. How do you know the rooms you are seeing were not simply booked using the points they own? They are the largest owner of the points,

I get people may not like the rules, but we agreed to the terms when we bought. But honestly, I don’t think they are pulling that many rooms out of service that would be booked otherwise way ahead of time,

As I mentioned earlier we would see a lot more rooms gone in the last few months than we do now. Most of the year, rooms are still there for short term bookings.

 

[crisi]

I can't figure out why anyone who owns DVC points who thinks Disney is engaging in egregious violations of timeshare law, of GAAP, and of the terms of the contract we have with them hasn't, during a time of record high resale prices, sold their contracts and stopped doing business with a company they believe is THAT unethical.

 

[Suzabella]

We don't mind using the 7-11 month window at our home resorts and almost always book at 10-11 months. Our other timeshare company's booking window opens at 12-13 months. We're used to planning ahead.

 

[The Jackal]

Disney owns a lot of their own points and can book many rooms that way. How do you know the rooms you are seeing were not simply booked using the points they own? They are the largest owner of the points,

I get people may not like the rules, but we agreed to the terms when we bought. But honestly, I don’t think they are pulling that many rooms out of service that would be booked otherwise way ahead of time,

As I mentioned earlier we would see a lot more rooms gone in the last few months than we do now. Most of the year, rooms are still there for short term bookings.

I agree, but isn’t DVC supposed to be a fiduciary. They are supposed to put the members interest ahead of their own. They seem to be forgetting this more and more lately. Especially with the point charts the past 3 years.

 

[tjkraz]

Not the same! Disney is using our points and calling it breakage. I’m fine with breakage. But actual breakage. It’s not cool that they use some trumped up algorithm to determine that these points will go unused when we all know that there are lots of people who book or change reservations within 90days.

Do you have any proof to support that allegation? Right now, there are MANY nights available at DVC resorts within the next 60 days. There are entire week-long swaths at multiple resorts.

If someone currently wishes to travel during the breakage period, they have ample opportunity to do so.

 

[tjkraz]

I agree, but isn’t DVC supposed to be a fiduciary. They are supposed to put the members interest ahead of their own. They seem to be forgetting this more and more lately. Especially with the point charts the past 3 years.

The point charts are obviously an area of concern. But nobody is served if that's used as justification for levying a wide array of unrelated accusations.

When using their own points to hold rooms, DVC is acting as an owner just like you or I. There's nothing improper about setting-aside rooms at 11 months. The breakage rules are also designed to aid members by turning rooms which are highly likely to remain vacant into revenue.

DVC has the potential to abuse the system in their favor. For instance, they could target the most sought-after resorts, dates and villa sizes for booking with their own points. Personally I haven't really seen evidence of that happening. If you look at distant availability for cash reservations at DVC resorts, it tends to reflect a wide variety of room types and dates.

More likely, fellow owners are cherry picking profitable dates for their own rental activity. Go look at eBay or rental sites that deal in confirmed reservations. Bet you'll find a fair number of AKV Value Studios, BWV Standard, Beach Club, etc.

 

[Sandisw]

I agree, but isn’t DVC supposed to be a fiduciary. They are supposed to put the members interest ahead of their own. They seem to be forgetting this more and more lately. Especially with the point charts the past 3 years.

Yes, but within the rules. Booking rooms with points they own is no different than any other owner who books.

That’s why they specially state they follow the same 11 month rules with their points as we do.

 

[DonMacGregor]

I can't figure out why anyone who owns DVC points who thinks Disney is engaging in egregious violations of timeshare law, of GAAP, and of the terms of the contract we have with them hasn't, during a time of record high resale prices, sold their contracts and stopped doing business with a company they believe is THAT unethical.

Apparently, in another thread, we have people offering dozens of friends free use of their points and getting zero takers. Unethical AND nobody wants to go anyway....

 

[DonMacGregor]

I agree, but isn’t DVC supposed to be a fiduciary. They are supposed to put the members interest ahead of their own. They seem to be forgetting this more and more lately. Especially with the point charts the past 3 years.

My impression is that it's akin to a developer building a new community, and setting up the HOA. Until a board comprised wholly of homeowners can be elected, the developer actually holds the vacant seats on the board with full voting rights. Initially, the majority of seats and control of the board. They are both the developer, and a voting member of the HOA board. Sometimes it can take several years for a developer to fully relinquish their voting rights in the HOA. It's a conflict that's raised eyebrows on many an occasion, but fully within the law. Especially when you have certain statutes of limitations on bringing litigation against the developer for construction defects, etc. and the board needs to vote to authorize said litigation.

The difference here is that those voting rights never fully revert to the individual ownership because the developer always owns some portion of the dwelling units.

 

[New Mouse]

We have no idea what rooms are breakage, what rooms are those booked with their own points, and what rooms are there because of trades.

This is the problem right here, lack of transparency and accountability. Disney has shown time and again they will cross the line so there is no reason to believe they are playing by the rules.

 

[Sandisw]

This is the problem right here, lack of transparency and accountability. Disney has shown time and again they will cross the line so there is no reason to believe they are playing by the rules.

Respectfully, I don’t believe that people need to assume the worst in every situation either without proof.

They gave away ALOT of points to owners and continue to do so since the closure. They did not have to.

Yes, they have made decisions that were questionable but it doesn’t mean they all are.

Why do you think we have a right to see what other owners do with their points, including Disney? Disney is an owner and the people who trade out are owners. I certainly don’t want my booking history open to other owners.

The majority of the time rooms are still there within 60 days so they obviously do not take all the rooms they can for breakage. That alone is data that they leave rooms eligible for breakage for owners to still use.

 

[New Mouse]

Respectfully, I don’t believe that people need to assume the worst in every situation either without proof.

They gave away ALOT of points to owners and continue to do so since the closure. They did not have to.

Yes, they have made decisions that were questionable but it doesn’t mean they all are.

Why do you think we have a right to see what other owners do with their points, including Disney? Disney is an owner and the people who trade out are owners. I certainly don’t want my booking history open to other owners.

The majority of the time rooms are still there within 60 days so they obviously do not take all the rooms they can for breakage. That alone is data that they leave rooms eligible for breakage for owners to still use.

Why do you think Disney should be allowed to operate with no teansparency?

Point chart fiasco x 2
Aulani Dues fiasco
Taxes fiasco
Okw extension fiasco
VGC closure fiasco
Those are some of the bigger ones.

All these are due to either incompetence or negligence. They scream that professional oversight is needed. You can tell me until you are blue in the face that we have to assume Disney will play by the rules, nothing has shown that to actually be the case in the last 10 years. Heck id argue that giving away their points was likely against the rules.