Can DVC members use other Deluxe pools?

[Dean]

I realize it's the policy, but I'm curious to know why the quiet pools at BC/BCV are included in the restriction.
I really don't care, as I never pool hop. Even if I did, the last place on my desirability list would be the BCV quiet pool.

Just curious...

MG

I'm sure it's just for consistency (not Disney like I know) and to keep people from going to the quiet pools and skirting over to the feature pool. It prevents people from sneaking in and from being upset if turned away but already on premises.

 

[Chuck S]

It's stupid question no one can know that not even Disney or DVC, but they do allow PH but not both ways so it's not fair, as I posted earlier I would be welcome at any resort to spend money but not to swim for free, really not sure why you want to continue this as you say it'a a non issue

But here is what they do know...

BCV sleeps a maximum of 1,440 people, SSR sleeps (counting 60 THVs) 7,308. So if 10% of both resorts pool hopped to each other, that would add 144 people at SSR pools, but 730 at BCV pools. I doubt the BCV could handle that addition influx, in addition to their own resort guests.

Safety would be an issue.

You really need to make your feelings known to DVC Member Satisfaction, if the pool hopping policy is an issue for you. No one on these boards can change the situation. But the only way to make the situation fair and safe would be to simply discontinue pool hopping altogether.

 

[Dean]

Like Chuck said, take it up with DVC, not with us on the DIS. We can't do anything about it other than recite the rules.

I'm curious. Lets say this person or someone else in a similar situation and persuasion did just that. Lets say they contacted DVC upper management then got a lawyer (or were a lawyer) after they didn't get a satisfactory answer and forced this issue. There's a very good chance that such contact would lead to the end of PH altogether as a direct result. BTW, this wouldn't be the first thing to change as a result of such a direction. That is exactly the scenario for being able to use the borrowed 2000 points to get free passes in 1999 and is similar to the proclamation related to lower dues at OKW for the end of the non extended contracts.

 

[Deb & Bill]

I'm curious. Lets say this person or someone else in a similar situation and persuasion did just that. Lets say they contacted DVC upper management then got a lawyer (or were a lawyer) after they didn't get a satisfactory answer and forced this issue. There's a very good chance that such contact would lead to the end of PH altogether as a direct result. BTW, this wouldn't be the first thing to change as a result of such a direction. That is exactly the scenario for being able to use the borrowed 2000 points to get free passes in 1999 and is similar to the proclamation related to lower dues at OKW for the end of the non extended contracts.

So it would be the end of legal pool hopping for DVC members. There would still be the illegal ones.

The UY 2000 points and dues issues would have been monetary issues. Pool hopping is something that can be taken at any time and doesn't have value, does it? They would have to prove that the value of their points was devalued by not being able to pool hop to one of the forbidden pools (I like that term, forbidden pools).

 

[Maistre Gracey]

But here is what they do know...

BCV sleeps a maximum of 1,440 people, SSR sleeps (counting 60 THVs) 7,308. So if 10% of both resorts pool hopped to each other, that would add 144 people at SSR pools, but 730 at BCV pools. I doubt the BCV could handle that addition influx, in addition to their own resort guests.

I understand your logic here, but does it really matter?? I mean, they shut down pool hopping once the pool is at capacity, so 730 guests would not visit SAB.

MG

 

[Chuck S]

I'm curious. Lets say this person or someone else in a similar situation and persuasion did just that. Lets say they contacted DVC upper management then got a lawyer (or were a lawyer) after they didn't get a satisfactory answer and forced this issue. There's a very good chance that such contact would lead to the end of PH altogether as a direct result. BTW, this wouldn't be the first thing to change as a result of such a direction. That is exactly the scenario for being able to use the borrowed 2000 points to get free passes in 1999 and is similar to the proclamation related to lower dues at OKW for the end of the non extended contracts.

I agree, a lawyer's involvement would hasten the discontinuation of pool hopping...but I'm not sure there is actually any legal issues. No one said the perks have to be the same at all resorts, just like SSR and OKW not offering valet parking or room service, BCV/AKV and BLT don't allow pool hopping. Pool hopping isn't a right/legal issue controlled by the state timeshare board like the dues/point issues.

 

[Maistre Gracey]

It was speculated here, when BCV first went on sale, that the main reason for not allowing hopping to SAB was to ensure strong sales at BCV.
I guess that was incorrect speculation since it's still in effect long after BCV is sold out.

I also seem to remember people assuming the AKL ban was to reduce the number of guests in order to reduce the stress on the animals.

MG

 

[Deb & Bill]

...I also seem to remember people assuming the AKL ban was to reduce the number of guests in order to reduce the stress on the animals.

MG

You mean it wasn't for more convenience, to better serve the member, to streamline the manner in which members visit the pools and to improve the member's visit?

 

[Dean]

So it would be the end of legal pool hopping for DVC members. There would still be the illegal ones.

The UY 2000 points and dues issues would have been monetary issues. Pool hopping is something that can be taken at any time and doesn't have value, does it? They would have to prove that the value of their points was devalued by not being able to pool hop to one of the forbidden pools (I like that term, forbidden pools).

Like beauty, value is in the eye of the beholder but it would be hard to but a $$ value on it. I don't think it'd be that hard to put a reasonable $$$ value on PH in a legal action. As for pool crashers, they are all over, too many dishonest people around.

I agree, a lawyer's involvement would hasten the disconintuation of pool hopping...but I'm not sure there is actually any legal issues. No one said the perks have to be the same at all resorts, just like SSR and OKW not offering valet parking or room service, BCV/AKV and BLT don't allow pool hopping. Pool hopping isn't a right/legal issue contolled by the state timeshare board like the dues/point issues.

I agree it's not a legal right but it'd be very easy to argue this one in court as set up currently. The other option would be to cut it off both ways if staying at those resorts and as noted, it wouldn't have that much affect anyway. Actually PH in general is a small number overall.

I also seem to remember people assuming the AKL ban was to reduce the number of guests in order to reduce the stress on the animals.

I seem to recall that being DVC's position. My opinion is they wanted to control the stress on the resort in general as I don't see how the animals would be impacted by numbers at the resort or pool. But I do see how people would combine PH with animal watching and that number could easily impact the experience for the guests there.

 

[Sandisw]

because the rules are the same for everyone.

but they are not are they it could not be simpler

YC to SSR yes SSR to YC no

You are right, pool hopping is not equal in terms that some DVC resorts have open pools and some do not.

But, just because things are not equal, does not mean they are not fair. The pool hopping rules are fair in the sense that they apply the same to all DVC members. When you stay at certain DVC resorts, you get to use those pools.

 

[Dean]

Here's an analogy that comes from other points systems. Lets say that DVC allowed certain owners to reserve earlier based on how many points they owned and whether they had bought directly from DVC. And that they allowed you to move inside the specialty group if you bought another 100 points retail even though all previous points were resale and that they grandfathered current owners resale or not. For sake of discussion assume that those who owned 1000 qualified pts could reserve 3 months early, those with 750 points 2 months early and those with 500 points 1 month early. It's fair because everyone has the opportunity to buy into any group they chose even though it does not fit many members vision of what DVC is and if grandfathered, you knew going in this was the situation.

 

[lark]

If you are a dvc member staying at a WDW on points via the concierge collection, may you pool hop?

 

[Dean]

If you are a dvc member staying at a WDW on points via the concierge collection, may you pool hop?

No.

 

[daisyduck123]

Really, I doubt BCVers will pool hop at all. And I'm guessing, overall, pool hoppers in general make up a very small percentage of onsite DVC owners/guests.

We have only done it once...and probably never again. We just did it to visit friends.

We spent 8 nights at BCV last week & we pool hopped last Sunday over to the Poly pool to visit other DVC friends who were staying there.

 

[kmk1180]

I doubt if we will pool hop but to clarify,
If we are staying at 2br AKV...which resorts CAN we pool hop to?

 

[daisyduck123]

I doubt if we will pool hop but to clarify,
If we are staying at 2br AKV...which resorts CAN we pool hop to?

You can hop anywhere except to the pools at BCV & BLT.

 

[Deb & Bill]

You can hop anywhere except to the pools at BCV & BLT.

Add all the pools at BC and YC to that list. Plus Swan and Dolphin are not included because they are not operated by Disney.

You can check the newest edition of Disney Files (page 16) to get the scoop on pool hopping. If you can't find the paper edition, you can also read it online at the DVC Member website.

If you are a dvc member staying at a WDW on points via the concierge collection, may you pool hop?

Rules are you must be staying at an eligible DVC resort (I'd bet that excluded VB and HHI.)

For the rest of the year, pool hopping is blacked out for Sept 4-7, Nov 23-29, Dec 13-Jan 3.

 

[Sammie]

Pool hopping to SAB was stopped due to over crowding the pool. I do think a good many BCV with kids visit the BW pool because of the slide. You can not wear a life vest on the SAB slide.

I think the worst situation is the Polynesian and I no longer stay there due to the horrible pool situation. I truly feel for those guests and that over crowded pool.

 

[kmk1180]

I doubt if we will pool hop but to clarify,
If we are staying at 2br AKV...which resorts CAN we pool hop to?

You can hop anywhere except to the pools at BCV & BLT.

So does that include non DVC resorts? Like Poly or GF?

Or....basically, Boardwalk, Saratoga Spring, Key West, and Wilderness Lodge (or am I missing any?)

 

[Deb & Bill]

So does that include non DVC resorts? Like Poly or GF?

Or....basically, Boardwalk, Saratoga Spring, Key West, and Wilderness Lodge (or am I missing any?)

You can pool hop to any pool operated by WDW on WDW property except for all the pools at YC/BC/BCV, all the pools at AKL/AKV and the BLT pool. You can visit the pool at the Polynesian or GF as long as it isn't blacked out and the lifeguard has okayed your visit because it's not too crowded. When we stayed at the GF, I thought the themed pool was always crowded, but the big pool in the center of the complex was not very crowded. The themed pool is the one with the waterfall. Both pools at GF have lifeguards.