Disney Vacation Club adjusts 2010 Vacation Points charts

[DaveH]

Here's the problem with that statement... that "majority" bought into DVC knowing the point structure for the weekends, and I say "majority" because do we have any actual numbers to verify it is a majority?

We all bought in knowing the point structure and many of us bought the number of points we needed to support our travel plans. This change completely throws that off. Disadvantaging the "minority" for the sake of the "majority"....

It appears to me that an imbalance in use has occurred and by the passionate responses that it there is/was an imbalanced. That way the minority has been helping the majority. It has been needing to balanced out for several years. Now more weekdays will be available to others.

 

[vascubaguy]

If that's your perspective, then we cannot ignore that DVC has been subsidizing weekday stays since the program's inception.
...

True, you could look at it that way... BUT, those who bought in knew the point structure when they decided to become a member. So whether they liked it or not, they accepted it.

And, while I agree that the weekend nights were too costly, this change will not alter my plans to stay the weekend (it still costs more than the weekday!)...

 

[tjkraz]

Here's the problem with that statement... that "majority" bought into DVC knowing the point structure for the weekends, and I say "majority" because do we have any actual numbers to verify it is a majority?

But you're assuming that people were actually buying into DVC to use points on weekends. About 45% of the weekly points were assigned to Friday and Saturday nights in the older charts. If only 15% of people were buying DVC for weekend stays, there's a big problem.

Only 55% of all points were spread over Sun - Thurs nights. If 60 or 70 or 80% of all members are buying in with the expectation of using their points for those weekends, we are headed for trouble.

 

[doconeill]

Here's the problem with that statement... that "majority" bought into DVC knowing the point structure for the weekends, and I say "majority" because do we have any actual numbers to verify it is a majority?

I'd just as easily venture to say the "majority" bought into DVC knowing that the point structure could change. Yes, they did say things that made it seem very unlikely based on the past, but it was always possible (not accounting for those who were supposedly told that they would never change).

 

[MiaSRN62]

Due to the point restructuring, we have placed our OKW contract up for sale.

We thought long and hard about it. But the reallocation is causing us to come up 30 points short every year (as I've mentioned before....just restating for some who may not have read this entire thread).

For us, 30 points is a bit much to swallow or cause us to "readjust" or "rethink" our vacation plans. It's too big a departure of why we purchased OKW in the first place back in 2000. Just wish we could have foreseen a jump this large for our situation. But alas, while we have loved our stays at OKW, we just don't feel "she" is worth the extra 6 points PER NIGHT or 30 points for our traditional stay.

My dh and I spoke. We would have been really MUCH more upset than we are had we gone ahead and extended our OKW contract.....I just can't help but to think, disney was really deceptive with us all about this.
I wonder how many who did the OKW extension are disappointed now or would have made another choice had they known about this prior to signing the extension deed ? There were opportunities for disney to have let Members know awhile back. Because I know for one thing, had we had knowlege of this reallocation 90 days before we purchased AKV, we would have added on alot more points.


I find myself a bit distrustful of disney now....

I am more upset about the poor timing and slightly deceptive way disney announced this....so OKW is officially on the resale market for us.


Maria

 

[Mississippian]

We would have been really MUCH more upset than we are had we gone ahead and extended our OKW contract.....I just can't help but to think, disney was really deceptive with us all about this.

Why would you even consider extending the OKW contract if the rules were to stay the same? It's a terrible deal. You get extra years worth about three dollars in present value and you pay $15 or $20 for them.

This is a bad deal no matter what and the people who are doing it are making a really dumb choice.

 

[BWV Dreamin]

Due to the point restructuring, we have placed our OKW contract up for sale.

We thought long and hard about it. But the reallocation is causing us to come up 30 points short every year (as I've mentioned before....just restating for some who may not have read this entire thread).

For us, 30 points is a bit much to swallow or cause us to "readjust" or "rethink" our vacation plans. It's too big a departure of why we purchased OKW in the first place back in 2000. Just wish we could have foreseen a jump this large for our situation. But alas, while we have loved our stays at OKW, we just don't feel "she" is worth the extra 6 points PER NIGHT or 30 points for our traditional stay.

My dh and I spoke. We would have been really MUCH more upset than we are had we gone ahead and extended our OKW contract.....I just can't help but to think, disney was really deceptive with us all about this.
I wonder how many who did the OKW extension are disappointed now or would have made another choice had they known about this prior to signing the extension deed ? There were opportunities for disney to have let Members know awhile back. Because I know for one thing, had we had knowlege of this reallocation 90 days before we purchased AKV, we would have added on alot more points.


I find myself a bit distrustful of disney now....

I am more upset about the poor timing and slightly deceptive way disney announced this....so OKW is officially on the resale market for us.


Maria

And did you know that it was a lawsuit filed against DVC that made non-extenders exempt from paying the increase in dues that will come from the extension? Before that lawsuit, EVERY OKW OWNER was going to be assessed higher dues due to the extension.

 

[MiaSRN62]

Why would you even consider extending the OKW contract if the rules were to stay the same? It's a terrible deal.

Mississippian,
We pondered the extension for all of about 5 min honestly. We sent in our decline paperwork last Fall....but had decided agains it earlier than that. I was more thinking about the people who did....and then this reallocation comes through. Magic season at OKW went up significantly----and it was almost trickery to offer the extension...and then LATER announce the reallocation. Same with the recent AKV/BLT addons. We should have been devulged this info prior to when we did hear. So that was more or less my point. And this whole thing has led dh and I to list our OKW contract.

BWV Dreamin.......no, didn't realize there was a lawsuit !
Wow...so if DVD was going to try that maneuvar with OKW owners.....I guess this lack of reallocation disclosure in a more timely manner is small change compared to what they planned to do with OKW.......trusting less and less.......

Maria

 

[tjkraz]

And did you know that it was a lawsuit filed against DVC that made non-extenders exempt from paying the increase in dues that will come from the extension? Before that lawsuit, EVERY OKW OWNER was going to be assessed higher dues due to the extension.

I don't believe that is true.

My recollection is that it was a complaint filed with the Florida Timeshare Commission--not a lawsuit.

Additionally, I don't think we can automatically conclude that non-extenders would have suffered harm if not for the complaint. It was certainly an issue that DVC did not properly address from the start. No question about that.

However, I'd say there was a high likelihood that it would have been resolved one way or another over the next 25 years. Internal auditors, external auditors, Florida state auditors...someone would have made the connection over the next 3 decades. It just so happens that it was a member who raised the concerns and DVC responded appropriately.

I think it's fair to fault them for not addressing the issue in advance--just one of many areas where the extension fell flat, IMO. But this isn't a case where DVC dug its heels in for months or years and our legal system had to intervene in order to protect members.

 

[waltfan1957]

If you've called and spoken to Member Services, what type of reply do you wish? Member services really is the reservation arm of DVC. To them, either your dates are available when you call, or they aren't avalable when you call and they offer to put you on a wait list.

If you need to discuss specific policies with DVC, or tell them something has impacted you negatively, you need to contact Member Satisfaction at: DVCMemberSatisfactionTeam@DisneyVacationClub.com or contact your guide.

i read it as he called but not spoken to, i think thats whats annoying him

 

[MiaSRN62]

As far as there being a lawsuit involving the OKW extension.....I truthfully have nothing to back it up either way. I don't know 100% what exactly happend. Does anyone ? Even if it was just a couple of complaints filed.....I still find the fact that disney was considering holding OKW Members accountable for higher extension fees unacceptable. But I could see a lawsuit as possibly happening.....disney is very good about sweeping things under the carpet (they have great lawyers).....regardless......either way, complaint or lawsuit, it was wrong of them to even think it. Because an extension was never discussed with us when we signed our deed back in 2000, so why would disney feel holding non-extenders up to paying the fees for this acceptable ?

So for us, it's something that has caused us to have a breaking down of faith in disney, and thus, we are forced to readjust and live with things as they are now. I had just wanted to say, the allocation convinced us to sell OKW.


Maria

 

[tjkraz]

Even if it was just a couple of complaints filed.....I still find the fact that disney was considering holding OKW Members accountable for higher extension fees unacceptable.

(snip)

.....either way, complaint or lawsuit, it was wrong of them to even think it. Because an extension was never discussed with us when we signed our deed back in 2000, so why would disney feel holding non-extenders up to paying the fees for this acceptable ?

I think you're reading too much into it. I don't recall Disney explicitly stating that non-extenders would be disenfranchised.

Based upon what I read on-line, there were some individuals who had no interest in extending. When they questioned DVC on how dues would be handled, the front-line Disney reps either couldn't answer the question sufficiently or had no information about any sort of subsidy for non-extenders.

Some individuals admitted to contacting the Florida Timeshare Bureau. Whether it was one person or 100, I have no idea. But they acted on behalf of members...questioned the situation with DVC...and DVC later stated that dues would be adjusted in the latter years for non-extenders.

You seem to be suggesting that there was malice on DVC's part--that they intended to defraud members. I don't see any evidence of that. It was just another aspect of the extension that wasn't thought-out very well.

I highly doubt there were any lawsuits or threats of lawsuits. The losses, if any, were decades down the road and DVC resolved the issue quickly and amicably.

 

[Hushaby]

We bought OKW through resale ~ no extension. What does this mean for us, higher maintenance fees? Ugh, now I am worried. Did we err in buying OKW? We chose OKW because it's our son's favorite, and the points fit our needs, and the fees manageable for us ~ if they're going to be higher than for other OKW owners, does anyone know how high? I am getting worried now ...

 

[Chuck S]

We bought OKW through resale ~ no extension. What does this mean for us, higher maintenance fees? Ugh, now I am worried. Did we err in buying OKW? We chose OKW because it's our son's favorite, and the points fit our needs, and the fees manageable for us ~ if they're going to be higher than for other OKW owners, does anyone know how high? I am getting worried now ...

The dues will not be higher for those that did not extend. And at some point in the future, there will be a dues subsidy, make non-extended dues lower than extended dues to compensate for the portion of dues that would go into the reserve fund for maintenance/upkeep on the buildings after the extension.

 

[MiaSRN62]

You seem to be suggesting that there was malice on DVC's part--that they intended to defraud members. I don't see any evidence of that. It was just another aspect of the extension that wasn't thought-out very well.

Well Tim....lately, respectfully we tend to see things differently.

IF....even it was a consideration on disney's part and no more, just the fact that they "pondered" charging OKW non-extenders higher fees to help cover the extension was wrong imo. Sure this was "poor planning" as you put it. Poor planning that would have impacted non-extenders in a negative way. Why would I want to pay more in fees for a service I would not be reaping ?

So my opinions differ from yours, but don't think you can convince me otherwise. And I do find it underhanded, that they baited OKW members with this extension without devulging the upcoming reallocation of points. I'm just glad we didn't snap up the bait they were sending us. I got several mailings claiming what a great deal it was. Hmmmm.....perhaps they did this because they could already foresee OKW'ers like myself, not real thrilled with a 6 point PER NIGHT increase. Maybe they could foresee an influx of resales on the market due to this. I don't know.....but then why weren't they more upfront with letting Members know about the reallocation ? I can come to no other plausible explanation for it. I am quite certain DVD worked on that idea for quite some time.

I know you say you "highly doubt" there were any lawsuits or threats of any.....but again, none of us here really truly knows that. And from the way this whole announcement of the reallocation has gone (announced so soon after the add-on incentives for AKV and BLT ended).....well, I just hope to keep my wits about me a bit more where DVD is concerned. Now I see how they prefer to operate.
So I know you like to defend them frequently, but I'm not on that team right now Tim. Not now.

Maria

 

[tjkraz]

IF....even it was a consideration on disney's part and no more, just the fact that they "pondered" charging OKW non-extenders higher fees to help cover the extension was wrong imo.

It was an error of omission, not a malicious act.

The non-extenders will be receiving a subsidy to offset the fact that they will not fund refurbishments which have a useful life beyond 1/31/2042.

When the question was first raised, DVC didn't have an answer. It was simply something they did not consider. Again poor planning but I don't see that as any indication that they were attempting to slip a fast one past thousands of members and every auditor reviewing association finances over the next 33 years.

And I do find it underhanded, that they baited OKW members with this extension without devulging the upcoming reallocation of points.

I don't see how anyone could call the existence of a reallocation "underhanded"--particularly OKW owners. It happened in 1996 and everyone should have had the expectation that it would happen again.

I know you say you "highly doubt" there were any lawsuits or threats of any.....but again, none of us here really truly knows that.

Here is a post from the one individual I am aware of who actually got involved in this matter:

http://www.disboards.com/showpost.php?p=24768515&postcount=31

It confirms the sequence of events I described.

If Disney were convinced it had a legal right to avoid a subsidy, no threat of a lawsuit would have dissuaded them from acting.

This was simply a case of our government working as it should. Complaint was filed. Investigation occurred. Situation resolved.

So I know you like to defend them frequently, but I'm not on that team right now Tim. Not now.

I have no desire to blindly defend DVC's actions. I'm simply looking at this from a logical perspective and trying to draw conclusions from the information we have available. I've admitted a number of times that I do think the OKW extension was completely botched. But again, I don't see any indication of malice. (And I also think the reallocation could have been handled MUCH better--but it's also something we should have expected and prepared ourselves for.)

I do think some others here are speaking more from an emotional perspective which can cloud one's judgment. I'm trying to stick to facts.

If this had stretched out for several years and lawsuits were involved, then I would have a very different opinion. But in reality it was resolved in about 6 months' time--perhaps quite less depending upon exactly when the complaints were filed. That's a reasonable timeframe given the pace at which government can move and the fact that they would have had to give Disney time to respond to inquiries.

 

[OneMoreTry]

If that's your perspective, then we cannot ignore that DVC has been subsidizing weekday stays since the program's inception.

The only reason that members were able to get a SSR Studio for 11 points per weeknight in Adventure season is because DVC forced weekend guests to pay 20 points per night. Now apparently the trends show that 12 weekday / 18 weekend is a more appropriate balance.

I don't see where stupidity even enters into the equation. The resorts are designed to be at 98% occupancy year-round and the point distribution (seasons, weekday/weekend) should be representative of member demand. IMHO, their biggest mistake was ignoring the problem for so long.

fwiw i agree 100%

 

[OneMoreTry]

As DVCers retire and children leave home, it is likely that even more of them will move to weekday stays. In that case weekday points will go up even more.

And working parents trying to squeeze in vacations on long weekends with their kids will benefit.

It's a long way between now and 2042. As society and the demographic of owners changes the point structure will change with it. That is DVCs obligation to members. Not just vocal members, but all members including what I am sure is a fairly silent majority.

I appreciate tjkraz looking at this from the perspective of the whole and not just "special interests."

I believe it is utilitarianism that states the highest good is what results in the greatest happiness for the greatest number.

 

[Mick West]

It was an error of omission, not a malicious act.

The non-extenders will be receiving a subsidy to offset the fact that they will not fund refurbishments which have a useful life beyond 1/31/2042.

When the question was first raised, DVC didn't have an answer. It was simply something they did not consider. Again poor planning but I don't see that as any indication that they were attempting to slip a fast one past thousands of members and every auditor reviewing association finances over the next 33 years.



I don't see how anyone could call the existence of a reallocation "underhanded"--particularly OKW owners. It happened in 1996 and everyone should have had the expectation that it would happen again.



Here is a post from the one individual I am aware of who actually got involved in this matter:

http://www.disboards.com/showpost.php?p=24768515&postcount=31

It confirms the sequence of events I described.

If Disney were convinced it had a legal right to avoid a subsidy, no threat of a lawsuit would have dissuaded them from acting.

This was simply a case of our government working as it should. Complaint was filed. Investigation occurred. Situation resolved.



I have no desire to blindly defend DVC's actions. I'm simply looking at this from a logical perspective and trying to draw conclusions from the information we have available. I've admitted a number of times that I do think the OKW extension was completely botched. But again, I don't see any indication of malice. (And I also think the reallocation could have been handled MUCH better--but it's also something we should have expected and prepared ourselves for.)

I do think some others here are speaking more from an emotional perspective which can cloud one's judgment. I'm trying to stick to facts.

If this had stretched out for several years and lawsuits were involved, then I would have a very different opinion. But in reality it was resolved in about 6 months' time--perhaps quite less depending upon exactly when the complaints were filed. That's a reasonable timeframe given the pace at which government can move and the fact that they would have had to give Disney time to respond to inquiries.

I am totally speaking from "Facts" - in 2010 the same trips that I'm taking in 2009 will cost me 40+ more points. That's not "emotions". In this thread I see lots of communications from "sponsors". Please enlighten me on who/what are sponsors and what is their role?

 

[MiaSRN62]

tjkraz :It was an error of omission, not a malicious act.

I never said the potential charging of non-extenders was a malicious ACT. How could it be ? It never happened.....rather that they were CONSIDERING charging us higher fees along with those that did extend is what I WOULD have found a bit underhanded and not fair. But it's a non issue anyway because their initial thoughts/plans or whatever u want to refer to them as, never came to fruition.

tjkraz :The non-extenders will be receiving a subsidy to offset the fact that they will not fund refurbishments which have a useful life beyond 1/31/2042.

I totally GET this Tim....I was commenting on what COULD have happened if disney did decide to go ahead with charging non-extenders. Just commenting on the fact that this was considered in the gestational phase of the extension plans.....that's ALL....that's it.

tjkraz : I don't see how anyone could call the existence of a reallocation "underhanded"--particularly OKW owners. It happened in 1996 and everyone should have had the expectation that it would happen again.

Tim...I really am beginning to think you just want to debate any and all opinions I have.

BUT...what I actually said is this :

And I do find it underhanded, that they baited OKW members with this extension without devulging the upcoming reallocation of points.

I don't find the reallocation underhanded....but rather the fact that they gave a cut-off for OKW Members to extend PRIOR to devulging the plans to reallocate. And, we're not talking about a couple points per stay here. We're talking 6 points per night for a 2 bedroom in Magic season. For us, a deficit of 30 points. I was just saying, it would have been more upfront and respectful of them (for lack of a better term), to let potential extenders aware that there was an upcoming reallocation ---and that it was a BIGGIE. I think OKW Magic season was hit significantly. More so than any other reallocation in the past. This is my opinion Tim....might not be yours. Let's just let it rest at that please ? I feel like everything I say is made to be out something else or flat out wrong when it's just my opinion. I'm entitled to it.

tjkraz : I do think some others here are speaking more from an emotional perspective which can cloud one's judgment. I'm trying to stick to facts.

Sorry Tim....but I find this very much self-righteous of you. I'm offended by your insinuation that my statements were not held in "fact".

Fact : OKW offered and sung the praises of an extension to OKW Members strenuously. I got many mailings singing the praises of what a bargain it was. HAD I gone through with it, which I had no intentions of anyway, I would have felt it was a bit underhanded in that they didn't let us know they were planning on jacking up the points. Offer Members that fact and let them make a truly informed decision as to extend or not. I didn't say I thought the allocation was wrong, but the lack of timely disclosure.

FACT : Disney offered enticing add-ons for AKV and BLT just a few months prior to allocation news. Again, a bit under-handed imo when they HAD to have known the announcement of the allocation was coming. I feel alot of people who did add-ons wished they had known PRIOR to adding on about this allocation. I don't feel we (dh and I) made as informed a decision as we would have because we didn't find out about the allocation prior to our AKV add-on. I would have most likely purchased double the amount of points at AKV and decided to sell OKW earlier.

FACT : I stated I had no reference to back up whether or not there was a lawsuit vs a formal complaint about the OKW extension fees snafu. But I said, to me, it didn't matter either way if disney even considered charging the extra fees to non-extenders.

So where, in what I said, is there not fact ? So I'm offended that you insinuate I'm making statements based on emotion and not fact---like you.

Last time I checked, I am entitled to my personal opinion. It's TERRIFIC that many will benefit from lower weekend points. I wasn't even talking about this. Just saying, for us, it's made us put our contract up for sale. Because 30 points is just too much to accept for us PERSONALLY. Now this is, once again, FACT Tim.

Maria