Disney Vacation Club adjusts 2010 Vacation Points charts

[yitbos96bb]

Were you there?? I don't remember you sitting there with us. Unless of course you were the guide that lied...

Come on.....is it really that hard to believe that a sales rep would say anything in order to get our $$$$. Esp since we came right out and told him we were looking at Marriott also...And we were buying a weeks stay! Get your head out of the sand thinking everything Disney is up and up. Disney is made of people whom are trying to make a living. I just wish I was smarter back then and taken in my the Disney "Magic"

And you are telling me that ALL DISERS who sit and complain and moan have 100% perfect audio memories and can remember from 10 years ago EVERY SINGLE ASPECT OF THE CONVERSATION. Let's compare to see the simplest explanation in all this... You remember everything 100% perfectly because you are some level of genius and the guide lied, and that's ALL the needed proof OR in the 10 years sense, you don't totally remember what the guide said, you understood what he said one way, but know in your heart that you may have MISUNDERSTOOD, but because there is a change you don't want to admit the possibility that you made a mistake in the interpretation. Occam's Razor says that I'm right.

Furthermore, HAD you actually understood the possibility that it might adjust, you are saying you wouldn't have bought it? I call Bull Pucky on that. THAT is something that bugs you in hindsight, not at the purchase time.

You protest to much... I was giving you the benefit of the doubt... but now.... it sounds like of all the people in the room, the GUIDE wasn't the necessarily untruthful one 10 years later.

 

[yitbos96bb]

I am sorry you misunderstood the rules that governed your ownership, but I am not sure what answer you were looking for from one of the current guides, who are (as you acknowledged in another post) salespeople? There have been a number of suggestions in this thread about how to manage your points differently to deal with the change and other than selling you more DVC points, which was probably the last thing you were looking for, I am not sure what the guide could have done to resolve your concerns. -- Suzanne

To be fair, the GUIDE was fairly rude. While I can see us telling those who do nothing but complain and moan based on their rainman like memory of 10 year old conversations to sell if they don't like it... the Sales guide should NOT have said that. It's very unprofessional.

 

[Chuck S]

Again, there were previous re-allocations, in 1996. OKW had a full reallocation, in fact studios in Adventure Season from 69 points per week to 80, and in 2010 they will be 77 per week. BWV had a very early re-allocation to create the preferred/Boardwalk view category. So there was a history there.

Your guide may have been unaware of the previous re-allocations, or it is also possible that what you understood to be a "block" was different from what s/he was considering a block, or your guide could have simply been mistaken, or you could have had a "one week" mindset from your preview at a Marriott (though most newer Marriotts are point based), or the guide could have lied. As none of us were there, it is your word against theirs, and after 10 years, I'm not sure either's recollection of the discussion would be 100% accurate.

 

[Dean]

I agree with you. This doesn't bother me in the least.

However, we are obviously a minority. My bet is that given the uproar we may see this changed again... not back to normal but a midway point. Given I like to arrive on weekends and stay to the ned of the opposite weekend, this didn't hurt me at all.

I'm not sure that those that think this is bad is a majority, we actually don't know one way or another though it seems to me to be a vocal minority. I'm inclined to think that MOST members at least knew it could happen and that MOST members are not negatively affected but most are neutral or nearly so.

Were you there?? I don't remember you sitting there with us. Unless of course you were the guide that lied...

Come on.....is it really that hard to believe that a sales rep would say anything in order to get our $$$$. Esp since we came right out and told him we were looking at Marriott also...And we were buying a weeks stay! Get your head out of the sand thinking everything Disney is up and up. Disney is made of people whom are trying to make a living. I just wish I was smarter back then and taken in my the Disney "Magic"

None of us were there but I think many of us know enough about the rules and have at least indirect info on thousands of DVC tours enough to think it's very unlikely you were purposefully misled. Even if you were, you should have read the paperwork. DVC did absolutely nothing wrong in this change which is clearly allowed and is actually required if the demand is too far out of balance.

For example

What we were told....if the sat night went down say 5 points then the sun - thur would have to go up 1 pt each night. the bottome line of 330 points would have to stay the same.

And what you were told was not correct either. It is the WHOLE page not blocks or vertical columns.

Actually neither is technically correct. What is required is that each UNIT (normally a collection of rooms) must remain the same. The end result is the entire resort but it is made up of many pieces.

Again, there were previous re-allocations, in 1996. OKW had a full reallocation, in fact studios in Adventure Season from 69 points per week to 80, and in 2010 they will be 77 per week. BWV had a very early re-allocation to create the preferred/Boardwalk view category. So there was a history there.

Your guide may have been unaware of the previous re-allocations, or it is also possible that what you understood to be a "block" was different from what s/he was considering a block, or your guide could have simply been mistaken, or you could have had a "one week" mindset from your preview at a Marriott (though most newer Marriotts are point based), or the guide could have lied. As none of us were there, it is your word against theirs, and after 10 years, I'm not sure either's recollection of the discussion would be 100% accurate.

BWV wasn't really a reallocation but a frank change in a segment which they could do with legal wrangling because it was to the members best interest plus they had unsold segments they could adjust to compensate. The other change, if you want to call it that, is when BWV came onboard. They essentially adjusted both the weekend/weekday ratio somewhat and really jacked up the GV points compared to a 2 BR plus a studio.

 

[disneynutz]

Lets make this real simple.

Disney will do what ever they want to make more money. That's their business. Their prior business model focused more on quality and the Guest experience. Now they have learned that if they offer discounts, deals, call something free, people will come and spend money. Maybe not as much as they used to, but that can be made up by reducing the number of employees, increasing the price and increasing the number of Guests served.

DVD moves the points around not to increase the Member experience as they may tell you, but to balance the attendance load.

 

[tjkraz]

DVD moves the points around not to increase the Member experience as they may tell you, but to balance the attendance load.

Given the fact that DVD sells enough points for the resorts to be booked solid year-round (less maintenance), please explain to me why proper load balancing is NOT in members' best interest?

 

[mdinme]

Does this alter totals for booked vacations?

 

[disneynutz]

Given the fact that DVD sells enough points for the resorts to be booked solid year-round (less maintenance), please explain to me why proper load balancing is NOT in members' best interest?

90% of my DVC vacations scheduled in 2010 will require additional points, that's not in my best interest.

Lowering the number of points required for Friday and Saturday stays will only increase the weekend park attendance which is already the busiest days, that's not in my best interest.

If Disney experiences reduced park attendance during the week, they will cut back on the park hours, reduce the number of special events, and cut back on the number of Cast Members scheduled during those times, that's not in my best interest.

I Don't see any of DVC's changes made during the last year or so benefiting the Members. RCI, $95 dollar transaction fee, 7 day booking restriction, two active wait lists, and developer points.

Don't get me wrong, DVC is a good deal if you are looking for discounted accommodations. I don't like the fact that members seem to take a back seat to sales and that there isn't any accountability for MS and the association management.

 

[Chuck S]

Does this alter totals for booked vacations?

There is no way it could change the points required for a booked vacation, Member Services was using the 2010 charts for all vacations booked in 2010, the charts were released prior to January 26, 2009, and no one could book a vacation with a date that included January 1, 2010 until then, even using the check-in plus 7 day rule.

 

[Chuck S]

90% of my DVC vacations scheduled in 2010 will require additional points, that's not in my best interest.

Lowering the number of points required for Friday and Saturday stays will only increase the weekend park attendance which is already the busiest days, that's not in my best interest.

If Disney experiences reduced park attendance during the week, they will cut back on the park hours, reduce the number of special events, and cut back on the number of Cast Members scheduled during those times, that's not in my best interest.

I Don't see any of DVC's changes made during the last year or so benefiting the Members. RCI, $95 dollar transaction fee, 7 day booking restriction, two active wait lists, and developer points.

Don't get me wrong, DVC is a good deal if you are looking for discounted accommodations. I don't like the fact that members seem to take a back seat to sales and that there isn't any accountability for MS and the association management.

It may not be to your advantage individually, while being as an advantage to the membership as a whole. For instance, raising taxes to improve highways is a disadvantage to the individual financially, but an advantage to the community as a whole.

Balancing room occupany is also in the best interest of the membership as a whole, it can reduce housekeeping costs resort personnel...we all pay for that.

I can certainly see where the 2 waitlist rule and $95 booking fee are advantageous to the entire membership. The waitlist restriction mean, overall, that a higher number of members are likely to get a waitlist filled, rathe than the fee that have 15 differnt waitlists running. And the $95 fee shifts the cost of providing the RCI trades to those that actually use the trades. There is no "7 day booking restriction" in fact, calling 11/7 from your check-in day is an advantage over waiting until your check-out day to try to book, or calling day by day. Who do you think were paying the fees for those day by day toll free calls? And the developers points really should not have had a impact, they were DVDs to use as they wish, whether as part of a sales promo, or for cash reservations...either way, those rooms would not have be available to other point reservations.

 

[honeymo78]

Although we have only been DVC members for a year, we purposely purchased a number of points that was slightly more than enough for our preferred trips. When we did our first add on at BLT last year, we chose 300 points. I week in a MK view is 287 this year and 288 next year. Knowing about the possibility that the allocation of points in the chart can change, we selected an amount that is reasonably likely to ensure we will always get a week's stay during October.

I know many members liked to avoid weekend stays like the plague, I'm sure there are plenty more who also book full week vacations, who aren't really affected at all, at least by the 2010 numbers.

 

[Dean]

Does this alter totals for booked vacations?

Not in general but it could for an individual and most certainly will for one who minimizes weekends.

90% of my DVC vacations scheduled in 2010 will require additional points, that's not in my best interest.

Lowering the number of points required for Friday and Saturday stays will only increase the weekend park attendance which is already the busiest days, that's not in my best interest.

If Disney experiences reduced park attendance during the week, they will cut back on the park hours, reduce the number of special events, and cut back on the number of Cast Members scheduled during those times, that's not in my best interest.

I Don't see any of DVC's changes made during the last year or so benefiting the Members. RCI, $95 dollar transaction fee, 7 day booking restriction, two active wait lists, and developer points.

Don't get me wrong, DVC is a good deal if you are looking for discounted accommodations. I don't like the fact that members seem to take a back seat to sales and that there isn't any accountability for MS and the association management.

I'll limit my remarks to the guaranteed and contractual components, namely a DVC stay. Whether it hurts or helps you is irrelevant as Chuck points out. The question is the overall affect and balance. Some will be hurt, some will be helped and most will be neutral or nearly so. DVC is not for everyone and it may not be for you with the changes you mention.

I had a coworker ask me yesterday whether I'd buy again now knowing what I know. She said "answer quick, don't think about it". I had to say no but then explain that it's because I had so many other options including trading in and that I'd still likely own at least a small contract for the perks.

 

[yitbos96bb]

Lets make this real simple.

Disney will do what ever they want to make more money. That's their business. Their prior business model focused more on quality and the Guest experience. Now they have learned that if they offer discounts, deals, call something free, people will come and spend money. Maybe not as much as they used to, but that can be made up by reducing the number of employees, increasing the price and increasing the number of Guests served.

DVD moves the points around not to increase the Member experience as they may tell you, but to balance the attendance load.

Maybe... but if people tend to use a lot of weekend days, the move IS more beneficial for them. Either way I think Dean is right... It's a wash for most people... people like you, who spend more time during weekdays were negatively effected and so you complain. But it does seem like you are happy with your membership. Why don't you sell? Or just rent out your points if so miserable. I may be misunderstanding your posts, but you seem unhappy.

 

[disneynutz]

Maybe... but if people tend to use a lot of weekend days, the move IS more beneficial for them. Either way I think Dean is right... It's a wash for most people... people like you, who spend more time during weekdays were negatively effected and so you complain. But it does seem like you are happy with your membership. Why don't you sell? Or just rent out your points if so miserable. I may be misunderstanding your posts, but you seem unhappy.

I'm unhappy because I know how Disney and the DVC used to be and I still hope that maybe things will improve.

The changes to the 2010 point chart was just one of many recent changes. If we continue to accept changes to our membership that benefit Disney and not the members, Disney will make even more changes. They would be fools not to.

Seems like a lot of folks today just accept what's given to them. I'm not that kind of person.

 

[Chuck S]

I'm unhappy because I know how Disney and the DVC used to be and I still hope that maybe things will improve.

The changes to the 2010 point chart was just one of many recent changes. If we continue to accept changes to our membership that benefit Disney and not the members, Disney will make even more changes. They would be fools not to.

Seems like a lot of folks today just accept what's given to them. I'm not that kind of person.

But again, many of the changes can benefit the Membership as a whole, while having a negative impact on individuals. Disney doesn't always make decisions based on what benefits the company, for instance, how in the world does changing the waitlist rule benefit Disney, it was all basically handled by computers? What it does is give more DVC Members a chance for their waitlist to come through without losing a day in the middle because someone waitlisted "day by day." And some changes benefit both the Membership at large and Disney. Some changes benefit the members, and not Disney, or have zero impact on Disney. The 2010 point chart, for instance....overall selling a few moe 25 pont contracts isn't a big "win" for Disney. they likely make little profit o those, given the operatig costs involved to sell them. Whether th DVC resorts operate at full capacity or not really isn't a big concern for Disney, either, as the upkeep expenses are already paid. So I really don't see how the point reallocation is very much in Disney's favor...but if it helps balance occupancy, the operational costs and availability can benefi DVC Memebers as a whole.

The DVC Program benefits, which benefits all members in a much broader way.

It has nothing to do with "accepting" what is being given to us, rather it is seeing the bigger picture.

 

[DebbieB]

I'm unhappy because I know how Disney and the DVC used to be and I still hope that maybe things will improve.

The changes to the 2010 point chart was just one of many recent changes. If we continue to accept changes to our membership that benefit Disney and not the members, Disney will make even more changes. They would be fools not to.

Seems like a lot of folks today just accept what's given to them. I'm not that kind of person.

I don't know that this change specifically benefits Disney. The problem is weekdays are full at the hotels and they have empty rooms on weekends. They are trying to even that out more.

 

[nickspace]

This is an amazing thread.

Like in everything it is good to have a buffer; a few extra dollars in the bank and a few extra points in the account. Granted there are specific nuances that need to be considered with this point system but only buying exactly what you need can be a mistake. Knowing upfront that the points can be adjusted within the total allocation necessitates slush points. If the system slides back and forth every year you need to plan for that adjustment.

 

[Dean]

I'm unhappy because I know how Disney and the DVC used to be and I still hope that maybe things will improve.

The changes to the 2010 point chart was just one of many recent changes. If we continue to accept changes to our membership that benefit Disney and not the members, Disney will make even more changes. They would be fools not to.

Seems like a lot of folks today just accept what's given to them. I'm not that kind of person.

DVC has changed, it had to. When I first joined there were designer shower curtains, cloth napkins, etc and there was a separate express check in desk at OKW and you entered on the right and there were free tickets for the parks. I went in knowing what was guaranteed and having an expectation there based on the legal paperwork. Then I knew the fluff that was present. I counted on the guarantees and hoped for more. I bought resale, likely the first one to do so not from a family member, but I had done the tour and been given a specific and incorrect piece of information on that tour which I had counted on to make my purchase decision. I was unhappy at first about it and DVC did offer to buy it back and make me whole due to this issue. We decided to give it a try and make the most of it and I'm glad we did even though we get far less benefit now than we did previously but that's more because our situation (other timeshare options) has changed than anything else.

I can't think of a true negative substantial change that has affected the entire membership or even a majority, involved a guaranteed component and wasn't a slam dunk on DVC's part to do so. I would agree that some of the handling of members moves (AKV savannah and concierge, BWV redo) have been far less than stellar but even then most that have posted they were unhappy have gone far overboard and expected too much of the system. But those are one time items that they seem to have done better with later ones than earlier ones and to have learned some from previous mistakes.

I can really only think of limited actual changes.

1. Change in reservations allowing a full week.
2. Two formal reallocations in 17 years.
3. Return to one transfer per year.
4. Establishment of a definition of "commercial renter" and enforcing same.
5. Move to more strict occupancy limits. Most people don't realize when they went to the semi formal allowance of 5 in a 1 BR and 9 in a 2 BR, they had previously been allowing more and 5 in a studio.

There may be others you would want to list. All are appropriate in my book and none are arguable as to the right or choices IMO even though I personally would have preferred a different decision on some of them.

Can you even think of one example of a system change that affected the majority of the members and wasn't clearly allowed from a legal standpoint. Can you think of even one item where DVC hasn't fulfilled it's required functions?

I don't know that this change specifically benefits Disney. The problem is weekdays are full at the hotels and they have empty rooms on weekends. They are trying to even that out more.

I'm not sure that this is true Debbie, nor that it is relevant. DVC rooms were likely less full on weekends but regular rooms the reverse as well as the parks more full on weekends. If it is required to balance DVC occupancy, none of the rest of the information matters anyway as DVC has the legal obligation to make these changes if needed to balance occupancy. I think the most valid complaint is why did they wait so long. The answer is likely because things had gotten so far off they had to. Had DVC made some type of change every 3-5 years starting with the mid 90's issue, as they likely should have, we would not be having such a discussion. Sure, we'd have had small similar thread's each time but nothing like this. IMO, the complaints in the mid 90's got us to here but these complaints are going to assure that DVC makes a change of some type periodically just to make sure the members know they can.

 

[Dean]

This is an amazing thread.

Like in everything it is good to have a buffer; a few extra dollars in the bank and a few extra points in the account. Granted there are specific nuances that need to be considered with this point system but only buying exactly what you need can be a mistake. Knowing upfront that the points can be adjusted within the total allocation necessitates slush points. If the system slides back and forth every year you need to plan for that adjustment.

When people post a thread for "how many points to buy", I have often suggested buying a cushion if buying looking at a lower season, smaller unit and/or mostly weekdays. I've often used 10% as a suggestion which would not have been enough to totally insulate one against this change but it sure would have helped over just having enough.

The truth is that in the worst case scenario, the cost for one totally avoiding weekends (which has been me for points reservations), has gone up a max of 20%. If this is enough of a change alone to make DVC not worth owning, it was likely never a good choice for them.

 

[disneynutz]

Disney doesn't always make decisions based on what benefits the company, for instance, how in the world does changing the waitlist rule benefit Disney, it was all basically handled by computers?

That's what we are told but how are wait lists really handled?

Wait lists are a pain for MS. They create extra work and prior to the new rule they really created extra work. Why were we not always contacted by phone or email when our wait list were filled? Because it created extra work. Why aren't we contacted now? Because it creates extra work.

Here is an example of a wait list for a member if they requested any studio at AKV.

Value Studio Jambo
Standard Studio Jambo
Savanna Studio Jambo
Concierge Studio Jambo
Standard Studio Kidani
Savanna Studio Kidani

Coincidence that the new "two only" rule went into effect prior to Kidani being available?

I have been told by MS that wait lists are matched at night so call back every day at the end of business and you might get what you want without a wait list.

Conversely, I have also been told by MS that wait lists are matched all day long so calling every day won't help.

Which is it? seems like MS doesn't really know.

How many members have reported that they just happened to get their match when they called in. Coincidence?

I have also been told by MS that the wait list software has problems and that the more requests a member had, the more problems it made for the software. Instead of fixing the software, they reduced the number of allowable wait lists.