Disney Vacation Club adjusts 2010 Vacation Points charts

[Dean]

No Dean I can understand if they need to even out occupancy, but the timing is what is upsetting to me. 2010 the points were available for use for January 2009 reservations started. I have a current trip planned for Feb 2009. I would have done this reservation differently to have enough points for my Feb 2010 trip. IF they would have even announced this 6 months ago I would not now be short for my 2010 trip. Heck if they would have announced this even 1 day before my 30 trip window I cold have cut days off that trip and banked them to have enough for 2010.

Denise in MI

But would you be upset with the timing if the change did not affect you negatively? I understand the timing is poor but would point out that there would have been people in the same boat if they'd have announced the changes 6 months or a year ago though maybe less people.

Not much bad about Marriott. The worst thing they've done in the last 10 years has been to raise the number of reward points required to stay in hotels. (Akin to Disney raising the point costs to stay in hotels.) Your resale prices are less, but buy-in and maintenance fees are also a lot cheaper. Availability is generally good, especially last minute in Orlando. And best yet, a week is still a full week.

Let me add to the list. There have been a number of special assessments in the last few years including one right now at Aruba Ocean Club which is apparently a direct result of poor workmanship and materials from pre-construction and possibly known by Marriott that early as well. In essence many owners think they're being require to pay for something that Marriott should have fixed before sales and that they likely knew this was the case. Marriott has dropped 9 different resorts over the time I've been following them and in some cases, resorts where they sold weeks to members knowing they were buying for the purpose of the internal trading preference with II. They strong armed the 3 remaining resort components at Vail into performing their required upgrades, two were dropped or pulled out because they couldn't go along with the changes. In the case of Spicebush and Swallow tail it appears that Marriott forced them to make certain upgrades to stay in the system then dropped them anyway. They just strong armed Beachplace to do certain upgrades that were more expensive, it was interesting to see the game of chicken. In the case of both the Vail and HH resorts that were dropped many were saying Marriott could never do so because it was HH and Vail and too valuable of a location. I predicted they would, they did. In he case of Vail there are technically 5 resorts in one, many said legally they could not be split up and Marriott would never let them be split up. I predicted they could and would, they did. Harbour Pointe and possibly Sunset point will likely be the next to go. If it happens, SP would be the first Marriott built resort to be dropped. To be honest, Marriott is likely less to blame than the HOA in these but they did/are happening. Oh and Marriott tells you which contractor to use then takes a % off the top for the recommendation.

 

[newgeneb]

I Never thought i would see the day when MICKEY MOUSE would lie and be so underhanded

 

[tjkraz]

What bothers me the most is that press release sheds almost no light on the logic and rationale used by DVC in making this change (and most other recent changes). The "to enhance the member experience" or "based on member feedback" is getting a bit tired. Yes, the press release alludes to balancing occupancy, but DVC has had the same system for many years...what has changed that has suddenly hurt DVC in regards to these travel patterns? DVC set the system up to favor weekday stays...why? Why is this suddenly a problem?

The answer is simple: things change.

DVC basically made a stab in the dark setting charts back in 1991. Then they adjusted 3 years later (announced in '94, effective '96) based upon the limited data that was available.

Over the next 15 years ('94 to '09) the demographic and travel habits of DVC members has changed. DVC went from a somewhat elite program with one destination and a 230 pt minimum buy-in (which was significant given the low point charts at OKW), to something that just about anyone could agree to finance at 15%.

Slowly the scales kept tipping more and more to weekday stays which the system as a whole simply cannot support.

Communications issues aside, DVC's biggest mistake was not rebalancing the charts sooner. Over the last 15 years we probably should have seen single-digit adjustments every 7-8 years. But we didn't and that's why this adjustment is so substantial.

If there is any silver lining for the weekday vacationers it's that we are just now being asked to pay higher rates. They should have gone up by smaller margins several times now.

 

[tamclan]

This change has affected me in a negative way, less nights for usual vacation trip of about 10 nights.

That said. To me this change is a realization by Disney that the points floating out there could not sustain the model of members mostly staying on weeknights. While it stinks for those that were the Sun - Thur pattern, if too many of these existed and weekends had a much lower occupancy the model is broken and in their eyes must be modified. DVC sells points for usage over 51 weeks, not 51 weeks of Sun - Thur usage.

 

[Maribel]

I don't think for a second this is a ploy to sell more points. Most of the resorts are either sold out or pretty close to it, so it wouldn't even be plausible for even 10% of the members to do a 25pt add-on. There just aren't that many points. And the problem here is not that too few points are sold, but that rooms are going empty on weekends, and that points are being orphaned. When enough points are orphaned, that means that people -- people like you, who paid good money for DVC and pay good money for MFs -- can't get a reservation and can't use their points. (And before you say that doesn't happen, remember that every so often around here we get a thread that darkly insinuates that DVC has oversold the resort because the poster can't get a reservation for when they want. It's not oversold, just out of balance.) Thus, there are actually too many points in the system to support the old point charts. If only, say, 75-80% of the resorts' points were sold, we could muddle on in the current system. But because 98% are sold, occupancy really has to stay up there or things don't work.

I think this is the best explanation to the situation, emotions apart. If weekend nights were left unused, it means a large number of points were orphaned, and, taking into account that in most cases, those two weekend nights were the equals to 4 weekday nights. That is way to many points left around.
I live in Fl, and when ocassionally want to make a weekend trip on a short notice (even one week before), I found myself able to get a reservation. Granted, most of the time the only resort available is SSR, but the fact that I'm able to get something tells me that those weekend nights are not being used as they should.
If this was only a sales scheme on their part, they would only affect the resorts that are currently selling, not the sold out resorts.
But after 15+ years, DVC has now sufficient historical data about usage patterns to make this type of drastic changes.
I'm really sorry for those affected. I understand their right to vent and I don't think the timing of the changes are right, in the end, I think it will benefit the DVC program, and therefore, us owners.

 

[BroganMc]

Let me add to the list. There have been a number of special assessments in the last few years including one right now at Aruba Ocean Club which is apparently a direct result of poor workmanship and materials from pre-construction and possibly known by Marriott that early as well. In essence many owners think they're being require to pay for something that Marriott should have fixed before sales and that they likely knew this was the case. Marriott has dropped 9 different resorts over the time I've been following them and in some cases, resorts where they sold weeks to members knowing they were buying for the purpose of the internal trading preference with II. They strong armed the 3 remaining resort components at Vail into performing their required upgrades, two were dropped or pulled out because they couldn't go along with the changes. In the case of Spicebush and Swallow tail it appears that Marriott forced them to make certain upgrades to stay in the system then dropped them anyway. They just strong armed Beachplace to do certain upgrades that were more expensive, it was interesting to see the game of chicken. In the case of both the Vail and HH resorts that were dropped many were saying Marriott could never do so because it was HH and Vail and too valuable of a location. I predicted they would, they did. In he case of Vail there are technically 5 resorts in one, many said legally they could not be split up and Marriott would never let them be split up. I predicted they could and would, they did. Harbour Pointe and possibly Sunset point will likely be the next to go. If it happens, SP would be the first Marriott built resort to be dropped. To be honest, Marriott is likely less to blame than the HOA in these but they did/are happening. Oh and Marriott tells you which contractor to use then takes a % off the top for the recommendation.

Your talking about individual resort problems with a managing company. That's not the same as changing an overall system for every owner. And as you say, it's the HOAs in these cases that have instigated these problems. That scenario is equivelant only if SSR's HOA were to decide to drop Disney as a manager (something they can't due to Disney retaining an ownership interest).

To equate the same situation to what Disney is doing, Marriott would have to impose a policy that using my October week at Cypress Harbour is now worth only 6 days in May. Fact is I can stay a full week at Cypress Harbour any time of the year. The difference in cost between Gold and Red seasons is a measly $20. I've also routinely traded my 2bedroom Cypress Harbour for a 3bedroom at Grande Vista for the exact same exchange fee as a 2bedroom.

 

[Dean]

What bothers me the most is that press release sheds almost no light on the logic and rationale used by DVC in making this change (and most other recent changes). The "to enhance the member experience" or "based on member feedback" is getting a bit tired. Yes, the press release alludes to balancing occupancy, but DVC has had the same system for many years...what has changed that has suddenly hurt DVC in regards to these travel patterns? DVC set the system up to favor weekday stays...why? Why is this suddenly a problem? Guides have promoted this value quite a bit in sales. Their rationale might help us better understand or accept the decision. Shouldn't we expect some sort of thorough explanation on this change and others? Goodness, this is an ownership program not a rewards program. Putting aside the emotions of this change hurting or helping our travel plans, I am most concerned with how and why these changes are made. Who is making them and why?

Include me in the group that is most upset over the manner in which the changes are made, and less about the outcome of the changes. Call me illogical for expecting logic.

Scott

Assuming all else, what would you have put in the press release had you been writing it. They could have, and maybe should have, said something like this.

We have the obligation to even out usage and we've noticed some areas where occupancy is skewed. The POS requires us to do so and we did. Here it is, have fun.

LOL! IMO, they should have addressed the issue of the timing in relationship to BLT sales proactively, I think anything before the 11 month window opens is fine and appropriate otherwise, obviously many disagree. Certainly with the aggregate of issues lately it's fair to question the quality of DVC's management. The question then becomes whether now is bad or before was bad but we didn't know it and current management has to fix it or a combination. Look at it as a healthy dose of reality. Hopefully these issues will get people thinking about he nuts and bolts in their decisions rather than the fluff. My experience with corporate matters is that a little basic bland explanation is OK but too much simply opens up for argument and makes it worse. It's much like when your teen wants something and you say no, the more you explain your answer to many of them, the more argument you get.

 

[dis-happy]

Say good-bye to the kinder and gentler DVC. When you think about how many new rooms DVC is adding as a percentage to the existing program (starting with SSR, then AKV, BLT, GCV and Hawaii) it's easy to see how things are going to change, and change drastically.

Since sales can't be booming due to the economy, more cost cutting measures will be in place. Things from as small as losing the tote bag for add-ons, to (I venture to guess) cutting back or eliminating Member events like the Christmas party. It's been fun the past few years but we won't have that pixie dust experience again.

I also wonder about the balance of power....up to now DVC properties have been all East Coast; it will be interesting to see if the new properties in the west cause further changes at WDW. I liken to whole thing to having a good relationship with my local bank, then one day they turn into B of A and you are hit with a bunch of extra fees (and nothing to show in return), they don't know who you are and they really don't care; the bottom line and a push to open new accounts is all that matters.

I'd really like to know why their PR dept. is so bad! As far as the charts being posted, unposted, the re-posted (and accompanying text which changed each time or didn't come true) really makes me wonder if there wasn't a crisis of heart in there somewhere. It's almost like the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing, or the ones making decisions are out of touch as to how the execution will affect their membership (and I'm sure the bean counters were trying to see if would affect sales). We purchased DVC not because we particularly wanted a timeshare (vacations in the summer house at Hilton Head are just dandy) but because we love Disney and had a faith that their standards were high and they would always do things well. All I can say now is that they are slipping.

 

[Belle & Ariel]

I think we need to look at this from a business standpoint.

Too many rooms are vacant weekends. Points need to be adjusted to improve occupancy rates which also raises park revenues. We can do it now (thought the effect will not be seen for nearly year). Or we can give longer notice. If it takes place 3/1/10, someone will be upset because they are going 3/2 and if they went a week earlier, they would not be affected. Ditto for if it is implemented 6/1 or 9/1 or whatever. Someone will always feel cheated.
As a business owner or stockholder who sees they are missing out on revenue, how long would you be patient to wait to remedy it? Most likely not
over a year. Companies are not in business to please the customer, that is a hoped for thing but not number one priority.
Finally, we all gripe about cutbacks--Fantasmic, shorter hours, less housekeeping, etc. Disney is struggling just like everyone else and has to do what is financially wise to continue providing the thing we all love.

 

[Dean]

Your talking about individual resort problems with a managing company. That's not the same as changing an overall system for every owner. And as you say, it's the HOAs in these cases that have instigated these problems. That scenario is equivelant only if SSR's HOA were to decide to drop Disney as a manager (something they can't due to Disney retaining an ownership interest).

To equate the same situation to what Disney is doing, Marriott would have to impose a policy that using my October week at Cypress Harbour is now worth only 6 days in May. Fact is I can stay a full week at Cypress Harbour any time of the year. The difference in cost between Gold and Red seasons is a measly $20. I've also routinely traded my 2bedroom Cypress Harbour for a 3bedroom at Grande Vista for the exact same exchange fee as a 2bedroom.

To me you buy a resort that may happen to be a member of a group. I realize that most DVC members don't see it that way but I'm sure you've seen me post that idea before. I'd break everything down to the level of resort first, system second. OK, how about when Marriott changed the reservation rule to allow 13 month reservations, this hasn't always been in place and was a change that came about well after many resorts were selling or sold out. If you owned one week and the potential availability were just cut in half, you might not be happy. And there are situations where DVC could drop a given resort and where the resort could drop DVC as the management company. Both unlikely to happen but possible and we've discussed it on DIS a number of times. As for the number of days, you're trying to come up with too specific of an example it seems. However, your post is inaccurate. You can stay in a full week in the unit size and season you own at the resort you own assuming the resort is still in business and your legally owned unit is on line. The ability to trade at all could be eliminated as could your resorts participation with Marriott, not likely but possible. Still, if Marriott take over internal exchanges, expect similar threads on places like TUG as you can be not everyone will be happy, possibly no one.

 

[jlewisinsyr]

The difference between Disney struggling and DVC is we pay for it. It's not like Disney is paying for the hotels, the rooms, the housekeeping or anything about the timeshare. We as members pay for it in our dues.

To add to it, I think in this economy, the worst thing any company can do is piss off its clients. Customers have shown already that they have brand loyalty to companies that are customer centric (companies like Apple have actually seen their sales continue to rise, even in this tight market).

 

[DVCSAMNH]

I am truly enjoying reading about why everyone thinks DVC did what they did. It reminds me of trying to figure out why my one of my 16 yr olds did something. All I can say is " good luck"! We're probably not even close.

I do have a question for the very smart folks on this board who seem to have the POS memorized. I know that DVC can raise points 20% per year so at some point they can even out weekdays and weeknights but can they go to a one week only reservation system? This would in effect do away with our point system. Now, I admit to only reading the POS before signing it, so forgive my ignorance on this subject but if I see a trend towards this, DVC will no longer hold any appeal for me.

 

[dizzneebabe]

After reading through the 61 pages of posts, I think my head has finally stopped spinning! My DH has talked me off the ledge--he's always the rational one in our house

I understand the need to even out the points on weekends. I agree with others that more notice would have made it much easier on many people, taking into consideration banking/borrowing for upcoming trips.

And I am really sorry for the people who feel that their membership has devalued. Fortunately, we feel our membership is still one of the best purchases for our family. We based our purchases on magic season (2x in 3 years). That way, if we didn't travel in magic, we automatically gained a cushion. Ideally we had enough points to go EVERY year in adventure, without banking/borrowing. Now, we'll have to borrow every year to do that--1pt in 2010, 2pts in 2011, etc. So, it's definitely not the end of the world for us. We'll make it work.

As with most changes, taking the emotion out of the situation is key to figuring out how to adjust. It's just so easy to be overcome by frustration and anger! I hope we are done with the surprises for now--I'm not sure I could take anymore!!!

Now I'm done ranting on this thread. Thanks for letting me vent earlier! My DH appreciates it!!!

 

[La2kw]

I think we need to look at this from a business standpoint.

Too many rooms are vacant weekends. Points need to be adjusted to improve occupancy rates which also raises park revenues. We can do it now (thought the effect will not be seen for nearly year). Or we can give longer notice. If it takes place 3/1/10, someone will be upset because they are going 3/2 and if they went a week earlier, they would not be affected. Ditto for if it is implemented 6/1 or 9/1 or whatever. Someone will always feel cheated.
As a business owner or stockholder who sees they are missing out on revenue, how long would you be patient to wait to remedy it? Most likely not
over a year. Companies are not in business to please the customer, that is a hoped for thing but not number one priority.
Finally, we all gripe about cutbacks--Fantasmic, shorter hours, less housekeeping, etc. Disney is struggling just like everyone else and has to do what is financially wise to continue providing the thing we all love.

Disney is struggling?
Have you seen Iger's compensation for last year? Wanna take bets on what it will be this year?

A company that is in the business of customer service better make sure they are pleasing their customers. If not, there's a good chance they may run into a few problems.

 

[OKW Lover]

I do have a question for the very smart folks on this board who seem to have the POS memorized. I know that DVC can raise points 20% per year so at some point they can even out weekdays and weeknights but can they go to a one week only reservation system? This would in effect do away with our point system. Now, I admit to only reading the POS before signing it, so forgive my ignorance on this subject but if I see a trend towards this, DVC will no longer hold any appeal for me.

While I don't consider myself one of those "very smart folks", I would question your statement that DVC can raise points 20% per year. I've never seen any provision remotely approximating that.

 

[Dean]

After reading through the 61 pages of posts, I think my head has finally stopped spinning! My DH has talked me off the ledge--he's always the rational one in our house

I understand the need to even out the points on weekends. I agree with others that more notice would have made it much easier on many people, taking into consideration banking/borrowing for upcoming trips.

And I am really sorry for the people who feel that their membership has devalued. Fortunately, we feel our membership is still one of the best purchases for our family. We based our purchases on magic season (2x in 3 years). That way, if we didn't travel in magic, we automatically gained a cushion. Ideally we had enough points to go EVERY year in adventure, without banking/borrowing. Now, we'll have to borrow every year to do that--1pt in 2010, 2pts in 2011, etc. So, it's definitely not the end of the world for us. We'll make it work.

As with most changes, taking the emotion out of the situation is key to figuring out how to adjust. It's just so easy to be overcome by frustration and anger! I hope we are done with the surprises for now--I'm not sure I could take anymore!!!

Now I'm done ranting on this thread. Thanks for letting me vent earlier! My DH appreciates it!!!

Nice post.

I am truly enjoying reading about why everyone thinks DVC did what they did. It reminds me of trying to figure out why my one of my 16 yr olds did something. All I can say is " good luck"! We're probably not even close.

I do have a question for the very smart folks on this board who seem to have the POS memorized. I know that DVC can raise points 20% per year so at some point they can even out weekdays and weeknights but can they go to a one week only reservation system? This would in effect do away with our point system. Now, I admit to only reading the POS before signing it, so forgive my ignorance on this subject but if I see a trend towards this, DVC will no longer hold any appeal for me.

Here's my interpretation. The longest required stay DVC could impose would be 5 days, that is clearly spelled out in the POS. They could also likely make it 7 days by a vote of the members themselves. What isn't addressed at all is any further requirements or restrictions. Could they for example say which 5 days such as saying your stay must include at least 1 weekend points night or even 2. IMO they could and I definitely want to participate in that thread if it were to even happen. I'm sure you'll get a lot of dissenting views on this subject but I think people will be a little less likely to say it won't happen simply because DVC is warm and fuzzy as has been many people's stance in the past.

 

[tom in ct.]

All i can say is I'm glad they got that extra $3,500 out of me for the contract extention before they announced the new point reallocation THANKS DISNEY!!!!!!!! Okay can eveyone say SLEAZY! If I just would of known i would of used that money to buy an add on to fix the point shortage i now have with my vacationing habits!!! AGAIN THANKS DISNEY!!!

 

[Sammie]

I think what some are missing, is that Disney is selling a product and has sold this product for years, and lately many feel the product they sell is not what we get after the fact.

From their website:

Disney Vacation Club vs. Traditional Time-Share

Discover what sets Disney Vacation Club apart from traditional time-shares. In addition to the magic and wonder for which Disney is world-renowned, Disney Vacation Club offers unsurpassed vacation-planning flexibility, special money-saving benefits and an incomparable commitment to excellence. Disney Vacation Club invites you to vacation your way — and see for yourself why it's Disney's best kept secret.

and

The Disney Difference is what sets Disney Vacation Club apart... it's the heritage, tradition and values that began with Walt himself, carried forward to today.

It's just lately and with the way they handled this last situation, I am not seeing alot that sets them apart from other time-shares and I am definitely not seeing the heritage, tradition and values that began with Walt.

So either they need to live up to their sales pitch or speak the truth. Right now I think they are talking out of both sides of their mouth.

 

[disneynutz]

I am truly enjoying reading about why everyone thinks DVC did what they did. It reminds me of trying to figure out why my one of my 16 yr olds did something. All I can say is " good luck"! We're probably not even close.

In the last few years it has become apparent that DVC does what they do because of Greed. DVC has gone from a small Disney unit to a major revenue stream and now they want to cut and adjust to make even more money.

Nothing just happens at Disney. Every change, every adjustment, is well thought out and planned for well in advance. The way that they make changes with no advanced warning is done for a reason.

I really wish that they would focus more on the membership and infrastructure, and less on sales. They really need to fix what they have before they grow more.

 

[CheapMom]

While I don't consider myself one of those "very smart folks", I would question your statement that DVC can raise points 20% per year. I've never seen any provision remotely approximating that.

In the POS it says the points can be reallocated but no unit can be increased more than 20% in a given year. So in order to make a very dramatic reallocation they would have to do over the course of a few years- they can't do it all at once.

It doesn't say they can raise it up to 20% without lowering it elsewhere.

Also not a very smart POS memorizer- but I do remember reading that.