Disney Vacation Club adjusts 2010 Vacation Points charts

[toocherie]

Dean,

Are you sure you're not employed by Disney???

I don't always agree with him, but Dean has been on these boards for a long time (much longer than me), and has always given great, sage advice in my estimation. Just because someone defends a company's acts doesn't make them a "mole" for that company. Since you've been on the board such a short time, perhaps you should do a search of all of the messages he has posted over the years and read all of the information Dean has imparted and you can re-phrase your question (or recant it).

 

[HookdonWDW]

Dean,

Are you sure you're not employed by Disney???

Nah... if Dean were employed by Disney, he would have found a way to have more of his ideas implemented by now.

If you read more of his posts, you'll soon see that Dean isn't an automatic fan of all things DVC. Like many of us, he does believe that when you buy into DVC, you are only buying the things promised in your contract - not whatever a commercial, guide or other member promises you...

 

[jarestel]

Dean,

Are you sure you're not employed by Disney???

Nah! Dean's one of the good guys that you can count on for a rational, unemotional, opinion whether you want it or not!

 

[dcfromva]

If you did not have similar points distributions for each resort then I think you would have had a disparity where people who stayed on weekends only stayed where the points were less on weekends and people who stayed Sun-Thurs. would have only stayed where points were less on weekdays--would have had the same problem but would have had different "vacancy" days at different resorts. If the points for weekends/weekdays at SSR, BLT, AKV etc. had been equalized as you suggest, you would have had those weekend only travelers crowding in those resorts--while the Sun-Thurs. travelers would book up the older resorts (where points would have been lower on weekdays). There has to be some equality among the resorts--they can't be out of whack.

Reality check: There is no equality between the points at other resorts and the BLT point schedule that you are suggesting. Further, BLT has not even opened and points are being changed. Based on what? Occupancy patterns? No one here has a good explanation for what has changed in 4 months?
Also, the lower weekend point values would only be open to owners during the7- 11month booking advantage, so the weekend points would not exist in a vacuum.

 

[BeccaG]

I still think there is a point some are still missing. I seriously doubt if any that posted on this thread did not give their purchase the necessary financial focus it needed based on calm unemotional decision making. To imply otherwise, is well; insulting.

However the emotional, pixie dust loving, magic part of us did make us choose Disney to give our money to rather than some sleazy, slight of hand, time share operation.

Lately DVC is looking for like the latter and less like the house that Walt built.

Thanks Sammie, I said something similar a (like around page twelve, but its so buried I don't even know where it is!). And I love what you say in post #1156. I would wager, like you, that most of us did our due diligence before we purchase. On the other hand, most of us bought DVC over another timeshare, or even considered DVC in the first place because we have warm fuzzy feelings towards Disney. Quite frankly, since I am traveling from the west coast, this change will probably be beneficial to me, however the way it was rolled out and the timing of it was poorly done at best, and appears to be the kind of carny trickery which Walt despised and inspired him to build Disneyland in the first place. That's why I said this feels unfair in my previous post, although it is probably a smart financial move and will benefit the majority of members. For many of us, we simply expect better from the house that Walt built.

 

[lugnut33]

Nah! Dean's one of the good guys that you can count on for a rational, unemotional, opinion whether you want it or not!

Rational and unemotional? Umm, last time I checked he still doesn't feel anybody should be unhappy with losing value in their membership. It was all the buyers fault for not padding their points purchase by 20% or more.

 

[canals68]

We used to go Sun to Thursday 3 times a year. N/o more.

 

[PSC]

Its taken me quite some time to read through the entire thread. Like most of the responders, I've always stayed Sunday through Thursday and these changes amount to something of a price increase for me. The changes will mostly affect my extended family as we won't be able to invite guests as often as we previously had.

My biggest concern is that this will delay the much awaited release of CaskBills Planner and Tracker tools. Long term planning and dreaming isn't as much fun when you have to do the arithmetic yourself.

 

[lisareniff]

Excellent post Kat!

I also wonder about the less controversial waitlist change. Just so people know, 2 waitlists may mean that 2 bedroom lock-off and 2 bedroom dedicated will be two different waitlists. BWYWTS.

For the record I am negatively impacted even though I didn't try and avoid weekend stays. But I'll work with what is given and am not crying unfair. I'm lucky enough to be able to choose various times to vacation so I'll adjust. But I have had a few thoughts about this change.

• I think this was poorly handled and that DVC is making too many sweeping changes. From a business standpoint I think this alone has been a bad decision and is creating ill will.
  
• I think DVC probably should have done season date adjustments and that they are now creating other allocation problems. I'm specifically referring to Adventure season in early Dec. which I felt was a real bargain. It may make the other adventure seasons a bit more difficult to fill and cause another gap in occupancy. After all isn't that the time people have really been complaining about not being able to get reservations?
  
• We don't have DVC's information so it is all supposition that weekends were not filling up. Personally we are and were going to continue to be weekend/week stayers. The DIS group is great at maximizing DVC value (and there's nothing at all wrong with that). But I don't think it's a typical representation. Ths jist is that I haven't been convinced that weekend/weekday points were so out of whack. In fact I'm now fully expecting to have difficulty in getting weekends. This change is a BIG plus for people who live close to WDW.
  
• The change to BLT points is just plain unfair and unacceptable. There is no way that they didn't know this change was coming. This is where Disney really brought themselves down more than a few pegs to the level of bad-mouthed timeshares.

I do understand about people's complaints in being told to pick out your season and unit size to determine what you buy. I was told the same thing. And even though the paperwork negates anything your told I have never bought the idea that just because a business covers their behinds in the legal paperwork that it is ethical to feel they can say anything for a sale. I hope that people will contact DVC and complain about how they were sold this product. I disagree with posters that say it's how it's done and just accept it. I won't get political but that's so much at the root of the problems we're experiencing in the country today. It actually is possible to be correct and honest and make a sale b/c hopefully there is enough to the product that makes it worthwhile in selling.

More than the point charts the thing that gives me greater pause is the much less discussed change to waitlisting. I think Dean is 100% on track that DVC is certainly encouraging and may be setting up for a change to longer stays. Limiting to 2 waitlists and starting to even out weekday/weekend points leads me to that conclusion.

 

[The DIS-DVC Team]

We have had an enormous outpouring of threads on this topic over the past several days. We have decided that we will need to consolidate the topic into one thread in order to more efficiently moderate it.

So feel free to continue your discussion here. We encourage all points of view and will ensure that the discussion continues respectfully and without argument.

Thanks everyone!

 

[jarestel]

Rational and unemotional? Umm, last time I checked he still doesn't feel anybody should be unhappy with losing value in their membership. It was all the buyers fault for not padding their points purchase by 20% or more.

If everybody lost value I would agree you have a point. But individual losses are matched against other individual gains. If the net benefits for the membership is a "plus" then the losses are justified. Surely you wouldn't want your individual desires to take precedence over the membership as a whole?

 

[dcfromva]

I also wonder about the less controversial waitlist change. Just so people know, 2 waitlists may mean that 2 bedroom lock-off and 2 bedroom dedicated will be two different waitlists.

I'm not so sure folks are going to like it when reality sets in. The rules say 2 WL's per membership per UY. So, what if you have the same UY and multiple home resorts? You are not allowed to have more than 2 WLs going? Hardly seems fair.

 

[toocherie]

Reality check: There is no equality between the points at other resorts and the BLT point schedule that you are suggesting. Further, BLT has not even opened and points are being changed. Based on what? Occupancy patterns? No one here has a good explanation for what has changed in 4 months?
Also, the lower weekend point values would only be open to owners during the7- 11month booking advantage, so the weekend points would not exist in a vacuum.

First of all--I wasn't implying that all of the points were equal across the resorts. I was saying that a certain ratio between the weekend vs. weekday points had to be equally maintained at each resort--not that a one bedroom in one resort would be equal to a one bedroom in another resort. (For example, a one-bedroom at WL will be more than a one-bedroom at SSR presumably because SSR is a larger resort and WL is next to the Magic Kingdom. But you couldn't (shouldn't) make weekend rates at WL much higher and have the rates at SSR equal on weekdays and weekends--because people will then tend to book SSR on the weekends and shut out those who want to stay across weekdays and weekends.)

Secondly, yes, the "lower" point values would only be available to owners at that particular resort until the 7 month point. But if you had a number of people trying to book lower values for either the weekend or S-Th (as the case may be) at 6 1/2 months out those lower point days would likely be gone once booking opens for everyone. Leaving some "orphaned" days which would be unlikely to be filled because someone wanting to book for a week would not be able to fill their week at one resort (or worst of all worlds--have to book higher point days during the week at one resort and then move to a higher point resort for the rest of their visit). Look back at the number of posts on this board about what a "bargain" OKW is point-wise compared to some of the other resorts--the only thing that saves it from being a total booking disaster is that it is a large resort. Otherwise, you can bet people who are trying to maximize the use of their points would have it booked up soon after 7 months passed (and please understand, I do not think it is a bad thing for someone to want to maximize use of their DVC membership).

My biggest fear in this whole points reallocation is that "locals" will book up the weekends now making it difficult for those of us traveling a long way (West Coast) to be able to book 7+ days at one resort. Time will tell.

I do not know why the BLT chart was changed four months later. Maybe based on sales demand? Maybe based on the number of calls into MS wanting to book it already (you know that had to happen). I do know that the points for VGC are pretty hefty, so presumably DVC is anticipating heavy demand for those units too. As I believe someone else said--it's "supply and demand."

 

[tjkraz]

Changes that I do not like, very poor communication especially the member magazine. The DVC member magazine was a great resource the new one is a joke. They release things on the website and then email the members.

So you think that the generic, unchaging website (what was the old password EVERYONE used to log-in..."welcomehome"?) combined with a quarterly member mag that had more day-to-day info is an IMPROVEMENT over the website/mag we have now?

Not sure I can agree with that one.

The release of this adjustment, which I agree might be needed, was very poorly done.

I think we are all in agreement with that one...

Larger DVC rooms, where???, none are larger than OKW

I didn't realize that your ire dated back more than a decade to when VB/HHI/BWV opened with the smaller floorplans.

Current DVC/DVD management appears to have reversed course on that with the noticeably larger AKV, BLT and VGC.

To me the materials and products they buy are cheaper grade and do not last as long.

If you're referring to BCV, then I wholeheartedly agree with you. SSR was an improvement (granite counter tops, name-brand furniture and fixtures) over BCV and--to me, at least--it's clear the materials used in the latest wave of resorts another step up. Again it would seem to be another feather in the cap of current management.

I could care less for a small stackable washer and dryer in a tiny closet over a full size laundry room. Standardized the towels instead of having color coordinated towels like we got at OKW in the beginning.

I'll grant you those two. But again if we are focusing on current management, the stackable W/D became a villa staple long before current management came on the scene. And of all the things people talk about changing in DVC villas, having a full laundry room ranks pretty far down on the list from what I have read.

When were the old towels phased-out?

Full Size walk-in closests got smaller and smaller to the point they disappeared at AKV.

The amount of closet space doesn't appear to have taken a hit and most people seem to think having the second (or third) bathroom is a better use of space than having a dedicated room for hanging clothes.

The first member cruise was nice and focused on the members, everything else has focused on sales.

Could you elaborate on this one? I've never been on a cruise but they sure do seem to have an impressive array of special guests (Disney Legends, Imagineers, actors/actresses) and gifts for attendees. They seem quite popular, too. I wasn't aware that folks were subjected to unending sales pitches throughout the voyage.

I could go on and on but the truth of the matter is unless you were there before the current adminstration, it would be hard to realize how much has changed and very little for the better.

Or perhaps things never really were the way you perceived them.

There used to be time when never, would a DVC member have to complain about cleaniness and the maintenance of the units. They were clean and well kept, that is not the case now.

"Never?" I know I've been reading cleanliness threads dating back to before I was even a member. So if there is a problem, it certainly pre-dates Jim Lewis or any other current DVC management.

Perhaps standards have slipped a bit. But IMO the most obvious change over the last decade has been the growth of the Internet as a forum for every poor experience.

10-15 years ago people who had problems on their vacation would get it resolved with the manager and (maybe) write a letter to complain. Now we often hear about these issues in real-time as people post the blow-by-blow from their guest room over free Internet service (another new member perk.)

I believe that there was a time when we would "never" hear about complaints--mostly because there was no forum for those complaints.

Through all of this I guess I have two points to make:

1. If we're going to fairly evaluate management on the things that have been taken away, it must be balanced with the new features that have been delivered, and

2. Just because something has changed over the last 15 years (floorplans, perks, furnishings) doesn't necessarily mean that it is now inferior to the original.

 

[dcfromva]

I do not know why the BLT chart was changed four months later. Maybe based on sales demand? Maybe based on the number of calls into MS wanting to book it already (you know that had to happen). I do know that the points for VGC are pretty hefty, so presumably DVC is anticipating heavy demand for those units too. As I believe someone else said--it's "supply and demand."

But, the basis for point reallocation was supposed to be on occupancy patterns unless you are suggesting that the sales department is driving the point allocations.....

If you look at 2010 VGC point values, you will see the weekend values are still quite heavily weighted.

 

[MommaX03]

I have a theory. Years ago, the DVC bean counters may have figured they could sell more points annually by dropping the minimum buy-in to 150 points, selling a greater volume of new contracts than with a 210+ point minimum, as they likely saw a slight increase with the previous drops (230 to 210 to 170).

They also probably figured a fairly high percentage of new owners would "get their feet wet" with a 150 point contract, but then do add-on contracts to increase their ownership.

But the add-ons didn't materialize, and a substantial number of 150 point owners, rather than do add-ons went to a Sun to Thur only travel window, throwing resort usage out of balance, and increasing demand for Sun to Thur visits.

Now, it may not have been a big problem for a few years. DVC could have used the weekends for CRO reservations to offset the non-DVC trade costs. But, as the economy worsened over the last couple years, weekend cash demand may have fallen, cutting the ability of DVC to recoup those trade costs. At the same time, DVC owners that rented points were often seeing savvy renters who only wanted weekdays on points, substantially undercutting CRO cash reservations, and at the same time people with higher point counts than 150 who were renting points were causing increasing weekday DVC demand, throwing the system further out of balance.

Surely there was a combination of factors that would lead to a re-allocation.

I completely agree with this analysis.

Among the many bothersome issues brought up by the reallocation of points is that DVC did not publish this information prior to the increase in the minimum add-on points at BLT and the price per point increases at various resorts in mid-January. I received two mailings and various emails on the January offer. It was not like they did not have the time or the forum to mention the reallocation of points.

As these new charts were published so shortly after that offer's deadline, it really gives one a bad feeling that not all the information out there for consideration was revealed. Of course, point reallocation can and does occur. It just seems very odd that such a major point reallocation would be published right after the price increases and the substantial increase in the minimum BLT add-on contract.

 

[baj0505]

If everybody lost value I would agree you have a point. But individual losses are matched against other individual gains. If the net benefits for the membership is a "plus" then the losses are justified. Surely you wouldn't want your individual desires to take precedence over the membership as a whole?

I'm not sure I understand, can you elaborate? Did Disney release information indicating how this change would be a net benefit for the overall membership? We are new members and haven't started receiving email information and just now received our membership number so that we can log into the membership site. Other than the small introduction included with the announcement the new point charts were available, I haven't been able to find anything.

(And yes were are Sun-Thurs night members and were forthcoming when we purchased that would be our travel habit--it had nothing to do with 'higher' weekend point values, we arrive Sunday mornings and leave on Fridays to be home for the weekend before going back to work so this change did affect us.)

 

[Chuck S]

When were the old towels phased-out?

I think the coral colored towels were phased out from OKW around the time that BWV opened, though the two are unrelated.

I thought the coral towels did "dress up" the units and were a nice touch, but I fully understand the decision to go to white. I would imagine that the white towels have a much longer use life, and every little bit helps our dues.

I'm sure the washing cycles and commercial sterilization chemicals used faded those towels, and thus made them look much older than they really were. If the white towel still only need to be replaced 2/3 as often, that is still a big savings.

 

[tjkraz]

But, the basis for point reallocation was supposed to be on occupancy patterns unless you are suggesting that the sales department is driving the point allocations.....

I think DVC just followed the same formula for new resorts as the old. After all, they wouldn't have had a true basis for calculations at a brand new resort so they probably give higher priority to consistency than anything else.

Consider this: If AKV had opened with lower weekend costs right from the start, it would have had a very damaging effect on weekend occupancy throughout the program. AKV would potentially run up to 100% occupancy (at 7 mos) while the other resorts' occupancy would drop further.

Similarly weekday WDW guests would undoubtedly have flocked to resorts OTHER than AKV in order to save a few points.

If you look at 2010 VGC point values, you will see the weekend values are still quite heavily weighted.

That may be with good reason. The demographic of the typical Disneyland guest is much different from Walt Disney World. Disneyland is a smaller resort complex and it attracts a much higher percentage of locals than WDW.

I haven't seen any finalized VGC charts for 2010 but it wouldn't surprise me if there was a greater disparity between weekday/weekend at DL than at WDW.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

Just going through the charts at BWV and wonder if this is what others are seeing with other charts. Except for a GV Sun through Thurs, if you reserve any room for five consecutive nights any time of year, regardless of which nights you choose such as weekdays only or weekdays with one or two weekend nights, the 2010 points needed for the same five consecutive nights appear to be higher than the 2009 points needed. This may also be the case for 6 night stays but I am getting "calculation" fatigue. In other words, everyone who normally goes 5 or 6 nights sees an increase regardless of which 5 or 6 consecutive nights in the week they choose.

I was getting the same feeling so after updating my spreadsheet with the new charts I added a few comparisons.

1. With very few exceptions what I see is that if you you were a 4-6 day person and only included 1 weekend day you will now be charged more points in all seasons for your stays.
2. If you already did 2 weekend days in a 6 day or less stay then you come out ahead in all seasons (once again - with a few exceptions - most notably GV's) (which season and unit size were you comparing drusba?)
3. And, as we all know, if you only did weekdays then your paying the highest price for the reallocation.

My supposition is that the people that are happy about this either already stayed 2 weekend days or they stayed 3 days or less which included 1 weekend day. Everyone else is now "paying" more - assuming I have typed numbers correctly into my spreadsheet that is the fact. Now it's just a matter of dealing with that fact.

In the long term it will impact purchasing decisions. Some people will sell their contracts--I'm not saying it will be in greater numbers than it is today--but turnover is constant. New members will discover DVC for the first time. The thousands of new owners DVC adds in the coming years will have a totally different perception of how points are used. Perhaps they will still lean toward weekdays even though the costs are higher than what you and I have previously seen. Others will simply favor the weeklong stays or weekdays plus 1. Still more will suddenly see weekend getaways as more reasonably-priced than they have been for more than a decade.

New purchasers will have the benefit both in seeing the new charts and in being more expectant of the changes. Unfortunately this should have included all BLT owners and probably new purchasers of AKV. By doing this to a resort that isn't even open it was at best incompetent or shortsighted and at worst it was not full disclosure of a known material change that was scheduled to occur. DVC ought to make right on this account whether the BLT sale has closed or is just in the works.

For current owners I don't think this change is enough to really cause a shift in patterns - weekends are still too much of a disparity if you didn't specifically purchase planning to stay then. What this might do is get new purchasers buying more but will that be enough? I doubt it. I hope that all the guides have adjusted their spiel and how they go about recommending points.