Disney Vacation Club adjusts 2010 Vacation Points charts

[Muushka]

I just found a bright side!!

You don't need to buy where you want to stay anymore!!!

How is that for optimistic!!!

 

[tamclan]

How about a little discussion of the positive aspects of this move?

I think the most immediate result will be a dramatic improvement in availability at all resorts. For years now it has been getting harder and harder to book outside of one's Home resort. Before the booking change, people were calling day-by-day out of fear of being blocked by hundreds of others trying to get the same dates.

This phenomenon has most often been attributed to things like a change in booking patterns by members (calling much earlier than they had previously) or "those SSR owners" booking other resorts at 7 months.

This reallocation sheds new light on the situation. The movement of points suggests that perhaps the biggest change which occurred in recent years was more and more people buying points for weekday use. One of the primary reasons for folks being unable to get reservations is excessive demand for the same Sun - Thurs periods...with a disproportionately small number willing to use their points for weekends.

Come 2010 we should see an immediate positive impact on resort availability--both in that 11-8 month priority window and at 7 months.

We should also see greater success of short notice bookings.

I agree with your suggested outlook 100%

 

[White_Sox_Fan]

TJ, I think you pretty well nailed it. Remember that when rooms sit empty we, as DVC owners, are losing our benefit of membership. As explained above someone may not be using their points which would be a loss in benefit to that person or a room may not be rented by CRO which is a loss to all of us as members due to loss of income which means an increase in dues.

I agree that communication of change may not be as good as it could be, but I feel that most changes are made with the mindset that it is for the good of everyone. The glassware removal, while raising a huge stink, did make sense. Would you like to use the glassware if you knew the person that used it before you was sick and it had been washed in lukewarm water? DVC changed their decision but with the addition of glasswashers so that the glassware could be properly cleaned.

This is also one of those decisions that is for the greater good and health of the system overall. As with most "greater good" changes, most of the people will be adversely effected.

 

[tjkraz]

Being the dope that bought at VWL for early December, I imagine that between myself not using as many days there in a 1 BR as well as other VWL owners, there probably won't be any problem for non-owners to get a 1 BR now.

For a high-demand period like December, I doubt that is true. More likely it means that other VWL owners will have access to the resort in early December when they previously would have been blocked. And where the resort may have previously been 100% booked 10 1/2 months out, now it may not happen until 9 months out (purely theoretical, of course.)

But I do agree that if DVC had reallocated several years ago as Dean suggests, there are many situations where owning at a specific resort would not be as important as it has become in 2009. I'm the owner of a 40pt contract myself so I can appreciate this phenomenon first-hand. Still it's hard for me to look at the possible future and be critical of it. I hope most would agree that having improved access to all resorts is favorable to buying small add-ons at a half-dozen different locations.

 

[Muushka]

For a high-demand period like December, I doubt that is true. More likely it means that other VWL owners will have access to the resort in early December when they previously would have been blocked. And where the resort may have previously been 100% booked 10 1/2 months out, now it may not happen until 9 months out (purely theoretical, of course.)

But I do agree that if DVC had reallocated several years ago as Dean suggests, there are many situations where owning at a specific resort would not be as important as it has become in 2009. I'm the owner of a 40pt contract myself so I can appreciate this phenomenon first-hand. Still it's hard for me to look at the possible future and be critical of it. I hope most would agree that having improved access to all resorts is favorable to buying small add-ons at a half-dozen different locations.

You are probably right in that VWL owners who figured they would go to VWL early Dec at say, 8 months out rather than right at 11 months would now have a better shot at it.

My biggest problem with this is that I am a planner and counted on the point schedule basically staying the same. I figured if they ever changed it, it may be a point or 2 difference, but 4! Plus WL is more expensive than the other DVC resorts for that time period, which really irritates me. I loathe surprises (well, this kind anyway).

 

[MiaSRN62]

Thanks very much Tim for taking the time to try and help me understand the whole occupancy goal and plan of DVC. I understood most of it, and I think I may have to read it a couple more times to fully grasp it. I'm no anaylytical person for sure....

 

[dis-happy]

How about a little discussion of the positive aspects of this move?

I think the most immediate result will be a dramatic improvement in availability at all resorts. For years now it has been getting harder and harder to book outside of one's Home resort. Before the booking change, people were calling day-by-day out of fear of being blocked by hundreds of others trying to get the same dates.

This phenomenon has most often been attributed to things like a change in booking patterns by members (calling much earlier than they had previously) or "those SSR owners" booking other resorts at 7 months.

This reallocation sheds new light on the situation. The movement of points suggests that perhaps the biggest change which occurred in recent years was more and more people buying points for weekday use. One of the primary reasons for folks being unable to get reservations is excessive demand for the same Sun - Thurs periods...with a disproportionately small number willing to use their points for weekends.

Come 2010 we should see an immediate positive impact on resort availability--both in that 11-8 month priority window and at 7 months.

We should also see greater success of short notice bookings.

Totally agree on this point. BUT, I still think we're going to see an unprecedented amount of DP's flood the reservation system as incentives for new sales (to go with the unprecented four new properties for sale at one time, as the website puts it).

And what if they give those people, say, an 8 month window instead? Didn't they just do this with the THV and those who purchased in CA or something? Surprised there wasn't more animosity towards that, btw.

I guess time will tell.

 

[granmanh603]

Ok just from a personal point of view....I stay at BWV and SSR in Oct and March for 3 weeks at a time and it is obvious that the amount of traffic in cars and at check in, pick up to a huge extent on Thurs late afternoon/night.....and I do mean incoming...I think the people on Dis boards are more point "thrifty" than many DVCers....I think Disney does what is best for Disney especilly in the last 3 or 4 years or so.....and I don't think we need to Rah Rah for them.
This change doesn' hurt me but them doing it this way does bother me for all the other people it does hurt.

 

[Karamia]

I totally agree that the people who vacation weekends would want some change. On the other hand DVC has been around for years and people have made their purchases, in many many cases, with the plan to spend Sunday to Thursday. I probably will be able to get by, but many will actually not be able to optimize their vacation now. In this economy they also may not be able to add on. What do they do? Terrible decision, especially right now IMO.
The last thing Disney wants is more undervalued sales, I would think.

 

[chalee94]

That would be nice. I didn't read the entire thread, but many pages ago a few people talked about a possible error with the 2010 point schedule. Has this been addressed yet?

the "error" was that the charts were posted too early. DISers found the charts that were posted by accident and blew up - and DVC removed the charts, saying that an error was made. (some posters assumed that the charts may have been wrong...most of us assumed that DVC just posted the information too early.)

DVC then posted the new 2010 charts, which were, in fact, the same as the old 2010 charts.

 

[Karamia]

the "error" was that the charts were posted too early. DISers found the charts that were posted by accident and blew up - and DVC removed the charts, saying that an error was made. (some posters assumed that the charts may have been wrong...most of us assumed that DVC just posted the information too early.)

DVC then posted the new 2010 charts, which were, in fact, the same as the old 2010 charts.

Ah! That is too bad because with a proper explanation, people may not be so angry.

 

[bookwormde]

Here are my thoughts on Mr Lewis, He is the boss and either by the senior people he has around him or actual decision he makes everything ultimately is his responsibility, anyone who has been “the boss” understands this. I was happy to give him time to get settled and try some thing (my management style is to always be trying new things). My issue is that the changes are poorly communicated, appear to be very poorly thought through, Lack of candor and honesty is something that I cannon abide and DVC’s announcements and there sales bias and disingenuous nature tell me he is not an good manager for the members of DVC.

I am willing to bet when the 2009 customer satisfaction timeshare survey comes out, and as I expect it is significantly lower you will never hear it quoted again.

My perception is that under Mr. Lewis’s tenure that there has been an increase level of incompetence, which has been acceptable to push forward poorly and somewhat myopic changes.

With the redemonstration of this through the most recent set of changes I am comfortable with calling for significant management change from the top down. Quite honestly I do not think mismanaging the operation section DVC will ever cause this to happen but the impact on sales that lower member satisfaction created likely have on sales will, particularly during these challenging time

One note I will make is that 100% occupancy is not the legal standard that DVC operations has to meet it is just one tool in the box to keep fees down. The standard is to manage DVC in the best interests of the majority of owners.

bookwormde

 

[tjkraz]

I totally agree that the people who vacation weekends would want some change. On the other hand DVC has been around for years and people have made their purchases, in many many cases, with the plan to spend Sunday to Thursday. I probably will be able to get by, but many will actually not be able to optimize their vacation now. In this economy they also may not be able to add on. What do they do? Terrible decision, especially right now IMO.

Consider the alternative.

Under the current charts, the 60% of points on weekdays is a known quantity. And just for the sake of argument, let's say that I'm close in guessing that people want to use 80% of their points for weekdays.

If we stick with weekends costing twice as much, most of the new members coming on board will continue to see DVC as this discount vehicle and plan for the Sun - Thurs stays. So what happens when we reach the point that 82% of all points are earmarked for weekdays? How about 85%? 88%?

How about when 90% of all members plan to use their points exclusively for weekdays which only have the capacity to absorb 60%? When that happens, a full 1/3 of members will simply be unable to secure a room. DVC becomes a game of musical chairs--for every 3 players there are only two chairs (rooms.) The first ones to sit (reserve) get their chair and the other is left with nothing.

We don't have the luxury of looking at the same data that DVC has available (and I wouldn't expect them to release much given the competition's interest in Disney statistical data), but in retrospect it's clear we are headed down that road. There is a ton of anecdotal evidence to suggest that the DVC resorts are severely under-booked on weekends (high arrival crowds on Sundays, departures on Friday, point rentals are almost always Sun-Thurs, 25% member discounts are freely available for weekends, short notice bookings very easy--even for peak demand periods, etc.)

Yes, I believe that DISBoards members are among those with the greatest success in securing reservations. Folks know to call 11 months out, have purchased points at multiple home resorts, know the busy and slow periods, etc. But that level of understanding almost certainly contributes to our slanted viewpoint of the system's overall health.

 

[gonzalj1]

That is just so unfair. I fully believe that some people did not have this information devulged to them as clearly as it could have. With tens of thousands of Members do u really think all transactions gave FULL disclosure of the rules ? !

Yes. I do believe full disclosure happens on every transaction. The disclosure is in the contract we all signed. It is not hidden.

Speak to any lawyer and they will tell you fully read any document you sign. If people didn't read the documents they signed then the surprise they feel fault NOT DISNEY'S.

It's time we stop blaming others for our own ignorance. We want others to take the blame for following the rules we agreed to. This is exactly the type of behavior we say we are teaching our children to avoid. Only when we are the ones who shoul dtake responsibility we do not.

If we didn't read the documents and agreed to something without a complete understanding of the terms and conditions then SHAME ON US. We are the ones who made a mistake. We need to take responsibility for our actions (or inaction) and deal with it.

 

[SuzanneSLO]

One thing that surprised me in this thread is that several S-Th regulars (or maybe it was the same poster more than once, given the length of this thread!) said that they enjoyed the fact that the PArks were less busy during the week.

I was surprised at this since the UG has said for years that weekends (esp Sat) tended to be less crowded than weekdays. Of course, there is some variation based on EMH, parade schedules and special events ( F&W and Weekend only Flower Power concerts come to mind). Anyone else feel that weekdays are quieter in general at the Parks? -- Suzanne

 

[tjkraz]

One note I will make is that 100% occupancy is not the legal standard that DVC operations has to meet it is just one tool in the box to keep fees down. The standard is to manage DVC in the best interests of the majority of owners.

I would agree with that--with the key being "in the best interests" of owners. This isn't a situation where a majority vote should decide policy for DVC. If we put it to a vote, I bet we could get more than 50% to vote in favor of weekdays costing 3 points and weekends 200 points per night. But that is clearly not in the best interest of the program as a whole.

I never said that 100% occupancy was a legal standard. But it is a goal which serves the best interests of the program and its members.

 

[Muushka]

the "error" was that the charts were posted too early. DISers found the charts that were posted by accident and blew up - and DVC removed the charts, saying that an error was made. (some posters assumed that the charts may have been wrong...most of us assumed that DVC just posted the information too early.)

DVC then posted the new 2010 charts, which were, in fact, the same as the old 2010 charts.

Ahhh. Thanks. As Ricky would say: "That 'splains that"

 

[tedhowe]

I read much of this thread, but not all.

Has anyone pointed out one potential consequence of this change:

since it takes effect 1/1/2010, I predict that we may see a surge in borrowing point INTO 2009 for additional/extended stays when the general membership learns of this.

The people in DISBoards are typically much more up to date than the membership in general. When the updated point charts are sent out and people see that their points will be "worth less" next year, I predict that a lot of people will use 2010 points in 2009 for more room nights.

This is similar to what was seen at OKW when 12/31/1999 was looming and more people wanted to get in a final stay with the free park passes - even if that meant they borrowed more points than usual.

This could contribute even more to easing room availability in 2010.

 

[Sammie]

Fair enough. I must be skimming those comments then.

Just wasn't sure where Sammie was coming from by including those comments in a reply largely directed at me.

I just included the last comment as a general reflection of some remarks, sorry if you took it to be your remarks it was not meant to be.

I am not upset about the change due to the affect on our vacation planning, it won't affect us enough to be upset. I am upset that it affects others. Something that some members here seem to not care about, how it affects others.

As to changes in the current adminstration Liferbabe did a better job of summing them up. I just do not feel that current management cares about the membership and the exisiting resorts on the same level as they do sales and expansion.

I think at Annual meetings they are evasive about discussing real concerns of the membership.

I will be glad if this situation helps but personally I don't see it happening. I think it was a move to help DVC on a level we will probably never know about and I think we will not see any improvment on a level where it affects the membership. And that is my complaint with the current management team.

 

[DVC92]

How about a little discussion of the positive aspects of this move?

I think the most immediate result will be a dramatic improvement in availability at all resorts. For years now it has been getting harder and harder to book outside of one's Home resort. Before the booking change, people were calling day-by-day out of fear of being blocked by hundreds of others trying to get the same dates.

This phenomenon has most often been attributed to things like a change in booking patterns by members (calling much earlier than they had previously) or "those SSR owners" booking other resorts at 7 months.

This reallocation sheds new light on the situation. The movement of points suggests that perhaps the biggest change which occurred in recent years was more and more people buying points for weekday use. One of the primary reasons for folks being unable to get reservations is excessive demand for the same Sun - Thurs periods...with a disproportionately small number willing to use their points for weekends.

Come 2010 we should see an immediate positive impact on resort availability--both in that 11-8 month priority window and at 7 months.

We should also see greater success of short notice bookings.

I disagree. The members who have fewer points will now book 4 days in lieu of 5, or borrow to keep it at 5 days, buy a few extra points to keep it at 5 days, or try to book OKW which requires fewer points. These members aren't suddenly going to use their points on weekends which still (at least currently) require more points.

As I previously stated, this problem was a direct result of DVD lowering the minimum point purchase. At the onset of the club when I joined in 1992, DVD had a clear vision of point usage. The minimum purchase was 230 points which allowed a member to get a 1 bedroom unit for a week in any season except premier season or a 2 bedroom for a week during at least 5 months of the year. Sales recommended 270 points for even greater flexibility. Since the minimum point purchase allowed such options, I believe the early members never begrudged using their points on weekends to get weekly stays. Having 310 points, I always stay over a weekend and will continue to do so.

Unfortunately, such flexibility and usage patterns were destroyed because of the lowering of the minimum point purchase. This was compounded with the increase in points necessary to book stays at the newer resorts. When people purchase, they look at the point charts, assess their future needs as best they can at the time, and purchase the necessary points. I don't blame these members for being upset at such a drastic change, with further changes in the future being likely. OKW altered the points once, but it was merely to correct true imbalance in Adventure season. This is different.