Disney Vacation Club adjusts 2010 Vacation Points charts

[childsplay]

This is a kick in the shorts, but one that DVC is well within their rights to deliver, so we will adjust and move forward.
We just returned from a wonderful 10 day trip at BCV and SSR over Christmas and New Years, so those memories are still fresh enough to temper the sting.

 

[Cmbar]

I'll just wear my 'Ask me about DVC' button Disney gave me

OOHH That is so good!! I have seen that button on someone and asked them about DVC (since I have been obsessed with buying for so long). They smiled and gave me a glowing review. I would think DVC would be a little wary of people walking around with them now. I like your thinking!! Besides I don't think it is illegal to give people opinions. You could just causually mention it to the person as you bump into them in the store they just went to!

I am not an owner and don't have a button, so Chuck don't go throwing me in jail just yet

I am one of those who feels a little mislead with the BLT purchase I was so close to making less than 10 days ago. Not one word about needing a bit more in points and while I know they CAN do it, it does feel sleezy that they didn't inform the membership before upping the minimum buy in at BLT and now VGC. Obviously I wish we had bought when prices were more reasonable. It just makes DVC less of a bargain than when the older members bought it. I think it is great that those who have owned for so long have gotten great value out of it!! But I can clearly see why people would be upset. And yet it would be the new owners because they have paid a great deal more to get less points than the older owners and therefore their value has gone down more. If the minimum buy in were still 230 points most people would not be able to buy in. I for one don't need to stay 12 days each year so a smaller contract is fine with me. But I would like to know how much more they can change my "locked in" vacation plans over the years. It definitely was portrayed to us that points would NEVER change outside of season adjustments. I don't like that I have to scour through the contract to find out they are lying to us. SO there

 

[bobbiwoz]

This is a kick in the shorts, but one that DVC is well within their rights to deliver, so we will adjust and move forward.
We just returned from a wonderful 10 day trip at BCV and SSR over Christmas and New Years, so those memories are still fresh enough to temper the sting.

and I'm just a bit under 2 months away from a spring break get away.

We were at Epcot for NYE and it was an amazing night...loved the fireworks, loved just being there!!!

Bobbi

 

[childsplay]

and I'm just a bit under 2 months away from a spring break get away.

We were at Epcot for NYE and it was an amazing night...loved the fireworks, loved just being there!!!

Bobbi

Enjoy your up coming trip!
We were at EPCOT as well for NYE and it really was special

 

[baj0505]

OOHH That is so good!! I have seen that button on someone and asked them about DVC (since I have been obsessed with buying for so long). They smiled and gave me a glowing review. I would think DVC would be a little wary of people walking around with them now. I like your thinking!! Besides I don't think it is illegal to give people opinions. You could just causually mention it to the person as you bump into them in the store they just went to!

I am not an owner and don't have a button, so Chuck don't go throwing me in jail just yet

I am one of those who feels a little mislead with the BLT purchase I was so close to making less than 10 days ago. Not one word about needing a bit more in points and while I know they CAN do it, it does feel sleezy that they didn't inform the membership before upping the minimum buy in at BLT and now VGC. Obviously I wish we had bought when prices were more reasonable. It just makes DVC less of a bargain than when the older members bought it. I think it is great that those who have owned for so long have gotten great value out of it!! But I can clearly see why people would be upset. And yet it would be the new owners because they have paid a great deal more to get less points than the older owners and therefore their value has gone down more. If the minimum buy in were still 230 points most people would not be able to buy in. I for one don't need to stay 12 days each year so a smaller contract is fine with me. But I would like to know how much more they can change my "locked in" vacation plans over the years. It definitely was portrayed to us that points would NEVER change outside of season adjustments. I don't like that I have to scour through the contract to find out they are lying to us. SO there

They will probably ask for it back But seriously, the best and most honest advice I could give someone about buying DVC would be to truly understand what 'point reallocation' could mean to them and how it can affect their travel habits, as we've seen from all the comments both negatively and positively.

I would be sure that they know that Disney not only has the right to make reallocations, but will do it, has done it, probably will continue to do it and the would be purchaser should expect it, be prepared for it, plan for it, you get the drift. If they go in buying 'just what they need' and come up short they will at least know they did just that on the front end. I know we all should have read the fine print so please don't lecture me. I would hope that Disney wouldn't remove anyone from the park for just telling the truth ::cop:

 

[jamstew]

I am not sure that the kiosks even have charts. I think the kiosks exist to get people over to the SSR showroom. We were at BWV once and I stopped at the little disk they had and asked to see a chart, because we were talking about our next visit. The person didn't have one to show me.
Bobbi
PS. If they did have the charts, I think it would benefit DVC to show next years charts.

I stopped a kiosk in September and browsed through the book that's on their desktops (no CM in sight). I didn't see anything beyond information on trips you could take outside the DVC properties. No charts.

 

[jamstew]

.

Also in the back of the book they have this disclouse page with various disclosures such as "the top of the world isn't part of BLT and access can be terminated (which means it will)

But also for the AKV it states: "
Purchasers should not rely on the continued existence of, and access to, existing Disney's Animal Kingdom Lodge Amenities, such as Savannas, Restaurants, and recreational facilities that are not part of membership."

Does this mean that AKV members won't have access to the lodge and their facilities? Does that mean they can't use the pool at the AKL?? Is this true for all the other properties like Beach Club and Boardwalk and Wilderness Lodge? What about BLT? Will I not be entitled to use the pool over at the Contemporary??

I could be wrong, but I think that language is in contracts for all timeshares. I know it's in the the ones for my traditional TS properties.

 

[tjkraz]

Some people will never admit or understand that everything that Disney does is based upon financial benefit, flavored to look like an improvement to the Guest/Member experience.

Programs, perks, park hours, point charts, DDP, are all adjusted to increase corporate revenue.

That is certainly true--after all Disney is a business. However the two (benefit Disney, benefit customer) are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Take DME for example. Disney seems to think that there is a benefit to them (increased guest spending), but millions of guests have also benefited from the free transportation.

In the DVC world you could point to something like the Annual Pass discount. Sure Disney wants people to spend more time in the parks, add more points, etc. But to members it certainly is a step-up from the 10% LOS pass discount we previously received.

Regardless of financial motivations, the DVC entity is a bit unique in that it does have a certain responsibility to members which goes beyond financial concerns. For example, they cannot raise annual dues above and beyond the cost of services provided. DVC cannot arbitrarily choose to oversell a resort by marketing more points.

Will the reallocation benefit Disney in a financial manner? I don't think so but I could be wrong. Either way it's actually irrelevant. As our timeshare manager, DVC has a responsibility to reallocate the points regardless of what it will do to sales or what members think of the changes. I suspect the greater fault would be DVC's for waiting 14-15 years since the last reallocation.

If people question Disney's motivation or the accuracy of the reallocation, file a complaint with the Florida Timeshare Bureau. If they receive enough complaints I'm sure they will investigate. I understand folks here contacted the bureau regarding issues surrounding the OKW contract extension and those people ultimately received a favorable response. That's what our tax dollars pay for.

I wouldn't expect DVC or the bureau to publish any specifics regarding the reallocation, but they should at least be willing to review Disney's numbers and confirm whether or not the calculations were appropriate.

 

[Muushka]

I am quite PO'd about the reallocation. My annual vacation will now require 40 more points. I own 220 points and now I need 260 points per year. I will not change the length of my vacations. I will not be adding on. I will be staying offsite those additional days that I can no longer afford.

I will not be selling my contract but I doubt I will be buying APs anytime soon. We will be spending less days in the parks and we will visit other area attractions more frequently.

Also, when I am in the parks, everytime I walk by a DVC kiosk and see people inquiring, I am going to pull out my member card, show it to them and tell them to think twice about buying. I will do my part to caution perspective buyers.

My sentiments exactly. We needed 220 a year for our needs and have 225. No way will we buy any more. Off site here we come.

Snip.....

2. Obviously it has created a lot of ill will among current members who (in my opinion) don't really understand the nature of--or need for--a periodic reallocation. Snip....

You know, this ill-willed person has a grasp on reallocation. In fact, I am surprised that it took this long. What this disgruntled member is not understanding is why they put December, Sept and Jan at more of a premium at VWL (than say BCV) and why the studios only received 1 point increase and the 2 BR received the exact same increase as the 1 BR (what we always book), 4 points. That is what I am upset about. Had it only been 2 points a night, I would not be on this thread.

 

[TisBit]

You know, this ill-willed person has a grasp on reallocation. In fact, I am surprised that it took this long. What this disgruntled member is not understanding is why they put December at more of a premium at VWL and why the studios only received 1 point increase and the 2 BR received the exact same increase as the 1 BR (what we always book), 4 points. That is what I am upset about. Had it only been 2 points a night, I would not be on this thread.

Actually, I think the problem is YOU have not grasped why they did this. I think the truth of the matter is, during the month of December VWL is by far one of the "hottest" resorts, so it would make sense to charge a premium. Similar to making BCV and BWV more premium points during F&W, I am not sure if they did that or not, but it would make sense.

 

[Muushka]

Actually, I think the problem is YOU have not grasped why they did this. I think the truth of the matter is, during the month of December VWL is by far one of the "hottest" resorts, so it would make sense to charge a premium. Similar to making BCV and BWV more premium points during F&W, I am not sure if they did that or not, but it would make sense.

Actually, I did think about the fact that VWL is a "hot" place to be for the month of December. And I also understand why they did the reallocation. I am just miffed the way they chose to spread around the point increase.
But they also increased the Jan and Sept time for those high point additions, so I am not sure what the heck they are thinking.

I need to edit my post to reflect the fact that it is not just Dec (the time we always go there) but Sept and Jan.

 

[dizney4us]

Let us know what it is like in the park security area, OK?

I wouldn't be rude about it, just honest. Telling prospective buyers that the product is not necessarily as it appears it the right thing to do. My cousin was just about to buy this week after a year of us telling her how great it is, I was embarassed to have to tell her the changes that were made and how they were made. I am also somewhat embarassed that I was conned into buying it. The impression that was made to us ws that reallocation was for the Easter and Christmas dates. Guess you can't even trust Disney nowadays!

 

[KLR-wlv]

Actually, I think the problem is YOU have not grasped why they did this. I think the truth of the matter is, during the month of December VWL is by far one of the "hottest" resorts, so it would make sense to charge a premium. Similar to making BCV and BWV more premium points during F&W, I am not sure if they did that or not, but it would make sense.

Actually WL 1 br is ONE POINT HIGHER than BCV during all of October. If we are to equate hot and in demand with the percentage increase in points, then Vero must be the hottest since weekdays were reallocated across all seasons and units the full 20%

 

[Muushka]

Actually WL 1 br is ONE POINT HIGHER than BCV during all of October. If we are to equate hot and in demand with the percentage increase in points, then Vero must be the hottest since weekdays were reallocated across all seasons and units the full 20%

Sheesh! I didn't even look at BCV and VWL for Oct. Why in the world do they have it in for 1 BR at VWL? I did email them that exact question.

 

[Dean]

I finally made a chance to play with the numbers. Assuming 1992 (or any similar year) as the base year and assuming the points are based on the 2 BR for all lockoff's, I simply multiplied the number of points for each weekday and weekend for each season times the number of those days times the number of units in each cat at SSR. I got a difference of 0.000078 or 0.0078%. I used the numbers from the last multi site POS I had which I know are not complete but should be representative. I added in the 60 THV units. IF someone will give me the final breakdown of the number of units (2 BR dedicated, 2 BR L/O, GV), I will update the numbers and see if it changes. But since the 2 BR units went up a slightly number of points and the 3 BR down a slight number of points, I doubt it'll be any different unless he mix of the last two buildings was different for 2 BR vs 3 BR than previous phases. So a difference of under 0.01% would be about as perfect as it will be given this circumstance and a number that should stand up to any scrutiny if my calculations are accurate. If it were a drug study, we could get FDA approval on the first try.

That makes the difference .000074 or .0074% or a points difference of 1035 for the entire year. Far less a difference than you get on a yearly variation due to the calendar or lockoff component reservations, but not exactly zero either which some would like to contend is the requirement.

I agree the method they chose was motivated by getting the most extenders possible. But I do believe, at the time, they thought the approach was a reasonable trade-off for the "pro" of being able to offer to everyone. There would have been a vocal contingent of disappointed members if the extension were not immediately accessible to everyone.

What they really didn't foresee was that members would find the opt-out process to be so cumbersome or viewed as such a negative.

DVC is a major bureaucracy a the present time and only getting bigger. To pare it down for a smaller group of members around 2042 will be difficult and expensive. DVC needs to cont all resorts for around the same time frame to minimize costs per point. I am sympathetic to the problem they had to accomplish this with OKW but IMO they do not have the legal right to institute a special assessment for this purpose and had I still owned OKW, I would have put that theory to the test.

 

[Dean]

Dean,

I did a spreadsheet on the diff between 2009 & 2010 for SSR. Unfortunately copying it into a post isn't very format friendly. If you PM me with you email I'll send it too you, you can compare it to what you have.

Thanks but no thanks, I've done what I wanted. IMO difference one year to another is not really relevant as it will vary a small amount based on when weekends fall from one season to another and the number of weekend days each year which can vary by 1, not to mention leap years.

Not sure about this comment. If people have a week off from work, I can see stays that begin with a Sat. night and end with a Sat. night = 3 high point nights in a vacation. People arriving on Saturday morning staying 8 nights and leaving the following Sunday maximize their vacation time from work.

I think the long week with 2 weekends is a very common option for many vacations, I've certainly done this several times in the past 10 years including HI, Aruba, HH, Gatlinburg and Orlando. I almost always travel at least part way to a drive destination when I have a full week. We will go to HH this summer arriving Sat and I'll drive from work at least 3/4 of the way the night before and stay overnight somewhere. That allows us to get checked in, do lunch and prepare for the other family members that are joining us.

Many posts have claimed that a vast majority of people use S-F reservations (thus the need for reallocation), therefore with that logic a vast majority of people will be negatively affected by this move - some estimates were at 75%. Did it have to be the full 20% increase at all at once?

I don't think anyone stated that the majority of stays were S-F but a significant portion are and even when they're not often it's 6 days with one weekend day or downsizing for the weekend days. As for 20%, it's hard to make much of a change and it not be 20% plus they may as well try to get it right, or at least as close as allowed, on one try.

 

[casper]

On subject but also kind of "off" subject...

Do you suppose it will be nearly impossible to get a reservation at the 7th month mark at OKW now? Many people are finding they are a few points shy of their vacation habits. Getting a reservation at OKW that usually requires fewer points might be a way of preserving the same vacation routine. If you can get in, that is.

I now have too few points to stay at SSR for 2 weeks of the year (8 nights). But if I change out to OKW in Nov, then I have enough points to continue my vacation habits each year. Even a few to spare!

 

[DisneyWalker44]

I also don't understand why we have just one huge thread for all our comments on this.

It was done to increase DIS board member satisfaction

 

[Dean]

I have a question about the maximum reallocation chart. It states that each club member will always be eligible to reserve at least one (1) Use Day in the different Vacation Home types at his or her Home Resort, subject to availability, for the following number of Home Resort Vacation Points.

It then continues on with a grid showing points for each Resort and accomodation size.

In comparing this to the current point charts it appears that this requires them to keep at least 1 season (or I guess technically 1 day in a year) at the point amount they list and then they are allowed to go over or under this, correct?

Second - are they ever allowed to change this maximum point number in the categories - ie, if they discover Studios have developed an overwhelming popularity and two-bedrooms have dropped like rocks and would that change apply to all members or just those who bought under those provisions?

From a couple of other postings on this it sounds like they have modified the length of time they will be guaranteed to book at this maximum - does the change to a one day rule apply retroactively to those members? I think Doc posted something similar to being guaranteed a week at a certain maximum.

I'm just wishing to beef up my knowledge of what can and can't be done in the future so I am fully prepared.

FYI - the Treehouse maximum is set at 42 while two-bedroom rooms at SSR are at 41. Just something that stood out since currently they are renting at the same point level.

They guarantee that you can reserve a day but not what day or that it's one you want. The only time the studio or 1 BR options would come into play is when there are dedicated units of those sizes. And yes they can potentially shift points from one unit size to another.

I wouldn't be rude about it, just honest. Telling prospective buyers that the product is not necessarily as it appears it the right thing to do. My cousin was just about to buy this week after a year of us telling her how great it is, I was embarassed to have to tell her the changes that were made and how they were made. I am also somewhat embarassed that I was conned into buying it. The impression that was made to us ws that reallocation was for the Easter and Christmas dates. Guess you can't even trust Disney nowadays!

I have no problem with it but do find it funny. A quote about a "woman scorned" comes to mind. It's funny to me that people are so upset over something that is spelled out in the paperwork we all agreed to. I doubt DVC would do anything unless you hung around for an extended period for that purpose. IMO DVC ownership isn't any worse, or any better, overall than it was a week, month or year ago other than as the changes affects one's personal situation.

 

[tjkraz]

On subject but also kind of "off" subject...

Do you suppose it will be nearly impossible to get a reservation at the 7th month mark at OKW now? Many peopel are finding they are a few points shy of their vacation habits. Getting a reservation at OKW that usually requires fewer points might be a way of preserving the same vacation routine. If you can get in, that is.

Just my opinion but I doubt it.

History seems to show that people (as a whole) are willing to spend more points for their preferred destination rather than just seek-out the cheapest option available. OKW has always been a cheaper option to all of the other resorts, yet it wasn't the first resort to be fully booked. Same for SSR. People are willing to pay extra points for the BoardWalk view, to be at BCV, to have the Savanna view at AKV and so on.

It may shift some patterns but I doubt it will be to the point where people are racing to the phone at 9am 7-months out just to get into OKW.