Disney Vacation Club adjusts 2010 Vacation Points charts

[Inkmahm]

but you knew the numbers set up before you bought in

Yes, which is why I never complained (or thought to ask anyone to subsidize me for points that I had to spend for weekends...)

 

[Bob Price]

I do because they obviously changed the formula for weekends vs weekdays. They would be best served to implement those changes across the board. Likely better to do so now than leave BLT the same then change it in a year or two. As I noted, anyone either knew or should have know it could happen, and frankly, that it would likely happen at some point. Now is as good a time as any. IMO, anyone who purposefully bought only the number of points for only part of a week or even a full week in a lower season, made a poor choice. I realize that sometimes you find the right contract resale (or add on) where you don't have total control over the number of points. The bottom line is to expect other changes and that at least part of those changes will be negative to you and I.

BUT, this change didn't happen overnight. They probably had some inkling they were going to do this WHILE they were setting the BLT charts. If they knew this was coming - hold off on announcing BLT, releasing the charts and beginning the sales UNTIL this change is implemented.

 

[twebber55]

Yes, which is why I never complained (or thought to ask anyone to subsidize me for points that I had to spend for weekends...)

im fairly new to DVC (which i still lve btw) but what was the reaction the last time they did something like this?

 

[jamstew]

Yes, actually. Why should Sun-thurs be so much cheaper than Wed-Sun? What makes Sun- Thurs sacred?

I think the point was (I could be wrong since I'm not the pp) that people who bought their contracts with the intention of traveling Sun-Thurs bought enough points to cover that travel pattern, and people who bought their contracts with the intention of traveling on weekends bought enough points to cover their travel patterns. i.e., they would have bought more points in the first place. Thus, the weekday traveler has been shorted (with little recourse), and the weekend traveler now has excess points and a great deal more flexibility

 

[Inkmahm]

im fairly new to DVC (which i still lve btw) but what was the reaction the last time they did something like this?

We'll have to ask some of the old timers because I wasn't a DVC member back then, either.

 

[chalee94]

im fairly new to DVC (which i still lve btw) but what was the reaction the last time they did something like this?

it was in 1994. there's no real comparison.

 

[Bob Price]

You feel they just realized the need to change the formula within 4 months of starting sales at BLT?

I find it very disingenuous to have had every opportunity to create a point chart for BLT reflecting the new emphasis and yet within 4 months of releasing the BLT chart and starting sales they have now changed the point charts - at the same time increasing the minimum purchase at that resort - especially when the resort does not even open for more than 7 months.

With every new resort , they have had ample opportunity to modify the point charts to reflect the expected member usage. They did modify the chart for SSR, again for AKV and yet again 4 months ago for BLT. They certainly have no track record to go on for utilization at BLT. Are you suggesting this was just brought to their attention since BLT sales opened in September?

Since 1992, DVC has always released the new point charts about 15 months in advance and usually sent those charts, in print form and by mail to each member. For whatever reason, we still have nothing even on the member website and even that information has been posted and then retrieved because it was in error.

I am not surprised that changes are being made - I agree it was inevitable at some point - but I am surprised at the changes across the board and at the poor timing used for these changes.

Doc, I have learned from you too and may have, inadvertently, “borrowed” your ideas. I read this after I posted. You have taught me well master.

 

[tjkraz]

Apparently many people were mislead. We did read the contract and asked about the points being changed. We were told the reallocation of points would be to adjust for certain holidays that did not always fall on the same day each year. I have read other posts where people were told the same thing. I understand that the wording of the contract allows more substantial changes, but to state "noone and I mean noone was misled" clearly is not the case. Have another drink of the kool-aid.

No kool-aid here. It just sounds like some had a better grasp on what they were buying than others. From the POS:

In order to meet the Club Members' needs and expectations as evidenced by fluctuations in Use Day demand at the Condominium experienced by DVCMC during a given calendar year, DVCMC may, in its soie, absolute and unfettered discretion, increase or decrease the Home Resort Vacation Point requirements for reservation of a given Use Day within a given Vacation Home during the given calendar year by any amount not to exceed twenty percent (20%) of the Home Resort Vacation Points required to reserve that Use Day during the previous calendar year; provided, however, that the total number of Home Resort Vacation Points existing within a given Unit at any time may not be increased or decreased because of any such reallocation.

No ambiguity there, I'm afraid.

As for people being mislead, I would never speak in such absolutes to say that nobody was mislead. But I also think some people may have heard what they wanted to hear.

For instance, if a customer asked whether the points changed on an annual basis, saying "no" would be an accurate answer even in light of the reallocation. While the possibility for a reallocation exists, annual changes have never occurred.

At the end of the day we all need to take some responsibility for protecting ourselves. That language is in the POS for a very good reason. And to simply think "oh, Disney would never do that to me" is a pretty naive outlook, in my opinion.

The reallocation is designed to balance demand--pure and simple. Emotional responses about how Disney is out to hurt people or suggestions that they just want to sell more points are simply that--emotional.

The system is designed to be at 98% occupancy year-round. Weekend points were too high to reach that 98% occupancy. Thus the charts HAD to be adjusted. Period. And the severity of the adjustments suggests that occupancy was horribly low on the weekends.

Gang, we just CANNOT have a system in which people expect to be able to use 98% of the points in 70% of the calendar nights. It just doesn't work!

DVC was wrong for waiting so long to communicate this. I think they ABSOLUTELY erred in how BLT and AKV were actively sold with no mention of the changes. These SHOULD be new points for 2011 and now 2010 to give people time to plan.

But they also erred by waiting too long to reallocate. This has been a long time coming. And I also think that they made a mistake by (apparently) not adjusting any of the seasons. Sorry but December 1-14 and the month of September should NOT be in the same season. Demand for those periods is very, very different.

But I digress. Personally this hurts me. In our years of ownership we have used points for exactly two weekend nights. Our points undeniably will not go as far in 2010 and beyond. But I also knew it was a very real possibility and that it's simply something I have to deal with.

 

[Bob Price]

I think you're being most generous towards DVC with these comments.

To suggest that they planned the BLT charts 2-3 YEARS ago and just planned the changes to all of the point charts (including BLT) 2 - 4 months ago is a very generous suggestion.

OK - lets say it was 4 months ago - then why would they NOT issue the new BLT points at the start of sales? To suggest that this plan was made less than 4 months ago when for the past 16 years the newly printed point charts have always been in the hands of the members by October certainly indicates that any deviation from that policy was in the works long before sales ever began at BLT and probably before the BLT sales point charts were even printed.

Perhaps some mention of these changes could have been announced at the annual meeting too - unless you're suggesting that the decision was made after early December? DVC has had plenty of opportunity to make these changes in a timely fashion and still get the new charts to members in the fall. In doing so, the BLT charts would have reflected the changes prior to removing the 100 point minimum purchase at that resort. Waiting until reservations are beginning for 2010 is a poor treatment of it's members when there has been plenty of opportunity for timely release of information. The Member website alone allows for opportunity for immediate communication and they certainly also use email for a number of other purposes - why not something as important as a change in the point charts?

I am not disputing the ability and right of DVC to make these changes - I was a member when this happened the first time , but at that time the changes coming for 1996 were sent to the members in September, 1994. I am challenging the timing and poor communication for such a "customer service" oriented company and one that holds itself out as being a notch above - the "DVC Difference".

The master has spoken.

 

[jamstew]

I think people have trained themselves to travel Sun-Thurs nights. It's just going to be an adjustment.

If by "adjustment," you mean "add-on," you may be right. That's what a lot of Sun-Fri travelers are going to have to do if they want to continue with the same vacations they planned when they bought in.

 

[pakhowe]

Did you consult a lawyer when you purchased? Did you call quality assurance to go over any contract provisions that were unclear? I'm not sure how to answer such a personal attack given that no verbal statements made by a guide/salesperson have any weight (and the disclosure documents clearly state this). Furthermore, the POS is quite clear about the reallocations that can occur. My suspicion is that many people simply did not read the POS or call quality assurance with any questions they might have had. Buying DVC is like buying any other real estate interest in the sense that you really need to know what you are signing. For some people, this means hiring a lawyer who is well versed in timeshares to review the contract you are signing. People might have deluded themselves or allowed themselves to "drink the kool aid", but no one could possibly have been mislead if they read their contract and asked quality assurance for clarifications. Sorry, but I'm not the one drinking the kool aid here (actually, we might all need something a little stronger in this case, LOL).

No I did not contact a lawyer when I purchased. I did contact quality assurance with a few questions I had concerning the contract. I did not ask specifically about point reallocations as the explanation the guide gave seemed perfectly rational. That was my mistake. I accept responsibility for the documents I signed and truth be told I probably would have made the purchase even if I was aware of the changes.

I did not intend to attack you personnaly as I don't know you. That being said I do think that there are a lot of people on these boards who will defend the actions of DVC blindly regardless of the facts. Or allow the fact that this change may be postitive for them individually color their assessment of the fairness of the implementation. In this case the described sales practices were less than above board. Although it is true the contract is the contract, the manner in which the contract is sold can be and should be open to critique. The allusion that it is okay for the salespeople to deliberately misrepresent the facts or that it is okay for DVC to knowingly keep their sales people in the dark knowing that they are giving incorrect information is unacceptable to me.

We have all heard the lamenting about the lack of customer service these days in society overall. This goes hand in hand with the lack of manners in general. By accepting these actions with a simple; well, they are salespeople and everyone knows you can't trust them, we are only exacerbating the problem.

 

[kristenrice]

BUT, this change didn't happen overnight. They probably had some inkling they were going to do this WHILE they were setting the BLT charts. If they knew this was coming - hold off on announcing BLT, releasing the charts and beginning the sales UNTIL this change is implemented.

In addition, they had no problem sending out promotional products (e-mails, flyers, etc) to encourage us to "add on before the price increase". Why couldn't they have mentioned the reallocation? It's not like someone came into the morning meeting and said, "Hey, let's reallocate all the points today"!

Now, we have a price increase and some of us who purchased based on a 5 weeknight stay are going to be forced to either add on or take a 4 night stay.

I also find it interesting that they lowered the buy in requirement at AKV to 100 points this past summer. Now, how far can one spread those 100 points? We planned on going 2 out of 3 years, banking and borrowing to utilize 300 points. With our kids' spring break schedule, we could have done a standard 1BR each time and had a 15 point "buffer". We also could have gone every other year and stayed in a 1BR savanna view or a 2BR standard. Now, we are very limited to where we can stay in premiere season. If we stick with the "2 out of 3" scenario, we are stuck with a value 1BR in premiere and a standard 1BR in magic season. No more chance at a savanna view . When we grow out of a 1BR, we'll have to change to every other year and only stay in a standard. Again, no savanna view. Now, our only chance at a savanna view is to go once every 3 years. (I know, we could stay in studios, but the 1BR is why we bought DVC.) Our kids are in pre-school and kindergarten so we have a lot of school ahead of us. We are going to be confined to spring break and summer trips for the next 16 years. Apparently, we'll also be confined to standard view rooms too.

FWIW, I was aware that the reallocation could happen. I wasn't expecting it to be a 20 point difference over 5 nights (I had a 15 point "buffer"!), but I digress. We will have to change (lessen) our trips to Disney World, which is a shame, but we have no other option at this point. Not everyone can just add on indiscriminately to cover the point reallocation. On top of that, we'd have to add on more points than we need because of the minimum add on requirement. Convenient that it was just raised to 100 points for BLT, huh? What about those people who purchased BLT with the intention of staying one week and now find themselves 2-3 points short? Does Disney really think that people will add on 100 points to cover such a small shortage? I'm thinking it will just result in a shorter stay.

 

[toocherie]

Did you consult a lawyer when you purchased? Did you call quality assurance to go over any contract provisions that were unclear? I'm not sure how to answer such a personal attack given that no verbal statements made by a guide/salesperson have any weight (and the disclosure documents clearly state this). Furthermore, the POS is quite clear about the reallocations that can occur. My suspicion is that many people simply did not read the POS or call quality assurance with any questions they might have had. Buying DVC is like buying any other real estate interest in the sense that you really need to know what you are signing. For some people, this means hiring a lawyer who is well versed in timeshares to review the contract you are signing. People might have deluded themselves or allowed themselves to "drink the kool aid", but no one could possibly have been mislead if they read their contract and asked quality assurance for clarifications. Sorry, but I'm not the one drinking the kool aid here (actually, we might all need something a little stronger in this case, LOL).

Well, not to add fuel to the fire--because I don't believe the change at hand will really affect me (coming from West Coast I will likely stay 7-10 days) I will say I DID read the POS and I DID call Quality Assurance--who basically was unable to answer questions or make any changes to the contract. Even though I believed something in the contract wasn't clear. (I am a real estate attorney.) Frankly, I (1) believed that Disney would not agree to ANY changes to their contract so after a few minutes of trying to explain the point just gave up, and (2) did so on the basis that Disney would "make it right" in the end if there was an issue. (For the record, there hasn't been with respect to the issue I raised.) So in my opinion I don't think calling Quality Assurance is helpful to really explain nuances of the contract; I think they're mostly there to explain, "you have to sign by the palm tree and notarize by the Mickeys" (or whatever the system was) to people who aren't used to signing such documents.

As a practical matter, what good would it have done for anyone to request a change--Disney couldn't make a change to how points are allocated anyway--because that would have thrown everyone else's contracts off. Once that first contract was sold for that resort the program had to be locked in. (The issue I wanted clarified would not have affected anyone else's contract--it was a clarification on Founding Member status for Grand Californian.) And Disney is not going to spend a lawyer's time to revise a document so someone buys 100 points at one of its resorts.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

I'm going to let you in on a little secret...the "updated version" will be the same as the one posted.

That's what I've been thinking too. Not so much wrong as posted at the wrong time. Somebody in IT didn't get the memo on when to make it go live.

 

[bethy]

I bought recently and I bought to go over long weekends to DLR and the occasional 7+ days to WDW/AKV. So this won't hurt us much. Besides the fact that the timeshares are located at Disney the other main reason we chose DVC over other nice timeshares is because of the fact that we like the flexibility. We do not want to do the same thing every year or even every other year. We just wanted to guarantee our options to travel to either park often and stay in a Deluxe level resort at a decent price over time.

For me, I guess I'm not as much a planner as many here. The 7-11 month window is no problem but beyond that I just look forward to sitting down once per year or so and checking my point balances for both resorts and figuring out what I get to do with them this time. I'm very psyched about that!

We rented a villa at the Royal Sands in Cancun a couple of weeks ago which is an absolutely lovely resort. We LOVED it and even talked about looking at resales. Problem is, we just couldn't bear to commit to the same week every year or every other year. So for now we'll just keep renting at all other places besides Disney. DVC is about as locked in as I ever want to get and to be honest even that level of commitment makes me a tad nervous sometimes. We really like to travel other places in the world as well and are not anywhere near close to retirement or having kids out of the house and so our available time during any given year is limited.

If I ever feel the sales spiel was misleading it will be when/if we come to a point where we are unable to visit other resorts besides our home resorts (which we adore, BTW). That could happen by simple lack of availbility. I also know and new before we signed that DVC could take away the ability to trade within DVC. I'll admit though that I'm counting on getting a little variety in there in the future now and then.

All that said, I can definitely see why folks who have a different travel style or DVC goal would be very disappointed by this. Especially if they have a regular Family trip they like to take as a tradition.

 

[TSMIII]

FWIW, the new point charts hurt us in one way but help us in another - the weekly points for when we like to travel have gone up by several points but we are now able to add an additional day on to our vacations (either Friday on the front end or Saturday on the back end) for fewer points than we previously could.

Did you consult a lawyer when you purchased? Did you call quality assurance to go over any contract provisions that were unclear? I'm not sure how to answer such a personal attack given that no verbal statements made by a guide/salesperson have any weight (and the disclosure documents clearly state this). Furthermore, the POS is quite clear about the reallocations that can occur. My suspicion is that many people simply did not read the POS or call quality assurance with any questions they might have had. Buying DVC is like buying any other real estate interest in the sense that you really need to know what you are signing. For some people, this means hiring a lawyer who is well versed in timeshares to review the contract you are signing. People might have deluded themselves or allowed themselves to "drink the kool aid", but no one could possibly have been mislead if they read their contract and asked quality assurance for clarifications. Sorry, but I'm not the one drinking the kool aid here (actually, we might all need something a little stronger in this case, LOL).

I agree completely with what Doctor P is stating above. And also with folks like Dean, Webmaster Doc & tjkraz that this was probably to be expected at some point, in some fashion.

I think there's almost universal agreement that it was a shock as to the timing and the botched delivery but it shouldn't have been considered as being completely out of the realm of possibility as it seems some people think it was.

That old maxim keeps ringing in my head: Caveat Emptor - let the buyer beware.

No doubt some were told by their guide something different than what the POS states. But if you are still unfamiliar with it, I would recommend you checkout tjkraz's most excellent site dvcnews.com and see his article on the POS language as well as read your own POS.

This most recent change, like others before and no doubt others yet to come, has understandably upset some members while at the same time pleasing others. But regardless of what may transpire one thing is certain - CHANGE is a fickle mistress and sometimes she is with us and sometimes she is against us!

 

[epcotwanderer]

No kool-aid here. It just sounds like some had a better grasp on what they were buying than others. From the POS:


No ambiguity there, I'm afraid.

As for people being mislead, I would never speak in such absolutes to say that nobody was mislead. But I also think some people may have heard what they wanted to hear.

For instance, if a customer asked whether the points changed on an annual basis, saying "no" would be an accurate answer even in light of the reallocation. While the possibility for a reallocation exists, annual changes have never occurred.

At the end of the day we all need to take some responsibility for protecting ourselves. That language is in the POS for a very good reason. And to simply think "oh, Disney would never do that to me" is a pretty naive outlook, in my opinion.

The reallocation is designed to balance demand--pure and simple. Emotional responses about how Disney is out to hurt people or suggestions that they just want to sell more points are simply that--emotional.

The system is designed to be at 98% occupancy year-round. Weekend points were too high to reach that 98% occupancy. Thus the charts HAD to be adjusted. Period. And the severity of the adjustments suggests that occupancy was horribly low on the weekends.

Gang, we just CANNOT have a system in which people expect to be able to use 98% of the points in 70% of the calendar nights. It just doesn't work!

DVC was wrong for waiting so long to communicate this. I think they ABSOLUTELY erred in how BLT and AKV were actively sold with no mention of the changes. These SHOULD be new points for 2011 and now 2010 to give people time to plan.

But they also erred by waiting too long to reallocate. This has been a long time coming. And I also think that they made a mistake by (apparently) not adjusting any of the seasons. Sorry but December 1-14 and the month of September should NOT be in the same season. Demand for those periods is very, very different.

But I digress. Personally this hurts me. In our years of ownership we have used points for exactly two weekend nights. Our points undeniably will not go as far in 2010 and beyond. But I also knew it was a very real possibility and that it's simply something I have to deal with.

Very well said.

 

[TK Brown]

Wow. Ive been out of town for the past week and have not heard about all of this. There was no time to check the internet while I was in DC for the inauguration.

We have planned our vacations to only stay on 1 weekend night, to keep the points used down. So this will sting us a little bit.

I do remember our guide saying that the points would never go up, but i did not read (which is my own fault I understand) that they could re-allocate points for a weeks stay as they saw fit.

I dont think this is a change, with our current economy, that DVC had to make right now. They at least could have sent something out and waited until 2011. I mean this is near the end of January already and many people have made tenative plans for 2010.

This may not keeps us from going as much as we have been, but it does take some of the luster from our DVC purchase. Im just bummed.

 

[jmtf2004]

The info is back on the member site again and the 2010 charts are posted too.
"Disney Vacation Club adjusts 2010 Vacation Points charts

To help address a growing Member interest in weekend stays and to better manage inventory of available rooms at Disney Vacation Club Resorts, Disney Vacation Club has adjusted 2010 Vacation Points charts, primarily reducing Vacation Point requirements for most Friday and Saturday nights.

In addition to better reflecting the changes in Members' vacationing patterns, the adjusted charts make accommodations more affordable during many popular Walt Disney World® events, such as Mickey's Very Merry Christmas Party and ESPN The Weekend.

To make this change possible, Vacation Point requirements for most instances of Sunday-Thursday stays are now higher. However, a full week's stay will essentially cost the same amount of Vacation Points as before.

To view the adjusted Vacation Points charts, click on the "View Vacation Points Charts" link in the "Plan My Vacation" section of this Web site (located on the right side of the page)."

 

[kristenrice]

*oops!*