Disney Vacation Club adjusts 2010 Vacation Points charts

[Dean]

Dean:

Seems to me your 10% recommendation should have also been part of DVC sales rep's sales presentation over the years too. It certainly was not part of the conversation relative to our two purchases. My husband and I did not take our purchases lightly and spent hours and days sifting through the materials and the contracts. We spent hours determining how many points to buy based on our future travel needs. We asked our sales rep and quality assurance personnel many, many questions even about point reallocation. It was almost rediculous and obsessive how many questions we asked! Reallocation info pertained more to holidays and seasons then week days and weekend days. At no time did anyone recommend a point cushion.

But don't you think that the recommendations you get here on DIS are a lot better for you than what you'd get from the guides. Sales people, esp timeshare sales people, are often some of the most skilled at manipulating people you'll ever see usually making car sales people look like amateurs. I think that's not quite true for DVC sales staff overall but they are still good at spinning the positives while still being honest within the context at hand. Do you think for a second that if they thought you, or anyone, would be easy to convince to buy an extra 50 or 100 points, they wouldn't go for it. If you're sitting there trying to figure out EXACTLY how many points you need for a given trip and they get a sense that's the best way to sell you, they are not going to remind you that at that moment that the numbers could change and you need extra unless they're pretty sure it'll get you to buy but more points. I would and that's why I wouldn't make a good salesperson.

 

[twebber55]

im not at all happy with what happened with the points reallocation because im a sunday - thursday guy. but i didnt love what my wife did today but i think i still love her and i ll keep her just like i ll keep DVC even though i dont like what happened i ll just lose one day of vacation day a year

 

[TSMIII]

Dean - I have enjoyed your insight over the years - but with all due respect - I don't know how we should all just should have expected what we purchased to go to ****. When we have experienced one thing for the 7 or 15 years of owning a product. I guess I should purchase a house, expecting there to be a sinkhole under it, or radon in the basement, or the tree next door to surely fall on it at some point. I suppose that way of viewing all purchases would keep me from any disappointment.

Well, maybe not expect it when you first purchase the house but certainly you should not believe that it would be out of the realm of possibility that something like this could happen after 7 or 15 years of owning it. Trees fall on houses all the time, radon is found in basements years after purchase all the time. It's a risk you take. If you buy a house with trees standing in close proximity, and you are a reasonable person, you realize there is a chance things may change in the future and one of those trees may be in your living room one day. So if you buy a timeshare and are told there's a chance the points can be reallocated, you need to at least allow for the possibility.

DVC has upheld a way of vacationing - which was sold to me - and which I have enjoyed as I understood it initially - for 8 years. WIth this drastic change - yes I believe changing weeknights the full 20% they are allowed under the contract is drastic - just as many would believe the full increase in maintenance fees allowed under law would be. What if that were the situation - what is the MF limit - 15% in one year? What would you say if - for the past 15 years DVC MF's have gone up the normal couple % points - and next year - they jump to the full % under law? I guess that should be expected too - and we should all purchase with the assumption that in 5 years, MF's will be double. I just don't trust this product anymore so I will not invest further thousands of dollars. Is that an emotionall decision? Sure - but it's a financial one for me and DVC as well.

I would guess that if MFs were to jump substantially there would have to be some causal factor for this - hurricane damage, unanticipated labor costs, necessary upgrade, etc. - and DVC would have to indicate that in our MF statements or else do a special assessment justifying the increase.

Certainly, you and anyone else could make up their mind that this would be too much to swallow and sell. I'd imagine that if point charts were reallocated multiple times over a short span of years, MFs went up due to uncontrolled costs, member satisfaction dropped, etc. then word would get out and a large number of members would be unhappy and want to sell. And I'd guess DVC would start looking like a number of other timeshares in that it's resale prices would fall to bargain basement levels accordingly.

 

[jecpva]

After reviewing some of the new points charts, I understand what Disney is doing but it still doesn't make it fair to people that unfortunately assumed that what they were presented would not change (i.e. the Point ratio for weekend days vs. weekday days). I for one thought that the only issue up for interpretation by Disney was the Seasons. For me, we never vacation at one spot consistantly but we usually do try to avoid Fri & Sat, we were doing alot of Mon. - Fri. trips. I've felt for the last few years that Disney is trying to steer members to more of the time share swapping & off property options so this may figure into this move also. The RCI swap at 160 Points for a 1 br in high season ends up being a deal compared to a 1 br on property (but remember, you're not at Disney!!) but some of the other options are way too top heavy with points for me to even consider. Oh, the days of free park admissions because you bought into DVC. Now that was a perk!!

 

[DVC Mike]

After reviewing some of the new points charts, I understand what Disney is doing but it still doesn't make it fair to people that unfortunately assumed that what they were presented would not change (i.e. the Point ratio for weekend days vs. weekday days).

The paperwork you received along with your DVC contract clearly spelled out that while the total number of points on a chart is fixed, DVCMC has some leeway to reallocate the points to different seasons and days of the week in order to ensure a balance between supply and demand. There was never any promise in your DVC contract that DVCMC is required to maintain the existing point ratio between Sun-Thu and Fri-Sat.

Due to numerous small point add-ons that were being used to book only Sun-Thu, an imbalance arose where there was inadequate availability Sun-Thu and excess availability Fri-Sat. DVCMC has an obligation to keep demand/supply in balance.

I feel sorry for those people that didn't read the Public Offering Statement before they signed on the dotted line. Unfortunately, these people are now going to get burned. That's a bad thing - a very bad thing - as they find they won't have enough points to book what they could before. Unfortunately, I don't think anyone can pin this on DVC.

 

[ColoradoDisneyFan]

Disney may have played by your rules, but they did not play by mine. If you pay attention to the what people are writing you will see a common thread where guides provided a rational explanation to the reallocation clause having to do with where certain holidays fall in the calender year. This is a misrepresentation and is wrong. To simply say they are sales people and you should expect them to lie is overly simplistic. This is the kind of rational that has caused such behavior to become almost acceptable in our society. Obviously quite acceptable to some of the posters here.

I agree Disney acted within the letter of the contract, but allowed their sales practices to be less than above board. It is easy to be smug when you are benefitting from these changes, but it does not change the fact that Disney has fallen way short in the manner in which this reallocation has played out.

Okay, so I am STUPID for not asking my lawyer to explain every detail and every scenario possible in the contract. But I guess I had too much pixie dust sprinkled over me as I was giddy that we could finally buy into BCV. I did specifically ask about the pts changing because that's how we arrived at the 210 number. I am normally a skeptic and believe most salespeople will try to %$*# me. I just thought Disney was more trustworthy than the norm. Don't flame me for not spending days on understanding the contract to the Nth degree...after all it wasn't a mortgage!

 

[WilsonFlyer]

Okay, so I am STUPID for not asking my lawyer to explain every detail and every scenario possible in the contract. But I guess I had too much pixie dust sprinkled over me as I was giddy that we could finally buy into BCV. I did specifically ask about the pts changing because that's how we arrived at the 210 number. I am normally a skeptic and believe most salespeople will try to %$*# me. I just thought Disney was more trustworthy than the norm. Don't flame me for not spending days on understanding the contract to the Nth degree...after all it wasn't a mortgage!

You can't be serious?!? That's exactly what it is.

 

[ColoradoDisneyFan]

You can't be serious?!? That's exactly what it is.

for me I was paying $15,000 (plus annual dues) for 40+ years of lodging at my favorite resort at my favorite place to vacation

 

[TSMIII]

Say good-bye to the kinder and gentler DVC...
Things from as small as losing the tote bag for add-ons, to (I venture to guess) cutting back or eliminating Member events like the Christmas party. It's been fun the past few years but we won't have that pixie dust experience again.

I liken to whole thing to having a good relationship with my local bank, then one day they turn into B of A and you are hit with a bunch of extra fees (and nothing to show in return), they don't know who you are and they really don't care; the bottom line and a push to open new accounts is all that matters.

We purchased DVC not because we particularly wanted a timeshare (vacations in the summer house at Hilton Head are just dandy) but because we love Disney and had a faith that their standards were high and they would always do things well. All I can say now is that they are slipping.

I think this is where some of the problem lies with changes such as this -too many of us do not separate in our minds the hospitality side of Disney from the business/sales side of DVC/DVD.

Yes, same parent company, but two totally different agendas. We begin to blur the two and feel that how things are done with the mechanics of the timeshare will be akin to how we are treated as guests in the resorts, parks and restaurants.

With DVC, it's about managing the timeshare to the letter of the law and the overall benefit of the membership. Yes, some will always be alienated with any change, but there are others that won't be and "post-change" the new members coming into the system won't be affected at all (though they potentially may be with subsequent changes).

IMO, the cardinal sin was the way in which we were all ambushed by the change - there was no prelude, no warning, no indication that something with such a major impact on many people's vacationing patterns was in the offing. To be sure, even with notification, many people would still be upset, but at least they'd have time to digest it and plan accordingly.

 

[DisDaydreamer]

The paperwork you received along with your DVC contract clearly spelled out that while the total number of points on a chart is fixed, DVCMC has some leeway to reallocate the points to different seasons and days of the week in order to ensure a balance between supply and demand. There was never any promise in your DVC contract that DVCMC is required to maintain the existing point ratio between Sun-Thu and Fri-Sat.

Due to numerous small point add-ons that were being used to book only Sun-Thu, an imbalance arose where there was inadequate availability Sun-Thu and excess availability Fri-Sat. DVCMC has an obligation to keep demand/supply in balance.

I feel sorry for those people that didn't read the Public Offering Statement before they signed on the dotted line. Unfortunately, these people are now going to get burned. That's a bad thing - a very bad thing - as they find they won't have enough points to book what they could before. Unfortunately, I don't think anyone can pin this on DVC.

I think you are right on the spot with the justification of point balancing...

That said, if DVC was truly trying to balance things and help the membership out, I would think a simple allowance of two or three points transfers per year would certainly help the members to smooth out any inequities amongst ourselves without having to acquire new points.

MY beef is that DVC has done this and we cannot help each other. Why?

This one transfer per year was supposedly in response to commercial renting, but obviously it is completely out of line and doesn't serve the DVC owners. This needs to change.

I'm not mad at you... just using your post to vent. Something is wrong in Disney.

 

[ColoradoDisneyFan]

IMO, the cardinal sin was the way in which we were all ambushed by the change - there was no prelude, no warning, no indication that something with such a major impact on many people's vacationing patterns was in the offing. To be sure, even with notification, many people would still be upset, but at least they'd have time to digest it and plan accordingly.

Absolutely...all in all this will probably benefit our family. School and activities are priorities for us now and quick weekend trips will be it for a few yrs!! (But I'm still disappointed.)

 

[WilsonFlyer]

If you're 10 points short with the new schedule and you own 150 points, what's the big deal about borrowing 10 points every year for 15 years? You might be ready to skip a year by then anyway... or do an add-on. I'm obviously missing something.

I still think the new BLT owners have a legitimate beef (in the interest of full disclosure, I am one) but Jeez people, this is turning into a whine-fest over 2-4 points per year (Edit: or per vacation). What is WRONG with you people?

 

[TSMIII]

First of all, DVD is SUPPOSED to make money. So is Disney. Their attempts to do so are not 'greed.' The primary responsibility of a company is, within the realm of legal behavior, to return a profit to its investors/shareholders, not to make people feel warm and fuzzy. Now, one of the best ways to do the former is to do the latter, but not always. Foremost, the business must sustain itself. If it doesn't, then the investors lose their money AND the public loses their warm-fuzzies.

Similarly, it's not greedy for DVC to attempt to equally represent the interests of ALL of its owners. Under the old system, some people were getting a large number of days for a disproportionately small number of points, some people were getting a small number of days for a disproportionately large number of points, and some people were getting shut-out entirely. It would be irresponsible for DVC not to attempt to re-balance the system. If Disney makes more money from these changes, it will be a natural result of the system working as it should, not greed.

Truer words were never written.

This is the definitive answer regarding their motivation, pure and simple.

Kudos Kmango!

 

[La2kw]

And if it were your company would you let it continually lose money?
And many are pleased with the change. The problem is you can't please everyone and maximize profits at the same time.

I was responding to your assertion that companies are not there to please the customer, they are there to make money. DVC has been doing both for many years, as do many companies that are in the business of dealing with customers. I don't believe DVC is losing money. If it was, I doubt they would be building 4 new resorts at once, with the fifth one beginning construction soon.

 

[ColoradoDisneyFan]

If you're 10 points short with the new schedule and you own 150 points, what's the big deal about borrowing 10 points every year for 15 years? You might be ready to skip a year by then anyway... or do an add-on. I'm obviously missing something.

I still think the new BLT owners have a legitimate beef (in the interest of full disclosure, I am one) but Jeez people, this is turning into a whine-fest over 2-4 points per year. What is WRONG with you people?

I could give a crap about a few pts...but what is wrong with wishing that Corporate America could have a little foresight and do the right thing? It's everywhere and I really did not expect Disney to be immune...after all, it's about the bonuses and the shareholders, right?

 

[BroganMc]

The paperwork you received along with your DVC contract clearly spelled out that while the total number of points on a chart is fixed, DVCMC has some leeway to reallocate the points to different seasons and days of the week in order to ensure a balance between supply and demand.

Ok this point is really bugging the heck out of me. The point totals ARE NOT the same for the entire SSR chart. There is a net difference shifting more points needed to cover all the smaller (studio to treehouse villas) rooms with a slight decrease in Grand Villas and Dedicated 2bedrooms. But overall, DVC seems to have manufactured several thousand points due from members for equal stays.

This was not a balanced change. If it was, then you would see weekly totals for a given unit balance out to 0 difference among the season. Instead we find plus numbers in all but two of the 5 columns. And the units covered in those two decreased columns are less than 1/3 of the entire resort stock.

Someone show me numbers that disprove my math.

 

[BroganMc]

OK, how about when Marriott changed the reservation rule to allow 13 month reservations, this hasn't always been in place and was a change that came about well after many resorts were selling or sold out. If you owned one week and the potential availability were just cut in half, you might not be happy.

And exactly how could I possibly be adversely affected by that "multiple week owners get first dibs at 13 mos" rule EXCEPT when looking at possibly the highest demand week: Christmas to New Year's. Given that when I purchased my first (and then my assumed sole week) I knew demand would be high then and my likelihood of getting thus decreased, I fail to see the pain in that rule change.

And there are situations where DVC could drop a given resort and where the resort could drop DVC as the management company. Both unlikely to happen but possible and we've discussed it on DIS a number of times. As for the number of days, you're trying to come up with too specific of an example it seems. However, your post is inaccurate. You can stay in a full week in the unit size and season you own at the resort you own assuming the resort is still in business and your legally owned unit is on line. The ability to trade at all could be eliminated as could your resorts participation with Marriott, not likely but possible. Still, if Marriott take over internal exchanges, expect similar threads on places like TUG as you can be not everyone will be happy, possibly no one.

You keep trying to say that this DVC change is nothing compared to what Marriott might one day do. But you fail to miss what DVC did and what Marriott can never do: shorten my one week timeshare to 6 days.

That is precisely what's happening with Choice season at SSR. The weekly jump of 8 whole points means that one of my 4 weeks has gone to 6 days. Absolutely no benefit to me. The lower weekend points are completely overwhelmed by a 2 pt daily increase in the weekday rates.

 

[Dean]

Okay, so I am STUPID for not asking my lawyer to explain every detail and every scenario possible in the contract. But I guess I had too much pixie dust sprinkled over me as I was giddy that we could finally buy into BCV. I did specifically ask about the pts changing because that's how we arrived at the 210 number. I am normally a skeptic and believe most salespeople will try to %$*# me. I just thought Disney was more trustworthy than the norm. Don't flame me for not spending days on understanding the contract to the Nth degree...after all it wasn't a mortgage!

Most lawyers wouldn't know any more than you could by reviewing the paperwork for an hour or two unless they had an inherent knowledge of the product and or industry separately. I would quibble with your insinuation that this is dishonest on DVC's part as it is clearly marked in the POS and is in bold letters in most of them.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

I could give a crap about a few pts...but what is wrong with wishing that Corporate America could have a little foresight and do the right thing? It's everywhere and I really did not expect Disney to be immune...after all, it's about the bonuses and the shareholders, right?

Yes. As a matter or fact, it is.

 

[ColoradoDisneyFan]

Yes. As a matter or fact, it is.

Wilson, I guess you and I agree on something!! (Dean are you getting paid by Disney??)