Disney Vacation Club adjusts 2010 Vacation Points charts

[DisneyWalker44]

I really appreciate everything that you have written about the need for reallocation. You have made wonderful points based on the premise that the dates and point schedule are out of whack. But, I haven't seen any data that says it is out of whack.

A lot of us have individual points of data. I've called many time about availability and been told the weekend days I want are free, but the weekdays are booked up. Every single time there is a difference, it's the weekdays that are booked. If I'm on the ball enough to call at the exact 7 or 11 month window, both are free. But I'm not always on the ball.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

I think this is definitely a huge part of the issue. Reallocation was inevitable (and necessary IMHO). The people it hurts the most are those with small contracts. I don't think the minimum should have been reduced, and I think they should have worked harder to make sure New owners (even those buying via resale) owned at least the minimum required points.

Sounds strangely similar to my contention several pages back. Better watch out. The natives brought out the machetes and came after me.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

I came across an interesting quote from Walt Disney I had to share considering the nature of this thread. I don't think DVC or WDW shouldn't make a profit, its just interesting to hear Walt's perspective. . .

"Disneyland is a work of love. We didn't go into Disneyland just with the idea of making money." Walt Disney

Walt died and this ain't Disneyland.

 

[jlovesee]

Ok I realize there is a bias on this forum against low point owners. However, I wanted to respond. I started with 25 points about 2 years ago at OKW, and added in 25 points this last summer (hoping for another 30 this summer!). Yes, I don't own 150, 200, or even 1000, however as I posting live from a VWL studio, I can definitly attest that I love my DVC! No matter how small it may be.

Back to topic. Most may be suprised to hear this, but at most I was mildly perturbed about the point re-location. Some have been crying here saying "I was never told!" by their guide, or that "I bought an exact # of points". When I took the tour about 7 years ago (SSR was all that was available and it hadn't even opened one of the reasons we didn't buy then!) my guide mentioned that point re-allocation was a possibility, plus if you even briefly glanced at the paperwork they gave you you would have seen this was a possibility.

Anyone that puts in thousands of dollars that DVC costs should do their homework. I know I did, I knew exactly what I was getting into, and even knowing what I do today, wouldn't change my DVC and am still looking forward to adding on more.

Yes I can see it as being frustrating, but if you look at it from a business stand point I can understand why they did it. If you have 100% occupancy Sun-Thur and only 20% occupancy on fri/sat (just guesstimates) that means you should raise points on the weekdays and lower points on the weekends, law of supply and demand. Its as simple as that.

Anyway thats my two cents.

BTW I love the Villas at Wilderness Lodge, but come on what's the deal with the door being right there by the sink? Oh the terrible consequences of being at Disney!

Jennifer

 

[palhockeymomof2]

A lot of us have individual points of data. I've called many time about availability and been told the weekend days I want are free, but the weekdays are booked up. Every single time there is a difference, it's the weekdays that are booked. If I'm on the ball enough to call at the exact 7 or 11 month window, both are free. But I'm not always on the ball.

I've had the exact same experience as well...usually remember to call at the 11 & 7 month mark but sometimes have a brain fart and forget

 

[toocherie]

This brings up an interesting question (at least to me).

Has anyone checked the resale market for the last couple of days? It appears that this hasn't affected pricing at all. If it hasn't, it would seem reasonable to conclude that none of us has lost any real value in our investment(s) (at least not because of this change).

While some of us may believe that our perceived value may have been diminished by this change, I think it is important to remember that the real value (read: $$$) appear unaffected by all of this.

This begs the question; HAVE we lost any value? Things that make you go, "Hmmmmm..."

Your point presumes that 1) those folks with listings are aware of the change (they may not be Dis-sers), 2) that they are aware of the change and haven't changed their price yet, and 3) that they intend to lower their price. The question shouldn't be what a person is asking for an interest--it's what a willing buyer will pay. I would think that someone who is aware of the change and thinks it lowers the value may offer less than they would have otherwise because of the change. And if the seller is aware of the change they might accept less. But ultimately it may not have an effect on price because the points change may not matter to the buyer in question.

In my case--the change doesn't matter--I didn't calculate "to the point" when I bought DVC fully intending to take advantage of different size villas, different seasons, banking and borrowing, etc. and yes, different days of stay. Someone who was contemplating a particular stay for S-Th in a particular unit in a particular season may think differently and not be willing to pay today the same price for DVC that they would have paid a week or two ago.

Edited to add: I don't think that it's a potential loss in "financial" value that has people upset--it's the perceived (and in some cases real) loss of "vacation power."

 

[bcrook]

It seems like the DVC - Resort Reservation Availability thread on DISboards would provide the data for this discussion. But it doesn't seem to indicate that it is difficult to get in to anything. Maybe the data is not up to date.

Is it impossible to get into anywhere during the weekdays or just places like BCV? It is my understanding the OKW and SSR have openings most of the time, even on weekdays. Just curious.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

Ok I realize there is a bias on this forum against low point owners. However, I wanted to respond. I started with 25 points about 2 years ago at OKW, and added in 25 points this last summer (hoping for another 30 this summer!). Yes, I don't own 150, 200, or even 1000, however as I posting live from a VWL studio, I can definitly attest that I love my DVC! No matter how small it may be.

Back to topic. Most may be suprised to hear this, but at most I was mildly perturbed about the point re-location. Some have been crying here saying "I was never told!" by their guide, or that "I bought an exact # of points". When I took the tour about 7 years ago (SSR was all that was available and it hadn't even opened one of the reasons we didn't buy then!) my guide mentioned that point re-allocation was a possibility, plus if you even briefly glanced at the paperwork they gave you you would have seen this was a possibility.

Anyone that puts in thousands of dollars that DVC costs should do their homework. I know I did, I knew exactly what I was getting into, and even knowing what I do today, wouldn't change my DVC and am still looking forward to adding on more.

Yes I can see it as being frustrating, but if you look at it from a business stand point I can understand why they did it. If you have 100% occupancy Sun-Thur and only 20% occupancy on fri/sat (just guesstimates) that means you should raise points on the weekdays and lower points on the weekends, law of supply and demand. Its as simple as that.

Anyway thats my two cents.

BTW I love the Villas at Wilderness Lodge, but come on what's the deal with the door being right there by the sink? Oh the terrible consequences of being at Disney!

Jennifer

Congratulations! You goes in the "Gets it" column. Seriously.

Unfortunately, and especially among relatively smaller point owners, you appear to be very much in the minority.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

<snip>

Edited to add: I don't think that it's a potential loss in "financial" value that has people upset--it's the perceived (and in some cases real) loss of "vacation power." <snip>

A perfectly valid point.

As is true in life, it is what you think it is: at least to you.

 

[bcrook]

Yes I can see it as being frustrating, but if you look at it from a business stand point I can understand why they did it. If you have 100% occupancy Sun-Thur and only 20% occupancy on fri/sat (just guesstimates) that means you should raise points on the weekdays and lower points on the weekends, law of supply and demand. Its as simple as that.

I completely understand this logic, but it is based on the assumption of 100% occupancy during the weekdays. Is that true? Are all DVC rooms booked during the weekdays?

I bet those BWV view rooms, BCV, Savannah view AKL/AKV, December VWL, and all the Epcots at food wine are hard to get. That seems like seasonal changes need to be made. But were OKW weekends just so darn expensive that nobody booked there? Did they really need to be adjusted?

Because we don't have the information that is needed to understand this, we are susceptible to the whims of management. We don't really know if it is in our best interest or not. Unless of course the goal is to give a break to locals who can utilize the weekends more frequently. In that case, it is understandable and logical. Because no matter how you look at any of this the weekend points are/were really high.

 

[tjkraz]

I completely understand this logic, but it is based on the assumption of 100% occupancy during the weekdays. Is that true? Are all DVC rooms booked during the weekdays?

100% occupancy isn't particularly relevant. It could be 90% weekdays and 20% weekends....or 80 / 30...or 50% weekdays and 100% weekends.

What matters is that the point spread is representative of member use.

 

[tjkraz]

This begs the question; HAVE we lost any value? Things that make you go, "Hmmmmm..."

Not unless DVC lowers its own sales prices.

IMO, the benchmark for resale pricing isn't based on any sort of formula. It's not based upon a certain number of nights per contract purchased or a specific breakeven threshold.

The most significant factors are DVC's ROFR and supply & demand. If demand drops because fewer people perceive DVC to be a fair value, then resale prices should go down.

DVC may not return the same number nights as they did before the reallocation. But it's still much cheaper than paying cash rates for similar accommodations. There is still significant value in a DVC purchase...it's just that some of us won't have as much to show for it come 2010.

 

[bcrook]

100% occupancy isn't particularly relevant. It could be 90% weekdays and 20% weekends....or 80 / 30...or 50% weekdays and 100% weekends.

What matters is that the point spread is representative of member use.

I have read this over and over again. Nobody seems to base their ideas of the point spread on anything concrete. So it is possible that this is not based on use pattern but a different marketing plan. If it is a different marketing plan that is something to howl about.

And do you think that ALL resorts show the same use pattern? Isn't it possible that OKW has a higher weekend reserve rate than AKV? Then should OKW weekends be reduced the same amount? The across the board 20% changes doesn't really look like it based on usage patterns.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

<snip> The across the board 20% changes doesn't really look like it based on usage patterns. <snip>

If that's the case, DVC is in a heap of legal trouble with the state of FL. My bet is that they better be able to prove the reallocation relative to FL timeshare laws if they demand it. They may not have to prove it to us but the state of FL is a different story.

There's a snippet of the FL timeshare statute a couple of pages back. It's interesting reading and while open to some interpretation, it's pretty cut and dry in its intent.

 

[Muushka]

Congratulations! You goes in the "Gets it" column. Seriously.

Unfortunately, and especially among relatively smaller point owners, you appear to be very much in the minority.

I feel very condescended upon. Thank you very much. This relatively small point owner is done with this thread.

 

[tjkraz]

And do you think that ALL resorts show the same use pattern? Isn't it possible that OKW has a higher weekend reserve rate than AKV? Then should OKW weekends be reduced the same amount? The across the board 20% changes doesn't really look like it based on usage patterns.

As WilsonFlyer said, DVC would be in a heap of trouble if they couldn't justify their numbers. I suspect (but don't know) that DVC probably farmed-out the reallocation to an accounting firm or actuary. That's the easiest way to deflect criticism when state regulators come knocking.

To specifically address your comments, it isn't an across the board 20% increase. Look no further than the BCV and VWL point charts. Through 2009 both resorts were identical. But if you look at the 2010 versions published, they are now different.

 

[BeccaG]

Walt died and this ain't Disneyland.

Yes . . .I realize that . .I was merely pointing out where Walt's heart was at. . I did state that I expected WDW and DVC to make money. . .so I am not sure what your point is, other than to say that this is no longer Walt's company, which was kinda my point to, but I am disappointed that is the case.

 

[lugnut33]

That's an emotional response shared by many but please realize that Disney was obligated to make this sort of periodic adjustments. They adjusted the points back in 1996 and it's a wonder they waited so long to do it again.

The laws of the state of Florida hold DVC (our timeshare manager) responsible for updating the point charts to account for shifts in demand. Here is a quote from the Florida statutes:



You can find the entire text here:

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes....HTM&Title=->2008->Ch0721->Section 56#0721.56

At this point the worst thing we can hold DVC accountable for is poor communications. Whether they profit from this is unknown and really irrelevant to the need for the changes.

You say that like you know people were overbooking on weekdays in every category, but we don't actually know that for a fact. We are assuming, but I doubt every resort and every type of room had that happening.

 

[lugnut33]

I see it differently. The factual draw is the same as it always has been. True that is may not be a good fit for some today that it was last month but the reverse is true as well. One buys DVC to have the option of a room on property for a controlled price. That price may vary somewhat because of reallocation and dues over the years. Shame on anyone for buying simply because they trusted Disney. I think it's funny, and wrong, to blame this on greed, sales attempts or any similar motivation. IMO the real area to place blame is squarely on the flexibility of the system, namely the ability to reserve less than 7 days up front without a priority given to those wanting the full 7 days. It's part of the cost of doing business with such a system.

Yeah, Disney didn't do it for money!! LOL. Trust me, they do everything for money and shareholder value as that is what drives large corporations like Disney. Having that Florida law gives them the means to do it. Just like you say it's written in the POS, so is the law of corporate greed. It's just ridiculous to say this isn't money driven considering the other changes that came along with it. And trust me, those who are getting burned by it will see it as greed, that's the way it works and no Florida law can change that. Don't forget, perception is 9/10 reality.

 

[lugnut33]

This brings up an interesting question (at least to me).

Has anyone checked the resale market for the last couple of days? It appears that this hasn't affected pricing at all. If it hasn't, it would seem reasonable to conclude that none of us has lost any real value in our investment(s) (at least not because of this change).

While some of us may believe that our perceived value may have been diminished by this change, I think it is important to remember that the real value (read: $$$) appears unaffected by all of this.

This begs the question; HAVE we lost any value? Things that make you go, "Hmmmmm..."

You might not have lost real money, but intrinsic value for some has been squashed because they are now not getting the same value for the buck that they did in 2009.

And somebody brought up a great great point, I think people will be borrowing their 2010 points like crazy to use in 09.