Disney Vacation Club adjusts 2010 Vacation Points charts

[TisBit]

Without providing any specifics, I had someone further up in the DVC food chain confirm that lagging weekend bookings were very much part of the motivation for this.

I tend to agree with Dean's take on the QA rep's statement. But even if we take it at face value, it was just a general statement about weekend occupancy. It doesn't address whether the occupants were staying on DVC points, 25% member discount (which is only available when DVC projects that points bookings will not fill the resort) or people who booked via the 60-day breakage rules. Saying that a resort is "full" doesn't mean "full of members using their points"--which is the true goal of the system.

As for using the availability reports here to draw any conclusions, that's a pretty flawed method. Instead of looking at December '09--which is 10 months away--look at March. There are nearly 100 date/room combinations reported as full at AKV, but the only weekends among those are:

Value Studio 6, 27
Standard Studio 27
Standard 2B 20, 21
Savanna Studio 27
Concierge Studio 27
Conceirge 2B 20, 21

That's 8 of 91 (8%) reported full dates being weekends. BWV is 15%. VWL is 0%. Weekends are 29% of our week.

I was going to point out the same thing, you can't pull one out of 12 months data and use it solely to justify your position. You need to use the availabilities boards full data for all months and then make a determination and still keep in mind that it could be skewed.

Brogan I think the truth is that there were a number of reasons for the reallocation, none of which is the overwhelming reason. If you look at what they did during the reallocation, they shifted points in the room sizes, obviously to help adjust bookings between studios through grand villas, they shifted weekends, to help there...and they even shifted resorts, probably to help create demand at different resorts during different times of the year.

 

[Dean]

Uh Dean, I would hope you aren't implying I was less than truthful about the quote. I did not reconstruct her words. She specifically said "we're booked on weekends too". The exact conversation was me saying "I understand DVC needs to balance demand but was disturbed by the changing of the weekly points" and her answering with the comment that weekends were booking as readily as weekdays.

I was taken aback by the comment myself for I assumed, like many here, that weekend nights being unbooked is the norm and the driving force for the point reallocation. Her comment led me to believe something else. I didn't grill her on the subject though. I was more intent on wanting to get the data for the point allocation math.

Until we have access to DVC's booking figures I'd caution anyone to presume what it actually is. All we know for certain is that DVC claimed the point allocation was done to meet member requests. For all we know, it was less about demand and more about complaints that weekend points were double the cost of weekdays. Joy did mention that was a frequent complaint among members to her, at least.

Certainly no reference to your intention but rather what was intended vs what was said by DVC and what was heard by you that might not have been as intended. Given we're unlikely to have access to this info, I guess we'll get to keep beating each other up over it. If you were told that there was no difference, then you were simply told wrong but unfortunately I don't have a way to prove it to you. Plus you have to look at the entire year and not just one month. It's entirely possible that some of the times didn't need to be changed but DVC would have changed them anyway to keep the same formula. Still, there are other factors which included when those times were booked and HOW they were booked plus whether people got what they wanted when they called to make reservations.

As I was looking through the RCI info today I realized that it's entirely possible that one of the factors involved could have been DVC's need to match up to the RCI points formulas for weekend/weekdays.

 

[bcrook]

I was going to point out the same thing, you can't pull one out of 12 months data and use it solely to justify your position. You need to use the availabilities boards full data for all months and then make a determination and still keep in mind that it could be skewed.

I understand about not selecting data that fits an argument. My point is simply this... IF the entire month of December is booked up weekdays and weekends, then you can't use the argument that usage patterns are behind the point shifts for that month or season. So, December vacation plans have been tampered with because March needs an adjustment. I think that is odd.

I would think the first steps for this reallocation would have been to address the high demand for December by moving it to Dream or Magic season along with the other seasonal adjustments like F&W etc.. The seasonal adjustments would make sense.

I don't think it would be fair to change the points charts simply because people complain that the weekends are too high. There was a solid reason for setting the points charts up the way they were, hundreds of thousands people bought their points based on their charts, and then the charts were changed dramatically.

When the planning guides come out soon, there are going to be hundreds of thousands of shocked people. It is still worth our time to pursue answers on this. What are the long term goals? Many people have speculated on the next moves.

 

[bcrook]

As I was looking through the RCI info today I realized that it's entirely possible that one of the factors involved could have been DVC's need to match up to the RCI points formulas for weekend/weekdays.

That would be logical. If that was given for the reason at the onset, I don't think I would have complained at all. Somebody from DVC will read that post and use that in their next round of explanations.

You have put a lot of energy and thought into this entire thread/topic Dean. I appreciate all of your comments.

 

[Dean]

I understand about not selecting data that fits an argument. My point is simply this... IF the entire month of December is booked up weekdays and weekends, then you can't use the argument that usage patterns are behind the point shifts for that month or season. So, December vacation plans have been tampered with because March needs an adjustment.

DVC needs a formula for weekends to weekdays, there needs to be consistency. If only one month were out, they wouldn't change anything in all likelihood. One or two months that are not out will still be included in the change. This change wouldn't hurt a month that's OK anyway.

That would be logical. If that was given for the reason at the onset, I don't think I would have complained at all. Somebody from DVC will read that post and use that in their next round of explanations.

You have put a lot of energy and thought into this entire thread/topic Dean. I appreciate all of your comments.

As I said, one possible issue but I doubt the main one. Not a problem on the effort as it is the type of thread I enjoy.

 

[DisneyWalker44]

how does this justify an allocation?

The reallocation is based on the fact that demand is greater for weekdays than for weekends. That doesn't mean the weekends are deserted wastelands that never get booked.

Weekdays do have more demand than weekends. I can't imagine any long-time DVC owner questioning that (unless they never try to book weekends). I've called many times and been told they have only some of the days I'm looking for. In those situations, weekends are always more available. I've read about and seen the situation over and over.

If you want to call and fight about the way the reallocation was introduced, have at it. If you want to fight and call and say the imbalance wasn't enough to justify the disruption, have at it. If you want to fight and call to say owners should be given some sort of accommodation to help deal with the reallocation (small add-ons etc.) have at it.

But if you want to fight and call to claim there was no imbalance, I guarantee you are wasting your time.

 

[bcrook]

The reallocation is based on the fact that demand is greater for weekdays than for weekends. That doesn't mean the weekends are deserted wastelands that never get booked.

Weekdays do have more demand than weekends. I can't imagine any long-time DVC owner questioning that (unless they never try to book weekends). I've called many times and been told they have only some of the days I'm looking for. In those situations, weekends are always more available. I've read about and seen the situation over and over.

If you want to call and fight about the way the reallocation was introduced, have at it. If you want to fight and call and say the imbalance wasn't enough to justify the disruption, have at it. If you want to fight and call to say owners should be given some sort of accommodation to help deal with the reallocation (small add-ons etc.) have at it.

But if you want to fight and call to claim there was no imbalance, I guarantee you are wasting your time.

I was referring to a quote from a DVC employee who dismissed the idea that weekday demand accounts for the change. I also made the point that that if the Month of December is totally booked based on current charts, why would December weekday/weekend points be changed.

But is it really true that weekdays are difficult to get at all resorts and for all seasons? Are SSR 2 bedrooms always full during the week in July and August and November? Is OKW difficult to book S-F in April or June? I haven't had any trouble booking anything at less than 7 months. Last year I was at HHI in early June and lots of the two bedroom units were empty during the week.

I think most of the difficult booking situations occur with the special and hard to get locations. I imagine all the Studios are going to be hard to secure now for all days and all seasons because that is the easiest way to conserve points. I stayed at a Studio last summer at BCV and vowed I would never settle for less than a 1 bedroom ever again. So I will have to cut days from my trips.

 

[BWV Dreamin]

The reallocation is based on the fact that demand is greater for weekdays than for weekends. That doesn't mean the weekends are deserted wastelands that never get booked.

Weekdays do have more demand than weekends. I can't imagine any long-time DVC owner questioning that (unless they never try to book weekends). I've called many times and been told they have only some of the days I'm looking for. In those situations, weekends are always more available. I've read about and seen the situation over and over.

If you want to call and fight about the way the reallocation was introduced, have at it. If you want to fight and call and say the imbalance wasn't enough to justify the disruption, have at it. If you want to fight and call to say owners should be given some sort of accommodation to help deal with the reallocation (small add-ons etc.) have at it.

But if you want to fight and call to claim there was no imbalance, I guarantee you are wasting your time.

Not to keep playing the same 'ole record, but NO ONE KNOWS why Disney reallocated the points chart. There are just way too many exceptions to all of the proposed theories already stated umpteen times. One thing I have noticed....I have noticed posters stating they will be adding on, if not now, in the near future! I have maintained there is a monetary reason behind the change...and my assumption is coming to fruition!

 

[tjkraz]

I was referring to a quote from a DVC employee who dismissed the idea that weekday demand accounts for the change. I also made the point that that if the Month of December is totally booked based on current charts, why would December weekday/weekend points be changed.

There are three different seasons spread throughout the month of December and each of them would have to be viewed as a whole. It doesn't so much matter what Dec 1-14 trends look like as much as all of Adventure Season which also includes September and January.

That said, the adjustments to weekday / weekend ratios appear to be global and not based upon history with each individual season and/or resort. I suspect there is a sound statistical basis for using that approach.

But is it really true that weekdays are difficult to get at all resorts and for all seasons? Are SSR 2 bedrooms always full during the week in July and August and November? Is OKW difficult to book S-F in April or June? I haven't had any trouble booking anything at less than 7 months. Last year I was at HHI in early June and lots of the two bedroom units were empty during the week.

Weekdays don't have to be at 100% occupancy year-round to justify the change. As long as bookings are weighted toward the weekday it's still justified.

I think most of the difficult booking situations occur with the special and hard to get locations. I imagine all the Studios are going to be hard to secure now for all days and all seasons because that is the easiest way to conserve points. I stayed at a Studio last summer at BCV and vowed I would never settle for less than a 1 bedroom ever again. So I will have to cut days from my trips.

I don't think it would be fair to draw any conclusions about how people will respond at this point. Not all members are negatively impacted and those who are will have several options available to them.

 

[tjkraz]

Not to keep playing the same 'ole record, but NO ONE KNOWS why Disney reallocated the points chart.

According to DVC it was:

"To help address a growing Member interest in weekend stays..."

and

"...to better [reflect] the changes in Members' vacationing patterns..."

Unless proven otherwise, I'm willing to take that information at face value.

There are just way too many exceptions to all of the proposed theories already stated umpteen times. One thing I have noticed....I have noticed posters stating they will be adding on, if not now, in the near future! I have maintained there is a monetary reason behind the change...and my assumption is coming to fruition!

True, but additional sales are only half of the story. We've also had member say they are considering selling, members who have said they will no longer recommend DVC to friends/family/strangers when asked, and DVC will certainly lose some new sales they would have otherwise gotten simply because 160 points no longer goes as far as it did before.

Whether or not this ends up being a net gain for DVC is completely unknown.

Welcome to the Flawed Theory Club, Hope!

 

[BWV Dreamin]

According to DVC it was:

"To help address a growing Member interest in weekend stays..."

and

"...to better [reflect] the changes in Members' vacationing patterns..."

Unless proven otherwise, I'm willing to take that information at face value.



True, but additional sales are only half of the story. We've also had member say they are considering selling, members who have said they will no longer recommend DVC to friends/family/strangers when asked, and DVC will certainly lose some new sales they would have otherwise gotten simply because 160 points no longer goes as far as it did before.

Whether or not this ends up being a net gain for DVC is completely unknown.

Welcome to the Flawed Theory Club, Hope!

Well you just do that........

 

[tjkraz]

Well you just do that........

Is there some reason I shouldn't?

A lot of people have asked for lower weekend points over the years. My own observations suggest that the points were out of balance. Both DVC's statement and a conversation with someone inside corroborates that.

Occam's Razor. Given our inability to disprove DVC's statements, the simplest explanation may just be the correct one.

 

[Dean]

Well you just do that........

If I wasn't willing to accept it I'd either move on, selling my points or challenge them formally with a state complaint and/or a legal challenge. Given the mass change from DVC is so great, to "you can't trust them", I'm surprised we aren't seeing mass postings that many plan to sell now. I've seen a number of postings that essentially say if anything else happens, they'll sell. Personally I separate out the sales process from the management process. IF I felt the way some do about some of these changes and the motivation, I would not cont to be a member. Complaining on this or similar BBS or Email lists or even calling DVC MS and complaining is not going to get anything done. If one truly wanted to find out the info and/or push for a change back, there are ways to do so.

 

[DisneyWalker44]

I was referring to a quote from a DVC employee who dismissed the idea that weekday demand accounts for the change.

With all due respect, I believe you are referring to a paraphrase, not a quote, and even the paraphrase was not what you seem to think. Please go back and check - feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

I also made the point that that if the Month of December is totally booked based on current charts, why would December weekday/weekend points be changed.

Weekends and weekdays can have different levels of demand and still get fully booked.

But is it really true that weekdays are difficult to get at all resorts and for all seasons?

As far as I know, nobody has made that claim. The claim is simply that weekday demand is greater than weekend.

 

[Disney MAINEiac]

"the way we travel and use our points I just don't see this as a big deal frankly".

HUH ???? This is the whole "point", no pun intended, of using points and the reallocation of same.

perhaps I didn't phrase this clearly, for us I see the reallocation as a positive which might allow us to get more use of our points. If that turns out to be the case (I haven't seen the actual final points chart yet) it won't be a big deal (read not something negative) for us. I think this will turn out to be a tempest in a tea pot.

 

[TisBit]

I understand about not selecting data that fits an argument. My point is simply this... IF the entire month of December is booked up weekdays and weekends, then you can't use the argument that usage patterns are behind the point shifts for that month or season. So, December vacation plans have been tampered with because March needs an adjustment. I think that is odd.

I would think the first steps for this reallocation would have been to address the high demand for December by moving it to Dream or Magic season along with the other seasonal adjustments like F&W etc.. The seasonal adjustments would make sense.

I don't think it would be fair to change the points charts simply because people complain that the weekends are too high. There was a solid reason for setting the points charts up the way they were, hundreds of thousands people bought their points based on their charts, and then the charts were changed dramatically.

When the planning guides come out soon, there are going to be hundreds of thousands of shocked people. It is still worth our time to pursue answers on this. What are the long term goals? Many people have speculated on the next moves.

I personally think that as others have suggested, we have to be careful thinking that the reallocation is over with. I wouldn't be surprised if DVC has some ideas on future adjustments, possibly seasonal adjustments that they are holding off on in order not to create an even larger uproar. This if they adjusted seasons and points this time around.

While December might not be the issue, what about the other months in that same season? If December is booked regardless of weekend/weekday points, but the other times in the same season aren't, it would be equally unfair not to adjust a season that has problems in all but one month. Plus, as Dean has already pointed out, there has to be some pattern to point usage. I don't see DVC making weekends cheap in one season and expensive in another, but rather that there is some rhyme or reason to how many points are needed for weekends vs weekdays throughout the year.

 

[DVC Mike]

This was finally mentioned in the Orlando Sentinel this morning:

The Walt Disney Co.'s time-share arm is trying to steer more of its customers into spending weekend nights in its resorts.

Disney Vacation Club, which sells real-estate interests expressed as "points" that guests redeem for nights in its time-share resorts, last month overhauled its point structure to lower the cost of weekend nights and raise the price of weekday nights.

Disney said it is trying to spread the demand more evenly throughout the week. The company had previously required close to twice as many points for Friday and Saturday nights as it had for Sunday through Thursday nights, which had prompted particularly heavy weeknight reservations.

Weekend nights will still be more expensive than weekday nights, but the disparity won't be as wide.

State law allows time-share operators to reallocate points through the year, so long as the total number of points remains the same. Disney said the total point-cost for a full week is largely unaffected by its changes, because the shifts made to the weekend and weekday rates offset each other.

 

[BWV Dreamin]

If I wasn't willing to accept it I'd either move on, selling my points or challenge them formally with a state complaint and/or a legal challenge. Given the mass change from DVC is so great, to "you can't trust them", I'm surprised we aren't seeing mass postings that many plan to sell now. I've seen a number of postings that essentially say if anything else happens, they'll sell. Personally I separate out the sales process from the management process. IF I felt the way some do about some of these changes and the motivation, I would not cont to be a member. Complaining on this or similar BBS or Email lists or even calling DVC MS and complaining is not going to get anything done. If one truly wanted to find out the info and/or push for a change back, there are ways to do so.

As always, I respect your thoughtful opinion. And while I would love to fully buy into this thought, the end result is that it is more expensive as a whole for members to continue to vacation with their points at hand. Further realloclation will continue this trend....the only way to compensate for the changes, and maintain current vacation habits, is to increase or add-on points. Shifting members to include one or both weekends will not save or maintain the current members vacation points needed. So call it what you will, the end result does not change.....members will need more points, our current timeshare is not the same value as before the points reallocation. No denying this.....

 

[tjkraz]

...the end result is that it is more expensive as a whole for members to continue to vacation with their points at hand.

This part of your statement is mathematically impossible. Since the total number of points in a resort cannot change, for every increase there was an offsetting decrease. Some members will get the same value they always did. Some will get a lower value. Some will get a better value. It all depends on how people use their points.

 

[palhockeymomof2]

As always, I respect your thoughtful opinion. And while I would love to fully buy into this thought, the end result is that it is more expensive as a whole for members to continue to vacation with their points at hand. Further realloclation will continue this trend....the only way to compensate for the changes, and maintain current vacation habits, is to increase or add-on points. Shifting members to include one or both weekends will not save or maintain the current members vacation points needed. So call it what you will, the end result does not change.....members will need more points, our current timeshare is not the same value as before the points reallocation. No denying this.....

maybe I'm missing something...but for us after comparing the 2009 and 2010 point charts...looking at different vacations we have taken or may take......our points needed for various trips vary a few points for the week up or down.... in the some cases..our F & W trip which is usually 2 weeknights & 2 weekend dates....has gone down more than a few points....so I don't understand how the reallocation made it more expensive for members as a whole to vacation......since everyones vacation habits are different... I also have no need to add on points and don't see any decrease in my DVC value......I do see looking at the point charts that members using their points for a weeknight only stay will have to use more points...but looking at 7 night stays the differences seem to be up or down a few points