Disney Vacation Club adjusts 2010 Vacation Points charts

[Tribe0701]

Yeah, I totally agree with this watching WDW over the last 30 plus years. Too many other prime properties for that one to be that popular.

We also need to remember that the world has changed a lot in 30 years including the inception of DVC. Remember that there are probably quite a few folks out there that will love the fact that they can get a villa that is secluded away from a main area where they may find it to be too much hustle and bustle. I have to disagree and feel there is no reason to believe that they would fail.

 

[jodifla]

We also need to remember that the world has changed a lot in 30 years including the inception of DVC. Remember that there are probably quite a few folks out there that will love the fact that they can get a villa that is secluded away from a main area where they may find it to be too much hustle and bustle. I have to disagree and feel there is no reason to believe that they would fail.

I never said they would fail. I'm only saying I think they'll be plenty bookable at 7 months down the road after the newness wears off.

As a 12 year member, I've never been blocked out anywhere at the 7 month window that I've wanted to go. (But, I don't book Christmas/New Year's.)

 

[TisBit]

I never said they would fail. I'm only saying I think they'll be plenty bookable at 7 months down the road after the newness wears off.

As a 12 year member, I've never been blocked out anywhere at the 7 month window that I've wanted to go. (But, I don't book Christmas/New Year's.)

Being a relatively new member, I have been blocked out at 7 months, both at the beginning of December and in June. But that is just saying that you never get blocked out at 7 months is a stretch...there are lots of reports of that on these boards alone.

As I said in the original post, I think DVC made the right choice of brining them in at a 2 BR costs and have the option of going up. Truthfully it would have been a mistake to "assume" their popularity, let the booking patterns dictate if there needs to be a change. But, there could be a benefit of lowering other room costs if they turn out to be very popular.

As with the new reallocations, only time will tell how booking patterns will change.

 

[4DisneyNUTS]

Wow this totally stinks. For those of us who have smaller contracts it is locking us out of being able to stay at the treehouse villas or a grand villa. I could afford one of those Sun -thurs now I can't. THAT STINKS

 

[jodifla]

Being a relatively new member, I have been blocked out at 7 months, both at the beginning of December and in June. But that is just saying that you never get blocked out at 7 months is a stretch...there are lots of reports of that on these boards alone.

As I said in the original post, I think DVC made the right choice of brining them in at a 2 BR costs and have the option of going up. Truthfully it would have been a mistake to "assume" their popularity, let the booking patterns dictate if there needs to be a change. But, there could be a benefit of lowering other room costs if they turn out to be very popular.

As with the new reallocations, only time will tell how booking patterns will change.

True, but to me, it's the location of SSR that drives down the desirability of the Treehouses. Just like the location did in the original treehouses and also the townhomes near DD.

One of the reasons I'm never blocked out at 7 months or below is that ALL the DVC locations are OK with me, and I don't try to book busy times of the year at 7 months. I use my 11 month booking window for those times.

I just booked AKV at 7 months...but of course, it's for a low time of year. HHI might be impossible to get at 7 months in the summer....not so much in January.

 

[tjkraz]

I never said they would fail. I'm only saying I think they'll be plenty bookable at 7 months down the road after the newness wears off.

As a 12 year member, I've never been blocked out anywhere at the 7 month window that I've wanted to go. (But, I don't book Christmas/New Year's.)

I would probably question use of the phrase "plenty bookable", but there certainly will be 7 month availability on occasion.

I can't think of another situation within DVC where a certain room class:

1. Represents less than 7% of the total resort, and
2. Costs the same number of points per night as 90% of the resort.

Unless the Treehouse Villas gain some sort of unsavory reputation, IMO it's a no-brainer for most SSR owners to book them first at 11 months. People may still try to move elsewhere at 7 months, which could free up some space. But with 360 dedicated Two Bedrooms, 432 Lockoffs and only 60 Treehouses--all costing the same amount per night--I suspect the THVs will be in much higher demand among owners.

YMMV.

 

[jodifla]

I would probably question use of the phrase "plenty bookable", but there certainly will be 7 month availability on occasion.

I can't think of another situation within DVC where a certain room class:

1. Represents less than 7% of the total resort, and
2. Costs the same number of points per night as 90% of the resort.

Unless the Treehouse Villas gain some sort of unsavory reputation, IMO it's a no-brainer for most SSR owners to book them first at 11 months. People may still try to move elsewhere at 7 months, which could free up some space. But with 360 dedicated Two Bedrooms, 432 Lockoffs and only 60 Treehouses--all costing the same amount per night--I suspect the THVs will be in much higher demand among owners.

YMMV.

I think some of that will depend on how far removed they feel from everything else, and what amenities are nearby, and what the bus service is like.

For those only using ME, they may be too far of a schlep (think of all the complaining that goes on about the Boardwalk hallways!)

 

[Dean]

Unless the Treehouse Villas gain some sort of unsavory reputation, IMO it's a no-brainer for most SSR owners to book them first at 11 months. People may still try to move elsewhere at 7 months, which could free up some space. But with 360 dedicated Two Bedrooms, 432 Lockoffs and only 60 Treehouses--all costing the same amount per night--I suspect the THVs will be in much higher demand among owners.

YMMV.

Only time will tell and I won't be surprised if they are hard to get simply due to their numbers and occupancy. However, I think the average SSR owner who wants a 2 BR size unit will opt more for the traditional 2 BR than THV due to location and distance. I'm sure they will have their following but likely not enough to make the difficult. IMO, if they routinely make it to 7 months out, the demand would be proven to be relatively low simply due to the low numbers. I predict a 2-3 year surge as people try them out then demand will likely lessen. OTOH, the reverse will likely be true at the 7 month window due to the number of people wanting to try them out and the slightly higher occupancy.

 

[DISNEY FIX]

I predict a 2-3 year surge as people try them out then demand will likely lessen. OTOH, the reverse will likely be true at the 7 month window due to the number of people wanting to try them out and the slightly higher occupancy.

Dean, would this fit for BLT MK views as well due to the high point value?

 

[DisneyWalker44]

I can't think of another situation within DVC where a certain room class:

1. Represents less than 7% of the total resort, and
2. Costs the same number of points per night as 90% of the resort.

Unless the Treehouse Villas gain some sort of unsavory reputation, IMO it's a no-brainer for most SSR owners to book them first at 11 months.

That's what the Carousel would look like if it were a separate booking category. Someone I doubt owners would book up the Carousel at the 11 month mark. Small doesn't mean "really popular".

THV's will only be a no-brainier if they most people prefer them. They don't need to be "unsavory" to have availability at the 7-month mark.

 

[doconeill]

That's what the Carousel would look like if it were a separate booking category. Someone I doubt owners would book up the Carousel at the 11 month mark. Small doesn't mean "really popular".

Carousel is different - its more of the same rooms, but very far away from the main part of the resort. THVs are very different. Standalone bungalows - no noise through the walls from you neighbors, more privacy between the guests in the villa, etc. All the amenities of of a villa, but the rustic separation of a campground.

THV's will only be a no-brainier if they most people prefer them. They don't need to be "unsavory" to have availability at the 7-month mark.

Actually, only 7% of SSR owners who book 2BRs need to prefer them, or at least look for the variety...

 

[Dean]

Carousel is different - its more of the same rooms, but very far away from the main part of the resort. THVs are very different. Standalone bungalows - no noise through the walls from you neighbors, more privacy between the guests in the villa, etc. All the amenities of of a villa, but the rustic separation of a campground.

I would agree that THV are somewhat different than would be certain areas if there were booking categories. Each will have it's following, the question is how that numbers come down.

Actually, only 7% of SSR owners who book 2BRs need to prefer them, or at least look for the variety...

Given that no all 2 BR L/O units will be booked as 2 BR, the number will be slightly higher. Assuming that the % of SSR members who prefer the THV is exactly the same as the % of 2 BR that are booked as 2 BR, they should book up at exactly the same time. In that situation, the same % of units of each should make it to 7 months. Now booking cat at SSR would certainly change things. My guess is you'd see demand come down to Grandstands and CP at the top followed by THV next then Springs (pretty close) followed by Paddock then Carousel. It'll take about 3 years for the novelty to wear off.

Dean, would this fit for BLT MK views as well due to the high point value?

Again, simply my opinion. My feeling is no, MKV will continue to be a sought after option ongoing because it has a draw independent of the novelty involved just like BWV has continued to be of high demand. There likely will be a surge for BLT and certain views in general as new members try it out but I doubt the difference will be nearly as great as it has been for SSR in general for example.

 

[DisneyWalker44]

Actually, only 7% of SSR owners who book 2BRs need to prefer them, or at least look for the variety...

Let's thing about this a bit. In order for the THVs to be booked at the 7 month mark, you need the % of SSR owners who (1) are looking for 2BR, (2) are able to book more than 7 months out and (3) prefer to THV to any other use of their points.

Taking compete wild guesses here, 50% of folks want 2BR (I think that's probably high) and 60% of those can and will book 7+ months out. So now we are down to 30% and we need almost 25% of them to prefer a THV over everything else, over BLT, BCV, BWV, AKV, VWL, OWK and the standard 2BR's at SSR. Do we really think 25% of folks each year will put a THV over everything else?

We can get some idea of the potential popularity by looking at the CRO world. There something like 99% of people choose to be in a resort, while 1% choose the peace and isolation of a cabin. There's a lot of reasons to expect the THVs to be more popular than the cabins. But I don't see you getting anywhere close to 25%.

 

[tjkraz]

I don't know that it's worth a calculation since things vary so greatly from season-to-season. And demand for the treehouse villas may well buck any resort-wide trends. Not much reason to book a SSR 2B in September at 11 months--but if you want a THV it certainly wouldn't hurt.

My own unscientific measure is that availability will be similar to the Grand Villas at OKW. For certain peak periods there will be nothing available at 7 months. During slower times there will be limited availability--but it's going to be difficult to really plan your vacation around it until that reservation is in-hand.

Also the new booking rules will come into play at 7 months. If there are 5 or 6 THVs available for a Sunday check-in at 7 mos, first dibs will go to members who can afford to arrive the Friday / Saturday before or the lucky few who get thru to MS first on Sunday morning.

I understand the remoteness of the villas and that how "house in the trees" aspect will not appeal to everyone. But if I've learned one thing over the years it's that members tend to let one or two aspects of a room/resort really drive their decisions. People LOOOOVE to book BCV and BWV for the location and/or Stormalong Bay, even though the rooms at OKW are much bigger and other resorts have much nicer guest rooms. In that vein, I think the THVs will appeal to many because of that 3rd bedroom, the presence of the bunk beds, and the fact that they are the only SSR rooms with the flat panel TVs and other ultra-modern appointments which the rest of the resort just missed out on.

The sort of backwoods/outdoors themes of AKV and VWL don't really do much for me. But I spent extra points to book a THV for our upcoming trip because the third bedroom really fits our travel party and the kids will enjoy the bunk beds. The other day I asked my son what he was most looking forward to on our upcoming trip and believe it or not his response was "staying in that treehouse hotel."

All of this is just my $.02 but I think there are other families who view the THVs as the closest they will ever come to staying in a Grand Villa. And you can't beat the price.

 

[doconeill]

Let's thing about this a bit. In order for the THVs to be booked at the 7 month mark, you need the % of SSR owners who (1) are looking for 2BR, (2) are able to book more than 7 months out and (3) prefer to THV to any other use of their points.

Taking compete wild guesses here, 50% of folks want 2BR (I think that's probably high) and 60% of those can and will book 7+ months out. So now we are down to 30% and we need almost 25% of them to prefer a THV over everything else, over BLT, BCV, BWV, AKV, VWL, OWK and the standard 2BR's at SSR. Do we really think 25% of folks each year will put a THV over everything else?

We can get some idea of the potential popularity by looking at the CRO world. There something like 99% of people choose to be in a resort, while 1% choose the peace and isolation of a cabin. There's a lot of reasons to expect the THVs to be more popular than the cabins. But I don't see you getting anywhere close to 25%.

Well, its easy to take random percentages and come up with numbers, but they don't mean much. But with your numbers, at 7+ months out it doesn't matter what they prefer outside of SSR, unless they have points at more than one resort, no? Since we are talking about availability or lack thereof right at the 7 month mark, I don't think we should add yet another factor of how many who have already booked THVs will move to another resort at the 7 month mark, since they won't all do that right at the 7 month mark anyways, they won't be available at 9am anyways when people first call, etc. Inside the 7 month mark things become even more murky.

There is another factor here...the addition of the points from the THV currently dilutes the point pool at SSR, assuming those points have not sold out yet and aren't likely to before we get to the point where the 7 month mark matters. But which way will this factor affect things? Will this mean that THV will be booked, but other 2BRs (or 1BR/studios) will be available? Or will THV have openings because not many want to try them or don't really know about/understand them?

Anyways, I think making up percentages about preferences is a useless exercise.

 

[Mick West]

Just one more reason to sell. The new management team needs to be replace.

Good bye folks.

I must say that I agree. I knew the term "owner" was not truly refective as to my status, but it is abundantly clear that the management could care less about current "owners" - my point totals, combined with my DW travel habits, will afford me less nights in 2010. It's not right, but what can a person do? Vote with their feet - there's lots of places I enjoy just as well.

 

[Mick West]

For me - nothing but bad! I can't imagine that this change benefits but a small portion of "owners" - but certainly benefits managements desires!

 

[disrailfan]

This is actually coming at a good time for DW and I. My youngest daughter graduates this year from High School and this summer will be the last family trip to the world for a while.

we will still be using our points, but instead of spending the couple grand at a time at the World, we will spending that money in other places while staying on our DVC Points. Now whether that is the DCL, trips to New York, or eventually Hawai'i, we will not be spending money at the World so that is their loss at this point (no pun intended).

We do intend to visit DisneyLand but that will be a few years down the road and it won't be for a whole week.

 

[tjkraz]

For me - nothing but bad! I can't imagine that this change benefits but a small portion of "owners" - but certainly benefits managements desires!

If true--that only a small portion of owners would benefit--then it pretty much illustrates the need for the reallocation. Under the old system only 55% of the year's points were allocated to weekday nights. If you have members attempting to use 60-70% of of their points for those nights, there's a big problem brewing.

After the reallocation weekdays still only represent about 60-65% of the year's points. Hopefully that will better reflect member usage.

 

[Dean]

For me - nothing but bad! I can't imagine that this change benefits but a small portion of "owners" - but certainly benefits managements desires!

The question isn't really whether it benefits (or harms) a given owner, but the needs of the system overall. Still, the more people are affected in a negative way, the more the change was needed given that would represent a higher number of those with some version of S-F type stays. DVC may indeed no longer make sense for a segment of owners as is true of any change. Worse case scenario would be that one loses 20% of their room buying power and can get at worst, 80% of the days they could have before the change.