Disney Vacation Club adjusts 2010 Vacation Points charts

[TECHJPM]

Disney mails each of us something. If not they email all of us if they have our email address...

Well, they could get a legal document drafted, and email it to us. Have us pay the 42 cents to mail back the vote.

They wouldn't have to pay that much at all....

Disney is looking to get more money out of the DVC owners that now need more points due to this change.

 

[Chuck S]

Disney mails each of us something. If not they email all of us if they have our email address...

Well, they could get a legal document drafted, and email it to us. Have us pay the 42 cents to mail back the vote.

They wouldn't have to pay that much at all....

Disney is looking to get more money out of the DVC owners that now need more points due to this change.

They still need to mail us the ballots, not everyone has email. And again, one vote per point, or one vote per membership, or one vote per member (some memberships have several deeded owners).

Should a 150 point membership have the same vote as a 1000 point membership? Should a 150 point membership with 5 owners on the deed have a greater vote than a 1000 point membership with 2 owners on the deed?

Who tallies the vote? Accounting firms aren't cheap.

But no matter what, voting is a pretty moot discussion, as we've all already legally agreed that any votes required would be done on our behalf by a representative on the board. Most timeshares work that way.

As far as needing more points...perhaps many members do need more points, many also do not. I generally bank points every year and the reallocation has little impact on my vacation habits. Reallocations were always a possibility according to our documents. In fact, there is even a maximum reallocation listed for each resort in the paperwork.

 

[doconeill]

They still need to mail us the ballots, not everyone has email. And again, one vote per point, or one vote per membershsip, or one vote per member (some memberships have several deeded owners).

And when a quorum of vote proxies do not respond, they have to do it again...and again...until there is a quorum. More cost.

 

[TECHJPM]

Well, then they could send out a letter stating that they would be doing a vote. Tell everyone that they need to respond, or everything stays the same. Total the votes. Votes are votes... if the votes come in at any quantity showing for, or against, then it rides through with any change necessary.

 

[Chuck S]

Well, then they could send out a letter stating that they would be doing a vote. Tell everyone that they need to respond, or everything stays the same. Total the votes. Votes are votes... if the votes come in at any quantity showing for, or against, then it rides through with any change necessary.

Honestly, they had trouble getting all the OKW members to respond to the extension paperwork.

And again, define votes. One per point, one per membership, or one per member. I think it would be terribly unfair for a person who bought a 25 point resale to have the same voting clout as a person who owns several hundred points. Stocks are voted "per share owned", and make no mistake, with the amount of developers points out there in new resorts and retained ownership, DVD pretty much would trump anyone else's vote anyway. It would be an expensive exercise in futility, as long as DVD/Disney doesn't break a regulatory law.

 

[TECHJPM]

One per property per person on deed.

 

[tjkraz]

Right now, a BCV Studio is 12 pts per weekday / 22 pts per weekend during Adventure season. That's 104 per week.

Why not change it to 5 points per weeknight and 40 points per weekend? I bet we could get members to vote in favor of that change, right?

But consider the outcome. Everyone's points would go 2-3 times further than they do now on weekdays. It would be a dogfight at 11 months to book the available rooms, and then millions of points would be left unused because nobody wants to book the weekends.

Still, if you put it to a popular vote, any reallocation which lowered weekend rates would pass with flying colors. Imagine a BCV studio for just FIVE points per night. Who wouldn't vote for that?!?!

But that's exactly why members are in no position to vote on something like this. DVC's primary goal should be the health of the points system. The values should remain commensurate to demand.

My example also illustrates why I have trouble accepting the premise that the reallocation is sales driven. If the only reason for the reallocation were to sell more points, the logical move would have been to lower weekdays further. DVC would attract FAR more new business if you could get a Studio room for 5 points per night (or 7 points, or 10 points) rather than the 13 PPN that the Studio night will increase to in 2010.

Sure there are current members who find their points don't go as far as they did in the past. But in and of itself, that doesn't go far to support the notion that the reallocation was designed to sell more.

 

[White_Sox_Fan]

I see no reason why they should allow the members to vote on something that is DVC's responsible, and well within ther rights and obligations, to handle. The right course of action in many cases is not the most popular. Imagine the trouble this country would be in if the constitution could be changed by a simple majority.

 

[Chuck S]

One per property per person on deed.

So a deed with 5 people and 50 points should have 5 votes, and a single person with 1000 points should have 1 vote? That makes no sense.

 

[TECHJPM]

Each contract had to have owners. You have maximum of one property per contract. You can have multiple people on the contract though.

It isn't going to do anything anyway. They would never let the public determine the outcome of a situation. We are all venting, and it is going to go nowhere.

 

[Chuck S]

Each contract had to have owners. You have maximum of one property per contract. You can have multiple people on the contract though.

It isn't going to do anything anyway. They would never let the public determine the outcome of a situation. We are all venting, and it is going to go nowhere.

But just like company stocks, if I own 150 shares, I get 150 "votes". If someone else owns 2000 shares, they get 2000 votes. DVC votes would certainly have to follow the same type of format, number of votes relative to number of points owned.

But, I agree with the ohers, this is NOT somethong that should even be put to a vote.

 

[OneMoreTry]

Again, please enlighten me on who are "sponsors" - are they elected, paid by Disney, or just folks who sign up for this? I'm really just curious about this as I've never seen so many post's, all defending this points change strongly by the way, in any other threads I go to.

I paid $60 to Disboards to support it this year. I realized that I receive a valuable service from this web site on an ongoing basis and decided I should contribute my fair share. So I'm a sponsor. They sent me a visor.

You can be a sponsor, too, if you continue to use the site and find it useful. I can tell you it in no way affects my opinions, and as far as I know, sponsors have no more influence on the workings of these boards than you or anyone else.

 

[OneMoreTry]

Each contract had to have owners. You have maximum of one property per contract. You can have multiple people on the contract though.

It isn't going to do anything anyway. They would never let the public determine the outcome of a situation. We are all venting, and it is going to go nowhere.

Members essentially "vote" when they book vacations. Every time you book a weekday night you cast a little teeny weeny "vote" to increase weekday points. When you book a weekend , you cast a vote to increase weekend points.

People with more points get to "cast" more of those "votes."

More popular = more points must be charged for that night to offset demand

Ballots would have a completely misleading effect. Members would have a HUGE DISINCENTIVE to vote for the greatest benefit for all. We would all vote to make OUR OWN VACATIONS COST LESS POINTS, which would mean the more popular nights would end up costing the least. That would be bad for everyone..

 

[vascubaguy]

I don't think a vote would be ideal because we'd most likely pay for it from a rise in dues...

However, I would like to hear from DVC exactly why the changes are necessary and what considerations did they make for the members who will ultimately be hurt with the change.

Not just... ta da... it's changing.

 

[Dean]

Thanks for filling me in on sponsors - and thanks for helping to support the site! We may "agree to disagree" on this reallocation, but on many occassions my wife and I "agree to disagree" - and we've been married 32 years!!

That's fine, it is OK to disagree. But where do we disagree, I feel what I posted was factual, not opinion. I'll break it down.

• Happened before - Fact
• Knew or should have known - Fact, happened previously, clearly stated in the POS.
• Timeshare Change - Fact
• Minority of members - no data but hard to dispute
• The more members did S-F, the more disruption to the system and therefore the larger need for the change - Fact

Some want to throw in ulterior motives for DVD/DVC and that's fine. If I personally felt that was the case, I'd get out, file a complaint or file a lawsuit. And I'm far more cynical in general than most of this group, or at least I have been in the past.

When we all bought in we all saw how the points were structured. Now that they are changing that structuring, I think they should really be willing to put it to a vote of owners. I think it is a little shrewd of them to do something like this, as a lot of us bought enough points to do a certain amount of things, and now a lot of us are finding that it will be hard...

Why vote. DVC is tasked with the responsibility of doing what's best for the system and membership as a whole. Any change will be negative to some and some changes may be negative to all.

Well, then they could send out a letter stating that they would be doing a vote. Tell everyone that they need to respond, or everything stays the same. Total the votes. Votes are votes... if the votes come in at any quantity showing for, or against, then it rides through with any change necessary.

Timeshare do this all the time, usually at least once a year. If they get 10-20% to respond, they are thrilled. With DVC we have signed away our rights under all but the most unusual of circumstances and if I read the rules correctly, only each unit gets a vote but then each owner in that unit has to vote to see what the overall vote for the "unit" is. They could pole the owners if they wanted to get an idea, they have done so in the past. The problem with a vote or poll is they are somewhat obligated to go that route and given they have legal and fiduciary responsibilities that may be in conflict with a vote, no reason to confuse the picture to satisfy a few egos.

One per property per person on deed.

The designated contact would be the legal rep to vote but as noted above, it ends up deferring to each unit as 1 vote.

 

[Dean]

I don't think a vote would be ideal because we'd most likely pay for it from a rise in dues...

However, I would like to hear from DVC exactly why the changes are necessary and what considerations did they make for the members who will ultimately be hurt with the change.

Not just... ta da... it's changing.

Marriott in particular has weekly working meetings usually with the GM and various other reps from different departments. They discuss things like refurbishment plans, units assignments, budgets, planning and bring things like fabric boards. As a nuts and bolts type of person, I much enjoy this rather than the fluff you get from DVC's weekly meetings. To heck with snacks, punch and hats, give me real info.

 

[OneMoreTry]

.....

However, I would like to hear from DVC exactly why the changes are necessary and what considerations did they make for the members who will ultimately be hurt with the change.

Not just... ta da... it's changing.

A positive, constructive, feasible suggestion. Even though I agree with the changes and was actually hoping for changes like this, I think it important that everyone have their grievances heard as well as receive both consideration and explanation of WHY this was done.

"Communication is the problem to the answer." -Hall and Oates.

 

[Mike]

nothing like a good Hall and Oates quote

 

[Dean]

A positive, constructive, feasible suggestion. Even though I agree with the changes and was actually hoping for changes like this, I think it important that everyone have their grievances heard as well as receive both consideration and explanation of WHY this was done.

"Communication is the problem to the answer." -Hall and Oates.

While it sounds good, I suspect it'd cause more problems on the surface much like a lot of explanations with a teenager who wants something different than the parents will allow. I suspect it'd just give points for people to argue over. Also, as I mentioned earlier, anyone can go look at the info if they make an appointment and ask specifically for what they want. All of the DVC info should be available but none of the DVD info.

 

[Buckalew11]

This is old info, I know.

This change will affect me by using more points on my weekdays (I stay else where on weekends, cheaper). In the end, I will have less points to use for more trips. Last year I did 3 WDW trips and one VB trip. From now on, I'll just use my points for weekdays at WDW, still staying elsewhere on the weekends, and go fewer times. If I add a trip, it'll be at the S/D and not a WDW resort. I won't be adding more points to make up for using more weekday points.

Welcome Wednesdays have never happened on ANY of my trips! They are always cancelled. DH would love to attend and the meetings are always cancelled!