Disney Vacation Club adjusts 2010 Vacation Points charts

[OneMoreTry]

......, 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. .......

I'm glad you said this because I wanted to make the analogy, but didn't want to get people more upset than they are.

However, as with teenagers, allowing them to BE HEARD and have their point of view CONSIDERED is very important. I think the explanation for the change, it seems to me, would be pretty simple and straightforward. It doesn't take much common sense to see why such a change would be needed -- just a little maturity. Those who reject it would be making a conscious decision to do so.

Among the reasonable, the explanation may face resistance at first, but at some point the light bulb goes on. I've got some good stories on that, including times when i was the one who was the complainer needing the explanation.

 

[Dean]

I'm glad you said this because I wanted to make the analogy, but didn't want to get people more upset than they are.

However, as with teenagers, allowing them to BE HEARD and have their point of view CONSIDERED is very important. I think the explanation for the change, it seems to me, would be pretty simple and straightforward. It doesn't take much common sense to see why such a change would be needed -- just a little maturity. Those who reject it would be making a conscious decision to do so.

Among the reasonable, the explanation may face resistance at first, but at some point the light bulb goes on. I've got some good stories on that, including times when i was the one who was the complainer needing the explanation.

DVC did give a basic explanation and my expectation of the reaction has already occurred. Same was true for the reservation change last year to reserve a week at a time. Still, I think DVC would have been better served to anticipate the contention and give a more factual based prelude. In no way should they show weakness including the idea that this issue is negotiable. Given the assumption they had to force more use of weekdays and less use of weekends, there were other ways to do so. They could have offered a poll for the various options. I see 3 options which could have sought to do the same thing. Reallocation, a minimum stay that required at least 1 weekend day or a priority for those reserving a min of 7 days. The current system would do that also if they made changes a cancellation and rebooking which they are very likely to do eventually anyway. I know some want DVC to spell out the occupancies and the like and they are not going to do so.

 

[OneMoreTry]

Dean,

I don't think allowing people to officially vent would be showing weakness, if that is what you meant.

I think your other 2 options involve more restriction and would be more difficult to program into computer, more difficult to work with and plan stays -- and easier to circumvent. Their current plan is more elegant and fair, I think.

As I said in my post, how to reallocate HAS been put to a vote -- people vote with their stays. Any balloting on how to allocate points would result in the majority, obviously, voting to their own benefit, which would then result in LOWEST POINTS FOR MOST POPULAR and MOST-USED DAYS. Which would be counterproductive and unmouselike.

Voting is unmouselike too. Disney does what disney does. I've never seen much weakness there.

 

[Dean]

Dean,

I don't think allowing people to officially vent would be showing weakness, if that is what you meant.

I think your other 2 options involve more restriction and would be more difficult to program into computer, more difficult to work with and plan stays -- and easier to circumvent. Their current plan is more elegant and fair, I think.

As I said in my post, how to reallocate HAS been put to a vote -- people vote with their stays. Any balloting on how to allocate points would result in the majority, obviously, voting to their own benefit, which would then result in LOWEST POINTS FOR MOST POPULAR and MOST-USED DAYS. Which would be counterproductive and unmouselike.

Voting is unmouselike too. Disney does what disney does. I've never seen much weakness there.

I don't think anyone is preventing venting, seems to be plenty going on now. I don't know that the other options would be easier to circumvent, I see them all about the same assuming they stick to the plan. Still, the reallocation best fits with the program in place though I do expect at some point they will make any change a cancelation and rebooking and won't be surprised to see a min stay at some point. As for voting, the only real option is to adjust your plan, complain or move on or some combo.

 

[OneMoreTry]

I......and won't be surprised to see a min stay at some point. .......

Now that would really get me UPSET. So far we've never stayed less than 3 nights, and that was at HH. At WDW we always stay 6 or 7. But that would be the first change that really violates the spirit of the original presentation of these condos, which is flexibility.

I'm not a resort swticher, but can you imagine what the outcry from them wold be if they HAD to spend a minimum time per resort?? what about the weekenders at HH or Vero or even WDW?

I seriously doubt DVC will ever go this far.

 

[Dean]

Now that would really get me UPSET. So far we've never stayed less than 3 nights, and that was at HH. At WDW we always stay 6 or 7. But that would be the first change that really violates the spirit of the original presentation of these condos, which is flexibility.

I'm not a resort swticher, but can you imagine what the outcry from them wold be if they HAD to spend a minimum time per resort?? what about the weekenders at HH or Vero or even WDW?

I seriously doubt DVC will ever go this far.

We'll see. As I said it may or may not happen but I won't be surprised. I'd give it around a 50/50 at some point. I'd expect that to be 3 days if done purely as a min stay though it's possible (though less likely) they'd tie the nights together such as at least one weekend night. Given the POS clearly says this, spells it out, I don't think it violates anything since I don't put any stock in something that a guide said or implied if not backed up in writing. There are other ways to push a min stay, actually the reservation change last year does to a degree and will further if (when) they make changes to that type reservation a cancelation and rebooking.

 

[dianeschlicht]

We'll see. As I said it may or may not happen but I won't be surprised. I'd give it around a 50/50 at some point. I'd expect that to be 3 days if done purely as a min stay though it's possible (though less likely) they'd tie the nights together such as at least one weekend night. Given the POS clearly says this, spells it out, I don't think it violates anything since I don't put any stock in something that a guide said or implied if not backed up in writing. There are other ways to push a min stay, actually the reservation change last year does to a degree and will further if (when) they make changes to that type reservation a cancelation and rebooking.

I too think that is highly likely. The only reason folks are so upset now is because they have to learn to use the new point system. Work it, so to speak.....just like everyone did by not staying weekends before.

 

[SuzanneSLO]

We'll see. As I said it may or may not happen but I won't be surprised. I'd give it around a 50/50 at some point. I'd expect that to be 3 days if done purely as a min stay though it's possible (though less likely) they'd tie the nights together such as at least one weekend night. Given the POS clearly says this, spells it out, I don't think it violates anything since I don't put any stock in something that a guide said or implied if not backed up in writing. There are other ways to push a min stay, actually the reservation change last year does to a degree and will further if (when) they make changes to that type reservation a cancelation and rebooking.

According to Section 4.2e of my Mebership Agreement for BWV, DVC may require that each reservation shall be for a minimum number of consecutive use days in the same season, which number of days shall not exceed 5. So this is another instance where the legal documents have warned the members that a minimum stay may be adopted. -- Suzanne

 

[BWV Dreamin]

According to Section 4.2e of my Mebership Agreement for BWV, DVC may require that each reservation shall be for a minimum number of consecutive use days in the same season, which number of days shall not exceed 5. So this is another instance where the legal documents have warned the members that a minimum stay may be adopted. -- Suzanne

Nice find. This would really put a big hurt on split stays.

 

[chalee94]

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

wait, is this hall and oates or 10cc? (the things we do for love.)

 

[DVCGeek]

So this minimum stay possibility has me wanting to verify that I have enough points going forward, particularly for the VGC add-on I have a proposal out on that should execute tomorrow! That leaves me with two main questions:

1) Do VGC contracts carry the same 4.2e verbiage of a minimum being possible, but not to exceed 5 nights?

2) Assuming yes to that "5 night max. for min. stay", does my method of determining the size of my contracts make sense to others here:

I calculated average point costs for the entire year at the two resorts I plan to own at because those are the only ones I'm guaranteed to able to book (subject to availability...). Knowing that, at some point during the year I will always be able to stay for that many or fewer points by definition. Take that number times a minimum of 5, and that is how many points I need to own to cover all my bases and definitely be able to use my membership as long as I'm flexible with my dates.

Specifically, I want to stay in a VGC studio for <= 5 nights every 3-4 years. Dates are flexible but I generally prefer to arrive on a Sat or Sun. 40 point add-on * 3 (bank + use + borrow) = 120 to play with. I added things up and got 8,552 points TOTAL for a full year in a studio. Divide by 365, average is a tad under 23.5 per night. Round up to 24 * 5 = 120.

I also crunched my existing master (and currently ONLY) contract. 160 points @ BLT {which I THINK has the same wording, but I'd have to look at home tonight}; I want 6 nights at WDW every year, with Sat. or Sun. arrivals again. 8702 points for a year for a MK view studio [also OK with less 'expensive' ones, used as worst case scenario], rounds up to 24 avg. per night. 24 * 6 {more than possible minimum} = 144.

That boils down to having enough points on both coasts for my desired stays under any contractually possible conditions (provided I remain flexible with my dates), right?

 

[MiaSRN62]

dianeschlicht : The only reason folks are so upset now is because they have to learn to use the new point system. Work it, so to speak.....just like everyone did by not staying weekends before.

This may be.......on average, the people who are upset are those coming up with larger point deficits every year (for me it's 30 points yearly short). The people who like the allocation, are those who have a very small deficit or no deficit at all....and of course, those that are saving points.

I am currently "working" it out. We can only vacation in Magic Season now. Have college and high school aged kids.

I know disney wants to push people into weekend stays, but this allocation will not do that for us. We will still "work" the weekday points. Because quite frankly, I refuse to accept having less days to use every year. Using weekend points puts us way over....and we never purchased DVC 9 years ago with the intent to use the weekends. I have an offsite timeshare for which we do that. So for now, while we have to stick with Magic season, we will get a little creative I guess. I'm sure one day will come when I can vacation in lower point seasons...but not for the immediate future.

So with us, our "working it" will be : instead of 5 weeknights in a two bedroom, it will now be : 2 nights in two studios, then switch over to a two bedroom for the remaining 3 nights. I still get 5 weeknights in Magic season and housekeeping, unfortunately, has to turn over more rooms. But this is what disney pretty much forced me into.

I have a choice to just stick us all in one studio the first night, then add a second studio for night #2 to save points. It's 144 vs 156 points. So we'll work it depending on whether we want to save points or borrow 6 points every year.

I do have my OKW up for sale.....but if it doesn't sell, this is our plan. So not sure what disney is really saving with us ? They are incurring extra housekeeping fees to turn over those two studios for the two nights ? Sure, we're getting two less nights in a 2 bedroom villa. In my experience, there was never a big shortage of 2 bedrooms in early to mid Aug.

So I guess I'm learning how to use the new point system to my advantage. And still not doing weekends..........


Maria

 

[dianeschlicht]

So not sure what disney is really saving with us ? They are incurring extra housekeeping fees to turn over those two studios for the two nights ?

Marie, that's not Disney's cost, that's a cost we members swallow. I'm sure there IS a financial reason for the change, I just don't quite know exactly what it is.

 

[MiaSRN62]

Oh I agree Diane. And I hate to have to cause extra housekeeping costs....but I really have no choice with the allocation. I've been put between a rock and hard place with this. I know the benefit is more people will be utilizing weekend points. Just not us. And I'm sure there will be people like us who will continue to bypass the weekends and find other ways to make their points work. I know I can't be unique in this respect. So I agree....there is a financial reason for this as far as disney is concerned. Disney wouldn't do this if there weren't a viable reason. I was just saying I don't know what it is either.


Maria

 

[Dean]

This may be.......on average, the people who are upset are those coming up with larger point deficits every year (for me it's 30 points yearly short). The people who like the allocation, are those who have a very small deficit or no deficit at all....and of course, those that are saving points.

Not completely true Maria. There are also those of us that think it's good for the system even if it does cost us more points personally, count me in that group. One of the differences is I'll learn and adapt better than most.

I know disney wants to push people into weekend stays, but this allocation will not do that for us. We will still "work" the weekday points. Because quite frankly, I refuse to accept having less days to use every year. Using weekend points puts us way over....and we never purchased DVC 9 years ago with the intent to use the weekends. I have an offsite timeshare for which we do that. So for now, while we have to stick with Magic season, we will get a little creative I guess. I'm sure one day will come when I can vacation in lower point seasons...but not for the immediate future.

It's the overall effect, not a given individual that is important. Many were staying a full week under the old system as well.

I do have my OKW up for sale.....but if it doesn't sell, this is our plan. So not sure what disney is really saving with us ? They are incurring extra housekeeping fees to turn over those two studios for the two nights ? Sure, we're getting two less nights in a 2 bedroom villa. In my experience, there was never a big shortage of 2 bedrooms in early to mid Aug.

Putting a timeshare up for sale and actively trying to sell are two different things. Just like houses, many list for sale and then see what happens. Often they are not serious about selling. It's not difficult to sell a good timeshare, you just have to price it right and below essentially everyone else with a comparable contract.

Another approach DVC could take, and they may yet independently, is to charge extra housekeeping for shorter stays. Many RCI points resorts do this now. As DVC moves more people to 7 day stays, pay as you play becomes more feasible in this area.

 

[MiaSRN62]

Dean : Not completely true Maria. There are also those of us that think it's good for the system even if it does cost us more points personally, count me in that group. One of the differences is I'll learn and adapt better than most.

I did say "on average" Dean if you check my quote......and I get what you say that there are people who thinks it's good. That's great that you'll be able to learn and adapt better than most Dean. I totally respect that you know your timeshare stuff.

And I realize I'm a grain of sand on the beach where DVC is concerned.....I realize this believe me............I was just speaking "individually" on how I personally intend to "work" the new allocation to my benefit. That's all. Diane had made the statement :

dianeschlicht: The only reason folks are so upset now is because they have to learn to use the new point system. Work it, so to speak.....just like everyone did by not staying weekends before.

and I was just responding to that specifically in terms of how my family plans to react---I know there will be all kinds of different reactions and plans to how to best make the allocation work for individuals. As a whole, how it affects DVC Members is up for observation.


Maria

 

[MiaSRN62]

Putting a timeshare up for sale and actively trying to sell are two different things. Just like houses, many list for sale and then see what happens. Often they are not serious about selling. It's not difficult to sell a good timeshare,

Fair enough Dean. I put it on the resale market. So I guess you feel I'm not actively trying to sell it ? I feel it's been assigned a fair price. I don't have a burning desire to sell it super fast. If it sits, so be it. I don't NEED the money from a sale any time soon. We are serious about selling, but not overly anxious for it to be tommorrow or anything. I have no plans to use our OKW points this year.....so we can wait. No biggie for us.


Maria

 

[Dean]

Fair enough Dean. I put it on the resale market. So I guess you feel I'm not actively trying to sell it ? I feel it's been assigned a fair price. I don't have a burning desire to sell it super fast. If it sits, so be it. I don't NEED the money from a sale any time soon. We are serious about selling, but not overly anxious for it to be tommorrow or anything. I have no plans to use our OKW points this year.....so we can wait. No biggie for us.


Maria

Maria, I don't know how aggressively you're trying to sell. I am simply pointing out if you truly want to sell you easily can and that the approach of price it like everyone else and see what happens is NOT truly trying to sell from the standpoint of someone who is unhappy and wants out of that home resort/contract. It doesn't matter to me, but if you want out, you can certainly get out. Every member has to take the changes and adapt, some more than others. In some cases that may require an add on and for some, possibly combining with an off property timeshare option.

I did say "on average" Dean if you check my quote......and I get what you say that there are people who thinks it's good. That's great that you'll be able to learn and adapt better than most Dean.

And I realize I'm a grain of sand on the beach where DVC is concerned.....I realize this believe me............I was just speaking "individually" on how I personally intend to "work" the new allocation to my benefit. That's all.

Fair enough but would you expect those that aren't affected to be esp upset. Given your line of thinking I'd think the question isn't which group those that are upset come (they should essentially all be related to a neg change) from but rather what % of those negatively affected (and I don't mean 2 or 3 points a stay) are truly upset. Not that the % should affect the decision DVC has made. This isn't about one member being insignificant but right/wrong, appropriate/inappropriate, needed/not needed, contractually allowed/not allowed, etc. My view is it's right, appropriate, needed and allowed. I'll point out there are many other ways to approach the issue for a S-F person who needs more points than before, it could be a blessing in disguise.

 

[MiaSRN62]

Maria, I don't know how aggressively you're trying to sell. I am simply pointing out if you truly want to sell you easily can and that the approach of price it like everyone else and see what happens is NOT truly trying to sell from the standpoint of someone who is unhappy and wants out of that home resort/contract. It doesn't matter to me, but if you want out, you can certainly get out. Every member has to take the changes and adapt, some more than others.

I agree Dean. We could drop our price and sell alot more quickly. Our agent suggested if we did this we would get a quicker sale. But...as I mentioned, since we have no plans to use our OKW this year (have AKV and SSR developer points to use).....we can sit on it a little longer. It's not costing us anything....we're not losing anything at this point. I appreciate your input.

Dean :Fair enough but would you expect those that aren't affected to be esp upset. Given your line of thinking I'd think the question isn't which group those that are upset come (they should essentially all be related to a neg change) from but rather what % of those negatively affected (and I don't mean 2 or 3 points a stay) are truly upset. Not that the % should affect the decision DVC has made. This isn't about one member being insignificant but right/wrong, appropriate/inappropriate, needed/not needed, contractually allowed/not allowed, etc. My view is it's right, appropriate, needed and allowed. I'll point out there are many other ways to approach the issue for a S-F person who needs more points than before, it could be a blessing in disguise.

Of course I wouldn't expect people to be upset that aren't affected ? I get this. Of course they're gonna be happy about it or at the very least, ambivalent about it. I'm just saying, it's pretty obvious to figure out why those who are upset, are. And why those who are not upset, are not. Makes total sense.

And yes, repeatedly in many of my past posts, I have acknowledged that what DVC has done is allowed. I'm not debating this at all ? I hope u didn't read this in my most recent post (response to Diane's statement). I don't see anywhere that I said it was wrong of DVC to do the allocation. I am trying to very carefully word my posts but I guess they're stilll coming off misconstrued. I don't know how else to get my thoughts across besides how I am doing it. I am not disagreeing with you or Diane on the above statements of DVC did what was allowed/right etc or how people have to learn how to work the new point system.


Maria

 

[Dean]

Of course I wouldn't expect people to be upset that aren't affected ? I get this. Of course they're gonna be happy about it or at the very least, ambivalent about it. I'm just saying, it's pretty obvious to figure out why those who are upset, are. And why those who are not upset, are not. Makes total sense.

And yes, repeatedly in many of my past posts, I have acknowledged that what DVC has done is allowed. I'm not debating this at all ? I hope u didn't read this in my most recent post (response to Diane's statement). I don't see anywhere that I said it was wrong of DVC to do the allocation. I am trying to very carefully word my posts but I guess they're stilll coming off misconstrued. I don't know how else to get my thoughts across besides how I am doing it. I am not disagreeing with you or Diane on the above statements of DVC did what was allowed/right etc or how people have to learn how to work the new point system.


Maria

It's cool, we're just batting it around and I suspect saying much the same things in a different way for most of this. However, I don't see how anyone can be upset with DVC on principle unless they feel it was wrong of them to make the change. They could certainly be upset at their bad luck, to me, that's different. As noted before, I do think BLT and other new member buyers have some reason to be upset if they fit into the window where the bought, couldn't get out and DVC changed the rules before they could even reserve.