Disney Vacation Club adjusts 2010 Vacation Points charts

[erionm]

It was announced near the end of January just before the 11 month window opened for reservations that could include the night of 1/1/2010.

 

[JMLBrats]

Is the 2010 points chart listed some where? Thanks! I'm too lazy to try to figure it out right now....

 

[Pirate Jack]

Is the 2010 points chart listed some where? Thanks! I'm too lazy to try to figure it out right now....

In the top right hand corner of this page directly under The Timeshare Store ad!

 

[photobob]

Maybe I have been under a rock, but I am starting to plan for summer 2010 and noticed that the points have gone up! When did that happen? I thought they were never supposed to do this?

Man that was some big rock!

 

[DisneyWalker44]

Man that was some big rock!

I suspect the majority of DVC members don't participate in on-line message boards and have no clue about the change. While it's been in the official Disney announcement, it's been buried.

While I think the reallocation is a good (and overdue) thing, Disney really dropped the ball on the communication. This is a big deal for many people. Disney needed to get members' attention and make sure they are aware of the change

 

[Laurabearz]

It was announced near the end of January just before the 11 month window opened for reservations that could include the night of 1/1/2010.

I would not say it was Announced... more like released quietly with barely a mention on the website.

I guess you should have read the literature on DVC. It states that points can be reallocated at any time. If a guide tells you something, ask to see it in writing in the DVC literature. Just like the five in a one bedroom. Our guide made sure that we knew that one bedrooms were limited to four persons 1997.

Yes yes shame on everyone who is upset they changed the points. They should have known... yeah yeah Thanks for the reminder

Maybe I have been under a rock, but I am starting to plan for summer 2010 and noticed that the points have gone up! When did that happen? I thought they were never supposed to do this?

See the above post by Deb and or Bill... Shame on you for not knowing they were going to do it.

I suspect the majority of DVC members don't participate in on-line message boards and have no clue about the change. While it's been in the official Disney announcement, it's been buried.

I totally agree with this. I think there will be thousands of members who dont find out until they call to book their reservation.

 

[Anal Annie]

I suspect the majority of DVC members don't participate in on-line message boards and have no clue about the change. While it's been in the official Disney announcement, it's been buried.

While I think the reallocation is a good (and overdue) thing, Disney really dropped the ball on the communication. This is a big deal for many people. Disney needed to get members' attention and make sure they are aware of the change

Must be why they still haven't published the new planners yet. They're afraid of the mass backlash they'll get once EVERYONE knows about it.

 

[tjkraz]

Must be why they still haven't published the new planners yet. They're afraid of the mass backlash they'll get once EVERYONE knows about it.

I dunno. I don't really envision people anxiously opening their planners and sitting down to do any sort of comparison to prior years.

It's been 3 1/2 months since the announcement. Members with registered email addresses received the website link (granted it wasn't very prominent in the email.) Others have certainly found the new charts and/or announcement on their own. Still others read the website discussion. And another large group has already booked 2010 trips over the last 15 weeks.

There will be some ebb and flow to the discussion, but we're probably past the point of any huge outcry.

 

[Muushka]

I dont think they raised the points, they just shuffled them around a little. If they raise a point in one category, they have to lower it in a different category.

I think I read that in 2010 you will find that the price of a Fri-Sat stay has decreased slightly, and the price of a weekday stay may increase slightly.

Unless they wanted to really put the screws to certain resorts at peak time periods. Like VWL, first 2 weeks of December.

If they had increased the points evenly, it would not have been as frustrating.
But they increased the Sun thru Thursday points very unfairly.

Studio went up 1 point (that is fine)
2 BR went up 4 points (not that bad)
1 BR went up 4 points

4 people can fit in a studio. 4 people can fit in a 1 BR. 8 people can fit in a 2 BR.

Can anyone explain that logic? Go ahead, tell me that it is all for the good of DVC and I should have expected it.

 

[hitthebids]

I was under the impression that DVC can reallocate the points anyway they want through out a year BUT they can not add or subtract the gross total points for a use year. In other words if a 1 bedroom villa booked 365 days took in 10,000 points when you signed up, then DVC can adjust the daily points any way they want but can never get more then 10000 points. It doesn't look like they are adhering to that with this new point distrubition.

 

[CarolMN]

Unless they wanted to really put the screws to certain resorts at peak time periods. Like VWL, first 2 weeks of December.

If they had increased the points evenly, it would not have been as frustrating.
But they increased the Sun thru Thursday points very unfairly.

Studio went up 1 point (that is fine)
2 BR went up 4 points (not that bad)
1 BR went up 4 points

4 people can fit in a studio. 4 people can fit in a 1 BR. 8 people can fit in a 2 BR.

Can anyone explain that logic? Go ahead, tell me that it is all for the good of DVC and I should have expected it.

It's not about sleeping capacity. It's about balancing the demand. Apparently, there was more demand for the one bedrooms than studios during the time you cited for your example, even though the sleeping capacity is the same.

The goal is to allocate the points such that each night / villa has the same demand. Not an easy task, I'm sure.

FWIW, I'm not crazy about the reallocation, either. But I am more than willing to accept that it was necessary.

 

[CarolMN]

I was under the impression that DVC can reallocate the points anyway they want through out a year BUT they can not add or subtract the gross total points for a use year. In other words if a 1 bedroom villa booked 365 days took in 10,000 points when you signed up, then DVC can adjust the daily points any way they want but can never get more then 10000 points. It doesn't look like they are adhering to that with this new point distrubition.

The technical reallocation language in the Position Offering Statement is that the total number of points required to reserve a unit for the entire year cannot change. (I paraphrased).

Generally, a unit for this purpose is defined as a specific group of villas and in some cases, a particular building. Not all units are the same, even within the same resort.

So you can't say that the total to reserve a 1 bedroom villa can't change. It can. Unless you know the specific makeup of all the units for a particular resort, you can't rightly say that Disney has done the reallocation incorrectly.

IMHO, the closest you can come to checking up on DVC's work is to add up all the points needed to reserve every villa in the resort . That's a total that cannot change. And to do that correctly, you'd have to know how they treated the lock off units - do they count as studios and 1 bedrooms? or as a 2 bedroom.

Some members here have attempted to do that and concluded that everything matches up very closely - if you go back and read all the earlier posts in this thread, you should come across that discussion.

 

[photobob]

I suspect the majority of DVC members don't participate in on-line message boards and have no clue about the change. While it's been in the official Disney announcement, it's been buried.

While I think the reallocation is a good (and overdue) thing, Disney really dropped the ball on the communication. This is a big deal for many people. Disney needed to get members' attention and make sure they are aware of the change

Sorry my normal sarcasm doesn't work as well in print as it does in person.
I agree there is probably a large faction that aren't aware and there is definitely been poor communication from DVC, obviously they knew there would be a huge uproar.
I'm one of those who did know reallocations could take place, I just never dreamed that would be so drastically changed. My previous stays will be about 25-30 points more. I was told that slight adjustments could be made. i don't consider that slight.

 

[ramkam]

The idea that it is all about "demand" does not make much sense in this situation. The major change was to decrease the number of points for a Friday/Saturday night stay and increase points for a weeknight stay. However, Friday/Saturday is still substantially higher. As a result there is still a disincentive to stay those nights. It does not seem like the change would result in less demand for weeknights and more demand for Friday/Saturday. In my case five weeknights at VWL now costs more points and the weekend nights are still too expensive. No effect on demand at all. The only change is that I must now spend more points for the five weekday nights.

It is more likely this change was intended to match Disney's marketing strategy in selling points for the new resorts. Disney wants those five week nights to cost more points without moving you to a weekend. This way they can market a higher initial point buy in to new members.

Demand should be irrelevant anyway. The demand is what it is for any given night. People still do not get the nights they want because the rooms are all booked. The points should be the same for all nights and you either get the reservation or you don't. It is likely the reason there are different point totals for different seasons is merely so Disney can sell more points for a given property than they could if the points were level throughout the year.

If you are a member you just have to live with the fact that Disney has a conflict of interest in this case and they will always set the point charts at levels that help the company make money.

 

[Dean]

I was under the impression that DVC can reallocate the points anyway they want through out a year BUT they can not add or subtract the gross total points for a use year. In other words if a 1 bedroom villa booked 365 days took in 10,000 points when you signed up, then DVC can adjust the daily points any way they want but can never get more then 10000 points. It doesn't look like they are adhering to that with this new point distrubition.

Adding to the above explanation, it's based on the "Base Year" which likely is 1992 and similar years and there is no requirement to be the same in any given year one happens to pick.

Unless they wanted to really put the screws to certain resorts at peak time periods. Like VWL, first 2 weeks of December.

If they had increased the points evenly, it would not have been as frustrating.
But they increased the Sun thru Thursday points very unfairly.

Studio went up 1 point (that is fine)
2 BR went up 4 points (not that bad)
1 BR went up 4 points

4 people can fit in a studio. 4 people can fit in a 1 BR. 8 people can fit in a 2 BR.

Can anyone explain that logic? Go ahead, tell me that it is all for the good of DVC and I should have expected it.

You should at least have known it could happen and IMO, it is for the good of the system and members as a whole. One thing to note is that the rules apply to the entire unit which as noted, can be a collection of rooms and except for 3 BR, I am not aware of any exceptions. When a lockoff is involved, the rules really only apply to the entire villa as I read them and not the lockoff portions. As I read the rules, they could raise all of the costs on the lockoff if they wanted with no balancing requirements. As noted, the number of people that will fit into a unit has no bearing on the situation.

The idea that it is all about "demand" does not make much sense in this situation. The major change was to decrease the number of points for a Friday/Saturday night stay and increase points for a weeknight stay. However, Friday/Saturday is still substantially higher. As a result there is still a disincentive to stay those nights. It does not seem like the change would result in less demand for weeknights and more demand for Friday/Saturday. In my case five weeknights at VWL now costs more points and the weekend nights are still too expensive. No effect on demand at all. The only change is that I must now spend more points for the five weekday nights.

I think it's unrealistic to suggest that the change will not shift demand somewhat from weekdays to weekends, the question is HOW MUCH. Unfortunately we don't have numbers from before and won't from after to evaluate both the decision and the results. IF the affect is not large enough, expect another similar change in a few years.

 

[tjkraz]

The idea that it is all about "demand" does not make much sense in this situation. The major change was to decrease the number of points for a Friday/Saturday night stay and increase points for a weeknight stay. However, Friday/Saturday is still substantially higher. As a result there is still a disincentive to stay those nights. It does not seem like the change would result in less demand for weeknights and more demand for Friday/Saturday. In my case five weeknights at VWL now costs more points and the weekend nights are still too expensive. No effect on demand at all. The only change is that I must now spend more points for the five weekday nights.

By all accounts, SOME people were already using points for weekends...just not enough to fill the resorts. If the resorts were at, say, 50% occupancy under the old/current system, the idea of the reallocation is to move them closer to 100%. I don't see how lower costs would not accomplish that goal.

Demand should be irrelevant anyway. The demand is what it is for any given night. People still do not get the nights they want because the rooms are all booked. The points should be the same for all nights and you either get the reservation or you don't. It is likely the reason there are different point totals for different seasons is merely so Disney can sell more points for a given property than they could if the points were level throughout the year.

Certain nights cost more points than others for the same reason that Disney charges more to cash customers for New Year's eve than they do for a Wednesday in September. It's all supply and demand.

Disney would have never entered the timeshare market in the first place if they were obligated to charge weekday Adventure season points for every night of the year.

 

[Chuck S]

It is more likely this change was intended to match Disney's marketing strategy in selling points for the new resorts. Disney wants those five week nights to cost more points without moving you to a weekend. This way they can market a higher initial point buy in to new members.

They don't need a re-allocation to do this. They can raise the initial buy-in requirement for new members anytime they wish. In fact, the original buy in for OKW, when studios in the lower season were 69 points for a full week, was 230 points, and the resort sold very well.

 

[Muushka]

snip....
You should at least have known it could happen and IMO, it is for the good of the system and members as a whole. One thing to note is that the rules apply to the entire unit which as noted, can be a collection of rooms and except for 3 BR, I am not aware of any exceptions. When a lockoff is involved, the rules really only apply to the entire villa as I read them and not the lockoff portions. As I read the rules, they could raise all of the costs on the lockoff if they wanted with no balancing requirements. As noted, the number of people that will fit into a unit has no bearing on the situation.

I think it's unrealistic to suggest that the change will not shift demand somewhat from weekdays to weekends, the question is HOW MUCH. Unfortunately we don't have numbers from before and won't from after to evaluate both the decision and the results. IF the affect is not large enough, expect another similar change in a few years.

Yes, I knew that the points could be reallocated at any point. I just didn't realize that they would do it in such a lousy way. We bought at VWL for just that time period, like a lot of people. It just seems lame that they decide to change the point system the way they did.

I know that we might get hit with a hurricane this year. Does that mean I should not be upset if or when it happens?

Disney has a way of shooting itself in the foot with me. We don't have enough points to continue with our current plans. Looks like selling a contract is more favorable to giving the mouse another dime.

I stayed away from this thread for a long time, I need to continue doing that.

 

[Dean]

Yes, I knew that the points could be reallocated at any point. I just didn't realize that they would do it in such a lousy way. We bought at VWL for just that time period, like a lot of people. It just seems lame that they decide to change the point system the way they did.

I know that we might get hit with a hurricane this year. Does that mean I should not be upset if or when it happens?

Disney has a way of shooting itself in the foot with me. We don't have enough points to continue with our current plans. Looks like selling a contract is more favorable to giving the mouse another dime.

I stayed away from this thread for a long time, I need to continue doing that.

You can certainly get upset about your bad luck if you want, it's just you have no appropriate reason to get upset with DVC for making the change. This is normal timeshare management, not a hurricane. A better comparison would be if you were upset at having to paint your house every few years or replace your roof at 18-20 yrs. Buying just enough points for 5 nights avoiding weekends was always a high risk venture, a calculated gamble made by many I know. I am curious. If you knew they could reallocate and knew the weekend to weekday differential, it seems you should have known the possibility they could shift the differential. We've certainly discussed that exact possibility a number of times over the years that you've been a member here.

 

[Chuck S]

Yes, I knew that the points could be reallocated at any point. I just didn't realize that they would do it in such a lousy way.

This made me chuckle.

Is there really a good way to do a full re-allocation? I mean, honestly, any re-allocation of any kind will have a negative impact on some members. There's no way to have a "no impact" re-allocation, unless they simply don't ever adjust the point charts, and I think we all know that is being unrealistic.