DVC must stop rentals.....

[Madame]

Yes…there is language that addresses that in the contract.

Yes. The biggest change is the online system and social media making rentals easier, but it also makes reservations & stalking rooms easier for members (well barring tech issues ). Everything changes so OP has to as well, or sell - the only 2 options really.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

The thing is that demand balancing is required as best they can for home resort booking and that is all.

Ever try to book AKV Value or Club at 11 months? They're failing in their bare minimum obligation, even in the home resort window.

They have no obligation to worry about what happens with trades to other places. . Matter of fact, BVTC could make point charts for non home resort owners that are different if they wanted to.

Legally, yes. In practice, no. The entire system collapses if there isn't points chart parity between the resorts.

And, as an owner, I expect them to worry about my home resort options and nothing more.

That seems like overkill. There are the extreme cases of what they MUST do and MUST NOT do, and you should never buy a product if you can't accept the worst case scenario. But that doesn't mean that your expectations shouldn't be higher than them doing the bare minimum.

 

[Sandisw]

Ever try to book AKV Value or Club at 11 months? They're failing in their bare minimum obligation, even in the home resort window.


Legally, yes. In practice, no. The entire system collapses if there isn't points chart parity between the resorts.


That seems like overkill. There are the extreme cases of what they MUST do and MUST NOT do, and you should never buy a product if you can't accept the worst case scenario. But that doesn't mean that your expectations shouldn't be higher than them doing the bare minimum.

Nothing they can do will ever make AKV CL easy or balanced. You have 5 lock off 2 bedrooms and I would say the majority of AKV owners want them..

In terms of BVTC, I agree they would not do it but the point was that it is something that could be done if they felt it was needed or wanted for trading out…people over the years have mentioned that places like SSR should not have as much buying power for trades as a place like VGF.

Again, I bought where I want to stay and want to own...trading is extra and my expectation is high that decisions made on my behalf have to to do with me as an owner of that resort, not other owners who don’t own there.

So, not overkill at all. We all know that DVC works best for those who book far in advance and at their home resort.

Now, I know I only need to be given a one month advantage over others, so if that ever happens I have to account for that But I still book all my trips 11 months in advance to ensure that I have what I want where I want.

To me, any attempt to make short term booking throughout similar to home resort booking defeats the purpose of the first come, first serve nature and would mean DVC has failed me as an owner.

The OP had rooms available for them so the system works, even 6 months out.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Nothing they can do will ever make AKV CL easy or balanced. You have 5 lock off 2 bedrooms and I would say the majority of AKV owners want them..

Every demand curve has a negative slope eventually. If Club studios need to be 80 points a night to balance demand, then Club studios need to be 80 points a night. There's no exemption that says "Disney must balance demand unless it turns out that people really really love Club level you guys, so they're allowed to throw their hands up and say 'welp what are you gonna do?'"

Similarly, Value rooms should be a single point cheaper than Standard View.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

To me, any attempt to make short term booking throughout similar to home resort booking defeats the purpose of the first come, first serve nature and would mean DVC has failed me as an owner.

I agree with this. I have zero problem with the idea that 7 month availability is worse than 11 month availability. Of course that's how it ought to be. I'm saying there are problems with particular room types that are problems in both windows, 11 and 7. They're more pronounced in the 7 month window, but that doesn't mean there's no need to correct them.

I don't like that Lake View is much easier to get than Standard View at Poly (both within and outside 7 months). I don't like that July is easier to get than October at Boardwalk (both within and outside 7 months). I don't like that 1BR is easier to get than Studios pretty much everywhere (both within and outside 7 months). Those things can all be corrected to the benefit of both owners and non-owners.

 

[Sandisw]

Every demand curve has a negative slope eventually. If Club studios need to be 80 points a night to balance demand, then Club studios need to be 80 points a night. There's no exemption that says "Disney must balance demand unless it turns out that people really really love Club level you guys, so they're allowed to throw their hands up and say 'welp what are you gonna do?'"

Similarly, Value rooms should be a single point cheaper than Standard View.

But you can’t legally do that without unbalancing the other rooms potentially. Not to mention those that believe that points can’t be shifted between units that keep them point neutral. Remember, points for sale were determined based on things like square footage which also played a role in initials totals.

It’s also not saying don’t try but the obligation is to resort owners and no one else. .

And, at what point do you have to assume balance for 5 rooms? They last to 10 months? Or 30 minutes? You are choosing the smallest category to make an example which is an exaggeration of the system.

The point is that this thread is not talking about home resort 11 month booking. It’s talking about rentals being used that hurt bookings for those who want to wait. That’s not the system..that’s an owner who simply had bad luck this time around.

There is absolutely no resort that has an 11 month booking issue for any day of the year. It may not be the rooms size or view you want, but they are there, which is what we all bought.

 

[Sandisw]

I agree with this. I have zero problem with the idea that 7 month availability is worse than 11 month availability. Of course that's how it ought to be. I'm saying there are problems with particular room types that are problems in both windows, 11 and 7. They're more pronounced in the 7 month window, but that doesn't mean there's no need to correct them.

I don't like that Lake View is much easier to get than Standard View at Poly (both within and outside 7 months). I don't like that July is easier to get than October at Boardwalk (both within and outside 7 months). I don't like that 1BR is easier to get than Studios pretty much everywhere (both within and outside 7 months). Those things can all be corrected to the benefit of both owners and non-owners.

But can they? There is no way to match peoples desire to travel exactly.

July is easier than October because of weather and holiday. You can only do so much to balance demand to the travel patterns.

We definitely disagree that non owners needto be considered at all in balancing demand. Not in my interest as an owner to do that. If all that is left for non owners at my home resort are the most expensive views and 1 bedrooms I am perfectly fine with that.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

We definitely disagree that non owners needto be considered at all in balancing demand.

I never said any such thing. I never said balance demand BECAUSE it will benefit non-owners. I'm saying balance demand because it will benefit owners, and it's just a happy side-effect that those same changes will also happen to benefit non-owners.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

But you can’t legally do that without unbalancing the other rooms potentially.

Obviously an increase in Club and Value would necessitate a decrease in Savanna and/or Standard.

Not to mention those that believe that points can’t be shifted between units that keep them point neutral.

Saratoga Standard/Preferred split disproves this theory.

And, at what point do you have to assume balance for 5 rooms? They last to 10 months? Or 30 minutes?

Balanced demand would mean each type of room is available as long as each other type of room. Studio and 2BR "sell out" at the same time. Standard and Savanna "sell out" at the same time. July and October "sell out" equally far in advance.

Obviously this will never be perfect. But currently they don't even try. Recent changes have seen already-underpriced dates get cheaper and already-overpriced dates get more expensive. This REEKS of an illegitimate attempt at increasing breakage.

The point is that this thread is not talking about home resort 11 month booking. It’s talking about rentals being used that hurt bookings for those who want to wait. That’s not the system..that’s an owner who simply had bad luck this time around.

Yes, I'm not agreeing with OP. This whole thing started with me saying "I don't think what OP is describing is a major issue, but here's something related that I think really is."

It may not be the rooms size or view you want...

That's a problem.

 

[Sandisw]

I never said any such thing. I never said balance demand BECAUSE it will benefit non-owners. I'm saying balance demand because it will benefit owners, and it's just a happy side-effect that those same changes will also happen to benefit non-owners.

And I contend that what they have been doing the past few years is doing just that….balancing for owners…

 

[Alicia22]

The only "practice" I sorta take issue with, and I'm guessing it's still not much more than a blip, is the whole idea of members, knowing they can't use their points due to travel restrictions, or scheduling, or whatever, grabbing reservations at peak times simply to maximize their profit. I don't want anyone to lose money due to circumstances beyond their control, but if you can rent out your points and break even or turn a small profit, rather than secure a prime reservation at Christmas or Easter or marathon weekend that you're never going to use, just to make more money in the process, then that's not cool. Allowed under the rules, but still not cool (kinda like buying 50 rolls of TP back in 2020, giving you a years' supply and leaving someone else stealing napkins at McDonalds).

This.

 

[Brian Noble]

Saratoga Standard/Preferred split disproves this theory.

I think it proves that DVCMC believes they can balance across Units. IANAL, but the language of the POS seems to suggest they cannot do that. I've yet to hear an explanation for this by someone who claims some expertise in interpreting contract language beyond "What are you going to do?/You can't fight city hall."

I'd definitely be interested in hearing it though, because SSR has two different instances of doing this (Treehouses/General resort and Standard/Preferred) while OKW and BWV both had similar distinctions made post-sales without changing the point values (Hospitality House/General and Boardwalk/Preferred). Is there something in SSR's POS that isn't in the previous OKW/BWV documents that allowed that? I don't know.

 

[Sandisw]

Obviously an increase in Club and Value would necessitate a decrease in Savanna and/or Standard.


Saratoga Standard/Preferred split disproves this theory.


Balanced demand would mean each type of room is available as long as each other type of room. Studio and 2BR "sell out" at the same time. Standard and Savanna "sell out" at the same time. July and October "sell out" equally far in advance.

Obviously this will never be perfect. But currently they don't even try. Recent changes have seen already-underpriced dates get cheaper and already-overpriced dates get more expensive. This REEKS of an illegitimate attempt at increasing breakage.


Yes, I'm not agreeing with OP. This whole thing started with me saying "I don't think what OP is describing is a major issue, but here's something related that I think really is."


That's a problem.

Absolutely no way in a first come, first serve system to make rooms sell out at the similar time. In terms of SSR? Some believe it should not have been allowed.

The most recent changes have definitely made a shift in the right direction…where are seeing high demand times for DVC bookings cost more points (fall) and less demand cost less points. Not sure where you have seen they lowered the high demand time periods. You always have to remember they can only shift the number of points for each use day by no more than 20% in one year. So, if December 15th is 16 points in 2022, it can only go as high as 19 in 2023.

Again, the nature of the program is that when booking at 11 months, you should have the ability to get a room at your home resort and so far, that has never failed.

 

[Sandisw]

I think it proves that DVCMC believes they can balance across Units. IANAL, but the language of the POS seems to suggest they cannot do that. I've yet to hear an explanation for this by someone who claims some expertise in interpreting contract language beyond "What are you going to do?/You can't fight city hall."

I'd definitely be interested in hearing it though, because SSR has two different instances of doing this (Treehouses/General resort and Standard/Preferred) while OKW and BWV both had similar distinctions made post-sales without changing the point values (Hospitality House/General and Boardwalk/Preferred). Is there something in SSR's POS that isn't in the previous OKW/BWV documents that allowed that? I don't know.

All I can say is that I am finding a hard time finding anything that shifting points for use has to follow the same rules as for sale. Points for sale must always match the unit but for balancing demand…it’s just not clear its not allowed. Some language says per room type…others says unit..

Vague enough in my research to make me not confident one way or the other.

 

[Brian Noble]

I wonder if the difference between SSR and OKW/BWV is just one of DVCMC's internal beliefs about what the documents have always allowed them to do. I'm trying to remember the order in which OKW added the Hospitality House category vs. the Treehouse rebalancing. If OKW happened first, then it could just be a matter of belief. But, if Treehouse happened first, it's odd that the Hospitality House change didn't also change point requirements in the way that SSR"s Preferred/Standard split did.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

I wonder if the difference between SSR and OKW/BWV is just one of DVCMC's internal beliefs about what the documents have always allowed them to do. I'm trying to remember the order in which OKW added the Hospitality House category vs. the Treehouse rebalancing. If OKW happened first, then it could just be a matter of belief. But, if Treehouse happened first, it's odd that the Hospitality House change didn't also change point requirements in the way that SSR"s Preferred/Standard split did.

Could just be that they believe they could charge a premium for HH but that it just wouldn't command much of one?

 

[Brian Noble]

Hospitality House books earlier, consistently. That suggests that the two categories are at least slightly imbalanced.

 

[_auroraborealis_]

The last part …And now I want to cancel our July trip and move to our regular December week to avoid the heat

I am just reporting FACTS.

 

[Ruttangel]

what amounts to walking across the surface of Mercury holding hands with Satan.

As an astrophysicist I can’t help but point out that Mercury can go as low as -290F at night, whereas Venus has a pretty much constant atmosphere that can melt lead.
I believe Hell freezes over at -250F so Satan would be in trouble too

 

[Jonfw2]

All time shares are inherently rigged against you. I’m in D23 and am an AP but I would never ever do DVC for this reason- it’s a time share scheme.