DVC point balancing 2022 vs 2021

[mgarbowski]

A different thought: DVCMC has demonstrated they believe the Base UY is not fixed, but it can be changed.
So why not use for every point chart the current UY as the Base Year? This way it would be ensured thatevery year the total number of points required by the charts to book the resort match exactly the number of points sold. It would require to adjust the point charts every year, but unless they want to rebalnce the seasons, I would expect just a point adjustment here and there to account for week ends.
This is the best option in the interest of the members.
Any other solution creates exess points that only advantages Disney who can poket the extra revenues from rental.

I have written to DVC asking for clarifications.

I've been following along but have not piped in until now. Having a Base Year only makes sense if the Base Year is fixed and unchangeable. It does seem to me that the only options to avoid manipulation are either:

• Use the actual year, with appropriate allowances for moving holidays, weekends, and leap years (as zavandor suggested in a slightly subsequent post), or
• Use a fixed base year, with de minimis allowances for any point total changes year to year

The entire point of having a Base Year is to select a fixed point of reference that is unaffected by annual differences caused by moving holidays, weekends, and leap years. If you can change the Base Year, then it does not have a purpose, except to obfuscate and make it harder for the membership to know if points are being manipulated, in which case they probably are.
It does seem to be this simple to me. Either (1) the claims that the Base Year can be changed are inaccurate, or (2) the system is inherently prone to corruption. Am I missing something? I think every other issue is downstream of this.

 

[zavandor]

Let me just make sure I am understanding this. For example, if March 10th is a Thursday in 2022 and a room is 43 points on that day, and in 2023 that day is a Friday, that day would now have to go to 53 as that is the cost for weekends..this is a RIV 1 bedroom.

Isn’t that more than a 20% change for that day? Or does it not have to be that micro?

I think it should work this way: the change between week days and week ends for a specific day is exempt from the 20% rule.

For example, March 3/11 is a Thursday in 2021 and is a Friday in 2022. However in both years it's in season F, so we compare weekdays in season F in 2021 to weekdays in season F in 2022. And weekends in F 2021 to weekends in F in 2022.

3/28 is a Sunday in season G in 2021 and a Monday in season F in 2022. But the change is due to the floating holiday. So we would compare a weekday during Easter week in 2021 to a weekday in Easter week in 2022 to check if the change is not higher than 20%.

Not sure what you mean by ignoring 2/29. Just want to be sure I get your thinking because it does coordinate with my questions to them about the changing of base year.

I believe the points declared for a resort are calculated for a non leap year. In leap years there is an additional day, so the total points to book the whole resort may exceed the points sold by the points needed to book 2/29.

 

[Sandisw]

I think it should work this way: the change between week days and week ends for a specific day is exempt from the 20% rule.

For example, March 3/11 is a Thursday in 2021 and is a Friday in 2022. However in both years it's in season F, so we compare weekdays in season F in 2021 to weekdays in season F in 2022. And weekends in F 2021 to weekends in F in 2022.

3/28 is a Sunday in season G in 2021 and a Monday in season F in 2022. But the change is due to the floating holiday. So we would compare a weekday during Easter week in 2021 to a weekday in Easter week in 2022 to check if the change is not higher than 20%.



I believe the points declared for a resort are calculated for a non leap year. In leap years there is an additional day, so the total points to book the whole resort may exceed the points sold by the points needed to book 2/29.

Thanks for your thoughts, Not sure how that fits with the POS, but it is an idea. The term high demand time associated with the choosing of the base year is what I am hoping to discuss in more detail.

 

[zavandor]

Thanks for your thoughts, Not sure how that fits with the POS, but it is an idea. The term high demand time associated with the choosing of the base year is what I am hoping to discuss in more detail.

DVC seems to think that is the way it works, because they have changed the BUY. Until the calculations made in this post I thought the BUY shouldn't change.

DVC thinks they can do whatever they want unless it's explicitly forbidden in the POS. I do not remember reading explicitly that the BUY shouldn't change, that's why they think it doesn't matter if they change it.

 

[Sandisw]

DVC seems to think that is the way it works, because they have changed the BUY. Until the calculations made in this post I thought the BUY shouldn't change.

DVC thinks they can do whatever they want unless it's explicitly forbidden in the POS. I do not remember reading explicitly that the BUY shouldn't change, that's why they think it doesn't matter if they change it.

I have been reading again and it says that the charts are based on a base year that includes the minimum weekend...or Friday/Saturday...during a high demand time. So, in essence, it seems to indicate it can change, which is why I want to discuss the term high demand. We know that has changed over the years with booking trends.

I know the FL statute it references discusses that one to one points sold to rooms can be based on 365 or 366 days for a leap year, Our POS states 365 so I’ll be asking about how that is dealt with as well.

 

[drusba]

A different thought: DVCMC has demonstrated they believe the Base UY is not fixed, but it can be changed.
So why not use for every point chart the current UY as the Base Year? This way it would be ensured thatevery year the total number of points required by the charts to book the resort match exactly the number of points sold. It would require to adjust the point charts every year, but unless they want to rebalnce the seasons, I would expect just a point adjustment here and there to account for week ends.
This is the best option in the interest of the members.
Any other solution creates exess points that only advantages Disney who can poket the extra revenues from rental.

I have written to DVC asking for clarifications.

One should note that "Base Year" is actually something that started with BRV when it was put on sale. The membership agreements of the earlier resorts -- OKW, VB, HHI and BWV -- did not refer to any "base" year. (A copy of 3.3 in the BWV agreement is attached along with a copy of the same section for BLT that shows the Base Year concept.) Under the applicable language of BWV the total number of points to reserve all use days in every year had to remain the same, not just the total number of points in the "base year" like that provided in BLT's membership agreement.

Moreover, the Product Understanding Checklist used in those earlier years (see my attachment to my post #35 here http://www.disboards.com/threads/po...t-tomorrow-12-16.3820482/page-2#post-62532538) made it very clear that annual point adjustments to any vacation home could be made only to address changes in seasonal demand. The checklist also provided that "except for variations which occur in the calendar year from year to year: The total number of vacation points required to use all Vacation Homes during the entire calendar year can never increase." The requirement that the total number of vacation points must never increase from year to year except for increases caused by normal calendar changes appears in the Product Understanding Checklists for all the DVC resorts. Then there is also the language in section 3.3 of the membership agreement for all resorts that requires DVCM, when it raises any points for any use day in a calendar year for any vacation home, to also decrease them in another day or days for the same amount, which is definitely a year to year requirement.

The conclusion based on all the documentary evidence is that the only changes in total points that can occur from year to year to reserve all vacation homes during all use days of the year are those due solely to normal calendar changes, e.g., since the points are based on a 365-day year, more points will obviously appear in a leap year to reserve that extra day in the year, and there can be variances from year to year such as those caused by variations in number and timing of weekend days (2022 should actually have that variance from 2021 since it has one more weekend day than 2021 -- a 365-day year year has 52 weeks plus one day and in 2022 that one extra day is a weekend day).

Thus, the way I view it, if there is a base year it is probably a set year but it really makes little difference. Based on the contractual language, there is simply no basis to the assert the 2022 total points can be more than the 2021 points, the 2019 points, or any base year points, except for that increase (or decrease) that is caused by normal calendar changes. That also rules out any basis for DVCM to just raise the studio and 1BR premiums for the year for resorts that do not have dedicated studios or 1BRs. And if DVC asserts a different position, I would like to see it provide the precise contractual terms it claims support its positions and do away with all the above-mentioned contractual provisions that say otherwise, including the one that says, like it has claimed, that total points can increase year to year without any decreases.

 

[i<3riviera]

͏

 

[zavandor]

I do understand the point that DVCM may claim they are doing this to consume surplus points; if they had said something to that effect proactively and said this is a temporary modification you will see go away in 2024, maybe we would all and accept it;

They will never say this, they might think it, but they cannot confirm they've done it on purpose. It would be a blatant violation of the Florida law. The management company cannot increase on purpose the point charts, regardless of the reason.
The excess points can be reabsorbed slowly thanks to the lockoff premium or, worst case scenario, the reservation system is a first come first serve.

 

[Sandisw]

They will never say this, they might think it, but they cannot confirm they've done it on purpose. It would be a blatant violation of the Florida law. The management company cannot increase on purpose the point charts, regardless of the reason.
The excess points can be reabsorbed slowly thanks to the lockoff premium or, worst case scenario, the reservation system is a first come first serve.

I may be the one who suggested this as a possible reason for choosing the base year that was chosen as comparison for 2022.

It was stated it kept things point neutral as required, but was the least favorable choice DVCM had as an option...unless I misunderstood that analysis.,.which is possible

It is why it got me thinking on whether a base year can change based on the specific language..or lack thereof..in the POS of the term high demand,

@drusbas newest post does give more information as to when the term came into play which has been added to my list.

I agree...that they can not just add points to absorb what was done...but if they have the right to change base year and more than one was available, did the extra points play a role in the decision to choose the base year they did?

Hope this makes sense. The more I study and read, the more I think we should just have a point chart that changes yearly, because the base year seems to be making it more confusing,

It appears everything was done legally, and that as long as it does, I am okay with it., but I also agree that it should not be complicated for owners to understand.

 

[SL6827]

DVC is becoming a "normal" timeshare unit. Sad.

 

[Blondie58]

THANK YOU!

 

[mdembko]

I had a conversation yesterday with two DVCM Members about specific questions I had for the PVB points charts. My questions/concerns were the increase in points after going from a 5 season to 7 travel period format, the Base Year Used to ensure the reallocation follows the POS, is the Base Year fixed and is it the same for all resorts and the apparent shift in points from bungalows to studios in the last 2 points charts.

They did say there is a fixed Base Year but that it changed when going to the new 7 period points chart and they differ by resort. The new Base Year for PVB was 2035 and appears to confirms i<3riviera's analysis that it contains 1Jan on a Monday and uses the 7 period chart to increase points while still complying with the POS.

They never said they could increase points at their discretion and stated that the annual points totals will go down again, (mentioned the Easter Season scenario)

As far as shifting points from bungalows to studios, they said it is within their rights to do so, (even though there are 3 completely separate unit types) but have no plans on doing so. They also acknowledged the uproar they had after attempting this in the original 2020 point charts.

I think i<3riviera's idea of suggesting a return to the 5 season charts is a good one. DVCM is supposed to make these changes to benefit all member. Basic reallocation definitely makes sense to even out availability throughout the year, but if these new charts allow for unreasonable point increases every year, it has no value to members and actually devalues the owners ability to book their vacation. Members are paying 100% (or 98%) of the Maintenance fees but not getting 100% of the benefits.

 

[New Mouse]

I had a conversation yesterday with two DVCM Members about specific questions I had for the PVB points charts. My questions/concerns were the increase in points after going from a 5 season to 7 travel period format, the Base Year Used to ensure the reallocation follows the POS, is the Base Year fixed and is it the same for all resorts and the apparent shift in points from bungalows to studios in the last 2 points charts.

They did say there is a fixed Base Year but that it changed when going to the new 7 period points chart and they differ by resort. The new Base Year for PVB was 2035 and appears to confirms i<3riviera's analysis that it contains 1Jan on a Monday and uses the 7 period chart to increase points while still complying with the POS.

They never said they could increase points at their discretion and stated that the annual points totals will go down again, (mentioned the Easter Season scenario)

As far as shifting points from bungalows to studios, they said it is within their rights to do so, (even though there are 3 completely separate unit types) but have no plans on doing so. They also acknowledged the uproar they had after attempting this in the original 2020 point charts.

I think i<3riviera's idea of suggesting a return to the 5 season charts is a good one. DVCM is supposed to make these changes to benefit all member. Basic reallocation definitely makes sense to even out availability throughout the year, but if these new charts allow for unreasonable point increases every year, it has no value to members and actually devalues the owners ability to book their vacation. Members are paying 100% (or 98%) of the Maintenance fees but not getting 100% of the benefits.

People would be mad about Poly Bungalows vs. Studios simply because the concept of the Bungalows was a disaster and they were 0 benefit to.the general membership. The only way for DVC to fix that would entail raising studios. Because the sales team was not up front about the realities of what could occur, plenty of people were suckered into Poly.

 

[DL1WDW2]

If you are a member please contact your guide for any & every concern because that is our only outlet. A friendly chat with the castmember standing in the booths is a waste of time. But an overflowing email query for guides will make them address concerns in their meetings! They need to sell, not waste time with those that have already purchased and they know we are good prospects normally for buying more!!!

 

[i<3riviera]

͏

 

[Lumpy1106]

Full disclosure; points for my typical stay went down a little bit, second year in a row.
I'm just going to add one thought; I know it is upsetting when the points for your typical vacation go up, but the easy thing for Disney to do is to leave it alone. They tinker with the points to try and encourage people to stay in the less in-demand rooms and/or at the less in-demand times. That's an ATTEMPT to quell the complaints about how the more in-demand rooms at the most in-demand times are never available. Devil you know, devil you don't. You can't please everyone NMW.

 

[Sandisw]

I had a conversation yesterday with two DVCM Members about specific questions I had for the PVB points charts. My questions/concerns were the increase in points after going from a 5 season to 7 travel period format, the Base Year Used to ensure the reallocation follows the POS, is the Base Year fixed and is it the same for all resorts and the apparent shift in points from bungalows to studios in the last 2 points charts.

They did say there is a fixed Base Year but that it changed when going to the new 7 period points chart and they differ by resort. The new Base Year for PVB was 2035 and appears to confirms i<3riviera's analysis that it contains 1Jan on a Monday and uses the 7 period chart to increase points while still complying with the POS.

They never said they could increase points at their discretion and stated that the annual points totals will go down again, (mentioned the Easter Season scenario)

As far as shifting points from bungalows to studios, they said it is within their rights to do so, (even though there are 3 completely separate unit types) but have no plans on doing so. They also acknowledged the uproar they had after attempting this in the original 2020 point charts.

I think i<3riviera's idea of suggesting a return to the 5 season charts is a good one. DVCM is supposed to make these changes to benefit all member. Basic reallocation definitely makes sense to even out availability throughout the year, but if these new charts allow for unreasonable point increases every year, it has no value to members and actually devalues the owners ability to book their vacation. Members are paying 100% (or 98%) of the Maintenance fees but not getting 100% of the benefits.

Thanks for sharing. The answers you got definitely cleared up some of my questions in terms of how things were done.

Different owners can agree or disagree on the way and reasons DVCM took the actions that they did,...best choice, number of seasons, etc... but ultimately, they decided that the chart that was created was the one that should be created and so far, nothing suggests it is in violation of our POS in doing so.

We will see if and when I get my response and call if the info makes as much sense as this does but honestly, the answers you got are reassuring for me as an owner that things seem to be being done appropriately.

The fact that we have had large periods of time in DVC history that had charts that remained the same, I am willing to trust this decision was made for specific reasons with owners in mind....for now.

 

[Minniemoo15]

Full disclosure; points for my typical stay went down a little bit, second year in a row.
I'm just going to add one thought; I know it is upsetting when the points for your typical vacation go up, but the easy thing for Disney to do is to leave it alone. They tinker with the points to try and encourage people to stay in the less in-demand rooms and/or at the less in-demand times. That's an ATTEMPT to quell the complaints about how the more in-demand rooms at the most in-demand times are never available. Devil you know, devil you don't. You can't please everyone NMW.

If it was as simple as my week went up because someone else's week went down - I would be 100% fine with this as this is how I understood the redistribution of demand to work. My issue is that the PVB 2022 point chart has 20,000+ MORE total points than previous years - so my week going up did not result in an equal decrease elsewhere in the point chart. I feel this is against what I was told when we bought into DVC.

 

[drusba]

Anyone who will be having a conversation with DVC about the point charts should avoid conceding that the base year can be changed at all from the one chosen when the resort first went on sale. Moreover, owners of OKW and BWV should not concede that the concept or choice of a "base year" even applies to those resorts. (VB and HHI also have no mention of a base year in their POS's but neither of those are involved in the 7-season point chart issue which relates only to the WDW resorts.)

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

Full disclosure; points for my typical stay went down a little bit, second year in a row.
I'm just going to add one thought; I know it is upsetting when the points for your typical vacation go up, but the easy thing for Disney to do is to leave it alone. They tinker with the points to try and encourage people to stay in the less in-demand rooms and/or at the less in-demand times. That's an ATTEMPT to quell the complaints about how the more in-demand rooms at the most in-demand times are never available. Devil you know, devil you don't. You can't please everyone NMW.

I agree that's a non-issue however it isn't actually the concern.