DVC point balancing 2022 vs 2021

[Sandisw]

Seeing that Disney is allowed to take ROFR contracts and sell them as new, would this also provide cover if they wanted to sell new contracts with the created points? I dont know that without a true audit and a deep one that you would ever be able to prove 1 to 1 correlation with that.

Points taken back via ROFR always count as sold points. They are attached to a unit and can not be changed.

One theory I have seen as to why sometimes a contract is taken that makes no sense is because of its deeded interest in a particular unit.

 

[New Mouse]

Points taken back via ROFR always count as sold points. They are attached to a unit and can not be changed.

Correct but is anything stopping them from selling these newly created points whether it be one time use or as a contract?

While DVC in its infancy was likely fairly innocent, the executive and managent choices over the years have proven to be a little less kosher as the years go by.

 

[Sandisw]

Correct but is anything stopping them from selling these newly created points whether it be one time use or as a contract?

While DVC in its infancy was likely fairly innocent, the executive and managent choices over the years have proven to be a little less kosher as the years go by.

They are not newly created. They simply change ownership. They would be counted in the declared points that were originally sold to someone.

Once DVD owns the points again, they can do whatever they want with them. They can resell, use to book rooms and indeed, sell as OTU points.

I will add that I am waiting on a return call to get a point clarified regarding declared points vs the ones never sold that DVD always keeps from the start. . The notes I took during the last call aren’t clear..which for me is not surprising!!! Lol

 

[zavandor]

Correct but is anything stopping them from selling these newly created points whether it be one time use or as a contract?

100% sure they cannot sell more points.
They can only sell the points they've declared for the resort (minus the 2% they have to keep), any attempt to sell more would be a clear violation of the law.
They are not creating points to sell, they're causing a little bit of point inflation that, once rented, can generate an extra revenue.

 

[zavandor]

I have been called back after my email, but it was a frontline CM. She tried to explain basic priciples like reallocation for demand and how points used by members for exchanges are rented out. She promised to check if it's possible for me to speak someone higher up.

 

[JOLT]

I just sent my email. asking why 2035 was used as a base year and how it was in the members best interest. I would be 100% okay if dvc used one of the years that fell on the average bar where some years would cost more and other years would cost less.

 

[i<3riviera]

͏

 

[JOLT]

i<3riviera does it seem that DVC does not like to run in the negative % for total points in the past? I think I saw 1 year go negative in 1 of your charts.

that could be a reason why they picked that base year.

 

[i<3riviera]

͏

 

[Tiggerette]

I have been called back after my email, but it was a frontline CM. She tried to explain basic priciples like reallocation for demand and how points used by members for exchanges are rented out. She promised to check if it's possible for me to speak someone higher up.

Love your signature line, btw.

I noticed a very interesting article in the most recent Disney Files magazine (published by DVC)*. There was a full page devoted to DVC resort inventory, breakage and exchanges, all under the explanation why it's easier to find availability for cash paying guests. It's worth reading, and noting what positions are defended by DVC, as well as omitted details. Considering our animated discussion so far, it makes me wonder what has been occurring to warrant this very public, assertive response.

*citation: Sakaske, Nieman and Miller, "Listening Post." Disney Files Magazine (Disney Vacation Club). Winter 2020 Vol 29 No. 4, page 12.

 

[Eldon32]

I sent an email a few days ago with many targeted questions based on the analysis done here: https://www.disboards.com/threads/dvc-point-balancing-2022-vs-2021.3820183/page-8#post-62575558

This is the <sarcasm> highly detailed </sarcasm> response I received:

-------
We appreciate your interest in your Membership and taking the time to reach out to us. The feedback we receive from our Members is very important.

Each year the Disney Vacation Club Management LLC reviews nightly demand for villas at our resorts and looks for opportunities to adjust the Vacation Points Charts in order to encourage travel at all time of the year, with the goal of improving Member availability. With 7 seasons to choose from, the 2022 reallocation strategy builds upon the 2021 model to balance demand in seasons, including point increases to the Fall season and point decreases in the Summer season.

Please note these changes only affect Disney Vacation Club Resorts located at the Walt Disney World Resort.

Thank you for providing this feedback.
-------

I would be surprised if the membership ever gets an answer without the question coming from the state.

 

[JOLT]

I was not prepared for a call from Yvonne. I was told the base year didnt change? I wad also told the base year has to be a year that the sum would never be below total purchase points.

I'm ok with them never allowed to go below total points. They couldn't give a good reason for splitting up easter which causes total points to not be as close to purchase total as possible.

I asked them to do what I<3riviera did and build out a graph to see what future years look like and how there are only 2 years that are 0% and the rest are all above.

I told them they should ask the members if they would like this rebalance if that means many years they are adding 200k+ points into the chart.

I do think dvc did this on purpose but they just didn't look at the bigger picture.

 

[Minniemoo15]

I was not prepared for a call from Yvonne. I was told the base year didnt change? I wad also told the base year has to be a year that the sum would never be below total purchase points.

I'm ok with them never allowed to go below total points. They couldn't give a good reason for splitting up easter which causes total points to not be as close to purchase total as possible.

I asked them to do what I<3riviera did and build out a graph to see what future years look like and how there are only 2 years that are 0% and the rest are all above.

I told them they should ask the members if they would like this rebalance if that means many years they are adding 200k+ points into the chart.

I do think dvc did this on purpose but they just didn't look at the bigger picture.

That’s interesting. They told me (not Yvonne but two other managers) that they had mapped out the point charts for all of the years remaining at PVB and that 2023 would go back down again. They stressed this (keeping everything the same) was a big IF due to covid and demand. I see now from @i<3riviera’s analysis that they are correct - 2023 points will be lower. But they failed to mention that even the low years such as 2023 are still above total points declared - which was my main issue. Or that points will continue to go back up to the 2022 level every couple of years. In that sense, 2022 isn’t simply an “outlier” year like they led to me to believe.

I am glad to hear they contacted you ..that shows they are aware of the feedback they have been getting.

 

[Lorana]

A point to note in questions to DVC is that none of us actually bought *points* when we signed a DVC contract. We bought a % ownership of a unit, and that % ownership is represented by points. It is stated as such right in the legal contract.

So what I’d like to understand is that if they are increasing the total number of points needed to book a resort that is more than the total sold points, doesn’t that decrease my % ownership? That is the reason why in order to increase one unit in a time period you need to decrease it in another unit. The points need to balance, and looking at these charts, that’s not the case.

 

[drusba]

A point to note in questions to DVC is that none of us actually bought *points* when we signed a DVC contract. We bought a % ownership of a unit, and that % ownership is represented by points. It is stated as such right in the legal contract.

So what I’d like to understand is that if they are increasing the total number of points needed to book a resort that is more than the total sold points, doesn’t that decrease my % ownership? That is the reason why in order to increase one unit in a time period you need to decrease it in another unit. The points need to balance, and looking at these charts, that’s not the case.

The issue is annual changes in total points that result from usual calendar changes.

The total points applicable to a 365-day year need to equal the total points applicable to the total ownership interests of the resort in the "base year," under the terms of the Membership Agreements for all resorts since BRV was created in 2,000. In other words when a resort first went on sale, DVC was supposed to choose a base year in which the total points for the year to reserve all rooms equaled the total points created by all the ownership interests.

Under the Membership Agreements and Product Understanding Checklists, outside of the base year, total annual points can actually increase for any calendar year but only for increases caused by normal calendar changes. When we had the 5-season charts, Easter and Thanksgiving would change dates annually but that had no real impact on total points to reserve all rooms for any year because it did not change total number of days in any particular season. Instead total points could increase as a result of other normal calendar changes, e.g., leap year adds an extra day to the year and thus points are added for that day in leap year; also some years have more weekend days than others or more weekend days in a high season which could increase points for the year above those in the base year.

Thus, those normal calendar changes allowed some increases in total points needed to reserve all rooms for some years above those in the base year, with the highest increases usually occurring in leap year.

What is happening with the new 7-season charts is that you can now have huge annual point changes other than those that occurred with the 5-season charts, and DVC can blame it mainly on a "normal" calendar change -- the annual change in the date for Easter.

The earliest possible date for Easter is March 22 and the latest possible date is April 25. Under the 7-season charts, the Sunday before Easter through Easter is in the highest season. The days in March (and April) before Palm Sunday and the Monday through Fri after Easter is in season 6 just below that highest season. Then all days in April thereafter are in the lower fifth season. Thus, when Easter is mid-March, you have a lot more days added to season 5 coming out of season 6, while when it is later in April you have more days added to season six that come out of season 5, e.g., when Easter is April 25, its latest possible date (which will occur in 2038), season 5 will actually disappear entirely, and all of March and April will be in season 6 or 7. In other words, annually, due to the annual Easter "normal calendar" change, you can have major changes in total points applicable to reserving all rooms for the year.

Added to the floating Easter issue created by the 7-season charts is that DVC seems to have purposefully chosen 2035 as the base year when Easter will be March 25. It could not reasonably have chosen a year when it could be earlier, e.g., the last time it was March 22 was 1818 and the next time will be 2285 more than 200 years after the current expiration date of all current DVC resorts.

The earlier Easter is in the base year, the greater the varying increases in total points can be from year to year. In other words, if DVC had chosen a base year with, for example, Easter on April 9, the annual possible increases caused by the annual Easter date “calendar” change would be significantly less than having the March 25 base year, and, in fact, there would likely be some years that total points are somewhat under the total ownership level of points. And maximizing the ranges of total points for the future calendar years maximizes DVC’s ability to gain more profit from the rental of rooms due to breakage.

In conversations with DVC that have been reported in this thread, it appears that DVC has claimed, inconsistently, that the base years for the resorts cannot change, that resorts have different base years, and that the base year for all resorts is 2035 and was changed when the new charts were created. It is the last of those I actually believe likely occurred, and, if so, one can seriously question whether DVC has acted properly in the best interests of the members by creating point charts that rely so heavily for total annual points on the change in Easter's date, and whether it even has the right to change base years once they are chosen for a resort when it first goes on sale. Moreover, there is also the issue whether the base year concept can even be legally applied to OKW and BWV because the first appearance of the use of a base year occurred in the POS for BRV in 2,000.

 

[zavandor]

Interest for this topic seems to be fading?
Anyway, I have a call scheduled for next week. I'll let you know how it goes.

 

[Minniemoo15]

Interest for this topic seems to be fading?
Anyway, I have a call scheduled for next week. I'll let you know how it goes.

I’m glad they are still scheduling calls. Please do keep us posted !

 

[New Mouse]

Interest for this topic seems to be fading?
Anyway, I have a call scheduled for next week. I'll let you know how it goes.

I think interest is there, but from an informational perspective theres really not much more than can be resolved without a lawyer. DVC has been either negligent or complicit in their actions in a way that really has no benefit to members other than eating the excess points that exist because of other decisions they made last year.

 

[mdembko]

Interest for this topic seems to be fading?
Anyway, I have a call scheduled for next week. I'll let you know how it goes.

I don't think interest is fading, there are others like you who may be waiting for a response or scheduled call. I sent a follow up letter after my initial call, and more specific information from i<3riviera. Although the reallocation that DVCM has made may be within the terms of the agreement, it does not fully meet III.3.a(1) of the Multi Site POS that states the reallocations are made to further the best interest of the Club Members...... I think i<3riviera has shown that there may have been a more equitable way to do this with much less annual points added. For PVB, the latest point charts appear to add over 500,000 additional points throughout the Contract than if they stayed with the 5 season charts.

Good luck with your call next week.

 

[EM Lawrence]

I’m still interested! I just don’t have anything to add!