Except that the first hand explanation is often inaccurate, in direct conflict with language in the POS, or just a fundamentally skewed narrative that serves only to further Disney’s efforts to undermine ownership.
In 2019 my extensive conversations with Disney yielded, among other things, the following three points:
- 1 Bedrooms are much higher in demand than 2 bedrooms and justifies a point increase
- By increasing lockoff premiums, members benefit first because more rooms become available as people will be able to book fewer days
- Disney had done nothing wrong legally and was acting in the best interest of owners, reversing course only to better “communicate” and avoid further “confusion” around the increase should they eventually do it again
The first point contradicts every observable reality that any Disney timeshare owner who has tried to book a resort with a lockoff has experienced (read: only blue and white card owners). Outside of creative metrics measuring “availability” as something beyond what an owner can book, this is just patently untrue.
The second point, while factually true, is a grotesque interpretation of what happens when ownership interest is diluted/reduced wholesale across the entire membership. By that logic, increasing, unchecked, the lockoff premium to the point where studios cost as much as 2BRs would best serve the membership because everybody would book 2BRs first, 1BRs second, and there would be a sea of studio availability suddenly available. Winner: us!
And the third point I don’t buy for a second. There was no “communication” issue or “confusion” on the part of the membership. They were caught in a lie about point one. Disney didn’t expect there to be as much diving into the POS or revisiting the legality of the Treehouses or Boardwalk view changes, so they backpedaled to get their ducks in order. And the new and improved, markedly more obfuscated, approach is what we see today.
I envy your faith in Disney. I really do. I imagine my ownership enjoyment would increase exponentially if I stopped looking so carefully at
point charts, or caring about the larger implications to the entire ownership when Disney makes anti-owner policy choices around their product offerings. But unfortunately, I’m unable to unsee what Disney keeps trying to do.
In the last round, we were labeled as a vocal minority of whiners and complainers. Now you repeatedly suggest that the reduction of ownership value by the party in this relationship who holds all the power, is a matter of “opinion”.
If ownership has taught me anything, it’s that my interests are much more aligned with the vocal minority of “whiners” on these boards than they are with Disney.
