DVC Point Charts for 2011 - Post chart release discussion begins on Pg 14

[pinnocchiosdad]

I feel sorry for new owners. You sit and look at the point charts and figure when and where you want stay. You calculate how many points suits your family, and then make your purchase. Congratulations you are now DVC members. You look foward to your summer vacations in your 2br every year. But now after your purchase, the points are reallocated and you no longer have enough points for a 2br so you downgrade to a 1br or cut a day off your trip. To me this is not getting what you paid for.

 

[Chuck S]

Yes, I know. I went through all these claculations last year with SSR. Breaking down total points per each room multipled by the number of rooms in each category. I ALWAYS came up with a discrepancy of more points in the 2010 vs 2009 use year. Member Services could never explain that to me but always said "we'll get back to you but our policy is that it can't happen".

Just because it is policy doesn't mean that policy is obeyed. Proof is in the figures which DVC never choses to actually show us. Instead they hide behind "member requests" and we change our schedules.

But did you have access to the "base year" info? If there were more weekend nights in 2010 than in 2009 that would account for a large number of points when applied to an entire resort. It is the points used within the "base year" that can not change resort wide.

This is more than policy, it falls under Florida timeshare law.

Also - If I recall correctly the original minimum buy-in (240 pts ?) for DVC (OKW) was based on the flat reallocation of points for a two-bedroom.

This was an important number because it guaranteed you enough points to at least have an opportunity to book a full week which could be used for external exchanges and in addition DVC could require a minimum 7-night stay.

When DVC later lowered the minimum buy-in, although they included warnings of limited membership and the potential for not being able to fully utilize the membership, IMHO DVC was doing those new members a great disservice.

That's a very good point. The original minimum was 230 - and you are correct, when the minimum was lowered beginning in 1993 there was a caveat about possibly not being able to take advantage of all features of the program with smaller purchases.

I agree with this, it is when they lowered the minimum number of points, and people with small contracts began the Sun to Thur stay pattern as "norm" that the demand began beig thrown out of whack. Disney could have kept the 230 point minimum, and used ROFR to pick-up any smaller add-on contracts that hit the resale market, the impact to the average owner would have been much less.

 

[Anal Annie]

We are not TOOOO affected by this years reallocation. We usually stay in studios and rarely if ever book anything with a view (ie we'd book a value or std. studio at AKV before we'd blow points on an SV studio). I see that a week at SSR in a studio in Magic season has gone down from 123 to 120. We orig. purchased our 250 pts. at SSR based on the idea that they would cover 2 weeks in a studio during Magic season at SSR. That now gives us 10 pts to spare. LOL...wheee!

We have taken several 4 night long weekend trips and in most cases we're coming out to the good on those with the lowered weekend points.

On the flip side however, we're doing our first spring break trip this March in a Std studio at Kidani for a total of 108 points for 6 nights (Fri & Sat in Magic Season and Sun-Wed in Premier). That trip in 2011 will go up by 8 pts to 116 total. We have not stayed at either BLT or BWV yet. Those are our remaining 2 resorts to try. Sadly, both of those will cost us a few more points now for what we would likely book. Studios at VGC look more reasonable so I am hopeful the new Hawaii DVC will fare OK...

I am glad now that we did not do a small add-on at AKV a couple of years ago as we would've calculated how many points we'd need to do an every other year trip in a Std studio and would've only purchased that many pts for our add-on. This way of calculating the amount of points you need is no longer a valid way to base your purchase. I think you need to figure it out that way then purchase over that amount by 15 or 20 pts for a studio stay or 20-30 pts additional for larger units. I really think that's how people need to be told now to anticipate their purchase requirements. Purchasing EXACTLY what you need no longer works. It's unreliable and DVC needs to be more up front about that with prospective members.

 

[dianeschlicht]

But don't you usually stay AKV Concierge? All of them went up -- every villa size for every season for a 7-night stay. Savanna View 1BRs went up for a 7-night stay for every season except Premier. So unless you were staying only Friday and Saturday nights, if you stay AKV Concierge it's going to cost more in 2011. Same for a stay in a Savanna View 1BR, unless you go Christmas or Easter weeks.

Yes, all of Concierge went up, but if I don't stay concierge, all my usual dates went down except for GVs. I'm thinking our concierge stays are over with. We are now down to planning 3 years worth of points per AKV trip. I find my real preference is to stay just a few days there anyway at the start of a trip.

As for the high GV and Concierge stays....I think those being high is why everything else appeared to go down. I'm wondering how anyonw could afford a holiday stay in an AKV GV! WOW! Almost 1000 points!

 

[dianeschlicht]

I agree with this, it is when they lowered the minimum number of points, and people with small contracts began the Sun to Thur stay pattern as "norm" that the demand began beig thrown out of whack. Disney could have kept the 230 point minimum, and used ROFR to pick-up any smaller add-on contracts that hit the resale market, the impact to the average owner would have been much less.

I agree that when they lowered the minimum it threw off the balance of point usage. Just look at all the Sun-Thurs rentals we see on Ebay to witness that. I think the change is going to be good in the long run. The whole reason the weekends were made higher in the first place was because when membership was small, it meant the locals or near locals could easily book up all the weekend points and leave few for those who traveled distances. That isn't so much of an issue now with members from all over and a high membership number. I cringed when I saw the point buy in being lowered to 100 points. I still think DVC may eventually make owning the even smaller contracts a problem. I can see them not allowing a total ownership of 50 points to not have 7 month booking priveledges at the non-home resorts. Just a thought of something they COULD do, but haven't yet.

I for one look at the points as a WEEK at a time. Then being able to add in another few days to complete a trip is easy. Almost all of our usual stays at OKW went down for the week with a couple of minor exceptions.

 

[PrincessV]

Also, people don't like change. Many fall into a pattern of "we always go to Disney at this particular week of this month each year" ....and when the price changes, emotions come out. Some don't have the ease of changing when they can go to "take the best deal out there".

I wonder... given that the DIS DVCrs are likely a small percentage of the DVC community, how many fall into that category? I'm betting many don't. For those who do, I totally get how frustrating this is; a couple of my good friends are in that boat. I have the luxury of living near WDW and planning my trips so as to take advantage of lower point values, regardless of when they occur, so the decrease in weekends is nice, but the changes just don't affect me much; I bought a contract I could afford and never really considered exactly what it would get me in any given year.

If true and at this point lets say it is, then possibly many have complained about the higher points for weekends. We tend to forget that we DISers are just a little fish in the huge ocean of members.

I also however think they are realigned to try and force members to change their habits of staying S-Th and try to encourage some members to stay on a Friday or Saturday, to stop the resorts from sitting empty or near empty on those days.

I actually bought a smaller contract than will cover all my annual WDW stays because weekend points were so costly; I knew going in that I'd continue to pay cash for my 2-5 weekend stays each year. BUT, I've also used the AP discount for those stays, and rarely have they been at DVC resorts, so DVC still wasn't filling rooms. I may be in the minority, but I have to wonder if that type of situation was part of the equation.

IMHO Disney does little in an effort to "improve the Member experience" and most changes seem to eventually benefit the Bank of Disney.

ITA - that goes across the board under the current regime. And filled rooms = people spending money in the parks and resorts.

 

[WendyinNC]

The thing that bothers me is I purchased a set number of points for a stay because the points charts had stayed the same for so many years. When I bought in I looked at the point charts and purchased based on a Sunday - Thursday night stay. I had enough points for a 5 night stay at BWV during Easter and enough points for a 5 night stay at HHI in the summer.

In 2009 the total points I needed for a 2BR SV at BWV during Easter and a 2BR at HHI during summer were 385 points. Now these stays cost 495 points. Additional points needed = 110 points. This is significant. It's almost a 30% increase. I have really seen the value of my points decline.

 

[photobob]

The thing that bothers me is I purchased a set number of points for a stay because the points charts had stayed the same for so many years. When I bought in I looked at the point charts and purchased based on a Sunday - Thursday night stay. I had enough points for a 5 night stay at BWV during Easter and enough points for a 5 night stay at HHI in the summer.

In 2009 the total points I needed for a 2BR SV at BWV during Easter and a 2BR at HHI during summer were 385 points. Now these stays cost 495 points. Additional points needed = 110 points. This is significant. It's almost a 30% increase. I have really seen the value of my points decline.

Totally agree. I knew that adustments could be made, but when it was presented to me by my guide it was glossed over that slight adjustments could occur. Her example was "say one particular room type goes up by one point an adjustment would be made for another to go a down a point to even out." The last two years haven't been slight adjustments, these are a complete overhaul of what they were. To be fair to my guide, I doubt in 2006 she could foresee such drastic changes since these are unprecedented.

 

[Muushka]

Our normal vacations would be 220 points a year. We now need 300.
Will I add on? He** no. Will I speak to my husband about selling them?

Did I say that out loud?

 

[dzorn]

Once again I am more upset about the late notice of the charts. I understand if they need to adjust them for empty rooms, but let us know with adequate notice.

I let my 11 month window come and go because I could not decide between a fall 2010 trip or a spring 2011. Why could I not decide is because I could not compare the point costs because the charts were not out. Since we fly I was trying to mazimize the number of days we could go. We usually go for more than a week.

If you have to change them fine but allow us to take full advantage of the 11th month booking window knowing what all our options are for that use year.

Denise in MI

 

[twinklebug]

While I agree the ("We have this handy little tool that will help you to decide how many points you'll need to buy") sales technique was bad, IMHO, bringing the weekend points into better alignment with the weekday points was a good thing. Many working folk and those with school aged children prefer to vacation using their weekends. DVCs point charts were killing us the way they were and we'd often find ourselves leaving on a Friday. With the new setup I'm more likely to stay Saturday through the following Sunday.


Edit: OK, I just did the math for Feb vacation (one of our fav times to visit and the results aren't encouraging, hehe... ugh):
Feb Vacation, AKV SV Studio:
2010 Sat - Sun 160, add on 25 fri night: 185
2011 Sat - Sun 161, add on 22 for fri night: 183

Also, our 9 night Wed through Fri Stay this year at 155 pts will be 177 next year. BUT... I'm taking the kids out of school 3 days this year so we don't hit the weekend twice. Hm. I'd better look at those summer points.

 

[BWV Dreamin]

Our normal vacations would be 220 points a year. We now need 300.
Will I add on? He** no. Will I speak to my husband about selling them?

Did I say that out loud?

Sent you a pm....

 

[BWV Dreamin]

Does anyone think that with the exhorbitant point increases for BLT and VGC that DVC could be setting the stage for a two tiered system? Bump those points up just before Aulani (Ko Olina) charts get released?

 

[tjkraz]

Does anyone think that with the exhorbitant point increases for BLT and VGC that DVC could be setting the stage for a two tiered system? Bump those points up just before Aulani (Ko Olina) charts get released?

Not sure I follow. Could you explain more?

I do think that the Aulani charts will be relatively flat with little weekday/weekend variance. Given the travel situation, I think they are going to aim for a very high percentage of week-long stays. Weekends may be moderately higher to help curb stays of 8-9 nights which include two weekends. When that happens they run a greater risk of having a villa sit empty for the following Sun-Thurs.

 

[dianeschlicht]

Does anyone think that with the exhorbitant point increases for BLT and VGC that DVC could be setting the stage for a two tiered system? Bump those points up just before Aulani (Ko Olina) charts get released?

No, I think it's just setting a higher point schedule for those places so that those of us who own too few will have to make a decision....Do we want to stay there badly enough to buy more points???? For some, obviously they will. For others...maybe not.

I was pretty sure when they announced Ko'Olina that it was going to be outside of our point realm, so it's not a big surprise for me. In my case neither VGC or BLT have enough intrigue to convince me to buy more points just to stay there. With Hawaii....maybe, but I doubt it. There are plenty of other good Hawaii trades and "deals" out there, that I'm not inclined to pay high DVC dues for my next trip there.

 

[kenny]

IMHO Disney does little in an effort to "improve the Member experience" and most changes seem to eventually benefit the Bank of Disney. Will these changes benefit some Members, sure, but I bet that based upon todays vacation patterns, it will hurt more Members than it helps.

Last year when they moved points around, they were so busy selling add-ons and re-writing contracts that were in process, that they brought in temps from other Disney units to help screen the Guides telephone calls. It worked in 2009 and it will work in 2011.

If the only goal is to even things out, why not just do it correctly one time?

Bill

I posted earlier that I did not see the upside for Disney by doing the reallocation. My thinking was unfilled rooms could go to CRO for rent and increased $$ for Disney.

Thinking about it a little more, I would love to know the amount of Villa's Disney rents on cash. I am sure it is not the full availability as the cost is so high.

By filling the rooms with DVC members, while they do not make $$ on the room, they make money in dining, merchandise, etc. That probably out weights the $$ in rentals.

While I have only been a member since early 2008, for as much as DVC says they make adjustments based on member feedback and requests, I can't think of one change that was overall "good" to members aside from free internet (II to RCI, loss of valet parking, pt reallocation, etc). While I understand that DIS'ers are only a small percentage of owners, I would like to see the #'s for requests on re-allocation of pts in 2010 and again for 2011.

While I am upset that depending on "how" I vacation my pt cost goes up, it is not tremendously. Most trips go up, but at a maximum of 6/7 pts per trip. While not a lot, it could hinder multiple trips per year as we may now fall short a few pts.

While I know I can borrow pts to make up for the shortfall, given the past 2 year pts re-allocation I would be reluctant. When we purchased we were informed that pts could change but were also told how that only happened once and that was back in mid 90's. While this was true back in 2008, it makes it very difficult to plan trips now if they are going to change pts every year.

I think it makes it more difficult to plan now. Some one who is short pts on a trip this year may wish to borrow from next year given their estimation of pts needed for next years trip. But then could find themselves short again if pts change the following year.

While I never like to borrow (it is a mental thing. I like having ALL my pts every year ), I am very reluctant now. I usually have a plan for this year and next for my pts. Right now we have a trip booked for March '10, Nov '10 and a "plan" for March '11. However my plan for both '10 trip's was based on knowing I would have enough pts for my March '11 trip. While I am still ok (barely) that may not be the case from year to year.

Not that it would ever happen but it would be nice if there was an allocation freeze. Meaning they can only re-allocate pts every X amount of years. At least this would help owners know what to expect from year to year and plan accordingly.

 

[Dumbo]

It isn't that the total on the point charts add up,

It is the total for the resort for the year.

In other words,......

But what if a resort decides to add more villas, like SSR did with the Tree House Villas. Shouldn't that affect the total number of points needed for that resort? I don't know the answer to this. I'm just asking.

 

[jodifla]

We vary our trips every year, and can work within the new point guidelines. Actually, bringing down the weekend points helps us.

I am surprised people bought in thinking it was like a regular timeshare, with this certain week always being the same amount of points.

I bought 56 points at BCV to be able to stay 4 nights in a studio, but I remember even at the time buying back in 2002 or so that the points values could change at any time.

 

[dianeschlicht]

But what if a resort decides to add more villas, like SSR did with the Tree House Villas. Shouldn't that affect the total number of points needed for that resort? I don't know the answer to this. I'm just asking.

Of course it does. THat happened at both OKW and BWV too when rooms were added after the visitor centers were closed.

 

[pinnocchiosdad]

Lets also remember that in a "traditional timeshare", you get the same unit (room) every year for the same week. It is always there for you and only annual MF will change. But DVC is a "hybrid" timeshare that allows the flexability of use. This option of flexability is what enticed many of us to buy at Disney. Now after seeing what this "flexability" can do to our memberships, perhaps it is no longer a benefit that works in our favor as owners. When you buy you should be given a point chart that stays with your points until they expire. Adjustments made by DVC can be passed along to new purchasers, and just as Disney has ROFR on resales, they can have the right to adjust point charts on resales. The opinions of owners seems split on the 2011 reallocation. Personally I do not like it. I have 3 upcomming trips. All will cost more points. I have adjusted 2 of them to include weekend stays and they still cost me more points.