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

[Dean]

Don't the total number of points have to stay the same? That's what the guides tell everyone, isn't it?

That rule would only apply to declared sections, they could theoretically increase or decrease the total points in certain circumstances as it applies to not yet declared units.

 

[DebbieB]

Also there have been occasions in the past where resorts were expanded so it increased the total points. Examples - 3 new buildings at OKW, additional rooms at BWV when most of the sales center closed.

 

[wdrl]

Can someone, please, cite specific examples of specific BWV units in which the allotted points are different for comparably sized Units?

I was referring to the original sales situation where they originally released on points table for the entire resort then quickly after it opened, they revised it so that about 20% of the resort was standard view (cheaper points) and left the rest the same. They then sold less points than they had originally intended to compensate. That's what should happen at AKV if they reclassify some units rather than raising the rest to compensate. The problem is they can't once they get the resort all declared but they can use the unsold points to compensate somewhat.

Assumption: To sell less points at a resort than it originally intended, DVD would have to allot fewer points to Units that are declared in the future.

I can't imagine any other way that DVD could reduce the total number of points allotted to a resort.

To date, DVD has consistently allotted 16,290 points to a two-bedroom accommodation at AKV, 36,130 points to a Grand Villa accommodation, and approximately 5,483 points for a dedicated studio accommodation (see http://www.disboards.com/showpost.php?p=35129542&postcount=123). When a Unit contains multiple accommodations, the Unit's total points still reflect this basic formula. That is why AKV Unit 17, which contains 6 studio accommodations, has (5,483 * 6) 32,900 points, while AKV Unit 113A, which has 2 two-bedroom accommodations has (16,290 * 2) 32,580 points. This allocation formula is the same for both Jambo Units and Kidani Units.

If DVD lowers AKV's total points, then it would have to reduce these basic allocations, such as lowering a two-bedroom allocation by 10% from 16,290 to 14,660 points. To date, I have not seen any such reduction.

If BWV had a reduction in the points allotted to it, we should see some of the Units that were declared early in it construction containing a different allocation formula than Units that were declared late. So I return to my original question: Can anyone cite examples of comparably sized BWV Units that have different point allocations?

 

[Dean]

Assumption: To sell less points at a resort than it originally intended, DVD would have to allot fewer points to Units that are declared in the future.

I can't imagine any other way that DVD could reduce the total number of points allotted to a resort.

To date, DVD has consistently allotted 16,290 points to a two-bedroom accommodation at AKV, 36,130 points to a Grand Villa accommodation, and approximately 5,483 points for a dedicated studio accommodation (see http://www.disboards.com/showpost.php?p=35129542&postcount=123). When a Unit contains multiple accommodations, the Unit's total points still reflect this basic formula. That is why AKV Unit 17, which contains 6 studio accommodations, has (5,483 * 6) 32,900 points, while AKV Unit 113A, which has 2 two-bedroom accommodations has (16,290 * 2) 32,580 points. This allocation formula is the same for both Jambo Units and Kidani Units.

If DVD lowers AKV's total points, then it would have to reduce these basic allocations, such as lowering a two-bedroom allocation by 10% from 16,290 to 14,660 points. To date, I have not seen any such reduction.

If BWV had a reduction in the points allotted to it, we should see some of the Units that were declared early in it construction containing a different allocation formula than Units that were declared late. So I return to my original question: Can anyone cite examples of comparably sized BWV Units that have different point allocations?

I hadn't notice that the filings with Orange County had points represented for each unit, at least for BWV or OKW, the ones I've looked at. Have you seen differently?

 

[Muushka]

I cannot convey how frustrated I am at the amount the points were changed in certain categories. The adventure season 1 bedrooms are really jumping. If this goes up again, I will now longer be able to "afford" my annual trip and and I will be damned if I am going to buy more points for the vacation I was supposedly paying for in advance. I know, I know...they can do this and it says so. DVC, by changing this, has almost made my affordable vacation, unaffordable. I expect that this category will go up again and I am really tweeked.

I feel your pain, believe me.

 

[wdrl]

I hadn't notice that the filings with Orange County had points represented for each unit, at least for BWV or OKW, the ones I've looked at. Have you seen differently?

All DVC deeds show enough information to determine the point allocation for a specific Unit. If you look at a deed for any DVC resort, the third paragraph (or thereabouts) reads "An undivided PCT interest in Unit XX of RESORT." Then, several paragraphs below, is another paragraph that reads "Purchaser's ownership interest shall be symbolized as ### Home Resort Vacation Points."

By dividing the ### of points by the PCT, you can determine the number of total points for that Unit.

A deed recorded today at OCC shows that the purchaser is getting a 1.1203% undivided interest in Unit 48B at Bay Lake Tower. The deed also shows that the purchaser is receiving 220 points. By dividing 220 by 0.011203, you get 19,637.597. For tracking purposes, I round that number to 19,640. This represents the number of points allotted to Unit 48B at BLT.

I combine the information about a Unit's point allocation with condo recordings also on file at OCC. Unit 48B was part of the 11th Amendment of the Declaration of Condominium for BLT made on November 10, 2009. On page 7 of this declaration is a floor plan showing Unit 48B is composed of a single two-bedroom accommodation. On that same page is the floor plan for Unit 48A, which is composed of 2 two-bedroom accommodations. If you located a deed for Unit 48A, the above calculation will show it has 39,280 points allotted to it.

My research shows this process of determining Unit points holds true for all AKV, BLT, VWL, and SSR-THV Units. If you know either the points allotted to a Resort's Unit OR the Unit's accommodation composition, you can predict the other.

The problem I have with BWV is that I don't know its' allocation formula. To test whether it changed after the introduction of the Standard View category, I would like to know the Units declared B.S. (before Standard) and A.S. (after Standard). I can try to track down deeds for these Units on OCC and I can try to check the floor plans on the BWV Declarations to compare Unit composition. There have been 27 BWV declarations, I think, so its rather cumbersome to match everything. But, it can be done.

 

[Dean]

All DVC deeds show enough information to determine the point allocation for a specific Unit. If you look at a deed for any DVC resort, the third paragraph (or thereabouts) reads "An undivided PCT interest in Unit XX of RESORT." Then, several paragraphs below, is another paragraph that reads "Purchaser's ownership interest shall be symbolized as ### Home Resort Vacation Points."

By dividing the ### of points by the PCT, you can determine the number of total points for that Unit.

A deed recorded today at OCC shows that the purchaser is getting a 1.1203% undivided interest in Unit 48B at Bay Lake Tower. The deed also shows that the purchaser is receiving 220 points. By dividing 220 by 0.011203, you get 19,637.597. For tracking purposes, I round that number to 19,640. This represents the number of points allotted to Unit 48B at BLT.

I combine the information about a Unit's point allocation with condo recordings also on file at OCC. Unit 48B was part of the 11th Amendment of the Declaration of Condominium for BLT made on November 10, 2009. On page 7 of this declaration is a floor plan showing Unit 48B is composed of a single two-bedroom accommodation. On that same page is the floor plan for Unit 48A, which is composed of 2 two-bedroom accommodations. If you located a deed for Unit 48A, the above calculation will show it has 39,280 points allotted to it.

My research shows this process of determining Unit points holds true for all AKV, BLT, VWL, and SSR-THV Units. If you know either the points allotted to a Resort's Unit OR the Unit's accommodation composition, you can predict the other.

The problem I have with BWV is that I don't know its' allocation formula. To test whether it changed after the introduction of the Standard View category, I would like to know the Units declared B.S. (before Standard) and A.S. (after Standard). I can try to track down deeds for these Units on OCC and I can try to check the floor plans on the BWV Declarations to compare Unit composition. There have been 27 BWV declarations, I think, so its rather cumbersome to match everything. But, it can be done.

I know that info is on the deed but I don't know that it's binding from a points standpoint. The points are only representative of the ownership, not the ownership itself. You'd have to go through the BWV deeds to figure out the formulas and you'd have to hope enough were sold and recorded to give you the information. Given the change happened very quickly with the resort opening, I'm not sure there'd be enough info to documented in this way. Still we know that there are less points than initially planned assuming the resort was not oversold.

 

[wdrl]

I know that info is on the deed but I don't know that it's binding from a points standpoint. The points are only representative of the ownership, not the ownership itself. You'd have to go through the BWV deeds to figure out the formulas and you'd have to hope enough were sold and recorded to give you the information. Given the change happened very quickly with the resort opening, I'm not sure there'd be enough info to documented in this way. Still we know that there are less points than initially planned assuming the resort was not oversold.

I'm not following you, Dean.

Are you saying that DVD announced BWV was to be a certain point size, but then, before sales commenced, it downsized the total number of points at BWV?

Or are you saying that DVD sold deeds for BWV, then decided BWV should have fewer points and that all subsequently declared Units were "downsized" to reflect BWV's smaller point size.

If its the former, then there would not be any difference in the point-to-accoommodation ratio for any of BWV's Units.

But if it is the latter, then we would be able to measure the difference in the point-to-accommodation ratio. Ideally, you'd want several Units to compare to confirm your findings. But even having no more than a single Unit that was declared before BWV was "downsized" will confirm or reject the hypothesis that DVD reduced BWV's total points. And, as you know, once a single deed is sold for a Unit, the total points in that Unit cannot be changed. Thus, even if only one deed was identified that was "Before Standard", we could test the hypothesis.

 

[Dean]

I'm not following you, Dean.

Are you saying that DVD announced BWV was to be a certain point size, but then, before sales commenced, it downsized the total number of points at BWV?

Or are you saying that DVD sold deeds for BWV, then decided BWV should have fewer points and that all subsequently declared Units were "downsized" to reflect BWV's smaller point size.

If its the former, then there would not be any difference in the point-to-accoommodation ratio for any of BWV's Units.

But if it is the latter, then we would be able to measure the difference in the point-to-accommodation ratio. Ideally, you'd want several Units to compare to confirm your findings. But even having no more than a single Unit that was declared before BWV was "downsized" will confirm or reject the hypothesis that DVD reduced BWV's total points. And, as you know, once a single deed is sold for a Unit, the total points in that Unit cannot be changed. Thus, even if only one deed was identified that was "Before Standard", we could test the hypothesis.

I don't know how they did the deeds in these terms. They announed the resort as all one points table then they began sales and opened the resort with that points table. After the resort opened, members complained and they introduced the standard view points effectively lowering the total for the resort. I don't know, but you could look if you wanted, if they were far enough into sales and recordings prior to the change to be able to tell with the method you describe. I don't recall anyone posting that they had to change the deed though. Given my current limitations and being away, I wouldn't be in a position to look for the info at this time. I'd presume they either changed the subsequent deeds to reflect the needed changes but whether they averaged it over the entire resort or only altered those needed, I don't know. I suppose they could simply have sold less points allowing the buffer to cover the lower points.

 

[dismedvc]

They announed the resort as all one points table then they began sales and opened the resort with that points table. After the resort opened, members complained and they introduced the standard view points effectively lowering the total for the resort.

If the above is true, it seems all you would need is the B.S. and A.S. point tables from 1996. If the points for the original category (when there was only one category) did not go up when the lower standard view category was added, then it seems like the total points would have had to have been reduced.

 

[wdrl]

If the above is true, it seems all you would need is the B.S. and A.S. point tables from 1996. If the points for the original category (when there was only one category) did not go up when the lower standard view category was added, then it seems like the total points would have had to have been reduced.

I wouldn't say that having the B.S. and A.S. point charts is "all" that you need to determine if and when BWV had a change in its total points. The point charts would confirm whether accommodation costs had changed, but you still need to ascertain whether the BWV Units had a change in their point-to-accommodation ratio.

Absent evidence to the contrary, I still hold to the assumption that DVD does not/cannot allot different point values to comparably sized Units within a Home Resort.

 

[photobob]

I have been rather vocal about the negative effects of raising weekday points since I am a Sun-Thurs guy. I guess all I had really only looked at the difference in those points, since those are the days I stay. Today I looked more closely at the charts and I am truly shocked at how far they have dropped the weekend points, shocked! For example from my home resort SSR a weekend night that was once 54 points is now 38.

While I am still not pleased that my vacation cost me more points and will likely make me stay in a smaller room, I must say that staying a Friday or Saturday night is no longer out of the question. I know that is the goal of the reallocation. It is much more likely for us weekday warriors to stay into the weekend when there isn't such a dramatic difference in points. Heck there is only a two point difference is some studios between weekday and weekend. I'm not doing an about-face but I have taken a look at the bigger picture and it does make much more sense.

 

[disneynutz]

I have been rather vocal about the negative effects of raising weekday points since I am a Sun-Thurs guy. I guess all I had really only looked at the difference in those points, since those are the days I stay. Today I had looked more closely at the charts and I am truly shocked at how far they have dropped the weekend points, shocked! For example from my home resort SSR a weekend night that was once 54 points is now 38.

While I am still not pleased that my vacation cost me more points and will likely make me stay in a smaller room, I must say that staying a Friday or Saturday night is no longer out of the question. I know that is the goal of the reallocation. It is much more likely for us weekday warriors to stay into the weekend when there isn't such a dramatic difference in points. Heck there is only a two point difference is some studios between weekday and weekend. I'm not doing an about-face but I have taken a look at the bigger picture and it does make much more sense.

They lowered the points on 2 days and increased the point requirements on 5. When everybody shifts to weekends, do you really think that we will find availability?

Bill

 

[RobDoc]

My recollection is basically the same as Dean's regarding the BWV point changes. If memory serves the BWV point charts were changed within the first few months of sales. BWV opened in July, 1996 and I think the charts may have been changed even before opening.

There was no significant internet collective memory at that time, so there may not be much available like early BWV point charts. In those early days, DVC did make some changes in a number of their sales practices. The VB changes are pretty well documented - early buyers still have a significant developers subsidy for their dues while later buyers pay the highest dues of any DVC resort.VB opened on October 1, 1995.

Early purchasers at HH had a purchase cost reduction due to changes in the resort plan regarding a private recreational island that never came to be. (We purchased HH in March, 1995 and the closing was later modified, along with lowering our purchase price, due to this change.) HH opened on March 1, 1996.

When BWV began sales there was a promised "special" members area for viewing fireworks (The Attic), which never came to fruition for members although "The Attic" is certainly a component of BWV, but open only to private events. The point chart changes which added the "Standard View" villas was another such modification to the original plans for the resort. Certainly, sales were in their infancy when the changes were made to the point charts and Dean's comments about the relative effects of those changes on those who had already purchased are valid in my opinion.

As an admitted pack-rat, I have years of Disney/DVC publications stored. I just found a "Winter 1995" Disney Magazine with information about BWV. Here is the quote about The Attic from that publication:
"Guests rediscover that sometimes "staying in" can be as much fun as "going out". Especially those who treasure getaways, such as the Disney Vacation Club Attic. This is a place - like grandma's cottage attic with generations of stored furniture - for reading, shore-watching or fireworks gazing." The Attic was never available as described - even from opening day at BWV.

I'm still looking for those early point charts. (I have found OKW charts for 1994, 1995 and 1996 (the first reallocation) and VB charts for 1995 and 1996/1997.

 

[Shamus]

I wouldn't say that having the B.S. and A.S. point charts is "all" that you need to determine if and when BWV had a change in its total points. The point charts would confirm whether accommodation costs had changed, but you still need to ascertain whether the BWV Units had a change in their point-to-accommodation ratio.

Absent evidence to the contrary, I still hold to the assumption that DVD does not/cannot allot different point values to comparably sized Units within a Home Resort.

When they released the 1998 BWV points charts it included the SV points as they "expected to have standard view rooms declared into the condominium by mid-1998". I know that doesn't answer your question but may help narrow down your search.

The popular vesion is that DVD created SV and reduced the points in response to complaints. But maybe it was in the plans all along.

Because with BWV there was no "increase" in PV points when SV was introduced, you will likely find that the PV and SV units do in fact have different point values for similar room configurtations. So I'm not sure that if the mid-1998 declairation is true that it would still answer the question unless you had something showing what anticipated total resort points were going to be when sales first began.

Hope this makes sense.

 

[Dean]

When they released the 1998 BWV points charts it included the SV points as they "expected to have standard view rooms declared into the condominium by mid-1998". I know that doesn't answer your question but may help narrow down your search.

The popular vesion is that DVD created SV and reduced the points in response to complaints. But maybe it was in the plans all along.

Because with BWV there was no "increase" in PV points when SV was introduced, you will likely find that the PV and SV units do in fact have different point values for similar room configurtations. So I'm not sure that if the mid-1998 declairation is true that it would still answer the question unless you had something showing what anticipated total resort points were going to be when sales first began.

Hope this makes sense.

The info I had at the time strongly suggested they changed the plans directly due to the feedback they got from early guests. I'm also thinking there was some type of announcedment in the Vacation Magic around that time but I could be mistaken.

 

[photobob]

They lowered the points on 2 days and increased the point requirements on 5. When everybody shifts to weekends, do you really think that we will find availability?

Bill

Availability, I don't know. I'm just speaking more about the likelihood that a usual weekday stayer may be more inclined to stay Fri or Sat than in the past.

 

[BWV Dreamin]

Good info! Not to stray from the topic but briefly, why did they advertise the "Attic" in their sales pitch and publications only to retract that even before opening? Any chance it will ever become available to members?

My recollection is basically the same as Dean's regarding the BWV point changes. If memory serves the BWV point charts were changed within the first few months of sales. BWV opened in July, 1996 and I think the charts may have been changed even before opening.

There was no significant internet collective memory at that time, so there may not be much available like early BWV point charts. In those early days, DVC did make some changes in a number of their sales practices. The VB changes are pretty well documented - early buyers still have a significant developers subsidy for their dues while later buyers pay the highest dues of any DVC resort.VB opened on October 1, 1995.

Early purchasers at HH had a purchase cost reduction due to changes in the resort plan regarding a private recreational island that never came to be. (We purchased HH in March, 1995 and the closing was later modified, along with lowering our purchase price, due to this change.) HH opened on March 1, 1996.

When BWV began sales there was a promised "special" members area for viewing fireworks (The Attic), which never came to fruition for members although "The Attic" is certainly a component of BWV, but open only to private events. The point chart changes which added the "Standard View" villas was another such modification to the original plans for the resort. Certainly, sales were in their infancy when the changes were made to the point charts and Dean's comments about the relative effects of those changes on those who had already purchased are valid in my opinion.

As an admitted pack-rat, I have years of Disney/DVC publications stored. I just found a "Winter 1995" Disney Magazine with information about BWV. Here is the quote about The Attic from that publication:
"Guests rediscover that sometimes "staying in" can be as much fun as "going out". Especially those who treasure getaways, such as the Disney Vacation Club Attic. This is a place - like grandma's cottage attic with generations of stored furniture - for reading, shore-watching or fireworks gazing." The Attic was never available as described - even from opening day at BWV.

I'm still looking for those early point charts. (I have found OKW charts for 1994, 1995 and 1996 (the first reallocation) and VB charts for 1995 and 1996/1997.

 

[tjkraz]

They lowered the points on 2 days and increased the point requirements on 5. When everybody shifts to weekends, do you really think that we will find availability?

Bill

I don't know that "everybody" is going to shift to weekends...but some will.

A weeknight Two Bedroom at SSR went from 27 points in 2009 to 34 points in 2011. The weekend night is still higher at 38 points.

I don't think it would be wise for DVC to reallocate a third year and make all 7 nights of the week identical in cost.

Weekends will be more palatable for those who find they better fit travel plans. But with weekdays being cheaper, there will still be plenty of people attracted to those nights.

 

[bobbiwoz]

I'm a "pre-Attic" BWV owner. In Doc's post, which quotes from a 1995 Disney publication, it's called the Disney Vacation Club's Attic! Why, oh why can't we use it??!! How was it taken away, when it was named that? Were the owners compensated?

Bobbi