DVC should really consider...

[RweTHEREyet]

You know JVS, I agree with you. I think a lot of the responses to your idea were rude and totally unnecessary. Glad you posted again and glad that this will not turn you away from these Boards. Although some people are rude and abrupt a lot of the time, most of the people that post here are helpful and friendly, don't let some of these posts make you think otherwise.

 

[ducklite]

Originally posted by JVSJr
Let me just throw this on the table:

DVC allowing someone to cancel and bank points because of a family emergency; is that in the agreement? That could inconvenience others by tying up a room that may end up vacant and then the next year more people are competing for rooms (btw, I’m not against DVC doing this but is it in the rules?)

Because DVC retains a small number of points in each property, they can do this without disrupting other members--it's "cash" guests that are affected by this, not members. Cash Guests are at DVC's discretion, so I do'nt see an issue here. Interesting point though

Room assignment policies, we knew what they were when we bought, but now they changed.

They haven't changed per the POS. What we had before or now (depending on your viewpoint was a "gift", kind of like teh free park passes to those who bought in early, or the Disney Store discounts.

Pool hopping to SAB was allowed at one point, and was allowed at all DVC resorts, but has that not changed?

Again, not part of the POS. "Rules" outside the POS can be cnaged at DVC's whim.

Renting out points. Are DVC members following the rules?

Not sure about this one, what does the POS say about renting points? Part of the problem is how does DVC know/enforce this, as the members name is always on teh reservation anyhow?

Oh, and they better take out the DVD players because I bought when VCR’s were there and I expect things to stay the same!!! (just kidding)

This not a material change, it's like changing the colors of the dishes.

It all come down to a legal obligation.

Anne

 

[married@wdw]

If DVC retains the rights to a certain number of points, couldn't they change rooms equivalent to that number of points if they so chose?

And how is the POS written -- are they so detailed that they say there will be sofa beds in the rooms? I'm just wondering because it seems there are some serious variations of rooms at BWV & BCV where bed sizes had to be changed and where some two bedrooms have queen/sofabed while others have two queen. Just curious how detailed these are.

I'm not trying to start an argument here, I'm just trying to understand the technicals.

 

[palmtreegirl]

If it's going to be an issue for you, then buy enough points for a 2BR. If you don't want to do that, then perhaps DVC isn't the right option for you.

Nice.

To the OP- Welcome to the board! We just bought into DVC too. The bunk bed option could be helpful to some people, thanks for sharing your idea!

 

[WDWguru]

Call me naive, but I don't think that particular quote was snotty. It's a simple fact of DVC ownership that I happen to agree with. If you are a family of 8 who visits WDW every five years and stays at All Stars, DVC is probably not for you. If you choose to buy anyway, fine, but don't then complain that the one bedroom should have six beds in it. Likewise if you are a couple who always stay at GF Concierge, buy DVC then complain you can't get the lounge and concierge service. You knew the trade-offs going in and what was available to you.

Obviously, these are extreme examples, but the point is the same. We can all scheme and dream all we want. DVC isn't stupid. They did their research before building the resorts and continue to do so as they expand. They know exactly what configurations and amenities will please the most people without breaking their bank.

By all means, suggest away... obviously the SSR 50-year contract is an example of something suggested that they saw value in. It's like the requests... they're just suggestions yet people get upset if they aren't met. If DVC feels a lot of people would benefit and they can afford it, they'll do it. Just don't expect it, then if it happens it'll be a pleasant surprise.

 

[ducklite]

Originally posted by married@wdw
If DVC retains the rights to a certain number of points, couldn't they change rooms equivalent to that number of points if they so chose?

And how is the POS written -- are they so detailed that they say there will be sofa beds in the rooms? I'm just wondering because it seems there are some serious variations of rooms at BWV & BCV where bed sizes had to be changed and where some two bedrooms have queen/sofabed while others have two queen. Just curious how detailed these are.

I'm not trying to start an argument here, I'm just trying to understand the technicals.

No argument from me. They own 3% of the points which are used for rooms booked for cash. I imagine that yes, they could change them, but if they did that they would then have to set aside those rooms as specific rooms, not points, which could become a problem. IT could also get complicated during peak times and low times, DVC's owned points flex jsut like the members do. So during peak season the number of "altered" rooms would be lower, and during low season "higher". That in itself creates a legal problem. Hope this all makes sense, it's really difficult to explain. Maybe someone better at explaining than me can do abetter job.

Bed sizes had to be changed at BCV because the rooms didn't conform to the POS--that was when the rooms were brand new! They are very detailed in this respect, and changing material amenities such as bedding would literally be illegal.

Anne

 

[palmtreegirl]

Call me naive, but I don't think that particular quote was snotty. It's a simple fact of DVC ownership that I happen to agree with. If you are a family of 8 who visits WDW every five years and stays at All Stars, DVC is probably not for you. If you choose to buy anyway, fine, but don't then complain that the one bedroom should have six beds in it.

Now I'd agree with you if the Original Poster had stated that they felt DVC was obligated to provide the bunk beds or if they were complaining there weren't any available. But OP was done as "just a thought", they were simply sharing an idea with us. Therefore I think some of the respones were over the top.

 

[married@wdw]

Thanks for the explanation Anne. I think I'm getting it now. I didn't realize that changing from a sofabed to a trundle bed (or for that matter from a queen bed at OKW to a trundle in a few studios, which would be my preference) would make that big a difference legally. While many of you disagree, I think it's too bad.

Maybe when they build at AKL or Poly they can consider this !

 

[ducklite]

Originally posted by married@wdw
Maybe when they build at AKL or Poly they can consider this !

I have long heard rumblings about a possible future DVC at the AKL, but not the Polynesian. I do'nt think the latter will happen, as it couldonly go towards teh GF, which would possibly interfere with teh wedding chapel. That is a HUGE cash cow for WDW, and I don't see them doing anything to muck that up.

What we were told at the members meeting in 2001 was the next one would be Eagle Pines (working name) back by the golf course.

Anne