Just a thought

[dianeschlicht]

With all the people on the boards asking about getting GV's at OKW when they do not own there and folks wanting to book the other resorts when they own at SSR, do you think the time is coming when DVC will do away with booking outside your home resort? I'm guessing it causes some problems for MS and DVC in general, and it seems to me it could be avoided with only allowing booking at your home resort and having the use of the other DVC resorts be like an exchange is now for II or the Disney Collection. What do you think? Can they even do that?

 

[*elaine*]

With all the people on the boards asking about getting GV's at OKW when they do not own there and folks wanting to book the other resorts when they own at SSR, do you think the time is coming when DVC will do away with booking outside your home resort? I'm guessing it causes some problems for MS and DVC in general, and it seems to me it could be avoided with only allowing booking at your home resort and having the use of the other DVC resorts be like an exchange is now for II or the Disney Collection. What do you think? Can they even do that?

It is a HUGE selling point for DVC, so no, I don't think they'll do away with it. I don't think that it is that much trouble for MS, in this computer day and age.

 

[Buckalew11]

They'd better not be able to do that because that is part of the selling points they stressed. Look, I'm sure I'd be happy at BCV but I want to be able to visit around. That is what they were selling, IMO. Our guide really stressed that. He actually really stressed trading through II a lot!

Getting to visit different DVC properties was one of the reasons I bought DVC. Being chained to one place wasn't part of the deal, IMO.

 

[JimMIA]

I don't see that happening. If it did, I think it would be a HUGE mistake. I'm perfectly happy staying where we own (OKW and SSR), but I would hate to lose the flexibility.

From a new-resort buyer perspective, I think DVC would become FAR less valuable than it is today if you could only stay one place. I'm talking $51 per point, instead of $101.

The only scenario I can think of where a home-resort-only policy might work would be at one of the monorail resorts, provided that it was exclusive -- meaning only owners at that resort could stay there. But even then I think they'd be drastically reducing their potential target market. I certainly would not buy at the Contemporary, for example, if that was the only place I could stay.

 

[DaddyBrady]

Here's where you'd really want to dig into all those documents we got but didn't read (like the Public Offering Statement?). This would explain what DVC can or cannot change in the program. I know I have that thing somewhere....

 

[NYMomof4]

I agree with the other posters on the points made. The flexibility and variety sold me on DVC. The 11 month advantage is there for the home resort, but no matter where I could have purchased-it wouldn't have been helpful for my current planning options so at 7 months I book what's available. I think sometimes the problems of availability are linked to later booking.

 

[Granny]

Here's where you'd really want to dig into all those documents we got but didn't read (like the Public Offering Statement?). This would explain what DVC can or cannot change in the program. I know I have that thing somewhere....

There is nothing in the documents that guarantees that Disney has to allow booking anywhere but someone's home resort.

I'm guessing it causes some problems for MS and DVC in general

It certainly causes more calls to MS, but I'm not sure it causes Disney any problems. And since members pay for MS, I don't see where Disney would be motivated to do away with reservations at non-home resorts from a cost standpoint.


Personally, I think that as long as Disney is selling DVC, they have to allow this to help out their sales folks.

Once they quit building and selling.....

 

[dianeschlicht]

There is nothing in the documents that guarantees that Disney has to allow booking anywhere but someone's home resort.

It certainly causes more calls to MS, but I'm not sure it causes Disney any problems. And since members pay for MS, I don't see where Disney would be motivated to do away with reservations at non-home resorts from a cost standpoint.


Personally, I think that as long as Disney is selling DVC, they have to allow this to help out their sales folks.

Once they quit building and selling.....

And that is what I'm talking about, Granny. It seems to me that there could be a time in the future where we might be limited to our home resort.

BTW, the POS only guarnatees us a 1 MONTH booking window at our home resort, not the 4 month window we currently get.

From a new-resort buyer perspective, I think DVC would become FAR less valuable than it is today if you could only stay one place. I'm talking $51 per point, instead of $101.

Jim, some of us purchased OKW originally (Disney Vacation Club) for that $51 per point and even lower. If I was paying $101 per point now, I'm not sure I would want to stay at a place "valued" less, but that is where the problem comes in. You have lots of OKW and BWV owners who have been members for 10 to 14 years. Now they see all these folks from the recent sales push wanting to book OKW and standard view BWV because of the lower point costs. It does seem to make things a bit lopsided.

THe reason I brought up this point is because of all the folks I see on the board asking about OKW GVs at the 7 month window. As long as I have owned (going on 10 years), GVs have needed to be reserved VERY early on in the booking process. I can't imagine that is going to change all that much. I know when they brought in SSR, they lowered the point requirements a bit for the GV compared to BWV, but not to the rates at OKW. At that same time, we have seen more people buying in at the barest minimum of 150 points (well below what it was when we bought in), and the draw of those low OKW and BWV standard points is much more appealing to them than the point costs at their home resort. I just keep thinking DVC might do something different in the future to even things out. Point totals can't change at the existing resorts, so maybe the next step is make the future DVC resorts, stand alone units in terms of points. Just a thought that was running through my head that I wanted to get other's opinions on.

 

[Dean]

They'd better not be able to do that because that is part of the selling points they stressed. Look, I'm sure I'd be happy at BCV but I want to be able to visit around. That is what they were selling, IMO. Our guide really stressed that. He actually really stressed trading through II a lot!

Getting to visit different DVC properties was one of the reasons I bought DVC. Being chained to one place wasn't part of the deal, IMO.

While they could limit or eliminate trading between resorts I doubt they ever will and see no reason they should. With the shift in availability due to the SSR trading out on a disproportionate basis, there will be a few year adjustment period. Most will learn they need to book during the home resort priority window. Those that won't or can't, will adjust as well or will sell and move on. It'll take a few years to settle down and the situation then will be the new normal.

As for what a guide said, that and a buck might get you a cup of coffee. There is no verbal contract in this situation. A guides words not backed up in writing carry no weight, no basis in fact. The best you could hope for IF you could prove the guide truly lied, would be a refund and cancellation of your contract.

 

[dianeschlicht]

I RARELY stay outside my home resort of OKW. I find it interesting that so many buy in now EXPECTING to stay outside their home. Dean, I think you are right about things settling down once folks "get with the program".

 

[Simba's Mom]

I'm looking through the POS now, and I can't tell from the legalese whether or not members can be limited to their home resort. All I can see is the phrase, "DVCMC" has reserved the right to increase or decrease the Home Resort Priority Period for a given DVC Resort [the priority will not be a period less than one month]. Does that mean-you can reserve at your home resort 11 months out and "DVCMC" has reserved their right to increase the priority period to 11 months, essentially shutting out any others except owners from reserving? I'm not a lawyer, it may not mean that, but I was wondering.

 

[Anewman]

I RARELY stay outside my home resort of OKW. I find it interesting that so many buy in now EXPECTING to stay outside their home. Dean, I think you are right about things settling down once folks "get with the program".

I is not just that new members buy SSR(or other mega DVC) "EXPECTING" to stay at one of the other DVC resorts, it has more to do that it was a HUGE selling point during the tour. Not saying that this is contract, I am saying it obviously helps sell points and if they take it away...

And small in-demand resorts dont just sell themselves out, they help sell points at the MEGA DVC resorts(SSR and others that may come). If the do build a CRV(or VCR) it will sell out regardless, but why would Disney not use it to sell out the next Mega resort that comes later?

I would be willing to bet that more money is maid per point on MEGA DVC resorts, if so there has to be a reason that Disney would still choose to build smaller less profitable DVCs.

 

[Dumbo]

I think the next logical step would be going to a 4 month window instead of a 7 month window. Home resort members will then have 7 months instead of 4 to book their home resort with a much better chance of availability. You can book outside your home resort only 4 months in advance.

That I think would be easier on Member Services. It also would eliminate a lot of home resort cancellations at the 7 month window by people tying up a reservation at their home resort with no intention of staying there.

Dumbo

 

[dianeschlicht]

I think the next logical step would be going to a 4 month window instead of a 7 month window. Home resort members will then have 7 months instead of 4 to book their home resort with a much better chance of availability. You can book outside your home resort only 4 months in advance.

That I think would be easier on Member Services. It also would eliminate a lot of home resort cancellations at the 7 month window by people tying up a reservation at their home resort with no intention of staying there.

Dumbo

ACtually, we already have a 4 month priority booking window. I think you may have meant that we would have a 7 month priority window, which would make home resort your only choice until 4 months out. That would probably help the smaller resort owners a great deal.

I'm looking through the POS now, and I can't tell from the legalese whether or not members can be limited to their home resort. All I can see is the phrase, "DVCMC" has reserved the right to increase or decrease the Home Resort Priority Period for a given DVC Resort [the priority will not be a period less than one month]. Does that mean-you can reserve at your home resort 11 months out and "DVCMC" has reserved their right to increase the priority period to 11 months, essentially shutting out any others except owners from reserving? I'm not a lawyer, it may not mean that, but I was wondering.

That is the part I was talking about earlier. It means we would basically only have a 1 month priority period at our home resort.

 

[Dean]

I'm looking through the POS now, and I can't tell from the legalese whether or not members can be limited to their home resort. All I can see is the phrase, "DVCMC" has reserved the right to increase or decrease the Home Resort Priority Period for a given DVC Resort [the priority will not be a period less than one month]. Does that mean-you can reserve at your home resort 11 months out and "DVCMC" has reserved their right to increase the priority period to 11 months, essentially shutting out any others except owners from reserving? I'm not a lawyer, it may not mean that, but I was wondering.

It actually means they can make it as high as 11/10 instead of 11/7 home resort to trading given only a one month home resort priority.

I is not just that new members buy SSR(or other mega DVC) "EXPECTING" to stay at one of the other DVC resorts, it has more to do that it was a HUGE selling point during the tour. Not saying that this is contract, I am saying it obviously helps sell points and if they take it away...

This point will not change. No matter how difficult it gets, it will always be enough to allow them to make this claim with reasonableness, even if when you want to go is totally out of the question to use the 7 month window or whatever it is then. But there's really no reason to change it as it's a self policing situation. Even if they did, most people would simply adjust their methods to fit the new times with little affect on most people.

 

[rocketriter]

I agree with Dean. There's no reason for DVC to change this policy. If it gets more difficult to book away from home at 7 months, then it will be more difficult to book away from home at 7 months, that's all. It's a self-balancing arrangement. But there will always be cancellations and times when a resort still has space, and it's good business for DVC to make it as easy as possible for other members to fill that space as soon as possible.

 

[DaddyBrady]

With the shift in availability due to the SSR trading out on a disproportionate basis, there will be a few year adjustment period. Most will learn they need to book during the home resort priority window.

By this do you mean that SSR members book at other resorts more often than do members of the other resorts? In other words, SSR members haven't "bought where they stay," so they book elsewhere? So, the behavior you're saying will change is that eventually the owners at those other resorts will realize they need to take advantage of their 4-month head start. Correct?

Just trying to make sure I understand the thread.

As for what a guide said, that and a buck might get you a cup of coffee.

Of course here in Seattle, it'll take you more than a buck!

 

[Granny]

Diane...this is not a new speculation on these boards as you know. We went through the same discussions as there was a presumption that people buying VB or HH (which had some hefty incentives to get them to close out sales) were doing so primarily to stay at WDW DVC resorts.

And I remember a few years ago when it was the OKW owners who were being "accused" of buying the cheapest point cost resort (OKW) on the resale market with intentions of staying at other DVC resorts.

But I agree that there seems to be a rash of people expecting no problems in getting the higher demand accommodations (GV's, BWV SV or Boardwalk View, BCV at F&W) at the 7 month mark. I don't know if that is because the Guides are even more brazen with telling people that, or if the internet has just provided more people with more access to sites like this to ask their questions.

I'm just waiting for Richyams to chime in (they have the internet in heaven, right?) to tell us all how the Guides are liars and cheats!

 

[CarolMN]

By this do you mean that SSR members book at other resorts more often than do members of the other resorts? In other words, SSR members haven't "bought where they stay," so they book elsewhere? So, the behavior your saying will change is that eventually the owners at those other resorts will realize they need to take advantage of their 4-month head start. Correct?

Just trying to make sure I understand the thread.


Of course here in Seattle, it'll take you more than a buck!

Obviously, I'm not Dean (and he can certainly speak quite well for himself anyway, LOL).

IMHO, it doesn't really matter much if SSR owners have or haven't "bought where they want to stay". Every resort has some members who stay elsewhere on at least some of their visits.

Let's assume that the same percentage of members at each DVC resort "stay elsewhere". Since SSR is so much larger than the other resorts, there will be many more SSR members booking elsewhere than there will be members from VWL or BCV booking elsewhere - even though the same percentage of SSR members book elsewhere as do members from the other resorts.

Due to the large increase in members since SSR began selling, it just stands to reason that there are lots more people trying to book the smaller DVC resorts at the 7 month window than there have been trying to do that in the past. Anyone who wants to stay at one of the smaller resorts needs to plan ahead, especially if their vacation is for one of the more popular times.

As members figure that out (due to being shut out of their first choice when they call for the reservation), they will learn that they might have to call day by day at the 7 month mark to stay elsewhere, use the waitlist or risk moving during their vacation.

I think Dean just meant that members eventually will figure the system out (the DIS really helps with that) and adjust - and then this (the fact that it's harder to book the smaller resorts if you don't own there and plan ahead) will seem normal to them.

It really wasn't until this year, that reports of "it's getting harder to book" the smaller resorts became so frequent. Members were used to calling only a few months in advance and still getting what they wanted when they wanted it. I can remember when it was only tough to get the week between Christmas and New Year's!

Best wishes -

P.S. I like the Seattle coffee (Starbucks) and will pay more for it if I have to. Must admit I prefer Caribou, though.

 

[Dean]

By this do you mean that SSR members book at other resorts more often than do members of the other resorts? In other words, SSR members haven't "bought where they stay," so they book elsewhere? So, the behavior your saying will change is that eventually the owners at those other resorts will realize they need to take advantage of their 4-month head start. Correct?

Correct on all counts. It IS my opinion that the percent of people who plan to stay at their home resort consistently is different for SSR, OKW, VB and OKW than it is for BWV, BCV and VWL. And OKW to a lessor extent due in part to the old time members who prefer to stay there and in part due to the lower points. Note, I didn't say it was a problem, just he way it is. And many of those who haven't been booking prior to 7 months will get the message and do so. There is the suggestions from what we're seeing on this BBS and with availability at the 7 month window, that this is already happening to a large degree. Carol said much of what I've been saying, but did a better job in summarizing it.

Of course here in Seattle, it'll take you more than a buck!

That's OK, you're going to have to dig into your pocket anyway if you believe what the guides say that is not in the written legal paperwork.