This is a true statement only for resorts without dedicated studios and 1 bedrooms. As a member heavily involved in that thread (and one of the few that talked to leadership directly) I wanted to just clarify that point. But everyone should realize if your home resort doesn’t have studio and 1 bedrooms what you said is exactly true. Though there are some believe
DVC can’t do that legally but that is something they won’t likely admit to since they tried and want to avoid lawsuits.
I delayed responding to your assertion until I had a chance to run the numbers. The situation is a bit more complex than my assertion (or yours).
What I said is true for the resorts that have no dedicated studios or 1BRs. These include OKW, VB, HHI, SSR, BLT, VGC, AHV, and VGF. These resorts have no protection against point inflation for studios and 1BRs.
What you said is true only for Poly, which has 360 dedicated studios + 20 bungalows. Poly is completely protected against point inflation by increasing the lock-off premium. If you plan to stay in studios, and you care about inflation protection, Poly is where you need to buy. You are not fully protected, because there could be reallocations between the bungalows and the studios, but that is a different issue than the lock-off premium.
Everything else has SOME protection, but is still subject to point inflation.
Of these AKV has the lowest inflation protection. There are 46 dedicated studios, but 250 lock-offs. So 15.5% of Studios are dedicated. This means that for every 100,000 point rise in the lock-off premium at AKV, DVC would have to reduce 15,541 points in other sizes (2BR, GV). To make matters worse, AKV has no dedicated 1BR, so the lock-off premium for 1BR at AKV has no protection against point inflation at all.
BRV has 30.8% dedicated studios and 37.5% dedicated 1BR, so for every 100,000 point rise in the lock-off premium for studios, DVC would have to offset 2BR by 30,769 points, while a 100,000 point increase in the lock-off premium for 1BR would be mitigated by a 37,500 point decrease in 2BRs.
BCV has 32.7% dedicated studios and 21.3% dedicated 1BR. So a 100,000 point increase in the lock-off premium for studios at BCV would be mitigated by a 32,727 point reduction in 2BR. (Yes, I am assuming that if they are raising the Lock-off premium for studios, they are also raising it for 1BR, so 1BR are not available as an offset)
Similarly, a 100,000 point increase in the lock-off premium for 1BR would be mitigated by a 21,277 decrease in 2BR.
So point inflation is definitely a risk, but to a lesser extent than the resorts with no dedicated units at all.
BWV has 39.4% dedicated studios and 46.6% dedicated 1BR. So for every 100,000 increase in the lock-off premium for studios, DVC has to mitigate it by lowering 2BR or GV by 39,431 points.
For a 100,000 point increase in the lock-off premium for 1BR, DVC has to lower 2BR or GV points by 46,595.
CCV is best situated against point inflation due to rise in the lock-off premium, but it is still significant.
CCV has 53.8% dedicated studios and 35.7% dedicated 1BR. So for every 100,000 points DVC increases the lock-off premium for studios, they must decrease 2BR, GV, or Cabins by 53,846 points.
For every 100,000 points DVC increases the lock-off premium in 1BRs, they would have to offset it by 35,714 points in 2BR, GV, or Cabins.
The lock-off premium issue is real. It impacts everyone, except Poly owners.
.
