Tired of SSR being blamed

Marionnette

Children see magic because they look for it
Joined
Sep 26, 2009
**A point deduction incentive to book the under-utilized rooms, those that are consistently the last room options left to choose from after the rest are booked:
1,2 & 3BR villas at Aulani & HH ?
OKW 1BR, SSR, or AKL Savannah view
and/or any specific rooms that are usually the leftovers
**A point increase premium for high demand rooms that are consistently the first to be booked at the 7 month mark:
AKL – Concierge and Value rooms
OKW – Grand Villas (near Hospitality House)
BWV – Grand Villas and Standard view rooms
BLT – Standard view rooms
GFV – Studios
Raising or lowering points at one room category within a single resort must be met with an equal overall change at other villas within the same resort. But the points still need to balance. You cannot lower points at, let’s say AUL GVs, and offset it by raising points at BWV std. view villas.

Personally, I see no need to change the point requirements for some villas just so that more of them are available at 7 months to non-owners. And I don’t think that DVC sees it that way, either. VGF studios aren’t gone at the 7-month mark because they are some kind of bargain price. They’re gone because there are only 47 of them and they get booked by VGF owners.

In the end, the only thing that matters to DVC is not whether an SSR owner is successful booking a BLT standard studio at 7 months. It’s whether the opportunity to do so exists at all, so that they can use it as a selling point. No owner is promised that they can book at a non-home resort. They aren’t even promised that they will be able to book exactly what they want at their home resort. DVC only promises the chance to be able to do it.
 

crvetter

DIS Veteran
Joined
Nov 26, 2018
Yes, and ironically a concern regarding the rescinded 2020 points charts - making people use up their points on fewer nights could increase breakage and give Disney more nights to sell for cash.
Yes but the difference is by shifting seasons (as @Sandisw was suggesting) wouldn't be increasing breakage, necessarily. You can do it by keeping the total points assigned to each room type consistent over the entire year, which is a major difference between the original 2020 point charts and the shifting of seasons.
 

Heather07438

WDW Apprentice
Joined
Oct 20, 2015
Raising or lowering points at one room category within a single resort must be met with an equal overall change at other villas within the same resort. But the points still need to balance. You cannot lower points at, let’s say AUL GVs, and offset it by raising points at BWV std. view villas.

Personally, I see no need to change the point requirements for some villas just so that more of them are available at 7 months to non-owners. And I don’t think that DVC sees it that way, either. VGF studios aren’t gone at the 7-month mark because they are some kind of bargain price. They’re gone because there are only 47 of them and they get booked by VGF owners.

In the end, the only thing that matters to DVC is not whether an SSR owner is successful booking a BLT standard studio at 7 months. It’s whether the opportunity to do so exists at all, so that they can use it as a selling point. No owner is promised that they can book at a non-home resort. They aren’t even promised that they will be able to book exactly what they want at their home resort. DVC only promises the chance to be able to do it.
My intention was never to give SSR or anybody else an advantage or coddle. It was to balance demand of relative value for all owners. You are right in that I was missing something.
 
  • Marionnette

    Children see magic because they look for it
    Joined
    Sep 26, 2009
    My intention was never to give SSR or anybody else an advantage or coddle. It was to balance demand of relative value for all owners. You are right in that I was missing something.
    But the truth is, different resorts have different “value” as is expressed by the market prices. There’s a reason that BCV, with it’s shorter contract life, consistently demands more $/pt. than SSR both direct and resale. The number of points per night are already at or near par for most seasons with SSR being much less expensive during holidays. Raising the points/night cost of BCV isn’t going to change the demand or balance the value between the two resorts. It would only hurt BCV owners.
     

    CraigInPA

    Since June 1974
    Joined
    Jun 11, 2012
    In the end, the only thing that matters to DVC is not whether an SSR owner is successful booking a BLT standard studio at 7 months. It’s whether the opportunity to do so exists at all, so that they can use it as a selling point. No owner is promised that they can book at a non-home resort. They aren’t even promised that they will be able to book exactly what they want at their home resort. DVC only promises the chance to be able to do it.
    THIS!
     

    Heather07438

    WDW Apprentice
    Joined
    Oct 20, 2015
    But the truth is, different resorts have different “value” as is expressed by the market prices. There’s a reason that BCV, with it’s shorter contract life, consistently demands more $/pt. than SSR both direct and resale. The number of points per night are already at or near par for most seasons with SSR being much less expensive during holidays. Raising the points/night cost of BCV isn’t going to change the demand or balance the value between the two resorts. It would only hurt BCV owners.
    When I said "It was to balance demand of relative value for all owners", I should have specified "at the 7 month mark" because that's when all points supposedly become equal.

    Is there any way to balance cost vs perceived value on high/low demand rooms at the 7 month mark? Home resort loses it advantage at 7 months. BWV standard rooms are already usually booked by the 7 month mark, for the few that remain at 7 months, it may not be fair to have home resort paying a premium they didn't have to pay at 11 months. That's another consideration.

    I'm entertaining the possibility that the point system could be optimized to better serve owners.
     

    Marionnette

    Children see magic because they look for it
    Joined
    Sep 26, 2009
    When I said "It was to balance demand of relative value for all owners", I should have specified "at the 7 month mark" because that's when all points supposedly become equal.

    Is there any way to balance cost vs perceived value on high/low demand rooms at the 7 month mark? Home resort loses it advantage at 7 months. BWV standard rooms are already usually booked by the 7 month mark, for the few that remain at 7 months, it may not be fair to have home resort paying a premium they didn't have to pay at 11 months. That's another consideration.

    I'm entertaining the possibility that the point system could be optimized to better serve owners.
    Ah. But here’s the thing...
    Changing the points charts thru BVTC so that those “preferred” villas go to higher points/night at 7 months is not going to balance demand. Pretty much all of them disappear from availability during the 11-7 month window. You’re still not going to be able to book an AKV value studio at 7 months even if the points/night were to double because there would not be any open to book unless someone cancels and the waitlist fails to pick it up. The same goes for any of the high-demand/low quantity villas.

    Those who have home resort priority at BWV would not pay a premium to book BWV inside of 7 months because they don’t “exchange” their points thru BVTC. Trading thru BVTC only comes into play when booking a non-home resort. The points chart for your home resort would remain unchanged for the entire year. But BVTC would have a different set of points charts, making it more, or less, desirable to switch resorts if they chose to do this at all.

    It’s all academic and I don’t really see it as being implemented or having much of an impact on 7-month availability if it were. As it is right now, a BCV owner can stay at OKW or SSR for fewer points/night than they can at BCV. You would think that would drive owners to abandon BCV at 7 months in order to save a few points but it doesn’t. At least not to the extent that it influences availably to any degree. Conversely, SSR owners are willing to spend more points per night for BCV, many of them rationalizing the higher number of points needed is being offset by the lower price per point that they paid. Not every decision is driven by how many points it will cost.

    And finally, DVC would have to perceive the inability of owners to book non-home resorts at 7 months to be a problem. And I don’t believe that they do. Most of the complaints that we see are from members trying to book something inside 7 months but they “don’t want <<insert available resort here>>””. Or because they cannot get the entire trip reserved at <<insert desired resort here>>. Even at this late date, there are villas available for random nights next week at HHI, VB,AUL, AKV-K, BLT, SSR, CCV, BRV, OKW and BWV. And this is during Fall Frenzy/F&W/Jersey Week/Wine&Dine.
     

    Sandisw

    Moderator
    Moderator
    Joined
    Nov 15, 2008
    When I said "It was to balance demand of relative value for all owners", I should have specified "at the 7 month mark" because that's when all points supposedly become equal.

    Is there any way to balance cost vs perceived value on high/low demand rooms at the 7 month mark? Home resort loses it advantage at 7 months. BWV standard rooms are already usually booked by the 7 month mark, for the few that remain at 7 months, it may not be fair to have home resort paying a premium they didn't have to pay at 11 months. That's another consideration.

    I'm entertaining the possibility that the point system could be optimized to better serve owners.
    Right now, and the way it is, fair to all owners because for home resort, everyone has the same opportunity to book and at non-home resorts, everyone has the same opportunity.

    No matter what they do, as already said, there will still be people wanting to go and some will get the rooms and some will not. Raising the premiums for rooms by having a 7 month chart for non-resort owners is still going to have those high demand rooms in high demand. Some might even say that by raising them to a level that could prevent them from booking so fast benefits someone like me who has 800 points to use in a year vs someone with only a few hundred.

    I have yet to have trouble getting something booked outside SSR when I wanted in some way, shape or form, when I am booking right at 7 months. And, if I don’t get it exactly, I keep at it.

    It’s getting harder, no doubt about it, but with planning, you can make it work. I personally think that people need to manage expectations and recognize that if you don’t buy at where you really want to be, then you are going to be frustrated. There is only one way to limit that...buy the home resort you want, be on at 11 months, and give yourself a cushion so you don’t have to get the hardest rooms like BWV SV, AKV Value or ConcIergo.
     

    Heather07438

    WDW Apprentice
    Joined
    Oct 20, 2015
    Thank you for the explanations Marionette and Sandisw, much appreciated. The more I understand about DVC before we buy, the better.

    I guess as an outsider it looked that collectively DVC owners don't find value in those 'last to go' categories. Collectively they find value in the 'first to go at the 7 month mark'. It's very complex to adjust and maybe unnecessary. I was seeing rainbows where point values could stabilize demand through 7 months and less, offering more choices if enough people jumped on reduced price surplus and avoided the high cost of coveted rooms outside their home resort. I could see my family exploring and tolerating both options.

    We're pretty flexible, we'd be just as happy in many different rooms. It could be frustrating if we never find anything from the dozens of possible rooms that suit us. Some boards make it sound like that, without experience I didn't catch the exaggeration.
     

    we"reofftoneverland

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Aug 5, 2015
    I just don’t think Disney needs to address the system at all. They have it just as they want it. I think they like the hunt, the walking, the stalking, people logging in every day. It keeps people engaged and Disney focused. When I was scrambling for rooms for Thanksgiving starting last summer, I was Disney, Disney, Disney. Points, points, reservations, reservations. Disney had me right where they wanted me. Waking up in the middle of the night, might as well check if any rooms have become available. Lol.

    Logging in on date night:

    dh: “Why are you on your phone?” Me (not looking up, entering names on the reservation): “Just got one night at BCV.”

    In line at space mountain on our July visit:

    Me: “Just got one night at BWV.” Dh: “Great,” although I am not sure he even knew what I was talking about.

    On the computer every morning at work: Wait, they offer point discounts on cruises sometimes? And what’s this Thanksgiving DVC dinner?

    Every time you go to that home page, Disney is marketing to you, creating circuit pathways in your brain that make you want to come back to see your dashboard and all Disney has to offer again, and again, every day if they can get you to look. They have us right where they want us. Everyone knows that people enjoy the thrill of the hunt, enjoy feeling like they got something scarce. If Disney just adjusts points, that’s boring. Too easy. Disney likes the complication. When we were going through rofr the first time, dh said that it was a brilliant strategy of Disney to make you wait as if what you were purchasing was something rare and valuable, make you feel lucky to get through, and at least once a day in the process make you wish you had bought direct. Disney was in your head. Right where they want to be 24/7. Right between your job and your family. Brilliant.
     

    Buzzsgramma

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Oct 3, 2000
    IMHO this is exactly why Rivieria is being sold with the stipulation that resale of this resort will only be able to book there and not the other resorts....Of late I have read many threads about people booking their own resort mostly SSR or a few others and the switching to Poly or BCV or BWV etc at the 7 month window...I guess in almost 20 yrs of owning at BWV I never knew this was a thing....also the 'walking a reservation '
    thing that is also happening and may have been done for years also...
    I have almost always booked a SV at BWV at 11 months or shortly there after...every year...a few years back a last minute reservation found us at SSR and OKW...
    Our family of 12...5 adult grandkids at present finds us usually in 2 - 2 bedrooms every few years...We love BW and being able to walk or boat to the 2 parks....
    We are retired 10 years now...and enjoy our DVC more than ever...
     

    Bing Showei

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Sep 10, 2017
    What we are talking here has to do with using membership and I don’t agree that the fact that a resort is smaller and harder to get into thAt is enough of a reason to give those owners more trading power, If VGF was triple its size, it would be easier to get.
    It states this can and should be done based on user behavior explicitly in the BVTC Exchange Disclosure documents. In fact, this particular section is bolded in its entirety. Emphasis below is mine.
    In determining the relative DVC Vacation Point valuations for each DVC Resort, BVTC shall take into account the location and anticipated relative use demand for each DVC Resort and shall use its best efforts, in good faith and based upon all reasonably available evidence under the circumstances, to further the best interests of the Club Members as a whole with respect to their opportunity to use and enjoy the Vacation Homes and related facilities of the DVC Resorts.
    You agreed to these terms the same as every other owner, so it matters little whether we like the idea of differentiating the exchange based on our resort behavior or not. We all said we understand this could and should be done. Again I would take this over the resale restriction in a heartbeat, but knowing how Disney operates, they'll just do both.

    And people will just roll with it and Disney will continue to devalue ownership in the "interest of the Club Members."
    I personally think that people need to manage expectations and recognize that if you don’t buy at where you really want to be, then you are going to be frustrated.
    Agreed. But I think Disney also has a responsibility to stop selling up the idea then that you can buy anywhere and stay anywhere else at 7-months. Today, that anywhere is Riviera and Aulani.
     

    Sandisw

    Moderator
    Moderator
    Joined
    Nov 15, 2008
    It states this can and should be done based on user behavior explicitly in the BVTC Exchange Disclosure documents. In fact, this particular section is bolded in its entirety. Emphasis below is mine.

    You agreed to these terms the same as every other owner, so it matters little whether we like the idea of differentiating the exchange based on our resort behavior or not. We all said we understand this could and should be done. Again I would take this over the resale restriction in a heartbeat, but knowing how Disney operates, they'll just do both.

    And people will just roll with it and Disney will continue to devalue ownership in the "interest of the Club Members."

    Agreed. But I think Disney also has a responsibility to stop selling up the idea then that you can buy anywhere and stay anywhere else at 7-months. Today, that anywhere is Riviera and Aulani.
    Very good information. If they have the power and the right to do it, then absolutely, I would have to accept it because as you said, it was what I agreed to.

    Having said that, I do not agree that there is a need to do that when at 7 months, there are options other than ones home resort most of the time. it may not be the exact resort you want, or the same room size, but with the exception of the fall when it is extremely difficult at 7 months, even to trade into SSR or OKW, one can switch out to something if they want.

    To me, the bigger problem is the popularity of the fall combined with the lower point charts and if anything should be looked at, its that.

    In terms of resale restrictions, right now, just like we agreed to terms of BtVC and the ability to set values at a more than 1:1 trade, people buying contracts agree to the restrictions.

    In terms of trading out and Disney selling it as easy, yes, they probably should be more honest in tempering people’s expectations for near park resorts, that I agree with.

    One of the reasons I am happy that I ended up buying in at RIV is to have the advantage to book there and stay there in the cheaper..well RIV cheaper..rooms. I own BWV to book and stay there and my SSR points will be used to stay there and maybe elsewhere when I can. Like I said, I go with the trends and if I can’t use my SSR points 1:1 down the road, I’ll manage and adjust!
     
    Last edited:

    Pooh12863

    Mouseketeer
    Joined
    Aug 11, 2018
    But I think Disney also has a responsibility to stop selling up the idea then that you can buy anywhere and stay anywhere else at 7-months. Today, that anywhere is Riviera and Aulani.
    With the exception of VGC you can still buy any resort direct from Disney.
     

    keishashadow

    Proud Redhead...yes, I have some bananas!
    Joined
    Dec 30, 2004
    Been then, done that, multiple times but the irony of physically being at WDW, yet not exactly ‘in the moment’ via booking yet another DVC trip at the first window of opportunity is not lost upon me lol.
     

    crisi

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Feb 25, 2002
    But some folks want to stay at a variety of places, but cannot own at all of them.
    I think trading at 7 months is just fine as long as everyone knows the rules going in.... and they should.
    Honestly, I don't think DVC is a good fit for those people. I think DVC is a good fit for someone who doesn't mind staying at the same resort every stay, booking at least eight months out - more if you want studios or specialty rooms like BWV standard - and who sees it as a plus if they log in at seven months and can get a different resort for variety sake - if they want to.

    If what you want is to stay at the BC this year because you are bringing your growing gills nephew and next year you want GF because its going to be a more adulty romantic trip, and the next year you want the Contemporary because it will work great with all the stroller laden MK trips you are taking, and then the Poly - because that was where you had your honeymoon, and then you want SSR because you think you'll be at DTD a lot - you are far better off renting points or using cash through CRO.

    There are exceptions - people who don't mind moving mid stay may be happier. People willing to waitlist and stalk might be happier. But you need to be realistic - DVC is a timeshare, timeshare means you may not get what you want if you try and trade around. And with a points based timeshare, you may not be able to reliably get what you want even at home at eleven months - if you are looking for a VGF studio in early December.
     

    Sandisw

    Moderator
    Moderator
    Joined
    Nov 15, 2008
    Honestly, I don't think DVC is a good fit for those people. I think DVC is a good fit for someone who doesn't mind staying at the same resort every stay, booking at least eight months out - more if you want studios or specialty rooms like BWV standard - and who sees it as a plus if they log in at seven months and can get a different resort for variety sake - if they want to.

    If what you want is to stay at the BC this year because you are bringing your growing gills nephew and next year you want GF because its going to be a more adulty romantic trip, and the next year you want the Contemporary because it will work great with all the stroller laden MK trips you are taking, and then the Poly - because that was where you had your honeymoon, and then you want SSR because you think you'll be at DTD a lot - you are far better off renting points or using cash through CRO.

    There are exceptions - people who don't mind moving mid stay may be happier. People willing to waitlist and stalk might be happier. But you need to be realistic - DVC is a timeshare, timeshare means you may not get what you want if you try and trade around. And with a points based timeshare, you may not be able to reliably get what you want even at home at eleven months - if you are looking for a VGF studio in early December.
    All such great points and as someone who does like to stay elsewhere if I can, I manage those expectations and know it will take work!

    But for one that doesn’t, then I agree..DVC may not be a good choice!
     

    Connect

    Disney News and Updates

    Get Daily Email Updates

    Subscribe to the DVCstore.com
    mailing list!

    BUY DVC


    SELL DVC


    DVC POINT CHARTS


    DIS PODCASTS

    Top