Why can SSR owners book other DVC resorts...

[Nick@ VB+OKW]

Originally posted by DrTomorrow
And, for the record, DW and I are doing our part to minimize the point imbalance by staying at SSR for our first two trips "Home"; yep, we'll dive on that grenade for our fellow DIS DVCers....

 

[RobDoc]

But, when they allow points to be used when there is NO corresponding property, there is a POTENTIAL (and, maybe insignificant) imbalance. They have, in essence, overbooked the capacity of the FAMILY of DVC resorts by two months worth of SSR points.

If this should truly be a concern, then we can substitute the BWV contracts from this past summer in the above statement, which have presumably already been used to make reservations at all DVC resorts and yet there is no corresponding inventory to compensate the system. That inventory won't become available until after the sales center is moved to SSR and after sufficient time to rehab the old sales center on the BW into usable villas (most likely late this summer). Utilization of those points will have been allowed to go on for over a year- without any outcry from this forum. No restrictions were placed on the continued use of those points despite their potential effect on the reservation system.

During the exterior rehab at BWV, there were many rooms taken out of inventory- perhaps more than the 2-4% owned by DVD. That lack of inventory would have had the same effect on the DVC reservation system- yet no restrictions were placed on BWV owners during that time.

SSR purchasers cannot make any reservations for stays until May 17, 2004. Recent BWV purchasers have had no restrictions, but won't have inventory placed into the system until after SSR begins to come online.

If there is truly an unfair imbalance created by this perceived lack of proper inventory, it appears to have already been affecting the system without noticeable effect.

 

[dcfromva]

If this should truly be a concern, then we can substitute the BWV contracts from this past summer in the above statement, which have presumably already been used to make reservations at all DVC resorts and yet there is no corresponding inventory to compensate the system.

WebmasterDoc,
That is exactly what I was thinking. Or, carried further, how about anytime a property is purchased from Disney? When a DVC property is purchased through Disney, DVC reservations are immediately accepted, but would those points have been released into inventory prior to closing?

Currently, article 7 of the product understanding checklist covers when "purchasers" are allowed to make reservations. (I am assuming that it is the same article number for every home resort as it was the same article number for all 3 of my home resorts). If this were changed to "owners" instead of "purchasers", it would certainly be less of a marketing advantage to purchase DVC through Disney.

-DC

 

[Dean]

Originally posted by stacy6552
If SSR owners cannot stay anywhere until their unit is available, where is this imbalance comming from?

All members will get thier chance to stay at SSR once the booking window opens. It didnt open for ssr owners at the regular point either. There was no difference when I booked, aside from that fact that the calendar read Dec instead June. I dont see how there will be any difference to the rest of DVC in Feb. So I ask again, just what is it that you all are fearing is going to happen?

Stacy, it seems that you can only see the SSR issue and not the overall DVC situation. I'll try again below.

WHATS THE DIFFERENCE?

You only have a valid arguement, if you can reasonably explain that the difference for you between booking a trip at SSR on Feb 4 or the first day of the 7mos window?

Ive asked that question a few times now, and nobody has yet to answer that question.

Actually I have answered your question at least twice now as have others. If we've failed to convince you, so be it.

If this owner you speak of is a WLV member, then they had their priority opportunity between 7 mos and 11 mos out. If this member owns somewhere else like BCV, why should they get priority over an SSR owner at the WLV? We only get priority at our own resort and only during the early booking window.

You are only focusing on the home resort priority and there is far more to it than that. The 7 month window at other resorts is truly the question, not the home resort priority. The rights of the club members should be protected also and in this case they were not. Remember there are some 80,000 members with a fair number of them planning on reserving at the 7 month window at non home resort locations. What DVC has done not only puts them competing with more points than there are rooms but also allots less rooms to the overall pool because SSR is out of the mix, a double whammy. And, I’m convinced, far more EXTRA points to worry about than when VWL and BCV came on board.

I'm sure I'll be redundant but I'll try to bring the issues together as I see them.

• First, if it was a big deal to me I would have been online with a DVC exec months ago when I realized the inequity. I can feel it's wrong, inappropriate, etc without being important enough for me to call my lawyer and get him involved. If the trend of sacrificing the current members continues, I’ll just sell my memberships and move on.
• There are extra points in the system which much be compensated for or absorbed. This is not new or unique to SSR but it is DIFFERENT this time. This is mainly an issue with new resorts as with existing resorts, DVC can't sell a unit that has not already been declared into inventory.
• There is always a delay in booking (or at least using) points on a new or add on purchase and this is doubly true on a new resort.
• And IMO, they are not truly members until they have signed the final papers and paid the moneys and therefore shouldn’t have the same benefits, much less more benefits. A new member can't use their points until their "unit" is available for occupancy. This will invariably create a backlog of bookings with any new resort and can be perceived as a limitation of a new purchase. If one decides to start their calculations form the point they signed the intent to buy, paid the deposit or the initial booking window, there will always be short comings. I would look at it differently and more in terms of the rest of the timeshare world where one can ONLY book their home resort when it is available and cannot exchange at all until the resort ACTUALLY is available.
• In the recent past (BCV and VWL), there were Magical beginnings programs where points were sold back to DVD. DVC could have used the points to offset the extra points introduced into the system. How well it balanced, not one here knows. DVD could also use the points they own to off set those extra points but we still don’t know if or how this was done. I think it’s fair to assume that it was equitable but it is an assumption.
• When a new resort opens or is about to, there are some nuances and situations that must be addressed. These will not be perceived as fair to all concerned no matter what you do. If you bought SSR and didn’t get what you wanted your first attempt, you would likely not be happy, especially if those rooms went to non SSR members. Still, the club rules are 11 months home resort priority and 7 months open for everyone. DVC SHOULD HAVE STUCK WITH THAT PLAN, even if it took rooms away from new owners initially. Special protections should not have been offered, PERIOD.
• Unfortunately, DVC took it even a step further. They gave SSR owners a 2 month period where they could book other DVC resorts but other DVC members could not book SSR, even worse than above. Will it kill the system, no, of course not but it is the principle of the thing and IMO does not bode well for DVC. Not every situation has a perfect solution but this was the worst of several options. My bet is that it happened by mistake, that no one actively planned to allow the one way none home resort window. I suspect DVC said “lets give them a limited window so they can book SSR without competing with none home resort members” and they didn’t realize or plan to let them book other resorts while blocking current members at the same time. As I said, they shouldn’t even have offered the home resort protection within the 7 month window but at least that one I can see.
• Regardless of what others have posted, I’m pretty sure there was no protection for VWL or BCV owners initially and am absolutely certain there was no one way trade out window.
  

 

[FriendsOfEeyore]

Good points Dean. Thanks for taking the time lay it all out in one post.

I think that summarizing the point and I think that I realized that MOST DVC members agree that this way of booking for SSR members was not equal.

Edward

 

[Terry S]

Wow is this thread long! I haven't read it all but, I did just want to chime in and say when BCV's opened up I was actually a bit upset because the first day they took reservations for BCV was on March 6th and at that time everyone (BCV and non-BCV owners) were allowed to book at BCV. The reason for this was that the resort was opening within the 7th month window. As I said, I was a bit put off about this because normally owners get a priority, but I understood when I signed my contract that owners and non-owners alike get a 7 month priority and it was within that timeframe. Sooooo, I am really surprised they are changing the rules for SSR.

 

[jaysue]

Prediction is that this thread is just about exhausted but it has been one of the recent great threads out there

Thanks to all for a lively community debate!

 

[RobDoc]

When a new resort opens or is about to, there are some nuances and situations that must be addressed. These will not be perceived as fair to all concerned no matter what you do. If you bought SSR and didn’t get what you wanted your first attempt, you would likely not be happy, especially if those rooms went to non SSR members. Still, the club rules are 11 months home resort priority and 7 months open for everyone. DVC SHOULD HAVE STUCK WITH THAT PLAN, even if it took rooms away from new owners initially. Special protections should not have been offered, PERIOD.

Something not mentioned in this thread to date that can also affect the 7 month window is the balance between banked and borrowed points. The true number of points in the whole system that are actually available for reservations is also dependent on the number that have already been banked and borrowed.

The bulleted message above still fails to address the situation at BWV where points have already been sold and (presumably) used for reservations for rooms not yet available for use (and probably won't be available until late this summer). It also fails to account for the rooms taken out of inventory during the exterior rehab at BWV. An earlier suggestion that the SSR reservations are somehow affected MB points already in the system was summarily dismissed by saying "I doubt there were enough points in the MB of BWV to balance even that situation as they sold points there before rooms were ready as well."

It still appears to me that there are many facets of this issue and that we don't have enough/any facts about any of those aspects to be able to make the accusations about DVC wrongdoing that are being brought forward. We don't even know the number of SSR owners period- let alone the number taking advantage of this supposed advantage. We also don't know the number of BWV owners who have already taken advantage of the sales center rooms yet to be included in the resort inventory. These owners have already had far longer than 2 months for their advantage and still have another 6-8+ months to go before those villas are available to anyone.

This is the first situation where DVC has presold a resort that will be entirely phased into existence and the first buyers there will not have an 11 month priority at their resort- they were given a 5 1/2 month opportunity and 2 month priority. Early VWL and BCV buyers also did not have the 11 month priority- but those resorts opened in their entirety and the available inventory has always exceeded the number of owners at resort being sold. Recent BWV add-on owners have already had their 11 month priority for units not even available.

Perhaps the notion that DVC has made an error in this situation is correct, but perhaps they know all of the factors involved- including the actual number of SSR owners, banked/borrowed points, developer inventory points (at all resorts) and the actual historical reservtion patterns at DVC resorts during the coming time period involved.

If they have already taken into consideration all aspects of the DVC reservation process perhaps they have already offered a responsible solution-equitable to all- in this situation.

.02

 

[FriendsOfEeyore]

I agree we beat the heck out this thread.

I appreciate the comment about one of the "recent great threads". I in no way take credit for that. The credit goes to all who pushed each of us to think about this idea. I don't want to leave anyone out, but a sprecial thanks to Troy, Dean, Liferbabe, Stacy, Doc and everyone else for their insight. I learned that most feel the same way that I do.

As I said earlier in the thread, I pride myself with be able to carry on lengthy, well thought discussions with anyone willing to talk. I was never on debate team in high school, and I may have missed my calling.

I often will take the opposite of a discussion, even if I believe the other person is right, just to challenge them to really think about what they are saying.

The most interesting thing about this post, is that it never got to a my resort is better than your's arguement. That is where so many of the longer threads on this particular board that go in that direction.

Now, I think that most of us feel that DVC does pay attention, at least casually, to these boards. If I get the dumpster view, so be it. But maybe, just maybe, DVC will think twice about their actions the next time. Dean and Terry S bring up great points that this is probably a loop-hole result of the changes that DVC made to avoid the inequality that occured with the initial bookings of BCV.

Then there is the point that Doc has stressed along, maybe DVC has the point inventory so that it really does not matter. Only DVD/DVC know the actual numbers. Do you think that they would tell me if I called and ask????? Probably not, that is why I asked the question in the next best forum: The DIS-DVC

Edward

 

[Dean]

omething not mentioned in this thread to date that can also affect the 7 month window is the balance between banked and borrowed points. The true number of points in the whole system that are actually available for reservations is also dependent on the number that have already been banked and borrowed.

True, but it doesn't seem particularly pertinent to the discussion as those are ongoing factors that are a function of the way the system works and should even out (or not) across the board for all resorts. If the last year of free tickets at OKW didn't create a problem in this regard, it's hard to imagine one until the very end of the current DVC resorts.

The bulleted message above still fails to address the situation at BWV where points have already been sold and (presumably) used for reservations for rooms not yet available for use (and probably won't be available until late this summer). It also fails to account for the rooms taken out of inventory during the exterior rehab at BWV. An earlier suggestion that the SSR reservations are somehow affected MB points already in the system was summarily dismissed by saying "I doubt there were enough points in the MB of BWV to balance even that situation as they sold points there before rooms were ready as well."

I'm not sure I agree. I addressed it earlier and in general terms above. The same thing happend for OKW with the new buildings and with every new resort after OKW opened as well as when OKW was phased in. There's no doubt there are other factors that affect availability, the question isn't that but simply uneven availability. Since those BWV points had MB associated, that should have covered part or all of any inequities. SSR is an extreme and unique example that goes beyond just extra points though.

It still appears to me that there are many facets of this issue and that we don't have enough/any facts about any of those aspects to be able to make the accusations about DVC wrongdoing that are being brought forward. We don't even know the number of SSR owners period- let alone the number taking advantage of this supposed advantage. We also don't know the number of BWV owners who have already taken advantage of the sales center rooms yet to be included in the resort inventory. These owners have already had far longer than 2 months for their advantage and still have another 6-8+ months to go before those villas are available to anyone.

No arguement there other than it's the principle and not the dynamics that bother me. As I said earlier, DVC will survive this with little or any apparent hiccups.

If they have already taken into consideration all aspects of the DVC reservation process perhaps they have already offered a responsible solution-equitable to all- in this situation.

Agreed, it's a possibility, other than the one way 7 month window which is simply wrong and IMO unethical.

 

[stacy6552]

Actually, Dean, I've been through this entire thread and your answer to my question is nowhere to be found. Two people did address the issue and Im hoping that I addressed their concerns.

The issue at hand is should SSR owners be allowed to book at other resorts within the 7 mos booking window, before Feb 4th. Right? Ive seen it repeated, Edward is argueing that SSR owners should not be able to book before feb 4. Edward, have I got the issue nailed down?

I submit that if SSR owners cannot book at the 7 mos window, like everyone else, then SSR owners are forced into a disadvantage, by having to wait. A OKW member should not get priority booking over an SSR member at BCV.....If the SSR owners have to wait until Feb 4, then everyone else has had priority booking advantage at other resorts that they have not had.

So now explain to me what the difference will be for non-ssr owners booking on Feb 4th. What do you expect to happen on that date, that would not have happened on the first day of the 7 mos window?

 

[Nick@ VB+OKW]

Stacey
I was just wondering if you and "FriendsOfEeyore" are continuing this thread to build up your post count?

Posts-on this thread
stacy6552 - 22
FriendsOfEeyore- 19

 

[madonna31]

I haven't read this entire thread - but I'm just curious if any of you thought that Disney is allowing new SSR owners to do this; simply as an incentive to 'sign on the dotted line'...

I mean when DVC first came about - as an 'incentive' - you were given park tickets for what? 10 years? If you ask me - I would MUCH rather have had THAT as an incentive then a stupid priority booking thing for one lousy year.

 

[FriendsOfEeyore]

Originally posted by stacy6552
cut...The issue at hand is should SSR owners be allowed to book at other resorts within the 7 mos booking window, before Feb 4th. Right? Ive seen it repeated, Edward is argueing that SSR owners should not be able to book before feb 4. Edward, have I got the issue nailed down?

I submit that if SSR owners cannot book at the 7 mos window, like everyone else, then SSR owners are forced into a disadvantage, by having to wait. A OKW member should not get priority booking over an SSR member at BCV.....If the SSR owners have to wait until Feb 4, then everyone else has had priority booking advantage at other resorts that they have not had.

...cut

Yes Stacy you do understand my point. I also understand where you are coming from. But at the same time, if an OKW member wanted to book BCV, while at the same time an SSR member wanted the same accomodation withing the 7 month. The unit needs to go to the OKW member. You can not take away the right that was previously given to the OKW. DVC should have never given that right to SSR (in my opinion only), because the SSR member had nothing that they could offer as a "trade". After Feb 4th, when all members could book all resorts within the 7 month window, then the SSR member would have a valuable asset to trade for the BCV unit, assuming that it was still available.

If possible, when a new property is developed, the new property members should be given equal rights to the existing members. For example some kind of home booking priority. I understand that this new members would not be given their full 7 month window, but then again, you can trade for something if you have nothing to offer.

I see you complaint Stacy, I really do. But as a new member, you rights would need to be restricted. This is a tough decision that DVD/DVC needs to work out. They are walking on very thin ice right now. Now, do I "hate" and SSR member for their window of opportunity? NO!!!! If I were a new SSR member, I would do the same thing. DVC did right by the SSR members, at the cost of it's existing members.

Tricky, Tricky, Tricky.... DVC has to have figured out that they created an unequitable situation. They tried to correct issues from previous properties openings, and missed this time again. They will undoubtably (sp?) do something totally different the next time. Someone will notice the effect and report it.

I am not sure what DVD/DVC could have done for the 7 month window, short of not allowing SSR members full access to the 7 month window at other resorts. Explained to prespective buyers that this was a one time occurence, and that it is the cost of being the new kid on the block. Kind of like an initiation....

Thought?

Edward

 

[FriendsOfEeyore]

Originally posted by Nick@ VB+OKW
Stacey
I was just wondering if you and "FriendsOfEeyore" are continuing this thread to build up your post count?

Posts-on this thread
stacy6552 - 22
FriendsOfEeyore- 19

C'mon Nick, I have been a member of this board for over 3 years, and reading it for over 4. I have whopping 300 posts in that amount time. I am not a big post # kind a guy... "Welcome Home", "bump", "anyone, anyone", "c'mon more answers", then some "little smiley face art" All of those are the artifical post # builders.

Let's look at you and Cindy (REMEMBER YOU LOST LIKE OVER 4000 posts), your new name started like in August 2003, and you already have more than 1000 posts again.

Now, who is the one padding his post count #s?????????

 

[stacy6552]

But Edward, what do you think will be different about booking on Feb 4 from booking on the first day of the 7 mos window?

If the resort is full of SSR members, then those members havent taken up space elsewhere. And there is the unusual benefit of knowing SSR members havent booked there only to cancel later because they really wanted to stay elsewhere (if going before Sept).

If there is room, then it becomes available to all non-ssr owners at the exact same time, so no preference there.

If theres no room anywhere at all, you cant simply point to SSR as the problem. There are busy times of the year, when rooms become hard to come by. IM not very experienced, but I hear the holidays, early Dec, and member events are the usual times, when not everyone can come.

I've already experienced having my booking window open up, not where it usually would and the only difference was the date on the calendar.

 

[Dean]

Originally posted by madonna31
I haven't read this entire thread - but I'm just curious if any of you thought that Disney is allowing new SSR owners to do this; simply as an incentive to 'sign on the dotted line'...

I mean when DVC first came about - as an 'incentive' - you were given park tickets for what? 10 years? If you ask me - I would MUCH rather have had THAT as an incentive then a stupid priority booking thing for one lousy year.

Yes, at least in part. That's why I said that this is the first time that DVC has thrown out the current owners in favor of the sale (or something to that affect).

 

[DrTomorrow]

Originally posted by FriendsOfEeyore
C'mon Nick, [...] Now, who is the one padding his post count #s?????????

Given the smileys in Nick's post - heck, most of his posts - and the fact that his sense of humor surfaces quite often here, I believe that he was just kidding, Edward.

 

[Dean]

Actually, Dean, I've been through this entire thread and your answer to my question is nowhere to be found. Two people did address the issue and Im hoping that I addressed their concerns.

The issue at hand is should SSR owners be allowed to book at other resorts within the 7 mos booking window, before Feb 4th. Right? Ive seen it repeated, Edward is argueing that SSR owners should not be able to book before feb 4. Edward, have I got the issue nailed down?

Stacy, I have answered that question on at least two occasions. I think you're trying to ask a rhetorical question that you think the answer is "of course SSR owners should get priority". IMO, the answer is no, SSR should not get priority within the 7 month window, PERIOD. The club rules are very clear and DVC has varied from them. SSR buyers are not even DVC members yet so any discussion of members and SSR is a stretch. Yes, SSR members should compete directly and head to head wiht ALL DVC members within the 7 month window even for their home resort even if it means they don't get their reservation. OR SSR should not be added to the club until it is open meaning DVC members from other resorts can't book there AND SSR members cannot book at other resorts until the full 11/7 month window is operational.

I submit that if SSR owners cannot book at the 7 mos window, like everyone else, then SSR owners are forced into a disadvantage, by having to wait. A OKW member should not get priority booking over an SSR member at BCV.....If the SSR owners have to wait until Feb 4, then everyone else has had priority booking advantage at other resorts that they have not had.

If I understand what you're saying, you think SSR buyers would be at a disadvantage because the resort isn't open and the time from the inital booking date and the availability date is less than 7 months. This is NOT a disadvantage, just the absense of an advantage and is a function of it being a new resort, no different than any other new resort in the past. And yes, IMO, the 7 month window should be the factor, not the idea that one is a new buyer and should get special treatment. They should compete head to head with all members within the 7 month window.

So now explain to me what the difference will be for non-ssr owners booking on Feb 4th. What do you expect to happen on that date, that would not have happened on the first day of the 7 mos window?

The real question is what do I expect will have happened between 1 Dec and 4 Feb and what affect do I feel this change in DVC behavior will have on the Club itself. Will this issue in and of itself bring down the entire system, of course not. As long as it's a one time occurance, it will have little real affect. It's more the principle than anything else, DVC sold out. But to answer you question specifically, here's the affects that I see realizing that none of us have ALL the data on points availability, cushions and the like. SSR will have had approximately 2 months to book not only SSR but other DVC resorts. During that time they were competing directly with other DVC members for reservations at all of the resorts. Some of these other members will be owners at those resorts but most will be other DVC members trying to book non home resort reservations at the 7 month window. That means less units available to them since there are no corresponding units open at SSR. And no I don't think there will be more units later at SSR in the situation we're discussing. Also, the extra points thrown into the system will have to be used somewhere and since there's no MB, there is not that offset as in the past few years. Not only that, I see SSR as a bank for many to book other resorts long term, not just that 2 month window. That's OK if it's done within the rules in place, I wish the opening had followed the current rules as well.

As for how I think with will affect the club long term depends on how they carry forward. If they continue to sacrifice the current members to be able to make the sale now, it will devalue and devastate the club long term. One of the things I have liked about DVC is their fairness and straight forward approach. It pains me more to see this integrity lost in this instance than the minimal impact this one issue will have directly on the club and members. Just remember that next time you'll be on the receiving end of any issues that might occur of a similar fashion.

 

[pmcpmc]

the biggest loosers will be those looking for stays within the last 60days before arrival.