Would you join a lawsuit against DVC to stop/revert the 2020 reallocation?

[mab2012]

OKW - 7,674,852

So for OKW (since I happen to have just run the numbers there), I have 7,662,600 in 2019 and 7,671,474 in 2020, for an increase of 0.13%. Under @mustinjourney's posted value in both cases, but not strictly neutral.

 

[mustinjourney]

But this isn't quite true. It doesn't say that "at least one Use Day in a Studio will be made available at XX points", it says "each Club Member will always be eligible to reserve ... at least one Use Day in a <type> Vacation Home for every X Home Resort Vacation Points". Strictly interpreted, this means for each unit type there must be at least enough nights available at or below point value X so that the member owning the most vacation points could use all his or her points to reserve a unit of that type at point value X. Subject to availability, meaning some other member hasn't gotten to those nights first. But that's a bit nonsensical. The only sensible interpretation is that it's meant to be an average, such that there always exists some combination of nights that would allow any individual owner to book Y nights at a total cost of X*Y (or less), subject to availability.

Taken to an extreme, and to use a concrete example, an owner at BWV, where the maximum reallocation value for a standard studio is 15* points, should be able to reserve every night of the year in a studio for a total cost of 15*365 = 5475 points. But the actual cost to book a standard studio at BWV in 2020, ignoring the extra day for the leap year, is 5533 points. Or, to rephrase, our hypothetical owner of 5475 BWV points would be short 58 points required to book the entire year, and thus unable to reserve "at least one Use Day in a Studio Vacation Home for every 15 Home Resort Vacation Points".

* I'm taking the BWV 15 point value to be accurate based on other comments in this thread and the link that someone posted to dvcnews.com. I haven't independently verified that it's correct.

To me, this says a few things:

• The 2020 point charts are clearly in violation of the "maximum reallocation" point values in some categories, including BWV standard studios (subject to my disclaimer* above).
• Reading the OKW POS that @WebmasterDoc posted (thank you!), there's no indication that "maximum allocation" must be "in effect" for those average point values to apply. Rather, they are given as the average point values at which "each Club Member will always be eligible to reserve" a particular unit type, and in fact this is stated prior to any mention of "maximum reallocation". The "maximum reallocation" concept (and chart) appears to be nothing more than an illustration of what would naturally occur if the point chart was flattened; there's no implication that they must do away with seasons in order for the maximum average value guarantees to apply.
• IF the initial point allocations for a given point chart are at the maximum (so, for example, if the initial point chart for BVW had the total points to book a standard studio every night of the year at 5475 points, and other booking categories similarly set at the maximum from the outset), then that would argue strongly for @zavandor's interpretation that points can't be reallocated across unit types, because any such reallocation would have to leave at least one category in violation of the maximum reallocation average. BUT... I ran the numbers on OKW, and the results were not quite what I expected. In every booking category, the average cost (and thus the total annual points required) to book the unit are lower than that unit's maximum reallocation average. This was true of both the 2019 and 2020 point charts. Thus it would appear that at least at OKW, there is some room to reallocate across unit types without exceeding the stated average maximums.

For the record, I don't think any of this means we need to break out the pitchforks, nor do I think it's necessarily legally significant. (If DVC can amend the terms of the POS at their sole discretion at any time, is any of it legally binding?) But I also don't see any point in denying what is fairly clearly written.

Not sure how you did your calculation -- but all of the reallocation calculations are supposed to be based on the same Base Year, which has the least number of F/Sa nights and is 365 days long. Perhaps 2020 has a higher number of F/Sa than the Base Year, and this might account for at least some of the difference?

 

[Dean]

But this isn't quite true. It doesn't say that "at least one Use Day in a Studio will be made available at XX points", it says "each Club Member will always be eligible to reserve ... at least one Use Day in a <type> Vacation Home for every X Home Resort Vacation Points". Strictly interpreted, this means for each unit type there must be at least enough nights available at or below point value X so that the member owning the most vacation points could use all his or her points to reserve a unit of that type at point value X. Subject to availability, meaning some other member hasn't gotten to those nights first. But that's a bit nonsensical. The only sensible interpretation is that it's meant to be an average, such that there always exists some combination of nights that would allow any individual owner to book Y nights at a total cost of X*Y (or less), subject to availability.

Taken to an extreme, and to use a concrete example, an owner at BWV, where the maximum reallocation value for a standard studio is 15* points, should be able to reserve every night of the year in a studio for a total cost of 15*365 = 5475 points. But the actual cost to book a standard studio at BWV in 2020, ignoring the extra day for the leap year, is 5533 points. Or, to rephrase, our hypothetical owner of 5475 BWV points would be short 58 points required to book the entire year, and thus unable to reserve "at least one Use Day in a Studio Vacation Home for every 15 Home Resort Vacation Points".

* I'm taking the BWV 15 point value to be accurate based on other comments in this thread and the link that someone posted to dvcnews.com. I haven't independently verified that it's correct.

To me, this says a few things:

• The 2020 point charts are clearly in violation of the "maximum reallocation" point values in some categories, including BWV standard studios (subject to my disclaimer* above).
• Reading the OKW POS that @WebmasterDoc posted (thank you!), there's no indication that "maximum allocation" must be "in effect" for those average point values to apply. Rather, they are given as the average point values at which "each Club Member will always be eligible to reserve" a particular unit type, and in fact this is stated prior to any mention of "maximum reallocation". The "maximum reallocation" concept (and chart) appears to be nothing more than an illustration of what would naturally occur if the point chart was flattened; there's no implication that they must do away with seasons in order for the maximum average value guarantees to apply.
• IF the initial point allocations for a given point chart are at the maximum (so, for example, if the initial point chart for BVW had the total points to book a standard studio every night of the year at 5475 points, and other booking categories similarly set at the maximum from the outset), then that would argue strongly for @zavandor's interpretation that points can't be reallocated across unit types, because any such reallocation would have to leave at least one category in violation of the maximum reallocation average. BUT... I ran the numbers on OKW, and the results were not quite what I expected. In every booking category, the average cost (and thus the total annual points required) to book the unit are lower than that unit's maximum reallocation average. This was true of both the 2019 and 2020 point charts. Thus it would appear that at least at OKW, there is some room to reallocate across unit types without exceeding the stated average maximums.

For the record, I don't think any of this means we need to break out the pitchforks, nor do I think it's necessarily legally significant. (If DVC can amend the terms of the POS at their sole discretion at any time, is any of it legally binding?) But I also don't see any point in denying what is fairly clearly written.

If you're saying each and every member would need to be able to reserve for this price then I would absolutely disagree because it's obviously subject to availability.

 

[DVC92]

Getting back to to basic reasoning for a point change - “In order to meet the Club Members’ needs and expectations as evidenced by fluctuations in Use Day demand...", the 2020 point reallocation doesn't on its face seem to meet the needs and expectations of Members. I own at OKW, BLT & VGF. Looking at the reallocation:
OKW - all studio nights increased, 2 of 5 1BR have increased, 3 2BR nights increased and 2 went down.
BLT - all 10 studio nights increased at standard and lake view, 8 of 10 1BR nights increased at standard & lake view; 4 up & 5 down for 2BR at studio & lake view
VGF - 8 of 10 studio nights increased, 1BR - all 5 standards increased, 2BR - 2 up & 5 down

How does this reallocation benefit members' needs and expectations? Clearly, it now requires more points for studios and 1BRs in most cases. Members who need nothing more than these types of units now will require more points or go for less days. These members don't want 2BRs. Unless I can be convinced otherwise, this reallocation benefits no one but Disney.

 

[Dean]

Getting back to to basic reasoning for a point change - “In order to meet the Club Members’ needs and expectations as evidenced by fluctuations in Use Day demand...", the 2020 point reallocation doesn't on its face seem to meet the needs and expectations of Members. I own at OKW, BLT & VGF. Looking at the reallocation:
OKW - all studio nights increased, 2 of 5 1BR have increased, 3 2BR nights increased and 2 went down.
BLT - all 10 studio nights increased at standard and lake view, 8 of 10 1BR nights increased at standard & lake view; 4 up & 5 down for 2BR at studio & lake view
VGF - 8 of 10 studio nights increased, 1BR - all 5 standards increased, 2BR - 2 up & 5 down

How does this reallocation benefit members' needs and expectations. Clearly, it now requires more points for studios and 1BRs in most cases. Members who need nothing more than these types of units now will require more points or go for less days. These members don't want 2BRs. Unless I can be convinced otherwise, his reallocation benefits no one but Disney.

But if studios and 2 BR were in higher demand, this change will swing the balance, how much we don't know. It's the overall membership, not the individual that is the determining factor here.

 

[mustinjourney]

But if studios and 2 BR were in higher demand, this change will swing the balance, how much we don't know. It's the overall membership, not the individual that is the determining factor here.

Shouldn’t 1BRs have gone down then? And if 2BRs were in higher demand, their prices shouldn’t have gone down overall.

 

[RobDoc]

...
To me, this says a few things:

• The 2020 point charts are clearly in violation of the "maximum reallocation" point values in some categories, including BWV standard studios (subject to my disclaimer* above).
• Reading the OKW POS that @WebmasterDoc posted (thank you!), there's no indication that "maximum allocation" must be "in effect" for those average point values to apply. Rather, they are given as the average point values at which "each Club Member will always be eligible to reserve" a particular unit type, and in fact this is stated prior to any mention of "maximum reallocation". The "maximum reallocation" concept (and chart) appears to be nothing more than an illustration of what would naturally occur if the point chart was flattened; there's no implication that they must do away with seasons in order for the maximum average value guarantees to apply. ….

First, Maximum Reallocation is defined as leveling point charts for a DVC Resort for each type of villa. There would be no weekday/weekend or date consideration any longer. It has never happened and, IMO, will never happen.

Maximum Reallocation has no affect on the Point Chart for any DVC Resort - including the 2020 point chart. None of the 2020 point charts represent a Maximum Reallocation.

Maximum Reallocation has never been described as an 'average' in any DVC document I have seen as several seem to insist. If that language does exist in a POS (or other official DVC document), please scan/photograph and post it for all to see.

The last sentence in the final paragraph on page 162 of the first document here defines Maximum Reallocation and the entirety of page 163 in the second document demonstrates what Maximum Reallocation the OKW point chart would look like under Maximum Reallocation. Please note that nowhere does the word "average" exist in this document. The 2020 Reallocation (and any previous Reallocation) is not Maximum Reallocation as never have the point costs been leveled across all days of the year at any DVC Resort.

 

[mab2012]

If you're saying each and every member would need to be able to reserve for this price then I would absolutely disagree because it's obviously subject to availability.

Nope, that wasn't what I was saying at all. This is what I said (somewhere in there - I know, it was long, I'm not surprised if you missed it ):

The only sensible interpretation is that it's meant to be an average, such that there always exists some combination of nights that would allow any individual owner to book Y nights at a total cost of X*Y (or less), subject to availability.

The OKW POS says that I will always be able to book a studio for at least one night for every 15 points I own, provided nobody else books those nights first. So if I have 5475 points, I should be able to book 5475 / 15 = 365 nights in a studio (again, subject to availability). Furthermore, my ability to do this is stated in the POS independent of any mention of "maximum reallocation" . Actually "maximum reallocation" appears to be derived from my entitlement to book a studio for at least one night per 15 points (subject to availability), not the other way around.

At OKW, the (weighted) average studio point cost is under 15 points per night, both now and in 2020. At BWV, the average standard studio cost is above 15 in 2020. Assuming BWV's POS contains similar language to OKW (and I don't know for sure that it does), then the 2020 point BWV point chart is in clear violation of the POS.

 

[mab2012]

First, Maximum Reallocation is defined as leveling point charts for a DVC Resort for each type of villa. There would be no weekday/weekend or date consideration any longer. It has never happened and, IMO, will never happen.

Maximum Reallocation has no affect on the Point Chart for any DVC Resort - including the 2020 point chart. None of the 2020 point charts represent a Maximum Reallocation.

Maximum Reallocation has never been described as an 'average' in any DVC document I have seen as several seem to insist. If that language does exist in a POS (or other official DVC document), please scan/photograph and post it for all to see.

The last sentence in the final paragraph on page 162 of the first document here defines Maximum Reallocation and the entirety of page 163 in the second document demonstrates what Maximum Reallocation the OKW point chart would look like under Maximum Reallocation. Please note that nowhere does the word "average" exist in this document. The 2020 Reallocation (and any previous Reallocation) is not Maximum Reallocation as never have the point costs been leveled across all days of the year at any DVC Resort.

I agree with you entirely. My assertion that BWV is in violation of the POS has nothing to do with "maximum allocation". It has everything to do with the written guarantee that:

"each Club Member will always be eligible to reserve at the Condominium, subject to availability: at least one (1) Use Day in a Studio Vacation Home for every 15 Home Resort Vacation Points (etc)".

"Maximum allocation" follows from this. It's an effect of the reservation entitlement, not the cause.

 

[RobDoc]

Shouldn’t 1BRs have gone down then? And if 2BRs were in higher demand, their prices shouldn’t have gone down overall.

We seem to be basing statements like this on anecdotal evidence since we no access to the real 'demand' for any DVC accommodation. We anecdotally can review the online reservation system and make judgement on the day-to-day changes found, but that still does not show true demand as those are only snapshots of reservation availability at a given moment.

How many of those 2BRs reserved at 11 months will be changed to a different resort/villa type at 7 months? How many ended up being canceled within 7 months, how many were canceled within 30 days? How many of these reservations were made using banked or borrowed points?

Since we do not have any those answers, we are using information which can change daily/hourly/every minute at 14 different resorts. We also are not privy to information regarding the use of DVC Points to 'pay' for non-DVC reservation options -where those points are used to make reservations available for cash reservations.

The DVC Reservation system is a moving target and, without all of the actual data, we are unable to clearly identify what is happening regarding demand at any DVC Resort.

 

[RobDoc]

I agree with you entirely. My assertion that BWV is in violation of the POS has nothing to do with "maximum allocation". It has everything to do with the written guarantee that:

"each Club Member will always be eligible to reserve at the Condominium, subject to availability: at least one (1) Use Day in a Studio Vacation Home for every 15 Home Resort Vacation Points (etc)".

"Maximum allocation" follows from this. It's an effect of the reservation entitlement, not the cause.

You stated : "The 2020 point charts are clearly in violation of the "maximum reallocation" point values in some categories, including BWV standard studios (subject to my disclaimer* above)."

The quote you provided above is available to any DVC Member via the POS for their Resort. Please note that the quote you include above was preceded in my POS by "As stated in the preceding paragraph, even in the event of maximum reallocation," and was followed by "a Club Member will always be eligible to reserve at the Condominium, subject to availability, at least one (1) Use Day in a one (1) bedroom Vacation Home for every thirty (30) Vacation Points and at least one (1) …". The POS I have quoted from is the May, 1993 OKW document and the statement above does NOT include mention of Studio, only 1 and 2 Bedroom Vacation Homes. Studios and Grand Villas were not specifically mentioned in this sentence, but were included in the Maximum Reallocation.

In looking at the 2020 BWV Point charts, there appear to be many nights where a Studio may be reserved for 15 points or less, so if that was the villa size you were referencing as a violation, it would seem that the 2020 charts do meet the intent as there are indeed nights (based on availability) where Studios cost 15 or fewer points. Again, that statement would also be true under Maximum Reallocation.

 

[RobDoc]

… They did say the numbers were as of Dec. 2014 and were accurate +/- 1000 points.

Why use 2014 information when discussing the 2019/2020 Point Charts?

 

[crvetter]

You stated : "The 2020 point charts are clearly in violation of the "maximum reallocation" point values in some categories, including BWV standard studios (subject to my disclaimer* above)."

The quote you provided above is available to any DVC Member via the POS for their Resort. Please note that the quote you include above was preceded in my POS by "As stated in the preceding paragraph, even in the event of maximum reallocation," and was followed by "a Club Member will always be eligible to reserve at the Condominium, subject to availability, at least one (1) Use Day in a one (1) bedroom Vacation Home for every thirty (30) Vacation Points and at least one (1) …". The POS I have quoted from is the May, 1993 OKW document and the statement above does NOT include mention of Studio, only 1 and 2 Bedroom Vacation Homes. Studios and Grand Villas were not specifically mentioned in this sentence, but were included in the Maximum Reallocation.

In looking at the 2020 BWV Point charts, there appear to be many nights where a Studio may be reserved for 15 points or less, so if that was the villa size you were referencing as a violation, it would seem that the 2020 charts do meet the intent as there are indeed nights (based on availability) where Studios cost 15 or fewer points. Again, that statement would also be true under Maximum Reallocation.

On the contrary the OKW POS does include the studio and grand villas. The paragraph you a quoting from is setting the maximum amount of points you would be required to have to participate in an external exchange based on a weekly reservations. If you read the preceding paragraph which is the language being mentioned by others does have the information and that is the setup to the maximum reallocation.

I've attached the section from OKW that does specifically state the rates for the studio and Grand Villas.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

Why use 2014 information when discussing the 2019/2020 Point Charts?

Weren't they posting the maximum number of points for the resort? The one that cannot change? Since OKW has not had any units added since long before 2014 then it should still be the correct number.

 

[Novakm]

I read thru a good part of this thread, but not all of it, so sorry if this has already been discussed.

From a contract standpoint, there are two definitions of points. The points contained “within” a unit are different from the points needed to “book” the rooms in the unit.

The total points needed to “book” the resort for a year needs to closely equal the points “within” the resort. The points to “book” a unit does not need to equal the points “within” the unit.

The number of points “within” a unit can never change. It’s on the deed, and was calculated based on cost to build.

The number of points to “book” a unit is based on how popular it is. The more people want to book it the more points. This is the only fair way to minimize breakage.

As an example, ocean view and parking lot view units contain an equal number of points, because they cost the same to build. But it costs more points to book ocean view because more people want ocean view. NOT because it costs more. Let’s face it, if GVs were the same points as studios, lot no one would want a studio.

The goal of a reallocation of points to book is to minimize breakage. If I look at the 60 day RAT today, there are 339 room nights available likely to become breakage. None are studios, and only 39 are 1br. The rest are 2+ BR. This tells me studio and 1 BR are “priced” too low compared to 2+BR.

Im willing to wait and see if this latest change helps with this. If not, they can readjust for 2022.

 

[Madame]

he goal of a reallocation of points to book is to minimize breakage. If I look at the 60 day RAT today, there are 339 room nights available likely to become breakage. None are studios, and only 39 are 1br. The rest are 2+ BR. This tells me studio and 1 BR are “priced” too low compared to 2+BR.

But you don’t know how many 2bds or 1bds are left. There could be 2 2bds and 6 1bds.

 

[Novakm]

But we can agree that 0 studios available out of at least 339 room nights indicates Studios are a under priced?

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

The total points needed to “book” the resort for a year needs to closely equal the points “within” the resort. The points to “book” a unit does not need to equal the points “within” the unit.

The lock-off premium means this is not true.

 

[Novakm]

Kat, I disagree.

The “lock off premium” just has to mean another category is less expensive than it would have been without the kickoff premium.

 

[mustinjourney]

But you don’t know how many 2bds or 1bds are left. There could be 2 2bds and 6 1bds.

Not to mention if VGF is sold out, the fact that SSR has inventory should not cause VGF to get reallocated.