2013 Point Chart Changes

[palhockeymomof2]

When we purchased in 2001 our kids were 11 and 14.....we visited WDW once a year working around their school and sports schedules...usually the third week of August......fast forward 10 years later...our son attended college in Florida...and decided to stay there and our youngest is almost done with college.....with the 2 points reallocations and the kids,schedules it now makes sense to visit Wednesday-Sunday or Thursday -Monday and we go for the food and wine festival....and one other visit a year

Back when our kids were younger we would not have been able to move the dates of our visits ...but we also bought points for a weeks visit so we would have been ok .....now that they are older we have more flexibility ...so we will see what the next reallocation is and work with it

 

[keishashadow]

I had mentioned it on another thread, where discussion with new guide turned to whether I should wait until the dust from the new allocation settles before adding more points and selling an existing contract.

There are some points available for the older resort I own in my UY, which weren't there when i last checked. Some promos coming with the video thing next week too. She was trying to close the deal and I expressed the obstacle of not wanting to add on too many points, but not wanting to be short yet again either.

Perhaps the buying strategy she offered (i.e. to buy now) is old news/generic advice to entice more purchased points but perhaps it relates to reallocationsbut it was suggested that:

for each current 5 day trip (S thru T) we want to book, we should look to the chart for Dream season and buy the points necessary to secure the entire week.

DH suggested that DVC might be going to less flexible mode and require a minimum 1 week booking beginning on Saturday as many other TSs follow at least until the 7 month mark. Just an idle thought, nothing to back this up! He did ask if this was possible though as a tweak ala reallocations. Naturally, I have no idea so I'll ask it here.

 

[chalee94]

DH suggested that DVC might be going to less flexible mode and require a minimum 1 week booking beginning on Saturday as many other TSs follow at least until the 7 month mark. Just an idle thought, nothing to back this up! He did ask if this was possible though as a tweak ala reallocations. Naturally, I have no idea so I'll ask it here.

i don't believe DVC would ever go to a 7 night minimum.

it has been suggested before (and is more possible) that they may go to a 3 night minimum or something. that's still not very likely IMO but you never know.

but if a lot of people are still booking sun-thurs stays (moreso than local DVC owners looking for just the weekends), then they would need to continue to raise the costs for weeknights till they hit an equilibrium.

 

[Simba's Mom]

i don't believe DVC would ever go to a 7 night minimum.

it has been suggested before (and is more possible) that they may go to a 3 night minimum or something. that's still not very likely IMO but you never know.

but if a lot of people are still booking sun-thurs stays (moreso than local DVC owners looking for just the weekends), then they would need to continue to raise the costs for weeknights till they hit an equilibrium.

I'm just wondering, if they did that, would they go to a 3 or 7 night minimum per resort or per trip? I was wondering if that means we could no longer "try out" one resort for a night or two before switching to another resort for a week?

 

[CarolMN]

I could see points at BWV and BCV going up during F&W.

Hmm, I hope not, but you could be correct, of course.

I wonder if the "demand" DVC looks at is just 11 month window booking or includes 7 month booking.

I hope they look at the demand patterns for the home resort booking period only. Selfishly (we own BWV), I want the point charts to reflect the demand patterns of the resort owners, not the non-home resort owners.

For example, if there are waitlists for certain times of the year before the 7 month window opens, then perhaps reallocation for that time is in order, i.e., point costs for that time should be increased. If there is still space available at 7 months, even if it is limited, why would a reallocation be necessary? Why should home resort owners pay more for a certain time just so non-home resort owner demand can be lessened?

AFAIK, there is almost always some space left at the BWV & BCV for the Food & Wine Festival time at the 7 month mark. I do not see a need to increase the costs for that time just because those who do not own there want to stay during that time. JMHO. YMMV

P.S. My comments are just general and not directed at Bob. I have seen the same thoughts from others.

 

[tjkraz]

Someone asked about a minimum stay at the Condo meeting a few weeks ago. DVC reps said they had no plans for such a change.

It was sort of a humorous interchange, IMO. The person who asked the question phrased it something like this: "are there any plans institute a mandatory minimum stay as has been rumored on Internet discussion boards?"

The response was "no" and I got the sense that the DVC reps were sort of amused by the question. Before answering they all sort of glanced at each other and chuckled, as if to imply they had no idea where such rumors would even come from.

I'm sure there are some valid reasons for such a change--most notably slight reductions in housekeeping and front desk charges. But I can't see those very modest savings offsetting the value in marketing the program's flexibility.

EDIT: To answer another poster's question, I believe the POS states that DVC could impose a minimum stay of no more than 5 days. But again, I can't see a justification for doing it. Just because the lawyers threw in that notation 20 years ago doesn't mean it will every be pursued.

 

[Sid74]

The 7 night minimum question was asked at the meeting, and it was said that it definately wouldn't be happening.

Sorry for the repeated information, I posted at the same time as Tim.

 

[tjkraz]

I have a feeling we will see changes to the point charts throughout most of the year. Not necessarily radical changes, but it shouldn't be as simple as increasing the cost for 6 weeks (Oct, early-Dec) and decreasing 6 other weeks.

The changes should be a result of statistical analysis of reservation trends over the last two decades. With so much data available, there is no valid reason for selectively altering a small number of dates while ignoring the rest of the calendar.

 

[DisneyStarWisher]

It is just frustrating to me that there was only one change that occurred since the beginning of DVC until I joined in 2008. Since 2008, this will be the third change! I don't like change! (I know, I know, sometimes change is good, but for me personally, the past two changes haven't been good. I don't suspect this one will be either.)

 

[dizfan]

I have a feeling we will see changes to the point charts throughout most of the year. Not necessarily radical changes, but it shouldn't be as simple as increasing the cost for 6 weeks (Oct, early-Dec) and decreasing 6 other weeks.

The changes should be a result of statistical analysis of reservation trends over the last two decades. With so much data available, there is no valid reason for selectively altering a small number of dates while ignoring the rest of the calendar.

Would DVC consider following their hotel pattern? A few years back, Disney hotels changed things up and now have many rates for specific dates.

For example, Value season (but exceptions for Marathon and MLK weekends)

 

[wdrl]

I wonder if the "demand" DVC looks at is just 11 month window booking or includes 7 month booking.

I hope they look at the demand patterns for the home resort booking period only. Selfishly (we own BWV), I want the point charts to reflect the demand patterns of the resort owners, not the non-home resort owners.

For example, if there are waitlists for certain times of the year before the 7 month window opens, then perhaps reallocation for that time is in order, i.e., point costs for that time should be increased. If there is still space available at 7 months, even if it is limited, why would a reallocation be necessary? Why should home resort owners pay more for a certain time just so non-home resort owner demand can be lessened?

I understand your feelings about DVCMC looking at booking patterns during the Home Resort period. However, for the purpose of reallocating point charts, I think the focus should be exclusively on vacancy rates.

In my opinion, it doesn't matter when Vacation Homes are booked, but if Vacation Homes are booked. If DVC resorts have a targeted occupancy rate of 98%, then it doesn't matter whether all the reservations were made at the 11-month mark or at the 60-day mark. The real issue should be the percentage of Vacation Homes that actually go vacant. Keep in mind that the DVC is a closed point system. If 10% of the Vacation Homes go vacant, the points that weren't used to book those Vacation Homes must still be used somewhere else in the Vacation Club system. However, since there is a finite amount of DVC inventory available to Members, there is a chance that those unused points will eventually be lost.

 

[wdrl]

The changes should be a result of statistical analysis of reservation trends over the last two decades. With so much data available, there is no valid reason for selectively altering a small number of dates while ignoring the rest of the calendar.

I agree with you that a reallocation should be based on several years worth of data. One would think DVCMC is constantly monitoring booking patterns and is always looking to see if usage is getting out of balance.

Obviously, Bilby already has sufficient data to show that a reallocation is needed. That is one reason why I am so perplexed why Disney is waiting until mid-January to release the reallocated 2013 charts. Once Bilby decided a reallocation was necessary, then it should take only a matter of days to recalculate the point charts.

I haven't a clue what Bilby thinks is to be gained by waiting until mid-January before the point charts are released. If she is waiting to get data on the Members' bookings in December 2011 and early January 2012 to see if it alters the degree of reallocation, then I fear she is using a very short view of the Members' booking patterns.

 

[arthur06]

I think that I am in the minority, but I don't mind the changes. I actually like that they don't have a rigid system that never changes. I like an evenly distributed system that should run at close to capacity for all 52 weeks. In the long run it is best for the system in my opinion.

 

[arthur06]

I haven't a clue what Bilby thinks is to be gained by waiting until mid-January before the point charts are released. If she is waiting to get data on the Members' bookings in December 2011 and early January 2012 to see if it alters the degree of reallocation, then I fear she is using a very short view of the Members' booking patterns.

The only real reason I can come up with, is that the online booking is to take effect in Mad-January as well. This could be that major changes are coming to the point chart so introducing it at the same as on-line booking could deflect some of the negative comments. Or it could simply be a "two birds with one stone" sort of deal.

 

[Brian Noble]

it should take only a matter of days to recalculate the point charts.

As near as I can tell, nothing happens quickly with TWDC, in any of their business units. What's more, deadlines as often as not end up as the forcing function.

 

[wdrl]

As near as I can tell, nothing happens quickly with TWDC, in any of their business units. What's more, deadlines as often as not end up as the forcing function.

True, nothing may happen quickly with TWDC. But that doesn't mean it couldn't happen quickly if the corporation was motivated to move quickly.

I guess what perplexes me is trying to figure out what factors lead DVCMC to delay until mid-January to release the charts. Granted, the charts have to be out by January 25, 2012, when reservations can begin for the first day in 2013. In my mind, they have to have working software for the online reservation system in place well before January 19, 2012, the date its schedule to start. Not only do they need the 2012 charts in place, but they should be testing the 2013 charts as well. If Bilby waits until mid-January to hand the 2013 point values to the computer programmers for them to install and test for the new online system, she may be in for some disappointments.

 

[Sammie]

I agree with you that a reallocation should be based on several years worth of data. One would think DVCMC is constantly monitoring booking patterns and is always looking to see if usage is getting out of balance.

Obviously, Bilby already has sufficient data to show that a reallocation is needed. That is one reason why I am so perplexed why Disney is waiting until mid-January to release the reallocated 2013 charts. Once Bilby decided a reallocation was necessary, then it should take only a matter of days to recalculate the point charts.

I haven't a clue what Bilby thinks is to be gained by waiting until mid-January before the point charts are released. If she is waiting to get data on the Members' bookings in December 2011 and early January 2012 to see if it alters the degree of reallocation, then I fear she is using a very short view of the Members' booking patterns.

Believe me Ms. Bilby is not the only one making these decisions. In fact it could have already been in the plans before she was even given the job.

As Brian said, nothing, happens quickly with Disney. My guess is that when the most recent point reallocation happened this upcoming one was already in the works. They simply did not wish to tweak that severely at one time.

I know it is impossible for everyone to understand how Disney works, but therein lies a lot of the frustration I see with some.

As to why they are waiting until mid January my educated guess is due to the online booking system going online then as Arthur mentioned. I would guess around the middle of the month for both.

 

[Sammie]

The only real reason I can come up with, is that the online booking is to take effect in Mad-January as well. This could be that major changes are coming to the point chart so introducing it at the same as on-line booking could deflect some of the negative comments. Or it could simply be a "two birds with one stone" sort of deal.

Love it, Mad January is exactly what it will be.

 

[tjkraz]

If Bilby waits until mid-January to hand the 2013 point values to the computer programmers for them to install and test for the new online system, she may be in for some disappointments.

New charts are undoubtedly already in the hands of IT. Disney isn't going to publish the charts until all internal resources are on the same page.

Once word comes down that all systems are prepped for the new charts, they will be released. Not before.

Also, I agree with Sammie. This is a project that has been several years in the making. Could the timeline have been managed better? Perhaps. But on-line reservations definitely complicate matters. DVC has been getting a tremendous amount of IT resources in recent months.

As for the charts themselves, you'd be amazed at how many different levels they have to pass through before delivery: actuaries, management, internal auditors, external auditors, legal, IT, ect.

 

[dizfan]

If DVD knows they sell a lot of points during the holidays, they would be wise to wait until mid-January to announce the changes. (Let the cancellation date pass)

To avoid potential issues, it's safer to let the cancellation period expire on most of these new contracts before announcing any changes to the system.

Disney can't even change the bathroom soap without Grumpy and Happy coming out on the Internet boards.