Tired of SSR being blamed

[Wakey]

I bought double points at SSR as I like to generally sleep around and have a different vacation each time. It's not necessarily about preferring one resort over another, although of course you get your favourites.
I keep saying, when the SSR returb is done with it's wonderful rooms and it's 5 sleep surfaces in one beds, then it's one of my go to resorts by choice- top 3. It has so much to offer including great pools, walking and running and DS.
But if I hadn't embarked on this strategy I'd have bought half the points at somewhere like Boardwalk probably, stayed in studios and added to the studio scrum.
Many people buying to sleep around go for 1 beds as it gives so much more flexibility and these folks actually free up studio availability.

 

[crvetter]

Are you confusing changing DVC points to reservation points? I know if you do that, and cancel, you can’t use them in DVC resorts anymore. So, if you book a cruise and convert points for that, and cancel the cruise those are stuck.

i never heard that if you book your points at another DVC resorts and cancel that those points are no longer attached to your home resort.

No there are DVC Vacation Points, which are converted from Home Vacation Points. Home Vacation Points are you points originally given to you at 11 months. They can only book your home resort

DVC Vacation Points are converted from Home Vacation Points. These are what allow you to exchange into other resorts. Technically the POS and BVTC Disclosure Document say it’s a 1 way conversion that happens at time of booking. So when you book Resort B (you own Resort A) you no longer have Resort A points but DVC Vacation Points. You just don’t know this happens as it’s all behind the scene (same as BVTC in charge of the exchange reservations but DVCMC in charge of home resort reservations).

As I said currently conversion is 1 to 1 but this isn’t technically necessary. Also they have been allowing the exchange of points to be reverted if you cancel a 7 month reservation, again they don’t have to. Also while the point charts for your home resort have to always sum to the same points, BVTC point charts don’t (currently they do simply because they just chose to run it that way).

I don’t expect them to destroy the 7 month trades but my post and @drusba (I think this is what he was intending) was meant to show their tools and rights on what they can do. I wanted personally to show DVC has ways to fix the problem if they really wanted to without crippling the system bit also show they could cripple the system if they wanted. BVTC is nothing more than RCI for DVC only resorts if that analogy helps.

 

[Madame]

I bought double points at SSR as I like to generally sleep around and have a different vacation each time. It's not necessarily about preferring one resort over another, although of course you get your favourites.
I keep saying, when the SSR returb is done with it's wonderful rooms and it's 5 sleep surfaces in one beds, then it's one of my go to resorts by choice- top 3. It has so much to offer including great pools, walking and running and DS.
But if I hadn't embarked on this strategy I'd have bought half the points at somewhere like Boardwalk probably, stayed in studios and added to the studio scrum.
Many people buying to sleep around go for 1 beds as it gives so much more flexibility and these folks actually free up studio availability.

Same. When we trade out of SSR we are booking 1 bds exclusively. Any change to the “buying power” of resorts not near-park is simply going to increase the studio madness.... and of course increase the 1 bds available to Disney to rent out for cash.........

 

[Sandisw]

No there are DVC Vacation Points, which are converted from Home Vacation Points. Home Vacation Points are you points originally given to you at 11 months. They can only book your home resort

DVC Vacation Points are converted from Home Vacation Points. These are what allow you to exchange into other resorts. Technically the POS and BVTC Disclosure Document say it’s a 1 way conversion that happens at time of booking. So when you book Resort B (you own Resort A) you no longer have Resort A points but DVC Vacation Points. You just don’t know this happens as it’s all behind the scene (same as BVTC in charge of the exchange reservations but DVCMC in charge of home resort reservations).

As I said currently conversion is 1 to 1 but this isn’t technically necessary. Also they have been allowing the exchange of points to be reverted if you cancel a 7 month reservation, again they don’t have to. Also while the point charts for your home resort have to always sum to the same points, BVTC point charts don’t (currently they do simply because they just chose to run it that way).

I don’t expect them to destroy the 7 month trades but my post and @drusba (I think this is what he was intending) was meant to show their tools and rights on what they can do. I wanted personally to show DVC has ways to fix the problem if they really wanted to without crippling the system bit also show they could cripple the system if they wanted. BVTC is nothing more than RCI for DVC only resorts if that analogy helps.

Got it . I just read the POs document on the website where I did see the language about DVC vacation points but I see nothing in there about points that are used to book another resort when canceled are no longer eligible for booking your home resort at 11 months. It simply says that canceling 31 days or more go back into your account as home resort points

So, I’m not sure where you are finding this but the documents on my account do not have language that allows for what you are suggesting.

Now it does say that you can not use non resort points to replace a home resort booked vacation if you have more than one home resort.

if you have a link to something that differs from what I have via my membership documents, I’d love to be able to compare!

 

[Bing Showei]

This probably won’t be a popular opinion but y’all are trying to complicate a pretty easy to use system to fix what is IMHO a non existent problem.

I agree the system is simple to use, but to suggest the problem is nonexistent requires being flippant, disingenuous, or exercising a bit of head-in-the-sand. If you’ve ever seen the state-sponsored (and run?) Facebook group of Disney timeshare owners, everyone is to blame as to how tight the booking system has become, you see on the DIS, in fact you see it in this thread as well.

It’s the renters. It’s the walkers. It’s the resale buyers. It’s the small contract owners. Its SAP owners. It’s SSR.

If you’re suggesting people shouldn’t be so vocally upset (or surprised) that booking at 7-months or less is such a challenge, I agree wholeheartedly. But to suggest the problem is nonexistent is divorced from reality. It’s what started this thread. And if mort1331 has been fed up with seeing it, you can be certain Disney gets their fair share as well. The question is, how are they going to choose to address it?

 

[MickeyWaffles]

We bought SSR direct. We didn’t pay attention to per point cost compared to other resorts (and honestly, I’m not sure that they were even selling another resort at the time?) We fell in love with SSR. The theming, the calm and serene vibe, the proximity to the action at Disney Springs (at the time, Downtown Disney.) We often travel as an extended family group, so the quantity of grand villas is an extra plus for us.

For the first 13 or so WDW DVC stays, we stayed at SSR. In that time we stayed at VGC and Aulani, too, as we wanted to visit Disneyland and Hawaii. We stayed at BLT in a 2BR on one quick trip for close proximity to MK, but that was it. SSR was our home and preference. Feels like such an escape from the chaos.

Now we have 2 kids, ages 4 and 3. While we totally love SSR, for the past 4 years (4 trips) we have been switching at 7 months. We tried Kidani and loved it, but disliked the distance from everything except AK. We stayed at a Poly bungalow for the experience, VGF for close proximity to MK and BWV for easy access to the parks. We were planning to go back to SSR in 2020, but with a 5, 3 & 1 year old in our group, we switched to BLT on a whim at 7 months so we can walk to MK.

It has been fun experiencing the different DVC properties. I still absolutely love SSR. At this phase of our life, having easy access to the parks is so convenient when we can get it. We did not purchase SSR for the ability to stay elsewhere at WDW at 7 months, but with little kids, our trips have changed. We spend more time at MK, less time at Disney Springs, we don’t lounge/read at the pool for hours, and we like to be able to get back to the villa quickly during the day for a break if needed or after a late night, etc. As the kids get older, I do see us staying more regularly at SSR again.

 

[BWV Dreamin]

As a VGF owner, i would love the value of my points to increase when staying at other resorts. We are planning a 4 night pre cruise stay at SSR, standard studio. Can’t beat 11 pts. Per night!!!

 

[CarolMN]

I really thought Disney would do something like this for Riviera (increase value of Riviera points for exchanging out at 7 months and require more points from L14 resorts to exchange in). Still surprised they didn't. IMO, that would have increased sales and made resale restrictions unnecessary.

 

[Sandisw]

I really thought Disney would do something like this for Riviera (increase value of Riviera points for exchanging out at 7 months and require more points from L14 resorts to exchange in). Still surprised they didn't. IMO, that would have increased sales and made resale restrictions unnecessary.

Do you think that this is something that they could still do? I believe there is language that allows them to pull back the restriction. Thoughts?

 

[CarolMN]

Do you think that this is something that they could still do? I believe there is language that allows them to pull back the restriction. Thoughts?

No idea! At times, their decisions are a mystery to me, but I don't have access to the mountains of data that they do.

IMO, the beauty of a "conversion chart" is that it makes the new resort a lot more attractive to buyers and makes the new resort easier to book at 7 months with no need to restrict resale points. It would also tend to decrease rental demand for the new resort at 7 months. Probably wouldn't help 7 months at L14 near-park resorts, though (unless the conversation was more favorable to them than the non near-park L14).

Anyway, total guess not worth more than anyone else's.

 

[Pooh12863]

I agree the system is simple to use, but to suggest the problem is nonexistent requires being flippant, disingenuous, or exercising a bit of head-in-the-sand. If you’ve ever seen the state-sponsored (and run?) Facebook group of Disney timeshare owners, everyone is to blame as to how tight the booking system has become, you see on the DIS, in fact you see it in this thread as well.

It’s the renters. It’s the walkers. It’s the resale buyers. It’s the small contract owners. Its SAP owners. It’s SSR.

If you’re suggesting people shouldn’t be so vocally upset (or surprised) that booking at 7-months or less is such a challenge, I agree wholeheartedly. But to suggest the problem is nonexistent is divorced from reality. It’s what started this thread. And if mort1331 has been fed up with seeing it, you can be certain Disney gets their fair share as well. The question is, how are they going to choose to address it?

My post was to those suggesting convoluted ways to fix the 7 month availability “problem”, problem solved book where you bought. If you’d like to stay somewhere that usually isn’t available at seven months buy a contract for that resort, problem solved.

 

[jcf8037]

This works well for people matching up the same size unit with the same days, but what about someone who needs to downsize a unit, or their week starts a day earlier/later. From how I am reading this it sounds like it would be unfair for a lot of people. I might have a 1 bd and want to change to a studio, but every group that already has a studio could get my shot at it because there's no one who wants to go from the studio to a 1 bd. The way it is now gives us all an even chance at 7 months.

Appreciate the response! I understand what you’re saying but I look at it this way: it may seem unfair on the surface, but as it stands now these rooms aren’t coming open for anyone at all. You’re right, this idea wouldn’t immediately help the people trying to switch room types or change dates. But it would at least get some movement going. Possibly, that opens up more, or different, rooms with cancellation or switching. The example you give is fair but as of now, nobody is getting the room. Even if it jumps a studio-studio switch ahead in the line past the 1b-studio switch, the positive is that now 2 members are happy instead of 0. Eventually most members will benefit.

 

[Heather07438]

It’s the renters. It’s the walkers. It’s the resale buyers. It’s the small contract owners. Its SAP owners. It’s SSR.

Lol. It's the bunch of saps who go sleeping around, walking with their puny
contract in hand! >:^( *waves pitchfork*

My post was to those suggesting convoluted ways to fix the 7 month availability “problem”, problem solved book where you bought. If you’d like to stay somewhere that usually isn’t available at seven months buy a contract for that resort, problem solved.

Additional value is gained for a potential DVC buyer from the option to visit other resorts. It's a major selling point. As much as one likes a certain resort, they may fear the idea of being locked into the same thing year after year, decade after decade thru different stages in life. Flexibility adds considerable value to such a long term commitment.
If DVC tried to sell me on your perspective, the deal would immediately lose value to us. As a potential buyer, it feels much more acceptable to me to have a separate 7 month point chart with point increases/decreases dependent on resort/room demand than needing to buy several contracts just to have resort variety.
People do what you say, but usually after they've used their original contract to try other resorts. Nobody is buying another resort contract without staying there first, and most people want to use the contract they already own to do that.

 

[SL6827]

Wow, just wow. Drusba post was very shocking and informative. If Disney could charge more points for an SSR or OKW owner at 7 months out to stay at say the Boardwalk than a Boardwalk owner then that is a game changer and is a game I want no part of. Even if they did this I feel as though they would grandfather in the current owners, right? Or would they? They might not. Could they do this in the future with the direct vs. resale ownership? Since I was a DVC ower that like to sleep around in the studios when I owned, this really makes me think I will never jump back in. I wouldn't put anything past Disney now.

 

[Pooh12863]

Lol. It's the bunch of saps who go sleeping around, walking with their puny
contract in hand! >:^( *waves pitchfork*

Additional value is gained for a potential DVC buyer from the option to visit other resorts. It's a major selling point. As much as one likes a certain resort, they may fear the idea of being locked into the same thing year after year, decade after decade thru different stages in life. Flexibility adds considerable value to such a long term commitment.
If DVC tried to sell me on your perspective, the deal would immediately lose value to us. As a potential buyer, it feels much more acceptable to me to have a separate 7 month point chart with point increases/decreases dependent on resort/room demand than needing to buy several contracts just to have resort variety.
People do what you say, but usually after they've used their original contract to try other resorts. Nobody is buying another resort contract without staying there first, and most people want to use the contract they already own to do that.

I’m in the process of buying a BWV contract, I’ve never set foot on the property.
7 month availability at BWV is gone for popular times before the 7 month windows even opens. Yes staying at other resorts may be a selling point for Disney, and they continue to use it even as 7 month availability is sketchy at best. You prefer the feel good pixie dust sales pitch, I’d prefer to know the reality up front. The problem is more people are going to Disney more often, you won’t fix the 7 month availability”problem.”

 

[Fred M]

Many people buying to sleep around go for 1 beds as it gives so much more flexibility and these folks actually free up studio availability.

This is what caused my wife and I to become a 1 bedroom family instead of a studio family. We bought DVC with the idea of getting a studio room because it’s just me, my wife, and our son. And because we’re here in California, we bought at Aulani. For our first DVC trip, we got the studio at Aulani and for the three of us, it still felt cramped.

For our first WDW trip, we couldn’t get studio space. So we got a 1 bedroom at Boardwalk (post upgrade) and a 1 bedroom at OKW. And the space that comes with a 1 bedroom when compared to a studio is night and day. It made our vacation so much more relaxing. We were immediately hooked on the 1 bedroom.

Now we’re only using our points on 1 bedrooms and to give us a Florida home resort, we added on at Copper Creek. We’re not going back to studios until we’re retired, and maybe not even then.

 

[SL6827]

If I has known about what Drusba posted about, I doubt I would have ever purchased my small OKW resale contract that I used to own. I knew the availability at 7 months was sketchy to almost impossible at certain times, but I also knew my time frames of when I could go was just about to sky rocket in the coming years. I had no clue they could do such. I just wonder what percent of DVC owners knew about that possibility at all?

 

[crisi]

Wow, just wow. Drusba post was very shocking and informative. If Disney could charge more points for an SSR or OKW owner at 7 months out to stay at say the Boardwalk than a Boardwalk owner then that is a game changer and is a game I want no part of. Even if they did this I feel as though they would grandfather in the current owners, right? Or would they? They might not. Could they do this in the future with the direct vs. resale ownership? Since I was a DVC ower that like to sleep around in the studios when I owned, this really makes me think I will never jump back in. I wouldn't put anything past Disney now.

IF they did something like this, I doubt they'd grandfather anyone in. That would involve too many point charts and bother, and not do what the whole exercise was meant to do - rebalance options.

It would feel more in line with traditional time share ownership - where the trading power of your resort will determine where can stay.

 

[SL6827]

IF they did something like this, I doubt they'd grandfather anyone in. That would involve too many point charts and bother, and not do what the whole exercise was meant to do - rebalance options.

It would feel more in line with traditional time share ownership - where the trading power of your resort will determine where can stay.

I do believe you are right. That would be a nightmare to keep up with, it really would. I am really glad I sold now. If they would do this, would the value of SSR and OKW resale drop?

 

[SL6827]

Am I right in thinking that if Disney was to change the points charts for 7-month swaps, it could work something like this.....

A Boardwalk studio for the night of February 1st-
@ March 1st-June 30th - 12 points( I don't know how many points are needed, just a number I threw out)
@ July 1st and after

A Boardwalk owner- 10 points
A Grand Flo owner- 10 points
A Poly owner- 11 points
A CCV owner- 13 points
A AKV owner- 14 points
A OKW owner- 16 points
A SSR owner- 16 points

Is this the way it could play out?