2013 Point Chart Changes

[WebmasterDoc]

...

They'd have to use one base year for the entire resort and that's likely either 1991 or 1992 but all they really had to do was pick a year. They'd use the same base year when they enlarged the resort and very likely just use the original numbers and info. For BWV that info was processed as part of the original planning, not sure about OKW. The bigger question would be for BWV related to the Standard View units however, the fact it was an enhancement to the resort makes it not really matter. They couldn't have gone the other way legally without a vote of the membership themselves as I understand the process.

It's not critical to have the base year to get an idea but it is to be 100% accurate because where weekends and seasons fall will cause minor alterations in a different year compared to the base year.

The "new" buildings at OKW were included in the original plan. Why would planned-but-not-built units be included in the number of points at any resort. VB also had a much greater number of units included in the original plan at that resort. Certainly those would not still be counted in the total points at that resort? The first OKW reallocation occured long before the new buildings were even started.

If you recall, when the "new" BWV villas were added after the sale office moved, DVC allowed advance purchasers for those villas to use their "new" points before the units themselves were completed. For that period of time it would appear that there were more points being used in the system than there were villas. That apparent imbalance self-corrected once the new villas were added to useful inventory.

Personally, I am satisfied that the resorts are in balance with regard to the number of points in service. I'm convinced that no resorts have been oversold and that the points are in balance as far as the reallocations are concerned.

 

[Dean]

The "new" buildings at OKW were included in the original plan. Why would planned-but-not-built units be included in the number of points at any resort. VB also had a much greater number of units included in the original plan at that resort. Certainly those would not still be counted in the total points at that resort? The first OKW reallocation occured long before the new buildings were even started.

If you recall, when the "new" BWV villas were added after the sale office moved, DVC allowed advance purchasers for those villas to use their "new" points before the units themselves were completed. For that period of time it would appear that there were more points being used in the system than there were villas. That apparent imbalance self-corrected once the new villas were added to useful inventory.

Personally, I am satisfied that the resorts are in balance with regard to the number of points in service. I'm convinced that no resorts have been oversold and that the points are in balance as far as the reallocations are concerned.

I'm comfortable also, if I wasn't I'd bail. I suspect we're either saying essentially the same thing from different directions or slightly different things in different ways. I'm not saying that the total points were included in the initial declaration but simply that the formula was set and the total points as planned at the time were taken into consideration in the points structure. In essence, they do a rebalancing prior to sale for any resort with different views, BWV was a good example where they rebalanced VERY early on.

From a sales standpoint, it is the base reallocation numbers included in the POS for that unit type that is set from the beginning, the one that has each unit type the same number of points for the entire year. Declaring new inventory of the same unit type increases the total points to sell and the total points that must be accounted for in reallocation by that SET amount. To alter that principle, they'd have to introduce a different unit type or declare a "new resort" within the existing resort, both possible but extremely unlikely. This happens with timeshares all the time but I don't see DVC doing it if they didn't with THV. I'm sure they're kicking themselves for not having the THV higher initially, it cost them a fair amount of money.