Hypothetical: "Generic DVC". Like the idea?

[JimMIA]

Why is that? I guess I don't see how the size of the resort would come into play as long as the total quantity of points remained the same, after the 7 month point it would be exactly the same as it is now for those with the 11 month advantage if not better.

What am I missing that you are seeing?

I think part of the confusion, Cricket, is that you and I are talking about a "Generic DVC" plan with NO 11-month window for the generic folks. Those who bought specific resorts, either previously or in the future, would STILL have their 11-month windows. That would not change. The only change is the "generic" folks - at their election - would only have a seven-month window everywhere, just like we have now.

I suspect that some of the posters did the common DISboard thing, read the OP and then post a response to that without reading anything else.

As I said above, the only way I can see that happening is for Disney to use their ROFR'd points (they can't just make up points, they have to come from somewhere). If they did that, a contract would get ROFR'd, the points would go from BCV points to "generic" points, and would be resold. BCV owners would benefit, because there would be one less owner competing for 11-month ressies, but the same number at seven months.

Granny - on the other hand - was talking about the opposite: a "Super DVC" where owners of Super Points would have 11-month booking everywhere. I don't think that is feasible, and I certainly do not think it would be desireable.

But I do think your original idea was interesting, and might have merit.

 

[cruise-o-matic]

Jim,

You make some interesting points. Perhaps the "Generic DVC's" could book at 8 months as an incentive?

But, the Generic and Super DVC seems to be very unpopular and I'm not in in favor of it, especially my own "8 month" idea......

One of the biggest issues I see is that the points are tied to real estate itself, with a legal property description, so I don't see how you can comingle points from different resorts. The Orange County Register of Deed would have a fit.... So if it were to come about, some "generic" owners would get a piece of BCV, others OKW, and so on. Plus SSR wouldn't be in the mix with its different expiration date, unless the others were extended to match.

Good concept, but it would appear to be a nightmare to manage.

 

[AFMom]

Interesting - but I don't think it's legally possible. They're actually selling us part of a certain property at this point - and I don't see how they could re-evaluate even rofr'ed points to be 'Generic DVC' points - since they are tied as real estate to the resort they were sold from. We think of them as points, but the points are just a convinient way of managing our share of that resort property with the flexibility of trading. It's the actual percentage of the resort that we own - so any existing DVC contracts couldn't be changed - I would think. They would have to start from scratch there......

 

[jade1]

Why is that? I guess I don't see how the size of the resort would come into play as long as the total quantity of points remained the same, after the 7 month point it would be exactly the same as it is now for those with the 11 month advantage if not better.

What am I missing that you are seeing?

Well I may be the brainiac here, but if I read this correctly (please let me know if I am way off), the suggestion is to eliminate the 7 to 11 month booking window reserved for the particular resort owner and open it up to everyone. Is that right? If that is right, why would a BCV or WLV owner like myself vote for that if that is where I always want to stay? Now if I were an OKW or SSR owner, it would be awesome because those never fill up anyway and IMHO have no booking window that is necessary anyway, but all of a sudden you can be first in line for BCV or VWL or BWV and never worry about frequent stays at SSR or OKW just like the current situation. And yes after 7 months it is that way now, but remember, those of us that care have already booked our stays at BCV, WLV or BWV-thats why many of us bought there.

 

[CarolMN]

jade1 - Even if DVC wanted to, they can't eliminate the home resort advantage for those of us who have already purchased. Says so right in the contracts we signed. We can't vote to change it (Well maybe it could be changed if every owner agreed to it, but that just isn't going to happen).

DVC can reduce the booking advantage to 1 month (and let non-home resort owners book at 10 months) but they can't eliminate it completely.

I'm pretty sure you already knew that, but just in case any of the newer members don't, I wanted to make it very clear.

It is fun to speculate and see what everyone else thinks about schemes like this, though. And I agree with you - it does seem like those in favor of it do not own at the smaller resorts. Wonder why that is, LOL!!

Best wishes -

 

[WebmasterCricket]

Interesting - but I don't think it's legally possible.

This was never really intended to be a "can they" but more as a "if they did" sort of thing.

Well I may be the brainiac here, but if I read this correctly (please let me know if I am way off), the suggestion is to eliminate the 7 to 11 month booking window reserved for the particular resort owner and open it up to everyone. Is that right?

Well, I think JimMIA is right on target that there is more than one description floating around and some are not separating the two. One version does seem to elude to your point and the other one does not.

Version 1 (Super DVC) would have the 11 month window as the original owners do but at all of the resorts.

Version 2 (Generic DVC) would only have a short term booking window but cost less with no home resort.

Both would have some sort of blended dues owed but neither would have any one resort as "home".

I suppose there could be a large pool from each resort that would act as another separate virtual resort that all those owners would share somehow (yes, I know not legally).

 

[WebmasterCricket]

jade1 - Even if DVC wanted to, they can't eliminate the home resort advantage for those of us who have already purchased. Says so right in the contracts we signed.

The difference with the Super DVC would be that they WOULD be owners at ALL the resorts so Disney wouldn't be taking anything away from the original owners.

Think of the Super DVC as 5000 people buying up all of the resales for a few years (and then some ) and coming to some sort of agreement to share all of the points evenly. At any time, they could use points from anyone else’s contracts whenever they see fit. They would have the 11 month window at all resorts without changing anything for the original owners.

 

[Mickmse2002]

If you have no "Home Resort", how can anyone welcome you home?

 

[jade1]

The difference with the Super DVC would be that they WOULD be owners at ALL the resorts so Disney wouldn't be taking anything away from the original owners.

Think of the Super DVC as 5000 people buying up all of the resales for a few years (and then some ) and coming to some sort of agreement to share all of the points evenly. At any time, they could use points from anyone else’s contracts whenever they see fit. They would have the 11 month window at all resorts without changing anything for the original owners.

I know this is hypothetical and dont mean to stretch this out, but its like the phone is ringing and I just am starring at it instead of picking it up. You are saying Super DVC WOULD be the owners at ALL resorts so Disney would not be taking anything away from the original owners (above). Are you saying the owner of a BCV would still have a priority booking window (currently 4 months) over a non BCV owner? If not you are taking a LOT away from an original owner. It sounds like (again the phone thing) you are saying all of sudden EX: a current OKW owner could also book BCV at 11 months.

 

[CarolMN]

The difference with the Super DVC would be that they WOULD be owners at ALL the resorts so Disney wouldn't be taking anything away from the original owners.

Think of the Super DVC as 5000 people buying up all of the resales for a few years (and then some ) and coming to some sort of agreement to share all of the points evenly. At any time, they could use points from anyone else’s contracts whenever they see fit. They would have the 11 month window at all resorts without changing anything for the original owners.

I don't see how this could possibly work within the existing DVC structure.

For example -

How would Disney/DVC control the 11 month thing - there could be only so many points from each resort in the "pool" under your scenario. What if all the people in the pool group wanted BCV and wanted to book at the 11 month window? How does DVC decide who gets to book at a specific resort at the 11 month window? In other words, if the pool only has 2000 BCV points, who gets to use them? First come first served? Take turns?

How does DVC keep track of all the different use years in the pool? And what effect does that have on who gets to book at 11 months?

How do you bank and borrow your share as part of a pool? And what resort would you be banking or borrowing?

How would use year work as part of a pool?

IMHO, unless you start out this way with a new DVC with all new resorts, the scenario you describe would be a nightmare to administer (if you could even work it out).

Best wishes -

 

[Deemarch]

I don't really think that it would make a difference to us. So far, we've had three trips using DVC and stayed at three different resorts. If we had the 11 month window for all, it would be the same, I think. There are still people that would want to plan vacations 2 months out and would still get on the waiting list. We have no tie to our home resort...Not yet, anyway.

 

[JimMIA]

First of all, as far as I know, Cricket is NOT a proponent of the Super DVC idea - I am pretty sure she was just trying to explain what she thought Granny meant in his OP. Granny is probably rolling on the floor laughing at all of us trying to fathom his idea!

Cricket's original idea was the "generic" idea, which would carry no home resort for those who chose to buy it, and would NOT affect any of the home resort privileges of anyone who now owns any resort, or those of anyone who buys a specific home resort in the future.

People saw "no home resort" and freaked out, thinking someone was taking something away -- not the case with Cricket's original idea, or my expounding on her idea.

Are you saying the owner of a BCV would still have a priority booking window (currently 4 months) over a non BCV owner?

YES!

In my view, the Super DVC idea DOES diminish the rights of ALL current owners, and I would NOT be in favor of it for that reason.

The "generic" idea, to me, simply offers a lower cost option for people who don't want or need the 11-month window...WITHOUT affecting the booking rights of those who currently have home resorts, or those who purchase them in the future.

 

[JimMIA]

Interesting - but I don't think it's legally possible. They're actually selling us part of a certain property at this point - and I don't see how they could re-evaluate even rofr'ed points to be 'Generic DVC' points - since they are tied as real estate to the resort they were sold from. We think of them as points, but the points are just a convinient way of managing our share of that resort property with the flexibility of trading. It's the actual percentage of the resort that we own - so any existing DVC contracts couldn't be changed - I would think. They would have to start from scratch there......

I understand your point, but I don't really see that as an impediment IF Disney wanted to do something like the "generic DVC." Those "generic" points could be anchored anywhere, but they would simply be points with limited useage -- like developer points, like reservation points, like points in holding account. Just a different category of restricted-use points.

As I said at the very outset of this discussion, I don't anticipate Disney ever doing anything like this -- not because they're magical people, but because there doesn't seem to be a big financial incentive for them to do so at the present. There are legalities to abide by, but I'll bet IF a big financial incentive came their way, they could figure out how to meet the legal requirements, and do it without hurting current owners in any way.

To me, the Super DVC idea is a whole different story, and a concept I do not think would be permissible under their contracts, etc.

 

[Tooneric]

I like having a home resort. I bought for the "home at Disney World" feeling. It's psychological.

I agree. When I bought DVC, I ran the numbers, analyzed, rationalized, comparisized, and strategized. But in the end I fantasized.

I like the warm, fuzzy feeling of emotional attachment I have to my "home" resort. I love the Poly, and the emotional attachment meant something to me and was an obstacle to me buying DVC. Eventually I bought BCV and love it as well (I still love you too, Poly!). As much as I love WDW, I may have bought a generic DVC, but I like the current system of having a home resort.

My only problem is I NEED MORE POINTS!

 

[WebmasterCricket]

First of all, as far as I know, Cricket is NOT a proponent of the Super DVC idea - I am pretty sure she was just trying to explain what she thought Granny meant in his OP.

You have it right except for one important point, like Granny, I am a "he"!

 

[jade1]

I don't see how this could possibly work within the existing DVC structure.

For example -

How would Disney/DVC control the 11 month thing - there could be only so many points from each resort in the "pool" under your scenario. What if all the people in the pool group wanted BCV and wanted to book at the 11 month window? How does DVC decide who gets to book at a specific resort at the 11 month window? In other words, if the pool only has 2000 BCV points, who gets to use them? First come first served? Take turns?

How does DVC keep track of all the different use years in the pool? And what effect does that have on who gets to book at 11 months?

How do you bank and borrow your share as part of a pool? And what resort would you be banking or borrowing?

How would use year work as part of a pool?

IMHO, unless you start out this way with a new DVC with all new resorts, the scenario you describe would be a nightmare to administer (if you could even work it out).

Best wishes -

I agree. Plus if this new "pool" of owners keep buying up all the resales and they can be used "anywhere", it could have a bigger effect on the current owners than is being debated. EX: if there is 100,000 points at BCV and the group ends up with 20,000-no big deal if they want to use them at BCV, but if the accumulate 20K from BWV and VWL and maybe 50,000 (or 250,000) ea from SSR and OKW, thats 110,000 plus that could all be used at BCV-more than it even has. I know not everyone wants BCV or even likes BCV-its just an example of how skewed the points could quickly become. Same with VWL 11 months out for XMAS etc.

 

[WebmasterCricket]

... but if the accumulate 20K from BWV and VWL and maybe 50,000 (or 250,000) ea from SSR and OKW, thats 110,000 plus that could all be used at BCV-more than it even has

No, that's not possible no matter how we come up with playing around with the numbers. The total at each resort must remain static.

 

[jade1]

No, that's not possible no matter how we come up with playing around with the numbers. The total at each resort must remain static.

So you are saying that no matter how many points the SUPER DVC group accumulates, only the percent that really came from BCV resales could be used as BCV priority ressies? If thats the case then whats the point of saying the points from this group could be used "ANYWHERE"?

 

[WebmasterCricket]

So you are saying that no matter how many points the SUPER DVC group accumulates, only the percent that really came from BCV resales could be used as BCV priority ressies? If thats the case then whats the point of saying the points from this group could be used "ANYWHERE"?

No, in the "Super" group, they would get priority and in the "Generic" they would remain the same as it is right now.

Either way, the total # of reservations at any resort would stay pretty much the same as it is now, it's just a question of booking windows.

 

[Granny]

First of all, as far as I know, Cricket is NOT a proponent of the Super DVC idea - I am pretty sure she was just trying to explain what she thought Granny meant in his OP. Granny is probably rolling on the floor laughing at all of us trying to fathom his idea!

Wow, I wasn't trying to be a troll by starting this thread, honest!!!

I apologize for any confusion. I actually must confess that I never saw WMCricket's original idea for "generic DVC" or whatever he called it. What I was referring to was a comment in a thread about buying where you want to stay the most, and WMC mentioned that pride in specific resort ownership was an intangible benefit that many DVC owners value.

So while it appeared I was "misquoting" WMC's idea, the truth is I just didn't even know he had espoused it! Sorry, WMCricket!

All I was trying to get at was if DVC had started as a generic WDW timeshare (leaving out VB and HH to keep it simple). Would we have preferred that or the current system?

I've read some great comments here, and I find the topic thought provoking, though obviously moot. Thanks for taking this in the spirit intended. I'm certainly not suggesting that we change the way DVC operates at this juncture.

Very good points being made all around. Like most things with DVC, there is no right or wrong answer, only great opinions!