2020 Point Charts

That's my understanding for resorts that don't have smaller dedicated units. For those that do, it's different but the lockoff's are still counted as a 2 BR for accounting purposes. Again, my understanding and the POS does support that position though it doesn't spell it out, at least it didn't in the version I looked at.

So they could basically take the 2019 point charts and raise points in all studios by 20% and raise points per night in all bedrooms by 20% and not reduce points anywhere else and it legal?

And they don’t have to show us how the points all balance out. And they don’t have to show why the point reallocation will spread out demand along with supporting documentation?

And I am supposed to believe that they aren’t going to benefit from this in more breakage $$$ they get from unbooked rooms?

If anyone with the where with all to get a lawyer involved to get answers should start a Go Fund Me page. You will have my $100 donation.
 
So they could basically take the 2019 point charts and raise points in all studios by 20% and raise points per night in all bedrooms by 20% and not reduce points anywhere else and it legal?

And they don’t have to show us how the points all balance out. And they don’t have to show why the point reallocation will spread out demand along with supporting documentation?

And I am supposed to believe that they aren’t going to benefit from this in more breakage $$$ they get from unbooked rooms?

If anyone with the where with all to get a lawyer involved to get answers should start a Go Fund Me page. You will have my $100 donation.
No, they have to keep the total points the same for the base year which I believe is 1992. And as I understand it, ignoring the smaller portions of a lockoff.
 
Reading this it would seem that you believe Disney is willingly giving away money out of good heart. Since we both know it's not even remotely possible, there must be other explanations. I can see two possible ones.

I would probably call it “good faith”, but yeah, same idea. It seems troublesome / burdensome to track the exact source (or destaintion?) of that revenue on every cash booking. Imagine Aulani has 3 One Bedroom villas available to cash guests; one is the result of an owner trading points for a Disney cruise, another is offered because DVC hasn’t sold all of the points and the third is made available via breakage. Disney sells one of those rooms. Which bucket gets the money?

I’ve worked with some large accounting systems before. Frankly, trying to track this activity on literally tens-of-thousands of guest rooms year-round may be more costly than making assumptions which (at worst) err in the members’ favor.

1) unused points trickle down from the most desirable resorts to the less desirable. At BCV or VGF if members don't use their points, people from other resorts will take their place so they're 100% booked. The rooms that remain empty are most probably at Aulani, SSR, OKW, VB and HI. Those rooms are sold by Disney for cash, but it wouldn't be fair for the system to give breakage income to those resorts only, so the money are redistributed between resorts. They might have a way to calculate which points went into breakage at each resort, but it's more probable that the breakage income is so higher than the total cap that they just don't care and allocate it evenly and keep the change (the change here is a check with multiple zeros).

The difficult part of this discussion is we have no idea of the volume. We know Disney resorts don’t operate at 100% occupancy (it’s typically closer to 88-90%). Due to the popularity of point renting, there are cheaper ways to book DVC villas. Members often grab all of the studios, leave 1B and 2B villas which are less desirable for cash guests. If the rooms are heavily discounted and bundled with dining plans or ticket offers, Disney is taking a healthy cut off the top with little breakage income left. Specific to Aulani, the millions of unsold points mean that Disney has access to 100% of the cash revenue on dozens (if not hundreds) of cash villas every night.

Is Disney REALLY doing this becuase it views <90 day cash reservations for larger DVC villa rooms—above and beyond the current breakage threshold—as a profit center? Particularly when they have unhooked hotel rooms at locations they own outright?

If nothing else, it seems we agree that there’s probably some fairness principle being applied.

2) every time a lockoff is split and booked as a studio + 1BRm extra points are generated. Disney keep track of those into a pool they use to book rooms like they do with their own points. This generates breakage income also at resorts were rooms very rarely reach the breakage time.

I strongly disagree with the idea that these transaction are “generating” points which are actively tracked by Disney to their benefit. The breakage rules are pretty straightforward—it applies to unblocked rooms 90 days before arrival. Before that point, members have full access to their room inventory which includes the ability to use banked or borrowed points toward those rooms.

Referring back to one of my prior posts, BCV has about 3 million points but it requires 3.28 million to book all lockoffs separately. I don’t see that as “creating” 280K points that DVC can do with as it wishes. That’s not how breakage works. Those charts create additional capacity which can be used by BCV owners who have banked or borrowed points, or owners of other resorts.

My skepticism is rooted in the fact that we’re talking about expensive cash rooms which are inherently undesirable by both members and non-members, in a resort system which does not operate at 100% occupancy.

This lockoff bump has always been with us. Up thru 2019 it takes 3.22 million points to book all of the BCV lockoffs separately. I understand (and relate!) to the frustration over the widening of that gap, but I’m not convinced that Disney has self-serving motivations. I would be really curious to see how member banking and borrowing activity has changed over the years. Given the tens-of-millions of points now in the DVC system, a couple percentage point change in banking or borrowing activity from year-to-year can have a dramatic impact on availability.
 
Last edited:
No, they have to keep the total points the same for the base year which I believe is 1992. And as I understand it, ignoring the smaller portions of a lockoff.

Use this example. A new DVC is built called the tiny tiny resort. It consists of 10 2-bedroom lock offs. It has only two seasons and has the same points on every day of the week for a season. One season is the “cheap” season and it has 182 days of the year. The other season, the “more money” season is for 183 days.

In the cheap season it is 12 points a night for a studio, 24 for a 1 bedroom and 32 for the two bedroom. For the more money season it is 20 a night for a studio, 40 for a one bedroom and 56 a night for a 2 bedroom. If I understand correctly the total points for all rooms for all year would be ( 182 * 32 ) plus ( 183 * 56) which equals 16072 as it is only based on the two bedroom point allocation.

So in one year then the studio for the cheap season could go up from 12 point to 14 (max 20%), the 1 bedroom for the cheap season could go from 32 to 38 points, the studio the more money season could go from 20 to 24 points, and the one bedroom in the more money points could go from 40 to 48 points. All these rooms could require more points without any offsetting reduction anywhere since the calculation is based only on the points for the 2 bedroom units.

Am I wrong?
 
I would lik to see at the end of 2020 a comparison of the dollars for breakage income for Disney comparing 2019 to 2020.
 
Again Disney does what's good for Disney while telling us believers that it is either for our benefit or for some other reason not the fault of Disney. We can speculate or guess all about the inner workings of DVD/DVC but it's a guess because Disney will never share their inner workings. When someone doesn't share information, there is a reason.

Our family is rethinking Disney as a vacation destination, too many changes, too expensive, to crowded, not as much fun anymore, and DVC's inner workings has taught us what Disney is really like. :sad2:

:earsboy: Bill

 
VGF does not have any dedicated studios or dedicated 1BR's. The 47 2BR lockoffs are what make up all possible studios and 1BR's there. My understanding has become that yes, both 2BR lockoffs and dedicated 2BR's all are declared for the same number of points. It appears that number is 23,420 for each 2BR. The 94 2BR's would have been 2,201,480 leaving 319,320 for the 6 GV's or 53,220/GV. Each Villa size has a stated point maximum that can be required per night - I don't recall a minimum being stated but there may have been. Other than adhering to the maximum they can allocate the points across all villas as is felt necessary. So even though the GV's were declared to represent 53,220 points those particular points are not restricted only for booking requirements for GV's.

So are you saying that when the total points for any given year are calculated, the the standard or lake lockoff + 1BR points are not looked at? Instead, they are assigned the same point value as the 2BR standard or lake view. If that is the case, then the points required for the lockoffs and 1BRs could be raised higher yearly, even exceeding the cost of a 2 BR. If so, the total number of purchased points by members would no longer be capable of purchasing all the available units, leaving more units for DVC to rent out. Such a capability would not seem legal to me.

Also, do you have the total number of standard lockoffs, 1BRs, & 2BRs?
 
Last edited:
Am I wrong?

For resorts with no dedicated Studios or 1Bs, I would generally agree with that. At WDW that includes Saratoga Springs, Old Key West, Bay lake and Grand Floridian. The others (AKV, BWV, BCV BRV, CCV, Poly) all have dedicated Studios and/or One Bedrooms which must be part of the chart calculation.

Obviously Disney has no track record of arbitrary 20% annual increases.

We can only speculate on what sort of vetting process Disney used for this particular change. If nothing else, the changes to the charts for SSR, OKW, BLT and VGF maintain some consistency with the others where expansion of that gap may have been unavoidable in any reallocation focused on raising Studio costs.

I would lik to see at the end of 2020 a comparison of the dollars for breakage income for Disney comparing 2019 to 2020.

You won’t get it. A Breakage figure is listed in the resort budgets but it’s capped at a certain level and personally I question how religiously they are willing or able to track the those specific dollars.
 
If so, the total number of purchased points by members would no longer be capable of purchasing all the available units, leaving more units for DVC to rent out. such a capability would not seem legal to me.

What you describe here has always been the case, at VGF and every other DVC resort. There are 2.52 million points at Grand Floridian. With the original point chart issued when the resort opened, it would require 2.63 million points to book all lockoffs as their separate 1B + Studio components.
 
Use this example. A new DVC is built called the tiny tiny resort. It consists of 10 2-bedroom lock offs. It has only two seasons and has the same points on every day of the week for a season. One season is the “cheap” season and it has 182 days of the year. The other season, the “more money” season is for 183 days.

In the cheap season it is 12 points a night for a studio, 24 for a 1 bedroom and 32 for the two bedroom. For the more money season it is 20 a night for a studio, 40 for a one bedroom and 56 a night for a 2 bedroom. If I understand correctly the total points for all rooms for all year would be ( 182 * 32 ) plus ( 183 * 56) which equals 16072 as it is only based on the two bedroom point allocation.

So in one year then the studio for the cheap season could go up from 12 point to 14 (max 20%), the 1 bedroom for the cheap season could go from 32 to 38 points, the studio the more money season could go from 20 to 24 points, and the one bedroom in the more money points could go from 40 to 48 points. All these rooms could require more points without any offsetting reduction anywhere since the calculation is based only on the points for the 2 bedroom units.

Am I wrong?
I think you are wrong. If I understand correctly you're making 2 mistakes. You're assuming all units booked as the smaller unit but legislated as the larger unit and you're ignoring the maximum reallocation chart and the minimum reservation chart. In your example and using round numbers, worst case scenario would put The reallocation maximum at around 44 points per 2 BR (using round numbers). Making assumptions from the other POS's I've looked a studio would be required to be booked at somewhere around 16-18 points and a 1 BR around 32 to 34 points for a 1 BR. I'll have to find my other POS's to look more at the minimum reservation options for AKV and BWV. But certainly if ALL were booked as smaller units it would be more points than allotted for the year and there would be excess inventory that could be used in a number of ways. Maintenance, other members who own at different resorts, breakage, variations related to banked/borrowed points all come to mind.
 
I don't have anything of value to add to this discussion, but I do love reading all the replies. All I know is it will now take 24 more points a year to enjoy the same amount of days we've always enjoyed. That's a lot of points for this family. Or we can reserve less days. I'm not happy with either scenario.
 
What you describe here has always been the case, at VGF and every other DVC resort. There are 2.52 million points at Grand Floridian. With the original point chart issued when the resort opened, it would require 2.63 million points to book all lockoffs as their separate 1B + Studio components.

So then am I correct in that DVC can raise the number of points for the studios and 1BRs to whatever number they so desire as long as they only raise it 20% per year.
 
So then am I correct in that DVC can raise the number of points for the studios and 1BRs to whatever number they so desire as long as they only raise it 20% per year.

No, as mentioned there is a stated maximum. They can go up to that.
 
No, as mentioned there is a stated maximum. They can go up to that.

Isn’t the stated maximum 20% a year? That still means they can raise points on studios and 1 bedrooms without being required to reduce points anywhere else.
 
I don't have anything of value to add to this discussion, but I do love reading all the replies. All I know is it will now take 24 more points a year to enjoy the same amount of days we've always enjoyed. That's a lot of points for this family. Or we can reserve less days. I'm not happy with either scenario.
We enjoy staying at AKV Concierge studio in early January. This year (January 2018) it cost 17/20 (weekdays/weekends) points per night. In 2020 it will cost 21/24 points per night. That's a 20-23.5% increase PER NIGHT on an already expensive villa over 2 years. My 100 AKV points covered 5 nights from 1/2/18 - 1/7/18 this year (91 points, 2 weekend days, 3 weekday days). In 2020 the same 91 points will only cover FOUR days (2 weekend days & 2 weekday days). They have taken a day of vacation away from me while JACKING UP membership dues.

I keep on wondering what will be the straw that breaks the camel's back and this may be it.
 
@lehrsj said:
Use this example. A new DVC is built called the tiny tiny resort. It consists of 10 2-bedroom lock offs. It has only two seasons and has the same points on every day of the week for a season. One season is the “cheap” season and it has 182 days of the year. The other season, the “more money” season is for 183 days.

In the cheap season it is 12 points a night for a studio, 24 for a 1 bedroom and 32 for the two bedroom. For the more money season it is 20 a night for a studio, 40 for a one bedroom and 56 a night for a 2 bedroom. If I understand correctly the total points for all rooms for all year would be ( 182 * 32 ) plus ( 183 * 56) which equals 16072 as it is only based on the two bedroom point allocation.

So in one year then the studio for the cheap season could go up from 12 point to 14 (max 20%), the 1 bedroom for the cheap season could go from 32 to 38 points, the studio the more money season could go from 20 to 24 points, and the one bedroom in the more money points could go from 40 to 48 points. All these rooms could require more points without any offsetting reduction anywhere since the calculation is based only on the points for the 2 bedroom units.

Am I wrong?

***

That is not quite how I understand it but the issue I do not know the answer to is what Disney actually did for every resort particularly for a resort that has no dedicated studios and 1BRs. For ones that have such dedicated rooms like Boardwalk, which I actually looked into a number of years ago, DVD determined the total points applicable to the resort by the addition of the total points it would take in a base year to reserve all the dedicated studios for the year at the studio per night cost, all the dedicated 1BRs for the year at the 1BR per night cost, all the lock-off 2BRs for the year at the 2BR per night cost, and all the GVs at the GV cost. When reallocating, that total would need to stay the same. Thus, for example, if they raise studios a point per night, that would be a raise for the dedicated studios in determining the total increase in points that needs to be offset elsewhere, such as by lowering 2BRs, but since there are a lot more 2BRs than dedicated studios, the 2BRs would not decrease a point every night of the year. In looking at the changes for BWV, my initial reaction without doing any calculations is that they look kind of right in that for the most part you have a significant increase in studios (except preferred remained the same in adventure season), a significant increase in standard 1BRs, a small increase in standard 2BRs, a kind of offsetting increase in some seasons and decrease in others for preferred 1BRs, a small decrease in GVs, and significant decreases in preferred 2BRs which are about 30% of all rooms in the resort. The real issue for BWV (and similar others) is why they thought it necessary to raise 1BRs at all, although possibly the allocation issue was that they really thought studios had to go up some and preferred 2BRs down a lot and you simply needed the 1BR increases to cover the amount of point decreases for the 2BRs because the studio increases could not alone cover those decreases.

What I do not know is what system was set up for the resorts that have no dedicated studios and 1BRs such as VGF and SSR. They likely had to do something different there in setting up original total points, e.g., perhaps they determined total points at VGF by treating the lock-off 2BRs (half of all 2BRs) as just separate studios and 1BRs. Doing so raises some risk that someone could challenge whether Disney originally created points that complied with the legal requirement to not have created more points than it would take to reserve all the rooms in the resort each night in the year, but likely it would pass muster. Then, any reallocations would need to maintain that same system and total.
 
Below would appear to be the most relevant text from the VGF Public Offering Statement regarding establishment of point charts and modification rights. Other resort POS's may vary slightly--this just happens to be the most recent I had available. I highlighted a few sections in bold.

My take:

- The idea that the point charts are based upon 2B villas is defined
- The existence of this "lockoff premium" is defined
- DVC's right to increase the "lockoff Premium" is defined
- Each resort has a unique stated rate at which members must be able to book at least 1 night in each villa size; for VGF Studio, the rate stated is 22 points

It kinda sucks...but it's very likely that all of this is legal. The POS language would have passed through many approval stages including the Florida Timeshare Bureau and numerous state licensing agencies. The existence of a lockoff premium should not be in question given that there is more administrative overhead involved in renting a single room to two parties rather than just 1.

I'm going to assume the that some reasonableness standards apply to the lockoff premium. In other words, I wouldn't anticipate DVC being able to charge 30 pts for a Studio + 45 pts for a One Bedroom, yet only 50 pts for the full Lockoff Two Bedroom.

----
3.3 Home Resort Vacation Point Reservation Values. A certain number of Home Resort Vacation Points have been or will be established by DVCMC in its sole, absolute and unfettered discretion for the use of each Vacation Home in the Condominium during each Use Day, with variations that will take into account, among other factors, anticipated seasonal and geographical demand factors and the related actual use demand of Club Members experienced in the operation of the Club. The number of Home Resort Vacation Points that a Club Member has with respect to an Ownership Interest will remain fixed and will always be symbolic of the Club Member's Ownership Interest. The Home Resort Vacation Point values established by DVCMC that are symbolic of all Ownership Interests will be based upon the 365 Use Day calendar year containing the minimum number of Fridays and Saturdays distributed through high demand periods (the "Base Year"). During the Base Year the total number of Home Resort Vacation Points required to reserve all Vacation Homes during all Use Days in the Condominium must always equal, and be symbolic of, the total number of Ownership Interests owned by Club Members in the Condominium; provided, however, that for reservation purposes, DVCMC may assign a premium to the separate use and occupancy of One-Bedroom and Studio Vacation Homes that are part of Two-Bedroom Vacation Homes that are lock-off Vacation Homes such that the total number of Home Resort Vacation Points necessary to separately reserve and occupy both the One-Bedroom and Studio Vacation Homes are more than the number of Home Resort Vacation Points necessary to reserve and occupy a Two-Bedroom Vacation Home (the "Lock-off Premium"). Any excess availability that may exist from time to time shall be subject to the Breakage Period priorities set forth in the Home Resort Rules and Regulations.

In order to meet the Club Members' needs and expectations as evidenced by fluctuations in Use Day demand at the Condominium experienced by DVCMC during a given calendar year, DVCMC may, in its sole, absolute and unfettered discretion, increase or decrease the Home Resort Vacation Point requirements for reservation of a given Use Day within a given Vacation Home (including an increase or decrease in the Lock-off Premium) during the given calendar year by any amount not to exceed twenty percent (20%) of the Home Resort Vacation Points required to reserve that Use Day during the previous calendar year; provided, however, that the total number of Home Resort Vacation Points existing within a given Unit (i.e., the amount of Home Resort Vacation Points representing 100% of the Ownership Interests in a given Unit) at any time may not be increased or decreased because of any such reallocation. The twenty percent (20%) reallocation limitation shall not apply to increases or decreases in Home Resort Vacation Point reservation requirements relating to changes in the Lock-off Premium or special periods of high demand based upon Club Member use patterns and changes in Club Member use demand (including, without limitation, use demand during special or holiday seasons), as determined by DVCMC in its sole, absolute and unfettered discretion.

Any increase or decrease in the Home Resort Vacation Point reservation requirement for a given Use Day pursuant to DVCMC's right to make this Home Resort Vacation Point adjustment (other than changes in the Lock-off Premium) must be offset by a corresponding decrease or increase for another Use Day or Days. Except as otherwise provided above, adjustments in excess of twenty percent (20%) in any calendar year will require approval of not less than sixty percent (60%) of all then-existing Club Members at the Condominium. The right to reallocate Home Resort Vacation Points is reserved by DVCMC solely for adjusting the Home Resort Reservation Component to accommodate Club Member demand. However, with respect to the Condominium, 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 22 Home Resort Vacation Points; at least one (1) Use Day in a One-Bedroom Vacation Home for every 45 Home Resort Vacation Points; at least one (1) Use Day in a Two-Bedroom Vacation Home for every 61 Home Resort Vacation Points; or at least one (1) Use Day in a Grand Villa Vacation Home for every 147 Home Resort Vacation Points. A maximum reallocation of Vacation Point reservation requirements could result in a "leveling" of all seasons, such that Home Resort Vacation Point reservation requirements would have no variation based upon seasonality or different times of the year. Similarly, a maximum reallocation of Home Resort Vacation Point reservation requirements could result in a "leveling" of differences in Vacation Point reservation requirements based upon particular Use Days in the week.
 
What I do not know is what system was set up for the resorts that have no dedicated studios and 1BRs such as VGF and SSR. They likely had to do something different there in setting up original total points, e.g., perhaps they determined total points at VGF by treating the lock-off 2BRs (half of all 2BRs) as just separate studios and 1BRs.

I compared the 2019 and 2020 numbers for both VGF and SSR. All lockoffs are treated solely as Two Bedroom Villas for purposes of calculating the charts. DVC is using the "lockoff premium" language cited in my other post to assign rates to Studio and 1B villas.

The rate of the lockoff premium for resorts like VGF and SSR is similar to other resorts which have dedicated Studio/1B included in their chart calculation. On that basis, seems like it would be tough to challenge the reasonableness of the premium. But that's more your area of expertise.
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!













facebook twitter
Top