@drusba - this statement kind of caused a revelation with me. While I realize it is somewhat sarcastic, it may well be wrong for us to assume that Disney is looking at this with MORE sophisticated tools than what we (the members) have at our disposal. My assumption has always been that they look at each resort and respond in kind.
In a thread heavy with posts I want to note:
THIS MAKES A CASE THAT DISNEY IS BEING ABOVE BOARD IN WHAT THEY ARE DOING.
So one of the things I've noticed - and mentioned here - is while working on the availability tools is that while the 2-bedrooms appear to be generally more available than 1-bedrooms at most resort, at SSR I am seeing the 2-bedrooms as being more available, albeit in this case the difference is very small. (Say 1-beds are still well available 2 months in advance while 2-beds are available at 1-month or less.)
But
@drusba's comment made me realize something - what if Disney's data analysis is
LESS sophisticated than what we as the more observant members of the DVC community are using. What if instead of analyzing every resort - they are only looking at the whole thing - and specifically what's left at the end. They could in fact care less that say at WLV the studios are gone at 9 months advance, 2-beds are gone at 7 months advance, and 1-beds are gone at 4-months advance. All they look at is that the studios, 1-beds, and 2-beds are all occupied at that resort - and therefore are equally "in demand".
So if we piled ALL the data together across the 10 WDW resorts, what we might just see is this -
the most unoccupied rooms that are left across an entire year in the entire WDW system are 2-bedrooms. Yes, all of these rooms are at SSR (and maybe occasionally at OKW or AKV) but WHERE they are doesn't matter. So, even though 1-beds as a generally rule book later - to Disney's way of thinking they ARE more occupied, and they are equaling "occupancy" with "demand".
Also, because so many two bedrooms become split into studios and 1-bedrooms by the drive for people to get studios, the total number of studios and 1-bedrooms - again across ALL resorts - may be VERY high. So if they are seeing this - combined with my underlined point above - there is a clear path to the internal logic that "
Across all of the resorts - we need to find a way to drive more people to occupy two bedrooms." The logic becomes if we can increase occupancy of 2-bedrooms everywhere, it will drive occupancy of 2-bedrooms at SSR, which benefits the entire system, and in fact increases overall occupancy which reduces breakage.
This also would be what is being used to drive the shift of points to make magic season 1-beds and 2-beds cheaper. Perhaps more of both are sitting unoccupied at that time of year than any other.
Though I think there are some flaws in the logic - I can see where this data would be enough to prove that the moves they made are in "the best interest of the members as a whole". And with that - I think any hope for an actionable case against Disney would fall apart.