History question: Why are 1-bedrooms "priced" so high?

[Dean]

It's amazing how they can change a contract to what ever they want. Beware what you buy, it WILL be changed if Disney has a whim.

This is the nature of timeshares, it's what we bought into.

 

[Orsino]

I had noticed the discrepancy between 1 and 2 bedrooms as well. What is more interesting to me is that renting a 2 bedroom costs less than renting a 1 bedroom and a studio. Since many 2 bedrooms are lock-offs, this means renting 1 bed + studio is renting the exact same thing as a two bedroom, yet costs more points.

Rolling that back to DVC sales, it is probable in my mind that DVC is limited in selling DVC points by the 2 bedroom cost of a lock-off. In other words, they have to sell the points assuming all 2 bed lock-offs are occupied as 2 bedrooms. (At least I hope they are required to do so, otherwise it is possible for DVC to run out of space with people owning points left out with nothing).

Anyway, that means every time someone rents a 1-bedroom, more points are used than originally allocated for. Again guessing, but I think that means DVC can use the "extra" as they see fit. Even more guessing pushes those extra 1 bedroom points are resold as the $15 dollar add-on points.

That's a long way of my saying that DVC could drop the 1 bedroom cost to (roughly) 2bed cost minus studio cost*. Why don't they? Because as long as the 1 beds get used, everything is fine. If everyone stopped renting 1 beds and people got angry at DVC for not having enough inventory to meet demand then *maybe* they would be pressured to change, but as long as the 1beds get used by someone, everything is fine, and DVC gets to pocket the extra^^.

* they would have to account for dedicated one bedrooms, but the general idea is still there.

^^ does anyone know where the 15 bucks for an extra point goes?

 

[Dean]

My POS, from 1993 says no more than 10% adjustment. But they have already ignored that with past changes.

OKW POS from May 1993 on page 11 says adjustments in excess of 20% require member approval. It goes on to say on that page that members will have AT LEAST ONE DAY they can reserve in a studio for 15 points, 1BR for 30 pts, 2BR 40 points and 3 BR 65 pts for what's now OKW. Exhibit I from that version also states the same 20% limitation.

Multi site POS from 2006 says on page 16/ "Demand Rebalancing:..Both DVCMC and BVTC SHALL periodically make adjustments or amendments to their reservation components in order to respond to actual club member use patterns and changes and club member use demand for existing vacation homes and facilities. So as I read it as a whole, the home resort POS's I've looked at give them the right to rebalance and the multi site POS requires they do so if needed. Obviously they are in charge of determining when it's needed."

 

[DougEMG]

Another thing that can't be argued, though some want to try, is that DVC has a contractual responsibility to rebalance if things get too far out of balance. As I read the POS that would include between studios and 1 BR as long as they don't change more than 20% per year and match the minimum requirements to be able to reserve a studio for one night at the contractual number of points.

As much as I'd like 1 bedrooms to become cheaper, I'd hate for studios to go up. So guess I would rather just keep things the way they are and hope that Disney never gets around to doing anything about this. Besides it would make it harder for them to sell new contracts if the studios cost too many points.

 

[LAX]

They really can't do that at the resorts that, esp at the points that don't have dedicated studios & 1 BR because the legal points are tied to the 2 BR. I believe they'd have to raise the raise the studio to do so unless there were dedicated smaller villas. They could potentially lower both the 1 & 2 BR but likely only at the resorts that had 3BR villas. And then there's the Poly where they likely should lower the 2 BR and thus raise the studios.

I thought any change in point reallocation is possible as long as the total number of points stay the same. Obviously, the math needs to work out so that the distribution of points is proportional to the distribution of room types. Hence, I don't understand why DVD can't just change the points on 1 & 2-bedrooms without touching the studios.

LAX

 

[PatMcDuck]

Personally, I would like to see DVC start fresh with some new room designs in their next new resort. (Specifically, to redesign the 1BR rooms, the others work well.) I think they really need a 1 BR, with 2 full bathrooms, that sleeps 5-6. CLEARLY there is demand, based upon the number of people putting 5 into a studio. The 2BR points are "too high" for many, and the 1 BRs sleep less people than the studios in some cases. It would be similar to the space in an Art of A suite, but deluxe. I have used the Art of A suites 4X, they are great and that Murphy bed is comfortable.

I know we have some 1BR with 2 bathrooms now, but I think we need them to sleep up to 5 or 6, not 4. I had 4 kids (grown now) and we always booked the 2BR for the 6 of us. I personally would not have put us into a 1BR, but I understand why people do.

 

[Dean]

I thought any change in point reallocation is possible as long as the total number of points stay the same. Obviously, the math needs to work out so that the distribution of points is proportional to the distribution of room types. Hence, I don't understand why DVD can't just change the points on 1 & 2-bedrooms without touching the studios.

LAX

The total points for the entire resort for a year has to stay the same. What I understood you were saying would reduce the total points for the resort for the year. Remember that the points for a 2 BR are contractual, the points for the lockoff portions of the 2 BR are more flexible and really not as protected unless there are also dedicated villas as I understand it. I'm pretty sure they could likely reduce the 1 BR and studios down to equal the 2 BR but not just reduce the 2BR Effectively I doubt they would ever do that thus the only way to make a change in the 1 BR or studio is to change the other proportionally (# of points not %).

Personally, I would like to see DVC start fresh with some new room designs in their next new resort. (Specifically, to redesign the 1BR rooms, the others work well.) I think they really need a 1 BR, with 2 full bathrooms, that sleeps 5-6. CLEARLY there is demand, based upon the number of people putting 5 into a studio. The 2BR points are "too high" for many, and the 1 BRs sleep less people than the studios in some cases. It would be similar to the space in an Art of A suite, but deluxe. I have used the Art of A suites 4X, they are great and that Murphy bed is comfortable.

I know we have some 1BR with 2 bathrooms now, but I think we need them to sleep up to 5 or 6, not 4. I had 4 kids (grown now) and we always booked the 2BR for the 6 of us. I personally would not have put us into a 1BR, but I understand why people do.

I doubt we'll ever see that. Even the 1 BR with 2 BA are an anomaly in the timeshare world. I suspect you're assuming they'd be cheaper but in reality if they made a sleep six 2BR, it'd likely be fairly close to a 2 BR, maybe halfway in between the current 1 BR and the 2 BR. Plus it'd be a weird unit that would make that resort stand out as different and anyone who owned there wouldn't be able to get the same type of villa in other DVC resorts. There are other things in the timeshare world that I think makes more sense. First, make a real studio with a more functional kitchen. Maybe have 2BR lockoffs with a larger and smaller (dlx & standard) 1BR which is fairly common in the industry. Or even have 4 BR lockoff's with two 2BR components. I still say they missed an opportunity with SSR to have lake homes.

 

[codina818]

Well for me, it is well worth it to have the ability to close the bedroom door at night and get some privacy.

 

[mustinjourney]

this thread has been an interesting re-read after the latest reallocation.

 

[DougEMG]

As I've said before, the 1 BR are too much at double the studios. I deal with many other timeshares and while they are all different, none are set up with such a discrepancy. IMO a rebalancing raising studios and lowering 1 BR would be the best course looking at this objectively. The 1 BR should be roughly 1.5 times the studio.

At that kind of ratio I would probably book a lot more 1 bedrooms. Wish that is what they would have done with the point reallocation.

We don't need the 1 bedroom, don't really use the kitchen or the laundry so find them to be a poor value. The number cruncher in me also has a hard time justifying the additional costs of 1 bedrooms. I bought DVC to save money, not to spend more money!

 

[DougEMG]

The 5 in a studio is actually a very smart financial move for Disney Vacation Club. It is very difficult to do meals in the studio. Breakfast would be only easy meal to prepare in the studio.

Meals to feed the 5 for lunch or dinner would then be on the Disney Grounds. Yes, sandwiches can be packed, and some meals can be microwaved.

The one bedroom has the kitchen and washer/dryer. If I am bringing a larger family (which I have 4 boys, based off my name), I cook to save money. Theme park tickets are already expensive enough.

Even though I would love to stay in 1 bedroom, we are the two - studios stayers to fit my family of 6. My boys are older now. It is more feasible points wise for us. For the price of 2 studios, it is the almost the same price as a 1 bedroom.

The other reason it was smart and why I think they did it was that common area costs are split between the hotel and DVC based on the number of people staying at each resort. Allowing 5 in a studio bumps up the number in the DVC component and thus requires DVC to pay for more of the common areas.

In my mind, allowing 5 in a studio should never been allowed especially as there are 1 bedrooms that still only allow 4.

 

[DougEMG]

this thread has been an interesting re-read after the latest reallocation.

Oops, didn't realize this was an old thread!

 

[DougEMG]

I looked that up once, SSR is the only one that doesn't list 5 in either studios or 1-bedrooms, and also the new Copper Creek doesn't.

No resort to share the costs with based on number of guests, so there was no need for DVC to increase the amount of people staying at SSR because it didn't help them.

 

[skier_pete]

Zombie thread! I still say if they had raised studios and lowered 1-beds I would've been totally behind what they're doing.

 

[ziravan]

Zombie thread! I still say if they had raised studios and lowered 1-beds I would've been totally behind what they're doing.

I think most people here would have been.

I kinda think that is the root of the head scratching here. What the heck were they thinking?!

Most of us know that the studios are becoming a problem. But raising the 1BRs too? Now you're just being greedy.

If they had lowered the 1BRs, it wouldn't have sounded such a shrill alarm about rebalancing points. Now, because they didn't, a good chunk of us feel like we've been lied to from the start about how the point charts are actually supposed to work. At least as important, it taints our confidence about stability in the future. If they can do this now, what else do they believe that they can do? That thought unfortunately is multiplied across multiple fronts this month.

 

[mustinjourney]

I think most people here would have been.

I kinda think that is the root of the head scratching here. What the heck were they thinking?!

Most of us know that the studios are becoming a problem. But raising the 1BRs too? Now you're just being greedy.

If they had lowered the 1BRs, it wouldn't have sounded such a shrill alarm about rebalancing points. Now, because they didn't, a good chunk of us feel like we've been lied to from the start about how the point charts are actually supposed to work. At least as important, it taints our confidence about stability in the future. If they can do this now, what else do they believe that they can do? That thought unfortunately is multiplied across multiple fronts this month.

No kidding -- in DVC alone we have 10% increases for MFs at multiple resorts, this 2020 point reallocation, big increases about to hit for direct costs, and then, of course, the January 19th creation of "the legacy 14."

Not to mention increased ticket prices, APs, parking (for regular resort guests), minnie vans, and food/snacks going up a ton (water went from $3.50 to $4.50).

Between the MFs and the reallocation, studios are going to effectively cost 20% more in 2020 than in 2019. So much for locking in your future vacations at a fixed rate.

 

[skier_pete]

Between the MFs and the reallocation, studios are going to effectively cost 20% more in 2020 than in 2019. So much for locking in your future vacations at a fixed rate.

OK - I will have to say - they NEVER said that.

 

[PaintsWithAllTheColors]

OK - I will have to say - they NEVER said that.

Oh they sure did to DH and I when we went on our DVC tours! Not just one guide either. We just knew it wasn’t accurate. When I finally questioned one and pointed out the very obvious issue of increasing MFs, he said brushed it off and said they’re “less than inflation” so really it was a WIN! Definitely misleading and deceitful but we did our homework, knew the reality, and purchased resale because it was still worth it to us.

 

[Lorilais_mommie]

Plus each club member is eligible to book a room time at a minimum amount at some point each year. For example at BLT,

. . . each Club Member will be always eligible reserve at lease one Use day in a Studio Vacation Home for 16 Home Resort Vacation Points, subject availability . . . at least one Use day in a One-BedroomVacation Home for Points for 39 Home Resort Vacation Points;

——- Wait what?!? Explain please I’m confused.

 

[mustinjourney]

. . . each Club Member will be always eligible reserve at lease one Use day in a Studio Vacation Home for 16 Home Resort Vacation Points, subject availability . . . at least one Use day in a One-BedroomVacation Home for Points for 39 Home Resort Vacation Points;

——- Wait what?!? Explain please I’m confused.

that clause just states that the point chart must have at least one day in which a studio can be rented by someone for a max of 16 points. But there is no maximum for the other 364 days of the year.