͏

[i<3riviera]

͏

 

[i<3riviera]

͏

 

[Chumpieboy]

wat

 

[CastAStone]

Interesting thing I noticed in there - if owners ever vote Disney out as management, they are required to immediately remove all references to Disney and Disney characters. Which given how many hidden Mickeys there are on various furniture, drapes, shower curtains, couches, etc, would basically require an immediate full refurb.

Talk about your poison pill clauses.

 

[DebbieB]

Thanks for posting this. I bought an addon resale at VGC in January, never got anything.

 

[CarolMN]

@WebmasterDoc added a link to this thread in post #10 of the DVC Resource Center.

Thanks, Doc and thanks @i<3riviera.

 

[CastAStone]

Something I learned from these is that Disney cannot sell more points than there is availability at the resort.

That seems obvious, but what it means in practice is that Disney has to undersell any resorts with lockoffs. For example, if every room at Saratoga Springs, which has no dedicated Studios or 1 BRs, is booked as a 2BR, Treehouse, or Grand Villa, it uses 14,041,340 points. Accordingly, Disney's report for Saratoga Springs indicates sales/owned by DVD of 14,031,570 points - basically spot on.

But If they sell the 432 lockoff units as Studios and 1BRs - and I bet that's what happens 95% of the time or more, that consumes 15,006,236 points. Or said differently, if no one was allowed to trade in or out of SSR, and all the lockoffs were booked separately, 6.5% of the rooms would be vacant because of the lock off penalty.

What is Disney doing with those extra rooms?

(LOL they're obviously selling them for cash stays which is why there is always availability 6 months out)

I checked Beach Club and OKW and the pattern was similar.

 

[i<3riviera]

͏

 

[CastAStone]

yes, it's a interesting feature of resorts with lock-off two bedrooms; it comes into play when comparing year-on-year point charts along with selecting the right "base year" for comparison (a calendar with a minimum number of Fridays and Saturdays, I have usually used 2017 as it begins on a Sunday)

there is a good read on the lock-off premium as well if you're interested ...
https://dvcnews.com/index.php/other-resources/feature-articles/4391-what-is-the-lock-off-premium

It’s just a fascinating thing to exist, because every time you book a studio or one-bedroom at a resort like Saratoga springs with no dedicated rooms, you’re basically donating a portion of your points to Disney to resell.

Interesting read and essentially exactly the thoughts I’ve had on this topic tonight.

Wil makes one mistake IMHO at the end when he allocates then lock-off penalty between Studios and 1BRs proportionally - one glance at the availability charts and my takeaway is that the lock-off premium exists basically entirely because Disney has perpetually overpriced 1BRs. The 2BR price minus the studio price makes a 1BR price that would probably move at the same rate as the studios and 2BRs do (and is more reflective of Disney’s cash prices for those same rooms)

 

[i<3riviera]

͏

 

[drusba]

Something I learned from these is that Disney cannot sell more points than there is availability at the resort.

That seems obvious, but what it means in practice is that Disney has to undersell any resorts with lockoffs. For example, if every room at Saratoga Springs, which has no dedicated Studios or 1 BRs, is booked as a 2BR, Treehouse, or Grand Villa, it uses 14,041,340 points. Accordingly, Disney's report for Saratoga Springs indicates sales/owned by DVD of 14,031,570 points - basically spot on.

But If they sell the 432 lockoff units as Studios and 1BRs - and I bet that's what happens 95% of the time or more, that consumes 15,006,236 points. Or said differently, if no one was allowed to trade in or out of SSR, and all the lockoffs were booked separately, 6.5% of the rooms would be vacant because of the lock off penalty.

What is Disney doing with those extra rooms?

(LOL they're obviously selling them for cash stays which is why there is always availability 6 months out)

I checked Beach Club and OKW and the pattern was similar.

Total saleable points for every resort that has 2BR lock-offs, were determined by treating those 2BR lock-offs as only 2BRs. Thus, if most of those lock-offs are reserved separately as studios and 1BRs, using more points than needed if reserved as 2BR lock-offs, there would be more total availability during the year than total points applicable to the resort, potentially giving DVC more rooms to rent, although what really occurs is likely more amorphous, including because members of different resorts can book at 7-months out and members can bank and borrow points to make reservations.

I have doubts Disney created the lock-off premiums (a concept that started with OKW) to make sure it would have more rooms to rent. My guess is that in the early 1990s, when it was created, it was done to assure Disney had one extra argument against a challenge to its reservation system, where no one owned specific weeks like most timeshares at the time, under the no-more-than-one-to one occupancy rule, e.g.,if challenged Disney could point out that its system was designed to assure compliance with that rule by creating some excess availability..

 

[i<3riviera]

͏