For those upset about the 50% borrowing rule

[justadreamaway77]

For everyone complaining about the 50% borrowing rule, you can see it was only 50% back in 1992 on this DVC promotional video from way back when. Totally funny watch! Love the emphasis of the 32" TVs!!! LOL

 

[Sandisw]

Very interesting! Had no idea!!!

 

[BcIcemen]

For everyone complaining about the 50% borrowing rule, you can see it was only 50% back in 1992 on this DVC promotional video from way back when. Totally funny watch! Love the emphasis of the 32" TVs!!! LOL

When did it change to 100% borrowing?

 

[drusba]

When did it change to 100% borrowing?

When it changed I am not sure, but as I have noted in another thread, it occurred sometime between January 1992, when the OKW POS had the 50% rule and A August 1996, when the first POS for BWV was issued and had the 100% rule.

 

[JWG]

Just watched that this morning. We never knew the 50% rule was original.

 

[we"reofftoneverland]

If it is in the POS as 100%, can they even change it to 50%?

 

[drusba]

If it is in the POS as 100%, can they even change it to 50%?

Since the BWV POS, the language of the POS has always been worded in a way that creates a right to do 100% borrowing, i.e., it cannot be taken away completely, but DVCM has the right to suspend borrowing or modify the percentage if conditions exist in which it would be in the best interest of the members as whole to do so, and despite that it cannot be completely done away with, there is no stated limit to the period of time during which it could be suspended or modified. In other words, what DVCM is doing now is allowable.

As to whether DVCM could just change the applicable membership agreements to allow only 50% borrowing as the max is questionable because such a change could be considered a material change in existing rights which would require the actual vote of the members to accomplish, but then with the existing suspension and modification exceptions to the rule, DVC does not really have a reason to make any such change

 

[moericus]

Didn't know about this. Yikes for my small contracts.

 

[mac_tlc]

And the banking provisions were different too. With staggered amounts depending on when in your use year you banked. Early banking = more points could be banked, Later in the year = less. But they didn't have the four month provisions.

Perks come, perks go --- most remember the ones that go.


mac_tlc

 

[DebbieB]

And the banking provisions were different too. With staggered amounts depending on when in your use year you banked. Early banking = more points could be banked, Later in the year = less. But they didn't have the four month provisions.

Perks come, perks go --- most remember the ones that go.

mac_tlc

100% 6 months
50% 9 months
25% 10 months

 

[keishashadow]

For everyone complaining about the 50% borrowing rule

There are those who are glad it was capped. Have found it more difficut to book non 11 month trips at home resorts a few times this year already. An inordinate amount of fellow members in play with banked points to compete against. Can only imagine it if borrowing was at the past norm.

Perks come, perks go --- most remember the ones that go.

True, but with all the stress surrounding us, DVC is an especially prime target on which to vent

 

[gisele2]

Really interesting thanks for sharing.

 

[Chuck S]

100% 6 months
50% 9 months
25% 10 months

And they were cumulative totals. So if you banked 50% of your points at the 6 month mark, you could not bank the rest at 9 months.

 

[Chuck S]

Didn't know about this. Yikes for my small contracts.

Yes, but back then the minimum purchase was 230 points. AND was priced reasonably enough that rather than borrowing, a lot of people just did add-ons as needed. We (Mom and I) did 3 add-ons, so I have four OKW contracts, 230, 40, 40, and 35...bringing us to a total of 345 points. At an average of $53.50 per point.

 

[AnnaS]

Thank you for sharing. It has been a while since I saw this specific video.

 

[mac_tlc]

Yes, but back then the minimum purchase was 230 points. AND was priced reasonably enough that rather than borrowing, a lot of people just did add-ons as needed. We (Mom and I) did 3 add-ons, so I have four OKW contracts, 230, 40, 40, and 35...bringing us to a total of 345 points. At an average of $53.50 per point.

Like you, we initially bought 230 @ $51, then did two small add ons of 25 and 30. I think our average price is around $52 or $53.

mac_tlc

 

[Donna M]

And I thought our price of $87 was good. I guess it is considering we had reservations at VGF and RIV for March.

 

[moericus]

Yes, but back then the minimum purchase was 230 points. AND was priced reasonably enough that rather than borrowing, a lot of people just did add-ons as needed. We (Mom and I) did 3 add-ons, so I have four OKW contracts, 230, 40, 40, and 35...bringing us to a total of 345 points. At an average of $53.50 per point.

I fell in love with BLT. I can't say other DVC resorts interested me. And we held out even after that because WDW is a decent flight away or ~2 days in the car.

We bought one small contract with a bank and borrow strategy. We never planned on visiting more than once every 3 years. Since then we added on and even bought another small contract for every other year visits. However, this will certainly shorten our stays.

 

[Greysword]

As to whether DVCM could just change the applicable membership agreements to allow only 50% borrowing as the max is questionable because such a change could be considered a material change in existing rights which would require the actual vote of the members to accomplish, but then with the existing suspension and modification exceptions to the rule, DVC does not really have a reason to make any such change

Interesting. Now I'm curious if resale holders have voting rights, or is this just for original contract holders, too.

 

[Chuck S]

Interesting. Now I'm curious if resale holders have voting rights, or is this just for original contract holders, too.

In the instance of a change actually requiring a vote of the general membership, yes, retail purchasers would have voting rights. But such an instance would likely never occur, as the membership for most voting circumstances have a representative that votes for us that has been picked by the DVC Management board. The representative's function is basically accept the proposed dues.