Maybe they shouldn't have a 7 mo and 11 mo. booking period.

[Figaro30]

I just thought of something. Maybe it doesn't make sense to have the 7 mo and 11 mo booking time. Maybe it's not to the DVC members benefit.

I just responded to a thread and somebody mentioned not being able to get a 2 bedroom at OKW. I just booked a 2 bedroom yesterday at OKW. However I'm wait listed for a 2 bedroom at BWV. What if that person has a 2 bedroom at BWV and is waiting for a 2 bedroom at OKW and i'm doing the opposite? Wouldn't it just make more sense to let people choose whatever they want, whenever they want so that nobody has to go through waitlisting to the extent that they do now.

People are booking at their 11 mo. just to get a ressie, however this might not be the ressie they want. And then those ressies that they made at the 11 mo. might be what somebody else wants and is wait listed for. Does this make any sense to anybody???


It just seems that if at the time I wanted to make a ressie WHEREVER I WANTED TO MAKE IT, I would then (if the rooms were available) have a 2 bedroom at the BWV, in which case that other person would have my 2 bedroom at OKW??? No? What does everybody else think? And please, this is just a thought, keep the tempers down!!! I am curious what other people think about this.
:)

[Dan Murfman]

Not a good idea. I didn't buy at Boardwalk with the higher dues in order to stay at OKW. Why should someone at OKW have the same priority at BWV as me? And why should I have the same priority as an OKW owner if I wanted to stay at a Grand Villa at OKW?

[Lisa F]

Originally posted by Figaro30
It just seems that if at the time I wanted to make a ressie WHEREVER I WANTED TO MAKE IT, I would then (if the rooms were available) have a 2 bedroom at the BWV, in which case that other person would have my 2 bedroom at OKW??? No? What does everybody else think? And please, this is just a thought, keep the tempers down!!! I am curious what other people think about this.
:)

The problem (as Dan mentioned, and as I'm sure many others will chime in) is that people at BWV have paid more for the luxury of staying at BWV. I think there would be a holy war if Disney up and said "okay, all of you people who are paying more to own at BWV now have to fight with everyone else in DVC for reservations at your home resort!"

Judging by how difficult it is to get certain reservations at BWV even within the 11 month window, this would only lead to problems.

I was just talking about the problem of two people holding the identical reservations at opposite resorts. What WOULD be neat is if they had a little bit more complex reservations software that allowed reservation matching. For example, family A books a week in OKW bedroom at the 11 month window and family B books a week at BWV at the 11 month window. At the 7 month window both want to swtich to the other resort. Family A goes on the wait list for BWV first. Family B calls to switch to OKW and there is no availability. Before going on the wait list, a search is made of all people holding reservations at OKW who are on the waitlist to get into BWV. If there is a match, the switch is made instantaneously (I guess if you were on the waitlist you'd have to have auto-confirm for this to happen).

This kind of a system would still keep the priority order of the wait list while at the same time allowing for the problem of two people who want to switch reservations but don't want to give up what they have until there is a confirmation on a different reservation.

Lisa

[Tiggeriffic]

I think that DVC has to keep a home resort priority. That is why people bought where they did. If there was no priority, then everyone would have bought at VB when they were giving great deals there. There would have been no reason to buy anywhere else. It would no longer be "owning" at a particular resort, but just owning in DVC. Personally, I think the 11/7 month priority is a good thing and would not be happy if they tried to change it.

I understand the scenario that you mentioned. However, I don't think that the majority of the reservations are made as "backup" reservations. So, although this inconveniences those people who want to stay at a different resort, overall I think the system works well.

[Figaro30]

Okay, never thought about that aspect of it.

Lisa, do we know if they currently have software that checks for overlapping wait lists??? Or does anybody manually look at them to solve this problem. I'd hate to think that there are 50 people out there with the exact identical problem as another 50 people. (Me being one of them) I guess I just feel bad for the people that want my 2 bedroom, the same 2 bedroom that I'm trying to trade away.
:cool:

[Joeblack]

I am sorry, but I totally disagree.

It will never happen since people signed papers stating what the conditions are and almost nobody is going to want to forfeit their window of opportunity at their home resort.

What would happen to Maintenance dues? Management? The papers everybody signed? Resale prices?

The only reason people pay more (resale) or pay higher mainenance dues is that 4 month advantage.

[Dan Murfman]

If I'm not mistaken I think DVC can change the advantage to 11/10. I even think they sent out a poll on this and most were against this.

[ckr]

I think you have a valid problem here, but not a valid solution. Perhaps you should put your 2BR on the trade board and see if there is someone with a corresponding ressie that you could trade with.

[Figaro30]

ckr- that's a good idea. Thanks for the suggestion. :)

[PamOKW]

Dan you are entirely correct. The Home Resort advantage (if you read through your paperwork) can be reduced to as little as one month. DVC did consider this just a few years ago. Their reasoning may have been the same as Figaro's. It seems if someone really wants a particular resort at a particular time they call right at the 11 month mark. Maybe those 2 extra months of wait time aren't as necessary as we think. :)

[Chuck S]

I wonder what the actual results of the DVC 11/10 month survey was...I would bet that there was an overwhelming majority wanting to keep the 11/7. I would also bet that if the survey were to be given today that the great majority would still want the 11/7 window. I for one, hope they always have the 11/7 window. I doubt I'd want to book anywhere but my home resort (OKW). I also doubt many folks at BWV would want to trade out to OKW or WL. The theory has always been buy where you want to stay. Of course, in '92 there was only OKW, but if I didn't like it, or want to stay there then I wouldn't have bought.

[PamOKW]

Chuck, when we signed the papers we didn't really know what the "Home Resort" was going to mean did we? All these other DVC's were just a gleam in Mr. Eisner's eye! :smooth:

[Chuck S]

PamOKW, it is true that we were not promised any additional DVC resorts in 1992, but the problem doesn't seem to be that BWV owners are trying to book at OKW and WLV. If you were a BWV owner, and were having trouble booking/changing ressies I wouldn't want a 11/10 window. And although the problem doesn't seem to exist at OKW now, if the two off-property resorts were allowed to book at 10 months out it would complicate matters. Of course, it would probably boost sales at VB & HH. ;)

[Dean]

I think the chances of matching wait lists just to have DVC exchange reservations would be an extremely rare one. As noted, the shortest home resort priority is 11/10 and regardless of the reasons anyone bought at a specific resort, they derserve the priority time. OKW is easier right now overall and there are many factors to include location, the fact it's a more mature resort and that the majority of members have been owners for longer than the average at BWV.

Another aspect is that even if there were matching reservations with matching wait lists; DVC could not just swap them unless both parties were at the top of the wait list. You can wait list day by day or for the entirity of the requested stay but the person at the top of the list would have first crack even if they only took say the middle day of a 7 day reservation that someone else relinquished.

Survey reported in Vol. 7, No. 2, 1998. 65% and 64% wanted to retain the current banking and cancellation systems. To impose chargest for additional items: amenities (soaps) 68%, towels 53% and change of room 79%. Can't find the previous survey results right now.

[Crissup]

I would agree that the main problem would stem from the difference in dues. I purchased at BWV because it was not only my favorite DVC resort, it was my favorite WDW resort. For that, I was (and am) more than willing to spend the extra money for the higher dues. However, if I had no more chance to stay there than someone who was paying less dues elsewhere, I would dump my BWV contract on the resale market and buy a HH contract instead.

Obviously, this would never work unless all the cost and assessments were tossed into one big melting pot, spreading the maintenance fees across all the resorts equally. I do not believe that is within the legal limits of DVC's authority.

[bicker]

It's not only dues, but also the original purchase price. Many folks paid a premium for BWV, and are now paying a premium for VWL. While there are times I wouldn't mind staying at OKW, I surely don't want to have to scramble to secure a place at BWV since I paid extra for it.

[Dean]

Bicker, I'm not totally sure I'm following you. The purchase price is irrelavent, the prices were the same for OKW and BW. Resale, one may make the choice to pay higher to get exactly what they want, but then you're a member at that resort, no more and no less. Besides if I paid less for my weeks in Aruba (a lot less) than some of the other owners, does that mean that I have less rights and previledges? I hope not. The important point has nothing to do with where you own; it's simply that you own at a DVC resort. There are home priority rules which can change but never be less than 11/10 months. Even the higher dues aren't there to give you any additional priority, they are simply for maintenance, taxes and the like. Hopefully most of us bougth where we prefer to own though with new resorts coming on board, not everyone will end up owning at their favorite. You will always have a home resort priority as promised in the POS.

Besides, no one paid a premium from DVC for any resort bought through DVC. Everyone paid the going rate for points at the time they official bought. Remember that the first official WLV was Jan of this year and yes, some did make a conscious choice to pay a higher price for WLV but they still paid the going rate for points at the time of their purchase. Paying for inflation is not paying a premium regardless how much the increased point costs have been. The real premium is in the points costs for smaller rooms, some think it's worth it and others don't, their choice.

[bicker]

The fact is that most BWV buyers had a choice between buying BWV from Disney and buying OKW through resale. Most of us made our choice to spend the extra money, in return for ???? that priority, of course.

[Dean]

More people chose OKW than BWV and all who did got what they paid for, no more and no less. You got the priority promised, so I'm still unclear what it is some members want that they feel they're not getting. I guess I'm just missing your point.

[bicker]

Yes -- I got the priority I was promised. All I'm saying is that that should continue.

[Dean]

OK, you have the guarantee of a 1 month priority though I suspect it'll stay a 4 months at least for a number of years. I thought I was missing something, you know how demanding those BW oweners can be. LOL ;)

[PamOKW]

Just to echo what Dean said, no one paid a premium for any DVC resort. Someone who buys HHI today is paying a "premium" over someone who bought 5 years ago. All DVC resorts (bought from DVC) have cost exactly the same when purchased on the same day.

The dues difference is also minimal. $.70 over OKW and $.20 over VWL. $.51 over HHI and actually $.14 less than Vero.

[Richyams]

Maybe my being so poor is the reason, but I don't call $0.70 per point in dues a "minimal" difference.

On 430 points, that is $300 per year every year. That is actually the lowest the difference has ever been. The difference on 430 points ranges from $400 to $300 each and every year.

I think that is significant. BWV owners pay that and I think any move away from 7-11 towards 10-11 is bad for DVC and its owners.

And I also think that it is a fair statement to say that many BWV owners paid a premium for their points. They never has a $15 per point buy back off as they did at Vero. Would it be fair to allow people who bought Vero because of the discount to have the same or even a one month disadvantage when booking BWV as someone who paid full price?

[Richyams]

Pam made an untrue statement:

" All DVC resorts (bought from DVC) have cost exactly the same when purchased on the same day. "



The VB MB program has long been different than the MB program at the rest of the DVC resorts. There were many days that some people bought BWV using the MB buyback that people bought VB using the MB buyback. Those buying BWV paid more(a premium) than those buying at VB.

[Dean]

Rich, it's actually a little of both. To get the MB, you're giving up the points associated. You could say the same about the free passes, especially for thost OKW owners that bought right after that incentive ended. I guess I look at any incentive or discount as just that, the MSRP was still the same. Or you could say that VB was worth much more because DVC was willing to give you $15 pp for each and every point, how's that for reversing the thinking. LOL

Still, I prefer to think of it as if you bought the same number of points and didn't use MB, you'd be at the same cost the same day. I'll say again that the dues are because it costs more to run BW, not as any incentive for a prioritiy over the other DVC resorts.

[Richyams]

I understand completely that the dues are what they are because of the cost to run the resort.

Somebody wanting to bathe themselves in the BWV atmosphere and willing to pay the difference in cost in dues, isn't paying specifically for the booking advantage, but they certainly deserve it.

SOmeone who bought at OKW because the love staying in the spacious, relaxing Grand Villas, also deserves a booking advantage.

Wether its cost or preference, we all bought at one resort with a limited ability to stay at the others. Material changes to that are wrong, in my ever so humble opinion.

I still think that there is an element of truth in the staement that many BWV owners paid a premium to stay there.

Many people bought VB simply because they fell for the DVC sales line that the booking window doesn't matter combined with the lower upfront cost that allowed them to afford it......those people don't have a right to the same booking advantage as someone whose home resort is BWV.

[WebmasterDoc]

PamOKW did NOT make an untrue statement!

The offered price at every DVC resort is always the same on any given day.

The fact that there is an incentive at VB (also at HH) which differs than one at VWL does not change the offered price. The buyer has the option of using the incentive. If he chooses not to use MB, he will pay the same for VB, HH or VWL.

Last fall, the offered price for BWV, OKW, VB and HH on any day in October was exactly the same- as PamOKW stated. The fact that some (not all) buyers chose to utilize the MB (and give up something in return) does not alter the offered price at all.

This may be nothing but semantics, but it is an important distinction when accusing someone of making an "untrue" statement.

[Peterd]

I do agree with Rich and the others about keeping it the same, (who would have thunk it).. I was wondering if they brought up the idea of changing it because they were having trouble selling the offsite properties. If they did change it, there would probably be a run on HH or VB.
I own at both Okw and BW, and would be a little ticked if others that chose to buy at the offsite resorts were now given the same window or a little less than the 11 month window, to reserve as home resort owners. I like the guarentee that we could get a GV at both Okw and Bw at the eleven month window, without having to worry about being shut out from owners who own elsewhere.
Some used to complain about not being able to get rooms at another resort, and we would say, "buy where you want to stay". I don't see why that should change.

[Dean]

Rich I assume we are saying mostly the same thing but I'm still not sure. Let me check things out here. First there is a guaranteed 1 month priority for any owners home resort. That priority is currently 4 months but could be changed by DVC at any time and we'd have no real right to fuss about it. ANY owner has the right to their priority at their home resort, regardless of what they paid or what their dues are.

As Doc says, it is semantics as to cost vs. discount. Besides Rich, you sure seem to be taking the liberal side of things lately, are you sure you're all right, LOL. ;)

I too hope that the priority remains at four months. I was trying to remember the main initial jist of this thread. I think it was waiving the priority period because there might be mirror image reservations with matching wait lists for the other resort. They say anything is possible and that everyone has a twin somewhere in the world. Lord help us if Rich and I have a twin somewhere, LOL.;)

[PamOKW]

Thanks Doc. I'll let your reply stand as my rebuttal. Rich, any time you want to show a DVC price list with different prices for each resort you just let me know.

I'm not in favor of reducing the booking window either. But the idea that folks paid a "premium" for BWV is not true either. They chose BWV and paid for it. They pay slightly higher dues to cover the extra amenities at BWV. They are entitled to the same guarantees regarding reservations that every other DVC member receives, no more and no less. There are no special privileges associated with owning at BWV beyond being guaranteed a Home Resort privilege at that resort, which is the same guarantee every other resort owners is granted.

$.70 x 400 or 1,000 or whatever certainly does start to add up. But, it is still $.70 per point -- not an amount that comes with any additional DVC privileges beyond paying for the valet and the slide pool and the other hotel costs.

[LindaDVC]

The problem is people are booking reservations they do not want incase their true requests can not be granted!

I am not sure how that problem can be fixed! The only Idea I can think of is a change of plan penalty and I DO NOT WANT THAT!

Linda:pinkbounc

[Dean]

It has long been a recommendation on this board to make a home resort reservation then try for the desired location when the 7 month window opened up. It's also been stated many times to make the reservation you can get then wait list what you would really prefer. I do wonder if they review wait lists for just the problem in question here, I don't know if they do or not.

[CaptainMidnight]

The 11 vs 7 month booking advantage really does make sense. Those folks at HH for which you would presume would mostly prefer summer months, would not be able to book the resort of thier choice. 4 months gives one some leeway in making vacation decisions. And at 7 months, we are hearing fo people getting reservations at alternative resorts, which is a major part of the package they purchased.... flexibility. Peak times, stick with your home resort (Christmas and Spring break, off peak you should be able to get reservations at alternative resorts with some potential dissapointment.

Also, didn't the fact that some resorts sell out help moderate unusually high demand for a popular resort?

I bought into the system knowing how it worked, and choosing my home resort to reflect peak vacation periods. I can always add on for 11 month windows at alternative resorts provided they are not sold out. And maybe having a collection of points from several resorts would be nice. Bank one resorts points for this year and use the others, and vice versa for next year. Nice to have options, that was a big seller for me.

[ILuvDVC]

Has anyone considered that they might change the window from 11/7 to 11/6 or 11/5??? It's possible, isn't it?

I like the booking window just the way it, but, when they first came out with Vero Beach...I started getting nervous. Because...I couldn't see myself going to Vero Beach Every year, but I knew people were choosing Vero Beach as their home resort, because Vero Beach still had those free passes (I, myself, almost bought there, just for the free passes, but decided there is no way I would go there every year!).

[bicker]

I don't think so. I think that it is limited to varying between 11/7 and 11/10. Does someone know for sure?

[Joeblack]

I do believe that BWV owners paid a premium (although not reflected in Disney's asking price) for their membership for two reasons. First, they are getting smaller accomodations and paying higher dues than at OKW for the sake of location and arguably themeing.

Secondly, market (resale) prices at BWV have most of the time been higher than at OKW. It would have been a bad move from Disney (that would have probably outraged other resort owners) to make a price differentiation between the different resorts, but the market has usually born a higher price for BWV because supply/demand determines it to be that way. (By the way, I belive that the market is the only force that can determine the TRUE price of something. Not Disney nor any other artificial force).

I would say it is a safe bet to say that it will be easier to sell 150 points at BWV than 150 points at OKW for, say...$68/pt.

Having said all that, I still maintain my position that the only reason to buy in a particular resort is the 7/11 window, and doing away with it would just make no sense.

[bicker]

Originally posted by Joeblack
I do believe that BWV owners paid a premium (although not reflected in Disney's asking price) for their membership for two reasons. First, they are getting smaller accomodations and paying higher dues than at OKW for the sake of location and arguably themeing.While I agree that BWV owners paid a premium, I'm confused by this rationale. The fact is that ANYONE staying in a BWV room is getting smaller accommodations. Furthermore, you don't pay a premium to get something *less* -- you pay a premium to get something *more* so the smaller room isn't a reason for the premium.

[Joeblack]

Bicker. Maybe Iam not explaining myself correctly, but, if you have a 50ml olive oil bottle and a 100 ml peanut oil bottle and both cost $3, then you are paying a premium for the olive oil.

If a 1-br at OKW is larger and costs less points to stay at than a smaller 1-br at BWV, then you are definitely paying a premium to stay at the BWC room, aren't you? AndI believe you are correct that you should get "something more" whhen you pay a premium. In this case, you are getting a better location and arguably, a better themeing.

In Real Estate, the most determining point is location, and BWV owners are paying a prime throug sacrificing room space, paying more points and higher maintenance dues just for the sake of staying at a privileged location, although Disney's "official price" is the same.

In other words, points/square feet are best maximized by OKW owners. BWV owners get a better location but don't get the same point/sqft ratio OKW owners do, and therefore, IMHO are paying a premium for the location.

[bicker]

Originally posted by Joeblack
Bicker. Maybe Iam not explaining myself correctly, but, if you have a 50ml olive oil bottle and a 100 ml peanut oil bottle and both cost $3, then you are paying a premium for the olive oil.I'm having difficultly understanding what point you're trying to make given the context of this thread: "Maybe they shouldn't have a 7 mo and 11 mo. booking period." If they got rid of the 11/7 system, and had all DVC members just book wherever they wanted, there would be no difference between the rooms that OKW owners get vs. the rooms that BWV owners get, since they'd be getting the same rooms, eh?

In other words, points/square feet are best maximized by OKW owners. BWV owners get a better location but don't get the same point/sqft ratio OKW owners do, and therefore, IMHO are paying a premium for the location.And I see those things as balancing out: BWV has better location/theming; OKW has better square footage. So back to the point of this thread: BWV owners are paying more, so what are they getting for THAT premium: It isn't better location/theming -- they're getting better location/theming "because" they're getting less square footage. Rahter, it is the 11/7 program that justifies the added cost BWV owners incur, IMHO.

[Dean]

And even if someone paid a premium for BW, the only thing they're entitled to is what's offered in the legal documentation, no more and no less. That means X number of points and the minimum of 1 month of home resort priority, currently a 4 month priority window. A members own personal reasoning and expectations above the legal documentation is just that and has no direct bearing on this discussion. That's true for any DVC owner at any resort, not just BW.

Actually, I would assume that HH and VB owners are at a signigicant disadvantage overall when it comes to flexibility for varied vacations. HH member are likely trying to get into their home resort in summer and/or compete with other members for other resorts. VB is not generally difficult to get but competing for other resorts at the 7 month window must be equally frustrating. The WDW resorts have a certain advantage because you can make home resort plans then change to another resort when the 7 month window opens up thus giving you a guaranteed trip with the exact resort the only question. Of course the VB and HH owners can do the same but that doesn't help them for WDW. Still I suspect those that plan can get something at the 7 month window, the exceptions will likely be BW at certain times of the year and HH for summer.