Are the Days of Walking a DVC Reservation Numbered?

[Tatebeck]

At least UY makes a hard break each year.

It's more of a soft break. You CAN walk across use years and keep going, you just have to call to do it

 

[Tatebeck]

If they "switch" at 7 months, stands to reason they booked Riviera at 11 months...so there is literally no difference. The only way this FUD works is if we assume people have Riviera points that they use purely as sleep around points today - not booking Riviera villas, only booking other resorts at 7 months. Which I am sure there probably are some people who do that but not many.

It still may increase the competition for 7 to 11 months at RIV. We just don't know how much yet.

If the room they originally wanted wasn't available, some people may just wait a few months to see if what they want is available at a different resort at 7 months for the same travel dates instead of making a different room reservation up front. With Restricted RIV they can't do that and will have to make a reservation anyway or eventually risk losing heir points.

You also may have small point resale contract owners that may not really have enough points for anything at 11 months but a duo or standard studio. If those are sold out they will just book those same rooms at a different date they don't want and then have to go when they didn't want to or rent out reservations. That is a bad place to be in and I wouldn't recommend a small resale RIV contract unless you have direct RIV to combine with at 11 months or at least something else direct to pair it with to combine at riv at 7 months

 

[Leight19]

What is really sad is that you seem ok with screwing with my booking as long as it doesn't impact you. Once again, that is the definition of selfish.

No what is really sad is you know how the system is designed to work but you are not willing to put the energy into doing it. You think you should be able to get exactly what you want, when you want without any effort and you whine when others put in more effort then you and have better results. This is the definition of entitled.

 

[muppets3d]

It still may increase the competition for 7 to 11 months at RIV. We just don't know how much yet.

If the room they originally wanted wasn't available, some people may just wait a few months to see if what they want is available at a different resort at 7 months for the same travel dates instead of making a different room reservation up front. With Restricted RIV they can't do that and will have to make a reservation anyway or eventually risk losing heir points.

You also may have small point resale contract owners that may not really have enough points for anything at 11 months but a duo or standard studio. If those are sold out they will just book those same rooms at a different date they don't want and then have to go when they didn't want to or rent out reservations. That is a bad place to be in and I wouldn't recommend a small resale RIV contract unless you have direct RIV to combine with at 11 months or at least something else direct to pair it with to combine at riv at 7 months

Lots of words to re-state the same FUD that people have been saying since Riviera opened with restrictions. At least you recognize it is all just fear, uncertainty, and doubt by constantly saying "may". I do agree that the more Riviera owners there are, the more difficult 7 month bookings will be - but that also isn't new in the DVC system, outside of popular sleep-around resorts like SSR.

All people have to do is book in the 11 month window. The way DVC has worked since day 1.

 

[Sandisw]

Ohhhhh okay then this point is where I think we ultimately disagreed and why I think it isn't allowed under the letter of the current rules and you (maybe?) do. When you make a booking, according to the rules and regulations, you are basing it on one day. That day is specifically check in day right now.

Rules, regulations, legal contracts, etc. often use very specific wording and they definitely can make a big difference.
The check in day is the SINGULAR day that you wish to arrive to the resort and can first check into your room (or I guess just the SINGULAR day that you want your reservation to start if you just wish to leave it empty -ouch that hurts to even say!)

It doesn't say that you can book 11 months from any day that you want for any reason, or any day you wish to have on the books to cancel later, it says that you a are allowed to book 11 months from the singular day you desire as the singular check in for that singular reservation. You cannot have 2 check in days for 1 reservation. You choose the one day you want as check in, and that determines when you can try to book according to the rules.

If you know beforehand that you will walk it forward, you are no longer technically eligible to book if the date you are wanting to walk it to (your desired check in date) is still over 11 months out. As soon as you say that the true purpose of that day would be to walk it forward to a different check in date, it is no longer your desired check in day. It is only a day that you wish to have on the books, but not specifically as the check in day for that reservation. You do not want to have your reservation start that day, which is what a check-in day is.

This is the same reason why you are able to modify it later if your plans change. Your desired check in date has changed so you change to your actual desired check in date if it is also within 11 months. The rules say you are supposed to book the date you want as the start of the reservation.

"make a reservation online via the DVC Website no earlier than eleven (11) months prior to the desired check in day for a reservation"

Except you are still going to intent and not the right of owners to book a room with their points when they want based on the rule of when the date comes. Take the motive out of it.

Yes, those who book with the intention of walking are exploiting the rules for their benefit because the intent of the rule was an assumption that an owner actually planned to use it that day.

I agree with that. But, as owners, we don’t have to actually want to stay that day….and why booking any date when the window allows it…which is 11 months exactly within a plus/minues 7 days.

Exploiting a rule is not breaking it. And why DVC has to amend the rules if they want to stop people from exploiting it.

As I said, I can go in today and book any date that is currently eligible to be booked regardless if I want it. My reason could be as simple as I dont want Disney to have if for breakage.

You see “desired” check in day as the day you plan to go…and I am saying “desired” can mean any reason you have to want to book that room.

That seems to be the point where we are not seeing it the same.

Once booked, we have the current ability to move a trip, for whatever reason we choose, as many times as we want…which is why walking works to gain advantage.

Again, it’s not against the current rules to do that because nothing in the rules prohibits it. The purpose of the home resort rules and regulations is required. And if there are to be penalties, those need to be defined…which is why the holding rules are there and so is the “no show” language.

To be clear, I am not making a judgement call on whther people should or should not be walking.

That is up to each person. But DVC can do nothing to stop any owner from booking a room even if they have no intent to use it. We don’t have to justify when we booked a room when we did.

What they can do is set rules for when we can reserve it, and what happens if we want to change the dates.

But, someone with the intention of walking who books November 18th today has the legal right to book it as well as the next 7 days and does not have to have good itentions to do so.

Which is exactly what the board was referring to in the statement that it’s a practice that isn’t in the “spirit” of the rules…they didn’t expect owners to exploite the rule.

 

[Sandisw]

I'd say change everything but the check-in day all you want. Limit the number of modifications to the check-in day without having to start over. This is all hypothetical, of course.
If it were 4 modifications, it would obviously allow some walking. I just think that if DVC ever decreed a finite number of allowed modifications, everyone would do it so it would confer no booking advantage at that point.

Isn’t the biggest impact to walking in those making reservations when the window opens?

Why set a limit on changes? IMO, it ends up creating rules that owners have to figure out what counts and what doesn’t.

Make the rule that during the first months, you make a reservation up to X days and it can’t be modified until 10 months from check in date.

Curbs walking, and is simple and easy to explain while balancing the flexibility of the program for those who don’t walk.

IMO, DVC isn’t going complicated with any rules.

 

[dvcsince93]

No what is really sad is you know how the system is designed to work but you are not willing to put the energy into doing it. You think you should be able to get exactly what you want, when you want without any effort and you whine when others put in more effort then you and have better results. This is the definition of entitled.

Yep, that's me. I know how to game the system to get special treatment, i.e., guaranteed reservations, at the expense of other members but refuse to do so for something as relatively unimportant as makng DVC reservations. I have to live with myself and I firmly believe in karma. If that makes me sad, guilty as charged.

"Entitled" to describe my refusal to walk reservations, huh, to quote Inigo Montoya, "I do not think that word means what you think it means."

 

[tx911]

Isn’t the biggest impact to walking in those making reservations when the window opens?

Why set a limit on changes? IMO, it ends up creating rules that owners have to figure out what counts and what doesn’t.

Make the rule that during the first months, you make a reservation up to X days and it can’t be modified until 10 months from check in date.

Curbs walking, and is simple and easy to explain while balancing the flexibility of the program for those who don’t walk.

IMO, DVC isn’t going complicated with any rules.

I'd be totally fine with that, it would just be a shame if DVC had to go to those lengths.

Walking may not be against the rules explicitly, but it is taking advantage of the wonderful flexibility that DVC allows. I would hate to lose any of that flexibility because some owners want a booking advantage.

 

[Sandisw]

There are some people, especially international members, who book 3 or 4 weeks vacations. The limit for a single stay is 30 days, 14 days is just an arbitrary number. And this proposal would give large owners a really big advantage over smaller contracts. I am against any solution that favors large contracts (call me socialist if you must).
Most of the proposal I've read have this in common: everyone suggests something that would work for them, without considering the membership as a whole. I hope DVC will not just consider the average member, but the interests of everyone.

Like I said, DVC has the numbers so setting the limit on the initial reservation would match that.

Personally, I don’t think any rule they come up with is going to be good because for me, I would much rather deal with walking and have unlimited modifications when someone needs it.

You simply can’t put in a rule that measures intent and why I don’t expect to see major changes. My impression from the meeting is that they are open to changes but that keeping the product flexible for changes is extremely important to the product.

 

[Sandisw]

This is a concern for sure! 50 of our RIV points are resale and I do worry about availability when I make those reservations. I am careful to use them all so we don’t have points to bank. DH and I have talked about this very scenario as more of those direct points get sold and become restricted on the market.

Since restricted points are no different when it comes to direct during home resort, there will never be a time when an owner can’t use them if they book at 11 months.

Now, you may have to accept a different view, room size, or adjust your dates a bit, but that is what it means to not be guaranteed any room or date you want.

But that is a whole different conversation.

 

[Tatebeck]

Except you are still going to intent and not the right of owners to book a room with their points when they want based on the rule of when the date comes. Take the motive out of it.

Yes, those who book with the intention of walking are exploiting the rules for their benefit because the intent of the rule was an assumption that an owner actually planned to use it that day.

I agree with that. But, as owners, we don’t have to actually want to stay that day….and why booking any date when the window allows it…which is 11 months exactly within a plus/minues 7 days.

Exploiting a rule is not breaking it. And why DVC has to amend the rules if they want to stop people from exploiting it.

As I said, I can go in today and book any date that is currently eligible to be booked regardless if I want it. My reason could be as simple as I dont want Disney to have if for breakage.

You see “desired” check in day as the day you plan to go…and I am saying “desired” can mean any reason you have to want to book that room.

That seems to be the point where we are not seeing it the same.

Once booked, we have the current ability to move a trip, for whatever reason we choose, as many times as we want…which is why walking works to gain advantage.

Again, it’s not against the current rules to do that because nothing in the rules prohibits it. The purpose of the home resort rules and regulations is required. And if there are to be penalties, those need to be defined…which is why the holding rules are there and so is the “no show” language.

To be clear, I am not making a judgement call on whther people should or should not be walking.

That is up to each person. But DVC can do nothing to stop any owner from booking a room even if they have no intent to use it. We don’t have to justify when we booked a room when we did.

What they can do is set rules for when we can reserve it, and what happens if we want to change the dates.

But, someone with the intention of walking who books November 18th today has the legal right to book it as well as the next 7 days and does not have to have good itentions to do so.

Which is exactly what the board was referring to in the statement that it’s a practice that isn’t in the “spirit” of the rules…they didn’t expect owners to exploite the rule.

Again, I agree that you don't have to want to physically stay in the room. Read the rules again. You have to want it as the single check in day for your reservation. They are again subtle yet different things. You are assuming they "mean" the first one, but the rules actually specifically state the second one.


If you already 100% plan to move the check in date, it is NOT your desired check in date and you should not be booking yet according to both rules as written and the spirit of the rules. End of story

If you were making a flow chart for specifically when someone can book:

Is the day you actually want as your single, final, only check-in date for this single reservation 11 months or sooner from today?
If yes -> you can book it!
If no -> you are not eligible for booking at this time

But yes, it does involve intent, which is why it is hard to enforce and why they may add even more specific wording to the rules or change how the booking or modification system works

 

[Sandisw]

I disagree as the other O14 resale owners have a chance to switch at 7 months to a different resort if there dates are not available during their preferred travel time. Resale Riviera owners can't and must book RIV so it will become much more competitive at the 11 month window as when it switches to 7 months others with qualifying points can book RIV and possible take that room away if they are not on it.

Right now, with very few resale points, SV and tower studios are riugh and you need home resort priority.

So, I think the concern that even direct owners will have an issue more than today is overblown.

Also, if things get bad, DVC can increase the home resort window for a restricted resort so no one can trade in until later.

Now, a RIV owner would not be able to trade out until later either, but we all know, or should know, that can change.

 

[Leight19]

Yep, that's me. I know how to game the system to get special treatment, i.e., guaranteed reservations, at the expense of other members but refuse to do so for something as relatively unimportant as makng DVC reservations. I have to live with myself and I firmly believe in karma. If that makes me sad, guilty as charged.

"Entitled" to describe my refusal to walk reservations, huh, to quote Inigo Montoya, "I do not think that word means what you think it means."

Entitled means exactly what I think it does and describes your mindset. The direct post I replied to you had said walkers are selfish for interfering with “your” reservation. News flash you are not entitled to the room at that time. It’s not your reservation; they didn’t take anything from you. You showed up late and got out competed for the room and are saying they somehow took something from you.

 

[tx911]

Entitled means exactly what I think it does and describes your mindset. The direct post I replied to you had said walkers are selfish for interfering with “your” reservation. News flash you are not entitled to the room at that time. It’s not your reservation; they didn’t take anything from you. You showed up late and got out competed for the room and are saying they somehow took something from you.

Isn't the fact that walking is on DVC's radar at all an indication that it is a problem?

This is plain and simple a manipulation of a flexible booking system to gain an advantage over anyone not doing it (and that's most).

Like the overuse of commercial renting, it has a very real possibility of DVC taking action that would inevitably decrease the flexibility of the product, which would be a huge shame.

Edit: I would say every owner is "entitled" to equal footing at 11 months, without having to jump through hoops to manipulate the system.

 

[RuntheMouse]

Since restricted points are no different when it comes to direct during home resort, there will never be a time when an owner can’t use them if they book at 11 months.

Now, you may have to accept a different view, room size, or adjust your dates a bit, but that is what it means to not be guaranteed any room or date you want.

But that is a whole different conversation.

All very true. My comment was more that I am aware that using these restricted points in the way I had hoped is not always possible and that when more people are restricted to RIV only, it may make things worse.

 

[zavandor]

Isn't the fact that walking is on DVC's radar at all an indication that it is a problem?

I don't think it's arguable. DVC has said:

• It's against the spirit of the rules
• It's not widespread
• They'll look into it
• They do not want to cause side effects to the vast majority of owners who don't walk

Most of this thread has people arguing against each other if walking is ehtical/ legitimate/ whatever.
It's much more interesting to read ideas on how to limit it without affecting all owners.
Because that is DVC's conondrum now.

 

[Sandisw]

What is not factually true is your rationale.

When you start to walk you know when the reservation window opens-8 am. Then you make a reservation that extends into the +7 period.

Depending on the length of your reservation, you can modify it anywhere from 1-6 days later , at any hour you choose. Only when you do, does a portion of the reservation release.

However, unlike you, I have no idea when the unit will open up from 1-6 days in the future. Moreover, because it is no longer in the +7 period, there is no guarantee that it will open (waitlists do exist). So the dates are not always available and if they are, you have no idea when they are available. (Unlike you who knows when it will be available.)

As opposed to competeing for reservations with everyone else, you give yourself a guarateed ability to get the dates you want while preventing everyone else from seeing the actual occupancy at their desired dates and stopping them from using the 11 +7 window. I can't make a reservation until you decide to release it even though you never intended to use it,

What is really sad is that you seem ok with screwing with my booking as long as it doesn't impact you. Once again, that is the definition of selfish.

We all bought DVC and it is sad that others feel the need to criticize someone because they don’t view it the same way.

How one uses their ownership should be up to them and even if walking is completely stopped, owners could lose out to someone else

If the rules currently allow it, it’s fair game. If the rules prohibit modifications to stop it, then it’s fair game.

Again, I have chosen to deal with walking by simply doing other things because I bought knowing that all of us have the right to use our points for rooms irrespective of why.

 

[Leight19]

Isn't the fact that walking is on DVC's radar at all an indication that it is a problem?

This is plain and simple a manipulation of a flexible booking system to gain an advantage over anyone not doing it (and that's most).

Like the overuse of commercial renting, it has a very real possibility of DVC taking action that would inevitably decrease the flexibility of the product, which would be a huge shame.

Edit: I would say every owner is "entitled" to equal footing at 11 months, without having to jump through hoops to manipulate the system.

I’m actually against walking and support Dvc fixing it but I take umbrage with the personal insults some in this thread are hurling at those who walk. Walking is the way the system works today and I walk becusse that’s how the system works. I’m not evil, or selfish, or a rule breaker for doing it when it’s literally how the system is designed to work today.

 

[Sandisw]

Isn't the fact that walking is on DVC's radar at all an indication that it is a problem?

This is plain and simple a manipulation of a flexible booking system to gain an advantage over anyone not doing it (and that's most).

Like the overuse of commercial renting, it has a very real possibility of DVC taking action that would inevitably decrease the flexibility of the product, which would be a huge shame.

Edit: I would say every owner is "entitled" to equal footing at 11 months, without having to jump through hoops to manipulate the system.

And why DVC said they’d be open to booking rule changes but also want it to balance against the current flexible system.

IMO, the move on commercial renting was clear. That is against the contract and I think the board realizes the current threshold for that no longer works.

With walking, it’s simply an outcome of the rules that are in place.

Obviously people feel it’s unfair but as I said, we don’t have to justify our reason for booking…as long as the day we book is open for securing a room.

 

[tx911]

I’m actually against walking and support Dvc fixing it but I take umbrage with the personal insults some in this thread are hurling at those who walk. Walking is the way the system works today and I walk becusse that’s how the system works. I’m not evil, or selfish, or a rule breaker for doing it when it’s literally how the system is designed to work today.

I'm certainly not intending to insult anyone, but I disagree that walking is "how the system is designed to work".

It's a very flexible booking and modification system, so it allows walking to occur. It is not, however, how it was intended to work.

This is no different than any other policies that allow for flexibility, and are then abused by some users for personal advantage, whether it be DAS, commercial renting, other non-Disney timeshares, or what have you. A few people take advantage of the very flexibility that makes the product great, and that flexibility gets neutered.

If DVC implements "fixes" that reduce the flexibility for all owners, that would be unfortunate.