Are the Days of Walking a DVC Reservation Numbered?

[Sandisw]

Lol, of course! If you'll at least agree that walking is a problem for many resorts and many room types at various times throughout the year.

Seriously though, do I think reservation walking is the biggest issue in the DVC landscape? Nope. But it is an issue that is easily fixed.

Now, don't even get me started on commercial renters!

I do think people do it when they don’t need to but if someone is ending up with what they want because the walkers walked on by, then I don’t consider that a big issue.

I did seem based on the comments that the board does not see it as an easy fix, which is why they mentioned several times about being cognizant of unintended consequences.

And for me, it is a good thing because it means they will put a lot of thought into the changes, assuming they happen.

If I had to guess, walking will go on the back burner in favor of updating the rules for renting.

 

[jcolvin5]

Seriously though, do I think reservation walking is the biggest issue in the DVC landscape? Nope. But it is an issue that is easily fixed.

If it could be “easily fixed” and Disney feels that it is a problem, wouldn’t they have already fixed it?

Not sure both of those statements can be true.

 

[jcolvin5]

I do think people do it when they don’t need to but if someone is ending up with what they want because the walkers walked on by, then I don’t consider that a big issue.

I did seem based on the comments that the board does not see it as an easy fix which for me, is a good thing because it means they will put a lot of thought into the changes, assuming they happen.

If I had to guess, walking will go on the back burner in favor of updating the rules for renting.

One thing I am positive about..”walking” is not an easy fix.

 

[BeachClub2014]

If it could be “easily fixed” and Disney feels that it is a problem, wouldn’t they have already fixed it?

Not sure both of those statements can be true.

Of course, both of these statements can be true simultaneously, which is a different debate.

I have no idea if DVC feels that walking is a problem. I'm just a long-time owner who has seen this problem become more widespread over the many years I have owned points. I believe it is a problem with an easy solution. Unfortunately, I don't work for DVC.

 

[BeachClub2014]

I do think people do it when they don’t need to but if someone is ending up with what they want because the walkers walked on by, then I don’t consider that a big issue.

I would agree if that were always the case, but sometimes the walkers don't keep walking past what another owner may need. Then it's a problem, right?

I did seem based on the comments that the board does not see it as an easy fix, which is why they mentioned several times about being cognizant of unintended consequences.

I would say the same thing if I were them. That's the prudent public comment to make. Do any of us realistically expect them to say, "walking is a pervasive problem that we've known about for years and haven't fixed," Of course they have to say that it isn't an easy fix and that they want to move cautiously, yada, yada, yada.

If I had to guess, walking will go on the back burner in favor of updating the rules for renting.

Probably

 

[jcolvin5]

Of course, both of these statements can be true simultaneously, which is a different debate.

I have no idea if DVC feels that walking is a problem. I'm just a long-time owner who has seen this problem become more widespread over the many years I have owned points. I believe it is a problem with an easy solution. Unfortunately, I don't work for DVC.

I’m a newer member. Not new to the world, just newer to DVC

How long would you say that “walking” has been an issue? I’m a root cause kinda guy, so I’m assuming this issue originated from a change in the system or decisions that were made that caused it. I have no clue, but everything has an origin. Be curious what started the trend.

 

[BeachClub2014]

I’m a newer member. Not new to the world, just newer to DVC

How long would you say that “walking” has been an issue? I’m a root cause kinda guy, so I’m assuming this issue originated from a change in the system or decisions that were made that caused it. I have no clue, but everything has an origin. Be curious what started the trend.

Someone else can probably explain it better than I can. As I understand it, "walking" became a thing when DVC changed the 11-month rule from the end date of your reservation to the first date of the reservation: that change and moving reservations to the online platform made "walking" easy to do.

I think it's become a lot more prevalent over the last few years. Purely anecdotally, I believe (with no actual evidence) that regular owners began "walking" more to combat the competition with speculative reservations for rental purposes and with the increase in commercial renting.

 

[Disney Spaz]

I will say I think walking has increased because of the spec renters and that maybe once they are gone it will calm down a bit. At least that is my hope. I do believe the bots are a bigger issue that is causing walking to increase and until that is addressed things will get worse versus better. Such as people walking even longer out blocking more DVC members.

 

[lowlight]

I’m a newer member. Not new to the world, just newer to DVC

How long would you say that “walking” has been an issue? I’m a root cause kinda guy, so I’m assuming this issue originated from a change in the system or decisions that were made that caused it. I have no clue, but everything has an origin. Be curious what started the trend.

You can find threads talking about walking since the dawn of this board. Threads about walking increased when online reservations became a thing and it was easier to do. Things hit a fever pitch a few years ago with the glut of pandemic points and revenge travel, with more walking begetting more walking. I think spec rentals definitely exacerbated it, but to pretend that it’s solely the issue is being willfully blind.

 

[Sandisw]

I would agree if that were always the case, but sometimes the walkers don't keep walking past what another owner may need. Then it's a problem, right?


I would say the same thing if I were them. That's the prudent public comment to make. Do any of us realistically expect them to say, "walking is a pervasive problem that we've known about for years and haven't fixed," Of course they have to say that it isn't an easy fix and that they want to move cautiously, yada, yada, yada.


Probably

If walkers don’t walk on by, then it’s a supply problem and where we see it…I monitor things for fun…is those hard to get rooms that are th cheapest…especially during the fall into the holidays.

How people want to take the boards comments is up to them but if the fix was easy, it would be done.

The reason it’s not because DVC has to be able to provide to owners they are doing something that makes things better and whether people agree or not, adding penalties and restrictions, or fees, is not making it better, outside of the issue of walking.

The other part that I have noticed is that as soon as someone has trouble getting a room, the answer is almost always “it’s because people are walking”.

Which may make it appear that it’s happening more than it is.

Who knows what will happen but the plus of all these indivual meetings is that owners had a chance to bring up topics related to the resorts they own as well as topics relating to all.

 

[jcolvin5]

Point of entry probably matters in this situation. If you joined before reservations could be made online, I can see how newer owners gaining the system (loophole) would be concerning.

When I joined, they didn’t give me a rule book or any guidelines. Through trial and error, I realized that if I wanted to guarantee a reservation, walking provided that guarantee. I gladly walked and I’ll continue to do so as long as it’s an option. I just don’t view it as a right or wrong thing. Everyone has the same opportunity to do it. That makes it as fair as I could imagine. Had I joined 20 years ago, maybe I’d feel differently.

 

[BL2020]

I know this won't be popular, but think DVC should initiate something like they have at recreation.gov for reservations for campsites for national park campgrounds. Their site is pretty effective at preventing walking. For example this site will let you make reservations with a start date up to six months out, once the first day becomes available you can book up to 14 days out from that first check in day. However, you can't modify the reservations dates that are not available to the general public until the dates you want to capture have been available for 4 days to everyone. (This could be modified to 4 days (or whatever is reasonable) for both the 7 and 11 month booking windows. Personally I believe walking is getting to be more of a problem all the time and will only get worse with greater point inventory vying for low point/high season reservations.
Caveat - I haven't read all the pages of this thread, so maybe someone suggested this already.

 

[Cfabar1]

I was not a DVC member, but I am sure walking became more prevalent when it became easier to do it with online bookings, and ease of use online...

I actually don't walk... haven't found the need to as we usually rent 1 BRs and also can be flexible with our dates...

However, walking doesn't really seem that difficult to do... and I suspect that is why it is happening...

However, I don't really object to walking, and certainly wouldn't want to see DVC not allow people to modify reservations within reason, or pay a junk fee to modify their reservation... We have, in our travels sometimes decided "we'll go a day later" or "let's leave two days earlier to do something else instead" or even "let's tack on a day or two"... I would hate to see DVC take away that flexibility...

As far as the commercial renters, I say take them on...This program should be for families who want to access their family trips and memories, and they should not have to be competing with commercial entities which are explicitly prohibited in the contracts we sign...

 

[Cfabar1]

I know this won't be popular, but think DVC should initiate something like they have at recreation.gov for reservations for campsites for national park campgrounds. Their site is pretty effective at preventing walking. For example this site will let you make reservations with a start date up to six months out, once the first day becomes available you can book up to 14 days out from that first check in day. However, you can't modify the reservations dates that are not available to the general public until the dates you want to capture have been available for 4 days to everyone. (This could be modified to 4 days (or whatever is reasonable) for both the 7 and 11 month booking windows. Personally I believe walking is getting to be more of a problem all the time and will only get worse with greater point inventory vying for low point/high season reservations.
Caveat - I haven't read all the pages of this thread, so maybe someone suggested this already.

can't speak for everyone, but this change would be unpopular with me at least...

I want 11 month priority for the entire 11 months, not only 1 time within that 11 months...

 

[Sandisw]

Am I underthinking this and how simple the solution can be? I’ve never made changes to a booking that would resemble walking in a pattern recognition. I’ve added days before, added days after, split stayed, but never dropped days off the beginning and added to the end in a manner that my final booking was a completely different date than my initial booking.

Step 1- define walking
Step 2- list penalty for walking
Step 3- use simple computer analytics to ferret out offenders, ask them what they thought they were doing, and cancel their reservations
Step 4- walking is dead

Nothing needs to be changed, no fees added, you are defining the rules of first come first serve booking and telling members that violating this (like commercial renting) will result in canceled reservations. Walking should be as easy to discern as commercial renting to analytics.

“Oh I wasn’t walking, I changed my date for my AKL value from mid July to Jersey week sixteen times because of schedule changes”.

Are you really going to try and play games when the definition is intentionally ambiguous like commercial renting? Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

The hard part is that finding rules that can be consistently applied when modifications take place.

They can make everything a cancel and rebook…stops walking…they can go to day by day booking…stops walking.

But, would those rules worse outside of walking? Yes…so DVC has to find a compromise on when moving the dates if a reservation without canceling is allowed.

That is why it does require changes because right now, outside of 31 days, we are free to make and modify reservations as much as we want.

The debate is what changes can DVC make that do both,,,curb or stop walking but at the same time be able to support the move as beneficial to owners and the program

Commercial renting is not allowed so it’s much easier to come up rule changes and enforcement for that.

 

[BeachClub2014]

If walkers don’t walk on by, then it’s a supply problem and where we see it…I monitor things for fun…is those hard to get rooms that are th cheapest…especially during the fall into the holidays.

Of course it's a supply problem, which is why people walk those reservations. In this environment, whoever begins the walk first wins. That's not the way the system was intended.

How people want to take the boards comments is up to them but if the fix was easy, it would be done.

In your opinion. Sometimes, companies don't fix issues until their customers apply enough pressure whether the fix is easy or complicated.

The reason it’s not because DVC has to be able to provide to owners they are doing something that makes things better and whether people agree or not, adding penalties and restrictions, or fees, is not making it better, outside of the issue of walking.

Again, in your opinion. If they added a fee or made other changes to address this issue, it would make things better for all of us, in my opinion.

The other part that I have noticed is that as soon as someone has trouble getting a room, the answer is almost always “it’s because people are walking”.

Maybe it is. None of us can access the information to confirm or deny that, right?

Which may make it appear that it’s happening more than it is.

Or maybe it is more prevalent than any of us knows. We do not have access to the data.

Who knows what will happen but the plus of all these indivual meetings is that owners had a chance to bring up topics related to the resorts they own as well as topics relating to all.

Which is awesome! I appreciate that you and other DISboarders have done so. Thank you for that.

We aren't likely to see eye to eye on this issue or any conceptual fixes, but I do appreciate the discussion!

 

[Sandisw]

I know this won't be popular, but think DVC should initiate something like they have at recreation.gov for reservations for campsites for national park campgrounds. Their site is pretty effective at preventing walking. For example this site will let you make reservations with a start date up to six months out, once the first day becomes available you can book up to 14 days out from that first check in day. However, you can't modify the reservations dates that are not available to the general public until the dates you want to capture have been available for 4 days to everyone. (This could be modified to 4 days (or whatever is reasonable) for both the 7 and 11 month booking windows. Personally I believe walking is getting to be more of a problem all the time and will only get worse with greater point inventory vying for low point/high season reservations.
Caveat - I haven't read all the pages of this thread, so maybe someone suggested this already.

Any rules for home resort booking have to be the same for everyone and each day must be offered to members on a FCFS basis.

Because we currently enjoy the plus 7 rule…the 11 month window is really a 7 night window and not a single day.

So, I’m not sure they can block any owner from booking a day that is outside that 7 days simply because they have nights booked under the plus 7 rule already.

Whatever they do…those two things need to be considered.

 

[ShaneDJ]

Adding a fee for no good reason is a penalty to owners and not one that will be well received because it takes away the flexibility of DVC in a big way.

There is a very good reason to do so: reduce the walking of reservations. It is not a penalty for owners at all.

It is a penalty for owners to add a fee for modifying reservations.

Not sure why you would state otherwise.

 

[Sandisw]

Of course it's a supply problem, which is why people walk those reservations. In this environment, whoever begins the walk first wins. That's not the way the system was intended.


In your opinion. Sometimes, companies don't fix issues until their customers apply enough pressure whether the fix is easy or complicated.


Again, in your opinion. If they added a fee or made other changes to address this issue, it would make things better for all of us, in my opinion.


Maybe it is. None of us can access the information to confirm or deny that, right?


Or maybe it is more prevalent than any of us knows. We do not have access to the data.


Which is awesome! I appreciate that you and other DISboarders have done so. Thank you for that.

We aren't likely to see eye to eye on this issue or any conceptual fixes, but I do appreciate the discussion!

It’s not my opinion that DVC has to do things in the best interest of its members…it says that in terms

Now, I agree, you see a fee as a good thing for the membership and I don’t…but DVC, if they do it, still have to be able to explain to upset owners why it’s a good thing…

To me, if the board st least made statements reassuring those at the meeting that changes need to be very carefully considered as to not end up in a position like we have now as well as stating it’s not a widespread issue…and they do have the data…it’s enough for me to put some credence in it.

The answer could have been, thank you for sharing and we will look into that” vs letting a discussion happen which did introduce the concept to owners who had no idea (an owner asked them to explain it).

These discussions are great because when people share ideas and others come up with other points of view, it does help the process of how to get to a compromise that DVC might actually consider.

It’s why I keep going back to the special seasons list…which I hadn’t really thought about until recently…and how that would go a long way to help BWV and AKV owners…they might not want the one month advantage for those rooms over four months, but at least every owner gets to add themselves to a list FCFS, and those confirmed rooms can’t be changed.

I just think fees would a tough sell, especially since it would have to be decided in terms of where does that fee go?

I am not even sure if they can add a fee for something like this.

 

[BeachClub2014]

It is a penalty for owners to add a fee for modifying reservations.

Not sure why you would state otherwise.

Please show me where I have advocated for that to occur.

What I have said is that DVC could cap the number of FREE modifications an owner makes to a reservation and then, after exceeding the number of FREE modifications, charge a fee for further modification to reduce (not eliminate) the walking of reservations.

At no time have I suggested a fee be assessed to make any modifications.