Are the Days of Walking a DVC Reservation Numbered?

[Leight19]

Except you are not personally using your membership. Your sister is. She is not an owner. I firmly believe that owners should get first priority for hard to book rooms, especially at the 11 month mark. If all owners and only owners had a fair shot at the 11 month mark, that to me is ‘fair’. I realize you disagree. If someone doesn’t want to buy because non owners wait behind owners, I think most owners would approve. I realize you disagree.

In my statement my designation of personal is compared to commercial. Enough dvc members use for friends and family any change to block that would be met with outrage. Further, the fact this isn’t a new product but something sold 30 years ago there’s no way they could make such a dramatic change as to say certain room categories can only be booked under names of members. There may even be timeshare laws in Florida that even directly forbid this change but would defer to others with more knowledge.

 

[dcfromva]

DVC has said it's a limited phenomenon. With which I think they mean that only for some rooms it's really a problem (the standards, values and CL rooms) and often not even all year around. I'd be surprised if more than 1% of nights is walked every year. You don't hire a million cops to stand at every corner of the streets to fine people that litter. Any response must be proportionate to the problem.
Which come the most important point: I don't want to be penalized because some people walk. I book the scraps at 7 months. I book, stalk, waitlist, cancel and change my way to a jigsaw of reservations until I get what I want. I'd hate if this flexibility goes away. I have not seen any proposed rule that doesn't have the potential to affect me. Fortunately DVC has acknowledged this.

I agree with you.
As I was reading your post I just thought of something-at one time Disney said they could institute a lottery for high demand periods (like New Years reservations, etc). I wonder how difficult it would be to implement a lottery system for high demand rooms?

 

[Genie+]

Just like spec renting went off the rails the more people got familiar with it, so has walking. Walking begets more walking. It’s snowballing. Is there any way it doesn’t keep increasing over time? We already see it clogging the system. For each person securing their dates is another person who has to keep checking back. It’s affecting the functionality of the system. Fall bookings get impacted by walking, turning more people to walking. Year on year the need to walk increases. At some point change is inevitable. Does DVC see us getting close to that point and why they finally assigned a ‘team’ to investigate impacts/solutions.

 

[JackosinDIS]

Except you are not personally using your membership. Your sister is. She is not an owner. I firmly believe that owners should get first priority for hard to book rooms, especially at the 11 month mark. If all owners and only owners had a fair shot at the 11 month mark, that to me is ‘fair’. I realize you disagree. If someone doesn’t want to buy because non owners wait behind owners, I think most owners would approve. I realize you disagree.

I think you’ll find that the vast majority of owners disagree with you on this one.

 

[Genie+]

This is another change I’m against. I booked a bwv trip for my sister this past summer. I was able to get the high demand standard studio for them. If Disney made a change that prevented that I would be upset; I would never have bought dvc if they were allowed to restrict how I use my points in personal capacity.

I think commercial renters are different topic then walking but really feel like stopping them isn’t rocket science. Many people here know exactly where to find commercial renters. I’m sure if they truly cared dvc could find these big players and stop them fairly easy. My honest opinion on it is seeing how many of the big resale players are former Disney employees in dvc I’m not sure how much dvc really cares to stop it at this point. I honestly wouldn’t be shocked if some current Disney dvc members are actually involved in commercial renting themselves on the side.

There was a decent solution posted on the confirmed rental thread, that would’ve still allowed your sister’s reservation.

I would offer one possibility that I've grown to like: Wyndham's Owner Priority dates.

At several resorts, during the most in-demand times of year, an owner can:

• Book whatever they want with themselves as the lead guest
• Book as many other units as they want for their guests traveling at the same time*.
• Book up to two reservations per year for unaccompanied guests.

The limit of two is across all restricted resorts/periods.

For most small-scale owners, this is just fine--we are unlikely to rent more than once or twice a year, so this doesn't matter. It can make things a little complicated if you often send your adult children on vacation without going along, but the solution to that is to add them to one of the deeds/contracts. (Wyndham allows differently-titled properties in the same master account; the owners of "the account" are the union of all of the owners on each property.)

It can even work well for folks who rent more often; they just have to choose times/resorts that are not on the restricted list, and plenty of those exist.

When this plan was implemented, availability at some of the toughest-to-book resorts got MUCH better in a hurry. For example, it used to be next to impossible to get summer dates at Glacier Canyon in the Wisconsin Dells without owning there--and even that required effort. Now it's quite a bit easier.

Also: most of the large-scale Wyndham renters hate this, and many other rank-and-file owners (though not all of them) seem to think it is just fine. That tells me that it's targeted reasonably well.

-------
*: Last I knew, the dates did not have to line up exactly; as long as there is some overlap it is fine.

And this would only apply during the highest demand periods, so depending when/where your sister’s reservation was booked, might not even count.

I like this solution because it’s just targeting the heart of issue without much in the way of unintended consequences. The only people who will absolutely hate everything about it are commercial renters hyper focused on pulling the cream out of the system for maximum profit potential. Owners could still rent out their points too. The only place they’d be limited is those highest demand resorts/periods, and even then still get up to two in that category.

 

[tx911]

I dont think I was ever told I can book 11+7. I also wasn't told 90% of the things I can do with my DVC points. they just give you a basic overview. All the resale owners dont get a crash course on how to book either. to say its unfair because people dont know how and that DVC doesn't have a tutorial is weird to me. Thats the reality of life you might not know all the "loopholes" or tips and tricks.

I HATE 8am bookings too much anxiety so I never try to walk but if you are going to spend the effort to modify a reservation every day or 2 you do you.

Two Facts:
1. Every DVC owner is intended to be on equal footing for home resort booking at 11 months.
2. Because of walking, all owners are not on equal footing at 11 months.

I want every owner to be on equal footing. A walker by definition does not want every owner on equal footing. They want an advantage.

This is a problem that needs fixing, however limited it might be.

 

[JOLT]

Two Facts:
1. Every DVC owner is intended to be on equal footing for home resort booking at 11 months.
2. Because of walking, all owners are not on equal footing at 11 months.

I want every owner to be on equal footing. A walker by definition does not want every owner on equal footing. They want an advantage.

This is a problem that needs fixing, however limited it might be.

how are they not on equal footing? are some owners blocked from walking?

 

[Leight19]

Two Facts:
1. Every DVC owner is intended to be on equal footing for home resort booking at 11 months.
2. Because of walking, all owners are not on equal footing at 11 months.

I want every owner to be on equal footing. A walker by definition does not want every owner on equal footing. They want an advantage.

This is a problem that needs fixing, however limited it might be.

I’m actually on board with fixing walking but disagree that people aren’t on equal footing. Every account is able to try to book the room and walk if they want. The fact some people don’t put the effort into walking doesn't mean they don’t have the equal footing to try. It’s exact same thing if someone signed on at 10am and said they should be able to get room since it’s the 11month window despite being late to the party.

Further, if your statement is true about not being on equal footing it’s equally true if I’m booking 3 weeks. Even though I’m not walking you still don’t have equal footing since I blocked you from even trying those last two weeks.

 

[Genie+]

Two Facts:
1. Every DVC owner is intended to be on equal footing for home resort booking at 11 months.
2. Because of walking, all owners are not on equal footing at 11 months.

I want every owner to be on equal footing. A walker by definition does not want every owner on equal footing. They want an advantage.

This is a problem that needs fixing, however limited it might be.

Walking is changing how the system works. It’s structured around 11 month priority, which seems that reasonable place between not too far out but planning well ahead of time. Just under a year. The trend of walking just keeps amplifying itself, pushing out that lead time for priority further and further. I think the original intention was to keep home priority within a reasonable time frame.

 

[AstroBlasters]

Indeed, it has been all over the place! These walking threads are entertaining if nothing else.

I always come back to the basics of what walking is: Booking a room you have no intention of using to give an advantage over other owners who don't know about walking. I think that's wrong, so I will choose not to do it. In the end, that's all it is, a personal choice.

Do you ever book a lighting lane first thing in the morning knowing that you are going to modify for a later time?

 

[Tatebeck]

Any statement that it is against rules or intent of system are baseless as nothing states it and the software is literally coded to allow it when it very easily could be coded to disallow it.

Come on. I'm sorry, but the actual rules have been posted and explained multiple times. Anyone who insists that most members walking are within the rules as written are either willfully misinterpreting the rule or simply do not know how to read rules or a contract. They simply cannot make a list of the almost infinite things that you CANNOT do, they simply list what you CAN do and anything else is against the rules.

I don't even have that much of a dog in the fight (other than wanting to try club level rooms at AKV lol) because I have been booking more 1br and 2br unless it is just my wife and I going. But I can read rules pretty well.

The rule is the earliest you can book is 11+7 from your desired check in day. If the check in day you are aiming for is further out than 11 months, you should not be booking as you are not technically allowed to yet. Just because they haven't disabled modifications in the system doesn't mean it is within the rules. They left it there because modifications help make the system flexible and make it a more desirable product

A couple other similar examples to possibly help explain for those still confused.

• If a rule says that you are "only able to swim in the swimming pools on property", it is not okay or a gray area to say "well they didn't say that I specifically CAN'T swim in the lake, so it must be okay. And nobody yelled at me when I dipped a toe in, so it's definitely allowed"
  • They aren't required to have cast members lining all the shores telling you this, they assume you can read. If someone accidentally falls in and gets out, they are unlikely to punish you, just like someone who legitimately has a need to modify a reservation is allowed to and shouldn't need to be punished for it
  • Before someone says, but there are fences and signs around that water! Just like there are warnings in the booking system when you try to book beyond the 11 month window. Just because you ignore the signs doesn't make it okay.
• If a rule says that "the only places you are allowed to defecate on property are into a toilet or into a diaper that is properly disposed of," it is not okay or a gray area to say "well they specifically didn't say I CAN'T just poop on the lawn, so that must mean it's okay to, and there is no one on the lawn guarding it so I'm good to go."
  • They are unlikely to punish someone that has an accident (just like they wouldn't punish a member for a legitimate reservation modification), and they can't have a cast member watching every inch of space on property, it would be ridiculous to do so.

These differences are similar to the difference between willfully walking and simply having to make a modification when things change. They can tell you not to, but they are unlikely to just disable modifications across the board. Just like they won't say "no swimming at all on property," or "no pooping allowed at Disney, EVER!"

 

[AstroBlasters]

Just like spec renting went off the rails the more people got familiar with it, so has walking. Walking begets more walking. It’s snowballing. Is there any way it doesn’t keep increasing over time? We already see it clogging the system. For each person securing their dates is another person who has to keep checking back. It’s affecting the functionality of the system. Fall bookings get impacted by walking, turning more people to walking. Year on year the need to walk increases. At some point change is inevitable. Does DVC see us getting close to that point and why they finally assigned a ‘team’ to investigate impacts/solutions.

I just don’t think this is the case for the overwhelming majority of rooms.

 

[Tatebeck]

Do you ever book a lighting lane first thing in the morning knowing that you are going to modify for a later time?

Yes, I have. But I have never been able to roll it into a reservation for the next day for a ride that is likely going to be sold out of LLs lol.

Edit: except for when guardians was down all day and I didn't get to use my virtual queue or LL I bought. They did let me ride any ride of my choice the next day for that

 

[AstroBlasters]

Two Facts:
1. Every DVC owner is intended to be on equal footing for home resort booking at 11 months.
2. Because of walking, all owners are not on equal footing at 11 months.

I want every owner to be on equal footing. A walker by definition does not want every owner on equal footing. They want an advantage.

This is a problem that needs fixing, however limited it might be.

Every owner can start booking 11 months out AND the first day of their Use Year if they don’t want the points caught up in bank/borrow. That is equal footing.

 

[JOLT]

Come on. I'm sorry, but the actual rules have been posted and explained multiple times. Anyone who insists that most members walking are within the rules as written are either willfully misinterpreting the rule or simply do not know how to read rules or a contract. They simply cannot make a list of the almost infinite things that you CANNOT do, they simply list what you CAN do and anything else is against the rules.

I don't even have that much of a dog in the fight (other than wanting to try club level rooms at AKV lol) because I have been booking more 1br and 2br unless it is just my wife and I going. But I can read rules pretty well.

The rule is the earliest you can book is 11+7 from your desired check in day. If the check in day you are aiming for is further out than 11 months, you should not be booking as you are not technically allowed to yet. Just because they haven't disabled modifications in the system doesn't mean it is within the rules. They left it there because modifications help make the system flexible and make it a more desirable product

A couple other similar examples to possibly help explain for those still confused.

• If a rule says that you are "only able to swim in the swimming pools on property", it is not okay or a gray area to say "well they didn't say that I specifically CAN'T swim in the lake, so it must be okay. And nobody yelled at me when I dipped a toe in, so it's definitely allowed"
  • They aren't required to have cast members lining all the shores telling you this, they assume you can read. If someone accidentally falls in and gets out, they are unlikely to punish you, just like someone who legitimately has a need to modify a reservation is allowed to and shouldn't need to be punished for it
  • Before someone says, but there are fences and signs around that water! Just like there are warnings in the booking system when you try to book beyond the 11 month window. Just because you ignore the signs doesn't make it okay.
• If a rule says that "the only places you are allowed to defecate on property are into a toilet or into a diaper that is properly disposed of," it is not okay or a gray area to say "well they specifically didn't say I CAN'T just poop on the lawn, so that must mean it's okay to, and there is no one on the lawn guarding it so I'm good to go."
  • They are unlikely to punish someone that has an accident (just like they wouldn't punish a member for a legitimate reservation modification), and they can't have a cast member watching every inch of space on property, it would be ridiculous to do so.

These differences are similar to the difference between willfully walking and simply having to make a modification when things change. They can tell you not to, but they are unlikely to just disable modifications across the board. Just like they won't say "no swimming at all on property," or "no pooping allowed at Disney, EVER!"

Isn't that the same rule that would technically make piecing together a reservation against the rules?

 

[jparilla]

I mentioned it earlier but wouldn't it be fair to require any modifications to include at least one of the original dates from the original reservation?

 

[AstroBlasters]

Come on. I'm sorry, but the actual rules have been posted and explained multiple times. Anyone who insists that most members walking are within the rules as written are either willfully misinterpreting the rule or simply do not know how to read rules or a contract. They simply cannot make a list of the almost infinite things that you CANNOT do, they simply list what you CAN do and anything else is against the rules.

I don't even have that much of a dog in the fight (other than wanting to try club level rooms at AKV lol) because I have been booking more 1br and 2br unless it is just my wife and I going. But I can read rules pretty well.

The rule is the earliest you can book is 11+7 from your desired check in day. If the check in day you are aiming for is further out than 11 months, you should not be booking as you are not technically allowed to yet. Just because they haven't disabled modifications in the system doesn't mean it is within the rules. They left it there because modifications help make the system flexible and make it a more desirable product

A couple other similar examples to possibly help explain for those still confused.

• If a rule says that you are "only able to swim in the swimming pools on property", it is not okay or a gray area to say "well they didn't say that I specifically CAN'T swim in the lake, so it must be okay. And nobody yelled at me when I dipped a toe in, so it's definitely allowed"
  • They aren't required to have cast members lining all the shores telling you this, they assume you can read. If someone accidentally falls in and gets out, they are unlikely to punish you, just like someone who legitimately has a need to modify a reservation is allowed to and shouldn't need to be punished for it
  • Before someone says, but there are fences and signs around that water! Just like there are warnings in the booking system when you try to book beyond the 11 month window. Just because you ignore the signs doesn't make it okay.
• If a rule says that "the only places you are allowed to defecate on property are into a toilet or into a diaper that is properly disposed of," it is not okay or a gray area to say "well they specifically didn't say I CAN'T just poop on the lawn, so that must mean it's okay to, and there is no one on the lawn guarding it so I'm good to go."
  • They are unlikely to punish someone that has an accident (just like they wouldn't punish a member for a legitimate reservation modification), and they can't have a cast member watching every inch of space on property, it would be ridiculous to do so.

These differences are similar to the difference between willfully walking and simply having to make a modification when things change. They can tell you not to, but they are unlikely to just disable modifications across the board. Just like they won't say "no swimming at all on property," or "no pooping allowed at Disney, EVER!"

The room I am booking is allowed and 11m
AND modifying is within the rules. You can’t say that doing two things within the rules is breaking the rules…. that’s not how rules work!

 

[Tatebeck]

Isn't that the same rule that would technically make piecing together a reservation against the rules?

That language is really only in the waitlist section anymore since they changed from checkout to checkin bookings. The waitlist system is broken too, but that may need it's own thread lol

 

[AstroBlasters]

Yes, I have. But I have never been able to roll it into a reservation for the next day for a ride that is likely going to be sold out of LLs lol.

Edit: except for when guardians was down all day and I didn't get to use my virtual queue or LL I bought. They did let me ride any ride of my choice the next day for that

But you still picked a time for a ride that was booked when you had no intention of riding at that time because you are going to fiddle/faddle to push it back to later.

 

[Tatebeck]

But you still picked a time for a ride that was booked when you had no intention of riding at that time because you are going to fiddle/faddle to push it back to later.

I have intentions to use it, unless something better is available. Also the new system makes you use actually a LL before you can modify into additional tier one attractions, making sure you aren't booking something that you can just easily toss and upgrade later. You also are limited only 1 per attraction. There are no limits on number of DVC reservations other than your point total. And you can't advance it to a future day that will be harder to book. That is not a very good example.