Are the Days of Walking a DVC Reservation Numbered?

[Brian Noble]

It is still true that only if all walk or none walk does the system actually provide equal footing when booking.

The system can't provide equal footing. For example, this is why high-frequency traders used to rent space at the Baby Bell switching stations: they had lower latency to the Internet backbone, and hence the markets. (Now they can just co-locate explicitly near the markets---for the right price.)

 

[DanCali]

In "walking" the way most members are talking about it they are aiming for a date much further out than the 11 month window and using the system in a way that is not intended, that allows them to get that reservation guaranteed before the 11 month booking window has opened for those dates.

In a normal change for a reservation, nothing has been attempted to get a room outside of the 11 month window at any time.

One is an attempt to skirt the 11 month booking window, one is not.

Counterexample -

Someone needs July 3-5 but books June 28 - July 5 and then modifies to 2 nights...

Was that not a skirting of the 11 month booking window without your definition of "walking" applying?

 

[Tatebeck]

Another argument can be made that even if all members are ABLE to walk, and even if you still see that as a 100% equal playing field, the act of walking itself has moved the point of competition for those rooms at a point other than the 11 month window, which could be considered as going against the "FCFC at 11 months" that the rules describe.

Which is to say you not only have to consider if members are exploiting an unintended loophole in the booking system, but also if Disney could be seen as violating their own rules and contracts by allowing that to happen once brought to their attention. Now that they have acknowledged it they may feel like they need to do something to avoid something like a class action lawsuit. Unless it's in the terms that we can't join a class action suit, which it is probably in there somewhere.

 

[Genie+]

If higher demand rooms stay booked after walker activity then the walker activity didn’t matter or make a difference? I don’t think that’s the case.

The people who did not walk never stood a chance, while the walkers did.

Which then forces the need to book sooner than 11m if you want any shot at them.

If maximum Home Priority can be anything from 11 months to infinity then why not just book our points in the room we’re mostly likely to want at the first opening available and just keep rolling them forward until we make the decision to stop?

I don’t yet know I when want to use my VGF or BWV points in 2026. Unfortunately, if I wait until 11 months for some of those categories, it’ll give up my ‘equal footing’. It’s best for me to decide now which of the hard categories I’m most likely to want, and go find an opening. Then I can just flip it every week and at my own convenience. After I get in no worries about 8am again. Now that’s flexibility

 

[Tatebeck]

Counterexample -

I need the July 3-5 but book June 28 - July 5 and then modify to 2 nights...

Was that not a skirting of the 11 month booking window without your definition of "walking" allying?

If those were your intended dates all along and you always only wanted to check in on July 3rd?

Yes then you should have waited until 11 months from July 3rd to book. And would be considered "walking" in the sense that most of us are talking about it.

IE you were able to secure your room for a check in date more than 11 months ahead of that check in date

But in all fairness those dates would have all been within the 11+7 at the time you booked, and that would be a very very minimal or one of the least severe examples of walking

 

[dvcsince93]

I really think you need to do some self reflection. In this thread alone I’ve seen you call people selfish, rude, immoral, cheaters, and now sad/stupid and losers over their strategy booking a vacation. What’s worse is you do this the whole time acting like you are the moral high ground as you belittle and demean others who you feel are beneath you for walking. The tone alone on your side of of the debate attacking walkers is enough for me to decide who I support in this debate.

I have to admit it-that is a great job of deflecting. Unfortunately, even a cursory look at your own posts shows the disingeniousness of your comments.

 

[Cyberc1978]

In "walking" the way most members are talking about it they are aiming for a date much further out than the 11 month window and using the system in a way that is not intended, that allows them to get that reservation guaranteed before the 11 month booking window has opened for those dates.

In a normal change for a reservation, nothing has been attempted to get a room outside of the 11 month window at any time.

One is an attempt to skirt the 11 month booking window, one is not.

But still when I walk I occupy a room only to just drop it when I continue my walk.

I see that as no different than the person booking at 11 months only to drop nights later on when their dates are finalized.

Ultimately we both block rooms that others could benefit from.

I do acknowledge that walking is short term blocking of rooms in larger scale.

But I don’t acknowledge it’s a huge problem as some claim. If somebody wants BWV in December you had to start walking a few months in advance - it’s been like that for as long as I can remember. It’s just the name of the game. If you don’t want to walk to can create a waitlist - everyone have the same opportunities.

After reading the majority of the posts here, it’s safe to say that some members are willing to put in the effort to secure their room and dates and the others who whine when they go online at 08.05am and the rooms are gone.

But the truth is not all rooms are gone at 08.05am only some are. If you aren’t willing to put in the effort you can always book another type of room - there will always be something available.

 

[DanCali]

In "walking" the way most members are talking about it they are aiming for a date much further out than the 11 month window and using the system in a way that is not intended, that allows them to get that reservation guaranteed before the 11 month booking window has opened for those dates.

In a normal change for a reservation, nothing has been attempted to get a room outside of the 11 month window at any time.

One is an attempt to skirt the 11 month booking window, one is not.

If those were your intended dates all along and you always only wanted to check in on July 3rd?

Yes then you should have waited until 11 months from July 3rd to book. And would be considered "walking" in the sense that most of us are talking about it.

You keep moving the goalpost. First it's a date "much further"... then it's 5 nights...? Well, what about 2 nights then?

And now we're examining at "intent"? Who knows what the "intent" is - maybe someone books for June 28 - July 5 and modifies it to July 3-5 later because they are going to be on a cruise with limited internet access for the next 5 nights? So it was intentional in that way. It doesn't matter... Maybe we should have walking tribunals too? Accuse owners of "walking to 1st degree" vs "walking to second degree"?

The point I'm getting is is the there are always "inequities" in a system like this. Those with more points will inevitably have more flexibility than those with less, like booking more nights than needed and then dropping. Those who don't work (or work from home) and can "lurk" will grab cancellations more easily than road warriors. It is what it is... you don't blow up the system because it works better for some people than others.

 

[TCRAIG]

So, the way I see it:
1. Some Members walk
2. Members walk mainly studios due to points/views/or amenities
2a. At AK and BW at popular times of the year
2b. At many resorts for the first 2 weeks of Dec or NYE
3. No one is really sure what the impact of Commercial bookings are vis-a-vis walking.

Personally, as I’ve stated before, I don’t walk…not due to any perceived moral issue…but because I book 1Brs…and even the walkers are ultimately really only trying to book 2a or 2b rooms which is a fairly limited subset of the overall DVC inventory…so any new rules that limit how/when the majority of Members (those who aren’t going to go after 2a or 2b rooms in particular) book their rooms is (again, the way I see it) overkill and not worth the effort and expense on DVS’s part. None of the changes I see proposed here look cheap to me as far as development, implementation and maintenance.
That said - I prefer DVC go after the Commercial bookers first since that is clearly against the rule and if after that, they could come up with a simple and cheap process to limit walking without impacts to everyone else - I say go for it.

 

[tx911]

The system can't provide equal footing. For example, this is why high-frequency traders used to rent space at the Baby Bell switching stations: they had lower latency to the Internet backbone, and hence the markets. (Now they can just co-locate explicitly near the markets---for the right price.)

Be that as it may, I view that type of advantage as fundamentally different from a conscious decision to pervert the booking mechanism for personal gain at the expense of other owners.

If owning more points, having a better internet service, etc etc gives you an advantage over me, I can live with that.

 

[Pooh12863]

If higher demand rooms stay booked after walker activity then the walker activity didn’t matter or make a difference? I don’t think that’s the case.

The people who did not walk never stood a chance, while the walkers did.

Which then forces the need to book sooner than 11m if you want any shot at them.

If maximum Home Priority can be anything from 11 months to infinity then why not just book our points in the room we’re mostly likely to want at the first opening available and just keep rolling them forward until we make the decision to stop?

I don’t yet know I when want to use my VGF or BWV points in 2026. Unfortunately, if I wait until 11 months for some of those categories, it’ll give up my ‘equal footing’. It’s best for me to decide now which of the hard categories I’m most likely to want, and go find an opening. Then I can just flip it every week and at my own convenience. After I get in no worries about 8am again. Now that’s flexibility

Play by the rules of the game in which you find yourself.

 

[Genie+]

If ya can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em.

Is that the answer? If I join, might as well do the method of maximum flexibilty.

 

[Tatebeck]

You keep moving the goalpost. First it's a date "much further"... then it's 5 nights...

And now we're examining at "intent"? Who knows what the "intent" is - maybe someone books for June 28 - July 5 and modifies it to July 3-5 later because they are going to be on a cruise with limited internet access for the next 5 nights? So it was intentional in that way. It doesn't matter... Maybe we should have walking tribunals too? Accuse owners of "walking to 1st degree" vs "walking to second degree"?

The point I'm getting is is the there are always "inequities" in a system like this. Those with more points will inevitably have more flexibility than those with less, like booking more nights than needed and then dropping. Those who don't work (or work from home) and can "lurk" will grab cancellations more easily than road warriors. It is what it is... you don't blow up the system because it works better for some people than others.

I said "in the way most people are talking about" it. Of course the most egregious examples will be the most talked about.
When you walk, there has to be a first step in your walk. That is the first step.

I myself have said that it involves intent many times before this. And I have not moved my goalpost.

Which is why it is so hard for Disney to do anything without a rule change or clarification.

Working within the system as they intend it to work is completely different that trying to work outside of the system as they intend for it to work.

 

[tx911]

come up with a simple and cheap process to limit walking without impacts to everyone else - I say go for it.

I have such a process. Everyone stop walking.

 

[tx911]

The point I'm getting is is the there are always "inequities" in a system like this. Those with more points will inevitably have more flexibility than those with less, like booking more nights than needed and then dropping. Those who don't work (or work from home) and can "lurk" will grab cancellations more easily than road warriors. It is what it is... you don't blow up the system because it works better for some people than others.

And you don't see anyone speaking out against any of those things.
Hmmmm, could it be that walking is totally different from those things?

 

[Orsino]

I do wonder what DVC's legal obligation is with respect to walking. Even if I accept that walking is fair in some abstract way because everyone can do it, does DVC have an obligation to disclose the practice to everyone? It is only fair if everyone knows about the practice and how to do it. When buying DVC, does someone have a legal case against DVC if they don't disclose walking and the implications of walking? I guess what I'm wondering is, if DVC knows that certain dates require walking, are they putting themselves in legal jeopardy if they don't disclose this fact?

The more I think about it, the more I agree with, I think it was lowlight, that DVC is being forced to act for legal reasons and nothing to do with an abstract sense of fairness.

 

[Maistre Gracey]

If higher demand rooms stay booked after walker activity then the walker activity didn’t matter or make a difference? I don’t think that’s the case.

The people who did not walk never stood a chance, while the walkers did.

Which then forces the need to book sooner than 11m if you want any shot at them.

If maximum Home Priority can be anything from 11 months to infinity then why not just book our points in the room we’re mostly likely to want at the first opening available and just keep rolling them forward until we make the decision to stop?

I don’t yet know I when want to use my VGF or BWV points in 2026. Unfortunately, if I wait until 11 months for some of those categories, it’ll give up my ‘equal footing’. It’s best for me to decide now which of the hard categories I’m most likely to want, and go find an opening. Then I can just flip it every week and at my own convenience. After I get in no worries about 8am again. Now that’s flexibility

Actually I was just thinking that exact thing.

 

[bdrex28]

I didn't want to edit out the rest of your post, but you keep coming back to this, & I'm surprised because it's one of those things that you CANNOT EVER PROVE what a persons original intent is/was, so it is pointless and irrelevant to any rule making, or debate, its completely irrelevant. lol

In your example for Christmas next year, you can NOT assume someone's original idea wasn't to check in on Nov 18th, & then they changed their mind to go for Xmas instead. THAT is the point, there is no way for you or anyone else to EVER determine that (especially Disney).

So I'm not sure why it keeps coming up as breaking a rule, when it isn't something anyone could ever prove... And even if they could prove it, what would be the difference if someone actually did intend to go in Nov, then changed their mind to go for Xmas, how would you possibly treat them different or know any different.??

What if They originally booked Booked Nov 18th for 7 days. Then they modified to Nov 20th for 7 days, then Nov 21st for 7 days then continued on until they had the week of Christmas? That's the easy and simple way to kill it. In that example, with nearly daily modifications it's pretty easy to see the original intent wasn't the 18th of November, epecially if they started 11 months +7 for that original booking.

 

[TCRAIG]

I have such a process. Everyone stop walking.

Sure - That’ll work - but how are you going to implement that process?

 

[Brian Noble]

Be that as it may, I view that type of advantage as fundamentally different from a conscious decision to pervert the booking mechanism for personal gain at the expense of other owners.

I mean, I am not a fan of walking either, and would rather see it curtailed. But it is not some fundamental injustice. While it exists, you can lose to 'em, or you can join 'em. Pick one and move on.