Best Rate Program is History

[doubletrouble_vb]

The Best Rate Program has apparently failed. The AP website has started showing codes for the next three months and Mousesavers says BRP is done.

Anyone care to speculate as to why this is?

 

[YoHo]

It went the way of the Character Caravan to the land of misfit managment decisions.

 

[All Aboard]

YoHo has made a good analogy. This was a very guest-unfriendly process. Clearly, WDW wanted to retain the AP rate program (both as a means of helping to sell AP's and as a means of filling rooms when occupancy was projected to be lower), so they reinstated the old (guest friendly) plan. I'm sure there are very many happy people right now.

 

[Peter Pirate]

No disrespect to Mr. Aboard or Yoho...Well, not much anyway, but why can't management be applauded for reversing a decision that wasn't working? I didn't like this policy either but I'll admit I'm not privvy to what they were attempting to achieve. I'm just thankful that someone was able to see the error and make the change.

 

[YoHo]

Why should I applaud someone for making a stupid decision, realizing it's a stupid decision and then reversing it?
I mean seriously. I don't applaud the managment at my company when they make stupid decisions that they have to reverse later. In fact, I got laid off for just such a reason at my old job. I mean be serious here.

Lets applaud the execs at Enron for not cooking the books again.

 

[fran99999]

Part of the reason was the emails that were sent to disney about not being able to book under the 60 day mark. I was one of the emails. I received a personal phone call from Disney yesterday early am to help me book my room at the $49 rate or I could have gotten a room at a different hotel for comparable savings.

I was beginning to think disney only deletes those emails.

 

[Peter Pirate]

Not like comparing apples to oranges is it Yoho? They were trying to fill their hotel rooms resulting in a higher yield. While I hate that my rate, well, my former rate, was the yield being sacrificed, I still undersand what they were trying and as a part of fiduciary responsibility it seems they are required to attempt such things. After all, resort stays were up, local assistance has been less necessary lately. It would be foolhearty to think that they wouldn't want to maximixe profits from high occupancy if possible. It didn't work, they reversed their decision ... whose worse for the wear?

 

[YoHo]

The Good will of the APers.

Keep poking with a stick........

 

[All Aboard]

Pirate, I too have a lot of trouble applauding the reversal a bad decision. I struggled to understand the motivation behind the move in the first place. The non-refundable deposit for a trip that starts no sooner than 60 days from booking sure felt like they were "trapping" your money. Honestly, did they think that it wouldn't result in the uproar that ensued? They can control the number of rooms on the discount. And they can adjust that number whenever and however they choose. They don't need the restrictive system they implemented in order to maximize yield.

Yes, I am thankful that things have returned to a friendlier system. But, it was a dumb decision in the first place. Not that my opinion, nor my applauding amounts to anything, but I have a hard time praising in a situation like this.

And, I agree with YoHo, that anytime you find yourself having to reverse a "takeaway" from your customers - you must have lost some goodwill along the way. People don't general take kindly to being treated like lab rats.

 

[tmt martins]

Well my company motto is


If you don't like it don't worry it will change
and
If you do you better enjoy it
because we can have none of that

 

[Chuck S]

I think a lot of AP holders wanted to book less than 60 days out. I know when we drive we often arrive a day early (I allow extra time in case of road problems, flat tires, car trouble, etc). We would call and try to get an AP rate for that first nght at avalue resort, before moving to OKW he next day. If it wasn't available, we'd probably spend that night off-site. I think they may have had some rooms, even as busy as they've been, sitting empty that could have been filled by last minute AP holders. Maybe due to cancellations or changes in travel plans.

 

[YoHo]

I still don't see how anyone could figure the resorts are booked solid given the free food program from last year.

In fact, they're booked way be low their historical 90% occupancy rate as far as I've heard.

It just doesn't make sense.

 

[doubletrouble_vb]

I wondered if it might have impacted AP sales. I know I bought a 10 day pass in November to use over the next two years instead of renewing my DVC AP (I have just 150 points so I'm a cash weekend kind of gal). Anybody who bought the pass because of the combination of savings on entry and on the room would have gotten a massive disincentive to buy an AP by way of this program.

So....now you have people with long lived passes rather than short lived AP's. They don't have quite compulsion to use the passes the way or with the frequency they did their APs. Less time in the World means lower returns. Or maybe they didn't see the bump up in occupancy they expected.

If they actually wanted people to embrace the BRP then tweaking the AP program might have been a smarter bet. Give people an extra 5% off the Best Rate if they jump through the hoops and accept the cancellation penalties and reservation deadlines. For everyone else you get the usual codes. That way whatever the exact goal was (sorry I haven't come up with anything for a goal) they might have a chance of achieving it...plus they can reduce the size of the code discounts if enough people rushed to jump on the BRP bandwagon...the BRP'ers get the normal sized discount and the last minute folks get ...something like 5% less than they did in prior years (I'm not going to do the math).

 

[DancingBear]

I still don't see how anyone could figure the resorts are booked solid given the free food program from last year.

In fact, they're booked way be low their historical 90% occupancy rate as far as I've heard.

It just doesn't make sense.

The "free food program" was instituted for the slow period after Labor Day, and it required that you be paying full rack rate, so I don't see that as dramatically different from any other discount programs they've offered. (But clearly they wouldn't have put it in place if occupancy rates were already very high.

Where does the 90% come from? What period in history would that be for? It seems really high.

 

[DancingBear]

The Disney 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2005 says occupancy rates at WDW for that year were 83%, up from 77% the year before, although there were 230,000 additional available room nights (due to Pop Century and reopening of POFQ). Per room guest spending was essentially level ($198 in 2004 vs. $199 in 2005).

Also says WDW attendance rose 5% in FY 2005 and per guest spending rose 2%.

FY 2004 10-K says occupancy rates were level (77% 2004 vs. 76% 2003) but with nearly 1 million more room nights available (Pop). Per room spending dipped slightly. Attendance up 7%, per capita spending up 6%.

FY 2003 10-K did not include the chart with occupancy rates at WDW, etc., but has this summary info:

2003 vs. 2002

....Revenues at the Walt Disney World Resort were down marginally and reflected lower theme park attendance and hotel occupancy compared to the prior year, partially offset by increased per capita guest spending at the theme parks and hotel properties. Decreased theme park attendance and hotel occupancy at the Walt Disney World Resort reflected continued softness in travel and tourism. Guest spending increases reflected ticket price increases and fewer promotional programs offered during the year....

2002 vs. 2001

...At the Walt Disney World Resort, decreased revenues reflected lower attendance, occupancy and per room guest spending at the hotel properties. These decreases were driven by decreases in international and domestic visitation resulting from continued disruption in travel and tourism and softness in the economy. Lower per room guest spending at the Walt Disney World Resort was driven by promotional programs.

 

[Mickmse2002]

Why should I applaud someone for making a stupid decision, realizing it's a stupid decision and then reversing it?
I mean seriously. I don't applaud the managment at my company when they make stupid decisions that they have to reverse later. In fact, I got laid off for just such a reason at my old job. I mean be serious here.

Lets applaud the execs at Enron for not cooking the books again.

So you would rather have them not change a decision that wasn't working out? I sometimes think it is very easy for people not making decisions to be hyper critical of those that do.

 

[All Aboard]

I don't think YoHo stated that he'd rather it not have been reversed. Clearly, his choice would be that the original change never have been made.

He stated that he's not going to applaud the reversal. Why should Disney management be credited for this? Isn't it akin to raising prices by $10, then shortly thereafter having a $10 off "sale"?

And, how do you know that YoHo isn't a decision maker? There are those of us on this board that are.

 

[raidermatt]

And, how do you know that YoHo isn't a decision maker? There are those of us on this board that are.

Well said.

Mickmse, I agree that hindsight is 20/20, and its easy to criticize a mistake after its made. But I'm pretty sure those criticizing it now were also at the very least, highly skeptical of the decision when it was first announced as well.

 

[Mickmse2002]

I don't think YoHo stated that he'd rather it not have been reversed. Clearly, his choice would be that the original change never have been made.

He stated that he's not going to applaud the reversal. Why should Disney management be credited for this? Isn't it akin to raising prices by $10, then shortly thereafter having a $10 off "sale"?

And, how do you know that YoHo isn't a decision maker? There are those of us on this board that are.

I never said he wasn't a decision maker. He certainly didn't make the decision(s) in question.

 

[raidermatt]

I never said he wasn't a decision maker. He certainly didn't make the decision(s) in question.

But unless you are saying that the only person who can criticize a decision is the person who made it, why make the point?