Mini Rant - searching for a room

[KAT4DISNEY]

I don't think that model should be replicated for DVC where most owners know the resorts, room sizes and views and can immediately drill down to what they want. It makes no sense to use resources to show me availability for dozens of 2B or Grand Villa units if I'm trying to book a Studio, or to show me WDW results when I'm trying to book Aulani.

If I could make one change, it might be to put a checkbox asking how alternatives should be presented, with options like "same resort, different view", "same resort, different villa size" or "different resort, same villa size". But that's what the current setup tries to do now intuitively.

Personally, I would say that upward of 75% of my searches give me exactly what I want the first time out. Doesn't really make sense (IMO) to make each and every search more resource-intensive than it is now.

I'm perfectly ok with them not showing all DVC resorts - just as Expedia would not show you Hawaii resorts if you were searching in Houston, TX. And while I can understand the choice to show resorts in the same area at WDW (BWV if you've done a search for BCV) it's baffling to show only those resorts when they don't have availability and to not show other options at WDW that do have availability. If every search is at 11-8 months out then it's very easy and I'm sure you have no difficulties. 4-5 months starts to be more frustrating and by the time you're last minute or just searching during a time that books quickly it's completely annoying. At that point it does at least starting displaying other room sizes too but again it will only show the resorts in that area and no where else. At first when it went online SSR would show up as an option if there was limited availability elsewhere but now even that seems to be hit or miss. WDW just isn't that big that for many of us we'd elect to stay at another location rather than nothing at all.

If it were check boxes to show more results that would work too. The requirements from search after search after search eats up server time also. Unlike you I don't have a problem with the way Expedia displays - it shows hotels that have availability and then you can select that hotel and it will show you what the room options are. Neat and tidy IMO. Hyatt website is similar although of course showing only Hyatt options. This just seems to be one area where Disney wants to buck the trend and there is little or nothing for them to gain from doing so. Or they've just left it to the programmers to decide. For a business the size of Disney I'm afraid I dismiss server size and capabilities as a valid issue. It's certainly an issue but not a credible one for them IMO.

I was thinking along the same lines that they could add some check boxes for those times when someone wants to conduct a broader search. I suspect that for most of the members most of the time, the current system works great -- results are returned quickly and time isn't wasted searching for and displaying lots of other options. When someone is looking for last minute availability or just wants to know all of their options, the check boxes you suggest would be very helpful. If looking for any studio or 1BR available anywhere at WDW, it would be helpful to have a "different resort, same villa size" check box so that at most, the user must do two searches, one for a studio, one for a 1BR. That raises the issue of whether you show offsite resorts as well, otherwise you need another check box to either include or exclude them.

All this would be nice and seem like very good options that address the concerns Tim mentions but also helps the user.

 

[iluvthsgam]

Unfortunately Expedia and Disney Parks are in different corners of the the Travel Industry...

Disney Parks is Travel Entertainment provider who happens to also provide on-site accomodations. Their focus is on providing top quality Travel Entertainment and their websites do a pretty good job of staying true to that focus. Booking rooms is sort of an "if we have to, we will" area for them. DVC is more of an accomodations provider but they are still part of Disney, so providing Travel Entertainment is still sitting at the high end of their focus.

No, no, no, no. DVC is exactly that: an accommodations provider. DVC is a freaking timeshare. You cannot realistically say it is not an accommodations provider. Booking rooms should not be an afterthought for DVC. DVC's top 2 jobs should be (1) managing the resort and (2) handling the booking of vacations.

Certainly it's technologically do-able. But there would also be drawbacks to presenting such information. Right now it takes 4-5 seconds of "processing" in order to return results for 4 different combinations. This is a bit of an oversimplification but if the underlying database queries are instead performed for 8 different combinations, it would instead take 8-10 seconds. 12 combinations could take 12-15 seconds.

The idea that adding search complexity would add time onto search results is fine, but I think your exaggerating the results. It wouldn't go from 4-5 seconds to 12-15 seconds. I have said this before, if Disney made this a priority it would be easy for them to do. It would take some technological resources, sure, but it wouldn't be terribly difficult. Just look at Twitter, Facebook, or any stock exchange website. Their systems are immensely more complicated. DVC only has 12 resorts. As mentioned above if Expedia can search hundreds of hotels across an area for different dates and room sizes, etc., surely DVC can put something together to do it.

To me, the issue is simpler. DVC has something that works and most people don't complain. Most people think it works good enough. So why spend time and money on fixing something that "isn't broken"? But they most certainly can make it better and most certainly can easily have 2 modes: simple and advanced. That fixes any problems with complexity. Advanced mode could let people search for exactly what they want. My perfect advanced mode would let me pick a date range and simply return to me every single option available across every resort, every view, and every room size. I know i'm dreaming though

 

[cwdefouw]

No, no, no, no. DVC is exactly that: an accommodations provider. DVC is a freaking timeshare. You cannot realistically say it is not an accommodations provider. Booking rooms should not be an afterthought for DVC. DVC's top 2 jobs should be (1) managing the resort and (2) handling the booking of vacations.

Not sure what the issue is as my post quite clearly states "DVC is... an accomodations provider" However, as my post also says, DVC is, has always been, and will forever be, a part of the Walt Disney Company and as such they will always have to deal with things in Disney's way and use Disney's systems. Consequently we will never have an Expedia quality booking engine, even Member Services cannot generate a search result like what the OP is asking for, and if they can't do it internally, we certainly won't be able to do it either.

The idea that adding search complexity would add time onto search results is fine, but I think your exaggerating the results. It wouldn't go from 4-5 seconds to 12-15 seconds. I have said this before, if Disney made this a priority it would be easy for them to do. It would take some technological resources, sure, but it wouldn't be terribly difficult. Just look at Twitter, Facebook, or any stock exchange website. Their systems are immensely more complicated. DVC only has 12 resorts. As mentioned above if Expedia can search hundreds of hotels across an area for different dates and room sizes, etc., surely DVC can put something together to do it.

To me, the issue is simpler. DVC has something that works and most people don't complain. Most people think it works good enough. So why spend time and money on fixing something that "isn't broken"? But they most certainly can make it better and most certainly can easily have 2 modes: simple and advanced. That fixes any problems with complexity. Advanced mode could let people search for exactly what they want. My perfect advanced mode would let me pick a date range and simply return to me every single option available across every resort, every view, and every room size. I know i'm dreaming though

Good points are made here, but the cost factor isn't considered. To put it simply...

Could they do better? YES absolutely, they could do better.

Would it cost more, probably a lot more? YES absolutely it would cost more, probably a lot more.

Am I willing to see increases, probably large increases in MF's to pay for a better booking engine that I only use occasionally? NO IMO, I am not willing to except higher MF's for that.

I would rather have my MF's directed to the resorts where I am staying for days or weeks on my vacation instead of to the booking engine that I use for 15-30 minutes a year. I am willing to learn to use the existing system to my best advantage and if it take a couple of extra searches to see resort wide availability, I am personally OK with that.

 

[myzel]

As has been pointed out it is an added expense to expand their res. system. IT costs money, Expedia et all are non asset based service providers and can put money into IT.

 

[Queenie122]

I agree with the op! In August I booked a 10 night stay at three weeks out. I spent hours and HOURS on the website trying to piece together my trip. It would have been too confusing to do at on the phone, with a cm giving me single days here and there at different resorts. I can't tell you how many times I wished there was a "studio for x date" option. Instead I had to go through all the options and write them down, piecing them together, over and over. Annoying! I realize it costs money to update the system but this seems like a simple fix.

 

[LisaS]

I realize it costs money to update the system but this seems like a simple fix.

Seasoned software developers will tell you that one of the things they learned early in their careers is that almost nothing is ever simple. Also I think Disney may have had a third party develop this software. If that's true and if they decide to go back to that third party for any changes, there would be a contract involved. Given that, they would probably want to batch up a number of changes and have them all done at once.

 

[KalamityJane]

A third party did develop it, but tbh, Disney doesn't pay well for IT so they don't have great IT. Hubs is a software engineer specializing in web applications and databases and knows people that either work for Disney IT or the third party.

 

[Alexander]

I don't want to see every possible resort room available, but if looking for a studio for example, I would love to see all available for my dates without having to run multiple searches. I know it will show a few options, so that can be helpful.

 

[mb_uh]

I think this would actually make things easier for them too. Not sure if others have booked 1-2 days because they needed a last minute room only to do another search and have to book and release other reservation. If I could see all my options it would reduce total reservation numbers.