Any good management company needs to be looking out for the welfare of its membership as a whole, even if changes come at the expense of a small minority. 
Actually to me the question is does it matter if it's harder to book a shorter stay than a longer one esp assuming we're talking 7 days vs less, my opinion would be no it does not matter and I usually stay 5 days S-F.
Actually I would be surprised if most of those items were not discussed in one way or another and that a number of them were specifically looked at as positives with the change. We do know that encouraging less calls and avoiding DBD bookings were specific goals, as to their take on the rest, I don't know.
I doubt we agree. What I said was it should not be the goal of the system to decide who (person) was deserving. Obviously if there are winners and losers there is a reason and that reason may be the rules in place. As long as the system isn't emotional about it by trying to socially engineer to the groups you mentioned in an earlier post or any other specific person or group, I'm OK with it. DVC does have two options for high demand times. They include a lottery and a special season preference list. Both have been used in the past. The lottery was used once, for the turn of the century and didn't work out very well as I recall. The special season preference list went on for a number of years but I'm sure there are others far more knowledgeable to discuss that than I.
IF you go with the first one now you may have a much less chance of success.I'm going with the first one.
This is the way it works now. Sponsors often get first crack, then Fan clubs, then promotions (radios stations) then when sales open it's the internet sales that happen almost instantaneously.I wonder how they'd feel if they camped out overnight to be first in line, and then found out that the 10 people behind him/her were going to be allowed to buy tickets first because they were going to the earlier show. So now instead of getting a shot to compete for those floor seats, they have to wait for 10 other people to complete their transactions before having a shot. Meanwhile, other outlets have less people for the early show and so by the time this camper has a shot, inventory is less than it would have been had he been able to buy tickets right away.
For any days it was not needed, there would be absolutely nothing to complain about under the new system either. Everything would work and no one would lose out. But we're talking a situation where some will win and some will lose at 11 months out are we not? If so the only question is how best to arrive at that decision both from a members and a system standpoint realizing they have different goals and needs and that every choice will be a compromise between the 2.
VWL in December is a popular reservation, and since DBD booking was available under the old system, and since there were other members out there taking advantage of DBD booking, I did as well. The phone lines were busy and the MS wait time was very long.
With the new system, I won't have to book DBD anymore.
And it appears DVC members more than most. My understanding was that those that called DBD and got their reservations tended to complain because they had to do it that way and they didn't feel they should. Those that feel they need to protect certain groups should realize that many of those groups are the exact ones that couldn't call DBD. Not that I'm saying they didn't have the option but that is reality that they couldn't. IMO that was OK as is a change that would actually favor them as I think this change will in the long run.
First, I asked you to make a decision and offer a specific thought on what you would have done to fix the problems laid out. You chose not to and waned to offer it for a vote. OK, lets take it a step further. Do you think you or I could design a vote that would get the exact results we wanted and still appear to be unbiased? How would you have voted if you'd have been presented with this issue vs an increase of $1 a point? How do you think the membership would have voted? I now you'll come back and say that's absurd, we're not talking that much money but in reality is FAR closer to that than $0.0X a point. I'd say if all DBD type bookings were stopped we'd be talking a 30-40% or more savings on the cost of MS. If we encourage longer bookings and increase the average length of stay by simply 1/4 to 1/2 day each add another 10-20% savings or more on reduced resort specific costs such as housekeeping, bell services, valet, front desk. I know some of these are currently outsourced but there is an inherent cost to each. And I realize that every benefit has a cost and the system must decide WHERE to draw the line. When do you pay for something for all that not everyone uses such as the pool, internet, cable, concierge, etc; the system must decide and it appears they have done so in this case.
