New policy for reservations based on check IN date

[maciec]

I just want to say thank you to everyone who has taken the time to write in to MS.
I have read every single post in this thread and I still don't think that I fully understand or could ever explain to anyone else what all of this is about.

I start to explain it and all I say is "I don't think it's fair" with every sentece.

When I look at all of the "I don't think it's fair's" all I can hear is my 7yo dd saying "Momma, life 's not fair, get over it!"

 

[SuzanneSLO]

Thanks for providing such detailed information! So this confirms squirrlygirl's report that if your first night is not available, you can waitlist the first 7 nights of your stay. Interesting info about calling back and filling in parts of your own waitlist. So if you can't get your first night, set up a waitlist and call back the next day. If you get days 2-7 (or 2-8 if you are staying longer) then you can fill in the last part of your waitlist reducing it to just the first night.

Well the good news that comes from this policy is that there is no benefit from a lengthy "walking" of reservations. As long as I have a WL for Dec 24 -30, I can call the next day and book Dec 31 if it is available. As a result, I will compete for that day with every other member who has a reservation for Dec 24-30, a WL for Dec 24 -30 or calls that day to reserve Dec 24 -31.

The only advantage to having the earleir reservation or WL is that your booking of the Dec 31 reservation may be easier to complete (MS already has th einfo) and thus allow you to snap up inventory sooner than those starting a new reservation.

The bad news is that it certianly makes longer reservations more difficult and it probably does little for those without the points to book a 7 night reservation or WL.

And it certianly sounds a lot like the equivalent to DBD booking and raises the issue of putting limits on cancelling WL as well as actual reservations.

-- Suzanne

 

[pyrxtc]

That's the problem I have with it too. No longer is the system equitable. Now some will be able to book AHEAD of other's 11 month booking window. Just doesn't seem too fair to me.

Some have ALWAYS been able to book ahead of other's booking window. They just ahd to leave the day before the other's. Yeah DBD helped them to get their days but only if they were first on the phone.

 

[bookwormde]

pyrxtc

Yes they could have booked the day before the start of your reservations but would have had the same chance at your start day as you at the 11 and 7 month thresholds. Not the case now.

bookwormde

 

[Dean]

This new policy is completely unfair. I understand that is it annoying should someone call in day by day to book a vacation but that is what they should have to do if they want to travel during a certain time or get a specific type of room. Why should one member get treated differently by when they can book based on the number of nights. The old way was fair to everyone. You knew exactly when you were able to book the room you wanted and every member has equal access.

I would be the first to say (and I have said) that not being able to call every day is a personal problem, I'd take the same stance if your choice of dates make it harder to reserve. In a sense neither are 100% "fair" but they are potentially unfair to a slightly different group of people. There is not 100% fair system, period.

pyrxtc

Yes they could have booked the day before the start of your reservations but would have had the same chance at your start day as you at the 11 and 7 month thresholds. Not the case now.

bookwormde

I have posted several times over the years that one holding a reservation and trying to extend it should have priority over one who didn't yet hold a reservation.

 

[Robo-Daddy 3000]

Does anyone know where these overwhelming member concerns come from? Is there a page on the back of Disney Files or my Checkin Materials that surveyed how I felt about Day By Day Booking? If so, I must not have the right secret decoder glasses.

I also too tried to figure out pin down Sheila about this "overwhelming member request" line that we are being fed. I'm not buying it for a second. She used the line with me as well. I asked what percentage of members constitutes "overwhelming" and she said that she didn't have a number for me. I told here that it seemed that this change has brought about an "overwhelming member request" and that people are not happy with this new system. All she could offer was that the negative responses have outweighed the positive regarding the "enhancement".

fwiw, I did also tell her that I found it interesting that after only a few months of being opened 7 days a week that MS is now too overwhelmed to do the job that they have always been doing- which is to booking vacations for members.

 

[jdg345]

Well the good news that comes from this policy is that there is no benefit from a lengthy "walking" of reservations. As long as I have a WL for Dec 24 -30, I can call the next day and book Dec 31 if it is available. As a result, I will compete for that day with every other member who has a reservation for Dec 24-30, a WL for Dec 24 -30 or calls that day to reserve Dec 24 -31.

Someone who already has those days though could still lock it down. There is surely a benefit to lengthy reservation walking. If they continue to walk forward, their fromt-end days would trigger a WL once they've dropped them all off, but if they are extending their stay, they can extend before you have a chance to compete.

The only advantage to having the earleir reservation or WL is that your booking of the Dec 31 reservation may be easier to complete (MS already has th einfo) and thus allow you to snap up inventory sooner than those starting a new reservation.

If I book 20 - 27, I can add day 28 on day 21. The only people that can compete with me are those that also have 20-27, so room inventory is the same. X people are competing for X rooms. Since the waitlist is for the period, you could WL for 21 through 28, but since days 21-27 are locked up, your waitlist does not fill for the 28th. Those extending still have first dibs apparently.

The bad news is that it certianly makes longer reservations more difficult and it probably does little for those without the points to book a 7 night reservation or WL.

Longer reservations appear easier.

And it certianly sounds a lot like the equivalent to DBD booking and raises the issue of putting limits on cancelling WL as well as actual reservations.

-- Suzanne

Yah, sounds equiv to DBD booking, it's just that it's way messier, imo.

 

[jdg345]

Some have ALWAYS been able to book ahead of other's booking window. They just ahd to leave the day before the other's. Yeah DBD helped them to get their days but only if they were first on the phone.

DBD leveled the playing field so that you could book at the same time as those leaving before you (if you wanted to go through that hassle).

Fact is, you can apparently still DBD book ... you just need to do so a week in advance now. And if these rules are all the same, it's the same messy garbage.

 

[jdg345]

I would be the first to say (and I have said) that not being able to call every day is a personal problem, I'd take the same stance if your choice of dates make it harder to reserve. In a sense neither are 100% "fair" but they are potentially unfair to a slightly different group of people. There is not 100% fair system, period.

I have posted several times over the years that one holding a reservation and trying to extend it should have priority over one who didn't yet hold a reservation.

The only thing that made the older system 'unfair' was not being able to call at 9am on certain days due to other responsibilities, etc. You could always add an associate to book on your behalf.

That said, I think folks are smart enough that if there is a way to give themselves an advantage, within the rules (or not, in some cases), they are going to use it if they feel they need to.

 

[bookwormde]

I have posted several times over the years that one holding a reservation and trying to extend it should have priority over one who didn't yet hold a reservation.

Dean, this is a valid idea if the priority is contiguous reservations, not equal and fair access.

bookwormde

 

[SuzanneSLO]

Someone who already has those days though could still lock it down. There is surely a benefit to lengthy reservation walking. If they continue to walk forward, their fromt-end days would trigger a WL once they've dropped them all off, but if they are extending their stay, they can extend before you have a chance to compete.QUOTE]

Actually if the WL policy as reported by some who received phone calls is correct, there is no ability to "lock it down" by making earlier reservations. Everyone competes equally for a day 7 reservation, those with existing reservations and those who can't get those reservatiosn and must WL, alike.

Again, it was reported that MS would allow a Day 1-6 WL and Day 7 reservation. As a result, the member with the Day 1-6 reservation has no particular advantage over the member with no reservation or an existing Day 1-6 WL, when calling to book Day 7.

So far, I have not seen anyone report that they have successfully waitlisted days 1-6 and then reserved Day 7. If it cannot actually be done, this would not be the first time since the policy change that the CMs have said one thing and system has done something else.

-- Suzanne

 

[Mickey Fliers]

Okay, just trying to digest all of this. Please help me understand one thing...11+7??? Is this just another way of saying booking at 11 months from checkin for a full 7 day vacation, or you all advocating call 7 days prior to check in and "walking" the reservation?

I have never called day by day, but this is all so confusing!

 

[dvcdisney]

pyrxtc

Yes they could have booked the day before the start of your reservations but would have had the same chance at your start day as you at the 11 and 7 month thresholds. Not the case now.

bookwormde

Exactly!

 

[pyrxtc]

Exactly!

Only if you were booking day by day. I like the fact that I can get my ressie for the next 7 days and am not switching rooms.

 

[mrdiscranky]

Only if you were booking day by day. I like the fact that I can get my ressie for the next 7 days and am not switching rooms.

Which you could have done under the old system too.

 

[LisaS]

Well the good news that comes from this policy is that there is no benefit from a lengthy "walking" of reservations. As long as I have a WL for Dec 24 -30, I can call the next day and book Dec 31 if it is available. As a result, I will compete for that day with every other member who has a reservation for Dec 24-30, a WL for Dec 24 -30 or calls that day to reserve Dec 24 -31.

I'm not following here. Quoting from robinb's post:

* You may call back another day and if the current booking start day is now available you may book it, any single days before it and any other contiguous available days after it (keeping in mind the 11+7 restriction on the date of your call). Your waitlist will be modified to start on the first non-available day.

If I call for Dec 24 and can't get it, I can WL Dec 24-30. If I call the next day, I can book Dec 25 plus any contiguous nights (up to 7) that are available. I can also fill in Dec 24 on my WL if it became available. But I don't see how I can book Dec 31 unless Dec 25-30 are also available. I can add that night to my WL but unless all 6 nights prior to Dec 31 are available when I call, I don't believe I can book that night on that call.

 

[robinb]

Okay, just trying to digest all of this. Please help me understand one thing...11+7??? Is this just another way of saying booking at 11 months from checkin for a full 7 day vacation, or you all advocating call 7 days prior to check in and "walking" the reservation?

I have never called day by day, but this is all so confusing!

Yes, 11+7 means that you may call at the 11 month window from the START of your vacation for a maximum of 7 days. If you have never needed to call day by day, then you don't have to worry about "walking" the reservation. The only people who will want to "walk" their reservation are those who want a particular room type at a busy time.

 

[LisaS]

Again, it was reported that MS would allow a Day 1-6 WL and Day 7 reservation.

I interpreted it that if your first night is not available your only option is to WL your entire 7 nights, even if nights 2-7 are available. If you can't get the first night, you can't book any nights within the 7-night window that are available. You can however call back the next day and if night 2 is available you can book it and any other nights immediately following that are also available, but you cannot book any non-contiguous nights. So if nights 2 and 4 are available but night 3 is not, you can only book night 2 that day.

 

[robinb]

If I call for Dec 24 and can't get it, I can WL Dec 24-30. If I call the next day, I can book Dec 25 plus any contiguous nights (up to 7) that are available. I can also fill in Dec 24 on my WL if it became available. But I don't see how I can book Dec 31 unless Dec 25-30 are also available. I can add that night to my WL but unless all 6 nights prior to Dec 31 are available when I call, I don't believe I can book that night on that call.

That was how it was explained to me. The reservation start day must be in the 11 month window or before. If you call at the 11 month window for Day 1 and Day 1 or Day 2 is not available, but Day 3 is you may not book Day 3 and WL for Day 1 and Day 2. If you call 2 or more days later and Day 3 is still available you may book it then.

I assume that in your example 12/31 would be added to your waitlist even if it was available as you do not hold a valid reservation to the days before it. I have to wonder again if the WL priority remains the same or if it is "reset" with the changes made. Does anyone know what the current rules are?

 

[dvcdisney]

I have posted several times over the years that one holding a reservation and trying to extend it should have priority over one who didn't yet hold a reservation.

I don't agree with this because it assumes that I don't have as much right to booking my reservation as someone who had a vacation planned before myself.

That is why I like the old system better since it was fair. Everyone has the same opportunity to get each day. If someone didn't want to call at 9am, then they understand that they may not get the room. However, it is unfair for any member to have priority of other members in the same Home Resort Priority.

Now, understandably DVC has provided a Priority for some members over others using the Home Resort Priority policy. But this is obviously something that is a benefit that we as members have some control over. If you wanted a Home Resort Priority for certain resorts, you have the option to buy at that resort (or for those past resorts, resale is available for them). So we do have the option that we choose or not to choose to do.

I understand the choice could be to book rooms that you do not want in order to get the advantage but this, surely, does not equate to booking DBD since those who book them are planning on using this days and not just trying to purposely take the rooms away from others for their own personal advantage. Which, yes is still within the policy. And yes, Life isn't fair. But why change a policy that was fair, just a lot of work for some members apparently (when I use to call DBD, it took me only a few minutes and it was done-I'm surprised how upset people seemed to be with it).

I just find that DVC was suppose to be a vacationing community and now some of us will spend our vacation planning time as nervous, anxious and sadly finding ways to compete with others to our own advantage. I don't think DVC was suppose to give you that experience. At least I didn't think so. It was suppose to be a community of people who share the love of Disney and the Resort. Wow. It's sad that members feel like they have to "game the system" in order to have a nice vacation. I know I'm not like this and I am sad to say that it really gets me thinking that I may have to do this.

By the way, if it does come to "gaming the system", I couldn't blame anyone. If it something that you are forced to do in order to get a good vacation, then so be it. It's just sad. It really didn't have that feeling when we first joined. But I guess it's bound to happen with such increasing DVC members. It's just sad, that all!

I just hope we don't feel any animosity towards each other that we don't acknowledge each other as a DVC family. We always meet lots of DVC members and we always have so much to talk about, and we have always spoke to others about our membership as a family/community of members who love Disney and in that we have so much in common. It would be sad for any one of us to say, yes it's a vacation club, but it's all about yourself, if you have to "step on other members" on the way to vacation, so be it. Sad

(Sorry if it's too long and dramatic) JMO