New policy for reservations based on check IN date

[jdg345]

Thank you. I am frankly surprised we've not seen more changes over time including a true minimum stay and reallocation. Also, I have wondered if DVC would ever join the ranks of formally giving retail buyers and/or higher point owners a formal preference or even limiting benefit for resale buyers. Obviously the internet was less of an issue at the time but my impression with the last reallocation was a similar response, esp from CAN members.

So while DVC started out with certain intentions, you still feel that they will [slowly] transition to a more traditional time share?

 

[jdg345]

OT ...

I just wanted to wish everyone a Happy and Safe 4th of July Holiday Weekend!

 

[Califgirl]

Thank you. I am frankly surprised we've not seen more changes over time including a true minimum stay and reallocation.

One of the reasons we bought DVC was the wonderful flexibility and NOT having to have a minimum stay. While some timeshares let you split weeks, some require that you use a weekend for one stay, but cannot use a weekend for your next stay (or visa versa). I found DVC's reservation ability to book whenever I wanted to stay very refreshing and it's part of what tipped us to buy.

I would be very sad to see the flexiblity of staying as long or short as I want, in whatever size unit I want, disappear.

As for the reservations, it seems that if we booked the entire stay from the day of Check out it might keep people from adding phantom days to the begining of their reservation. Although, I'm sure there would still be some problems .....

 

[lugnut33]

If I had two big contracts and could make two separate ressies for New Years, could I in turn rent them for big dollars to DVC members who couldn't get the dates they wanted during New Years? There's got to be a way for someone to hoard points and now book multiple rooms in the "popular" sections and rent them out for big bucks during the busy times.

 

[Dean]

Point Reallocated, per the POS, is give and take, isn't it? So if they add points in one area, they have to remove them from another, correct?

Absolutely but as this thread proves, if your personal visit time is affected, the rest doesn't seem to matter.

So while DVC started out with certain intentions, you still feel that they will [slowly] transition to a more traditional time share?

I think they will change in some areas, not in others, the question is what are those areas. As someone recently pointed out to me in a PM, I've made other predictions that have not yet come true, likely all will not. As I pointed out earlier in this thread, things are done for a reason. The flexibility involved has costs and DVC is much more expensive in terms of dues for most people than any other system I know save maybe the Ritz and Four Seasons. Thus the issue is the balance between "flexibility"/yearly costs/satisfaction/POS limits. DVC has to find that balance but the economy my force them to shift it somewhat. If they came back and said we can raise dues $1 a point or make X/Y/Z changes, each would have to decide where they stand.

I've agreed they could have handled it better but I don't agree that they should necessarily have waited until everyone got they're next magazine. Maybe change the recording, put in the the website, send out the emails through their list.

One of the reasons we bought DVC was the wonderful flexibility and NOT having to have a minimum stay. While some timeshares let you split weeks, some require that you use a weekend for one stay, but cannot use a weekend for your next stay (or visa versa). I found DVC's reservation ability to book whenever I wanted to stay very refreshing and it's part of what tipped us to buy.

I would be very sad to see the flexiblity of staying as long or short as I want, in whatever size unit I want, disappear.

As for the reservations, it seems that if we booked the entire stay from the day of Check out it might keep people from adding phantom days to the begining of their reservation. Although, I'm sure there would still be some problems .....

I don't think the basic option of no minimum stay will go away but I suspect we haven't seen the last of changes that are in part intended to direct members to more structured stays and less phone calls and thus may reduce the availability of those shorter stays.

 

[dianeschlicht]

Dean, I also asked about the perception that DVC is going toward encouraging people to use the week at a time plan....I was told flat out, "no, that will never happen", but I do think the changes indicate that. Does anyone know? Was Jim Lewis part of a traditional timeshare at one time?????

 

[dianeschlicht]

What's this about online booking??? Did you pick up any other information?

Just that it IS coming, but no indication of when. I asked about it specifically though. I wanted some REAL information other than just giving my opinions on the new policy.

 

[CarolMN]

Carol, I asked the member satisfaction person who called me a direct question about online booking. I posed the question of the 11 month booking window being at 12:00AM and was told that yes, that would be the booking window. ..........

Another example of poor management / poor training. CMs should not be speculating with members (or providing them with advance information) about things that have not been officially announced. Someone who works on the Member Satisfaction Team should know better!

 

[Dean]

Dean, I also asked about the perception that DVC is going toward encouraging people to use the week at a time plan....I was told flat out, "no, that will never happen", but I do think the changes indicate that. Does anyone know? Was Jim Lewis part of a traditional timeshare at one time?????

I have no direct information that this was by intent but I do believe it encourages 7 day stays including weekends regardless of the intent. I feel this is a good think for the membership as a whole but do see the concerns and as I've said, it works against me personally. I would again say that this level likely does not have much info as to intent.

Jim Lewis Bio

 

[lisareniff]

Thank you. I am frankly surprised we've not seen more changes over time including a true minimum stay and reallocation. Also, I have wondered if DVC would ever join the ranks of formally giving retail buyers and/or higher point owners a formal preference or even limiting benefit for resale buyers. Obviously the internet was less of an issue at the time but my impression with the last reallocation was a similar response, esp from CAN members.

I'm also surprised they have done one reallocation over all these years. It seems like it would be necessary to do a tweek every year or two to keep things running smoothly. Also these smaller tweeks are less painful to the owners then one big change and gets them used to the change.

Personally I'm not adverse to min. stays of 2-3 days, but I don't think DVC can easily make that change due to how they have sold the property.

If they did have preferences for larger point owners (over all sub-contracts) it might encourage the add-ons that this new booking policy may discourage. What is a larger point owner? Maybe someone who can reserve a 2 bedroom for 2 weeks in Dream? 700pts? I'm not there!

 

[jdg345]

If I had two big contracts and could make two separate ressies for New Years, could I in turn rent them for big dollars to DVC members who couldn't get the dates they wanted during New Years? There's got to be a way for someone to hoard points and now book multiple rooms in the "popular" sections and rent them out for big bucks during the busy times.

Not only could you rent them to DVC Members, but to non-DVC members as well! And since it looks like it is going to be easy to grab and walk weeks at a time, I suspect this could happen between Christmas and NYE.

 

[jdg345]

Absolutely but as this thread proves, if your personal visit time is affected, the rest doesn't seem to matter.

I don't know if that's true for everyone, but I see where you're coming from.

I think they will change in some areas, not in others, the question is what are those areas. As someone recently pointed out to me in a PM, I've made other predictions that have not yet come true, likely all will not. As I pointed out earlier in this thread, things are done for a reason. The flexibility involved has costs and DVC is much more expensive in terms of dues for most people than any other system I know save maybe the Ritz and Four Seasons. Thus the issue is the balance between "flexibility"/yearly costs/satisfaction/POS limits. DVC has to find that balance but the economy my force them to shift it somewhat. If they came back and said we can raise dues $1 a point or make X/Y/Z changes, each would have to decide where they stand.

I was under the impression that while dues were higher than for the average timeshare, that was -- in part -- the cost of flexibility. Perhaps a better way to do this would be as you suggest, "We would like to make the following changes to reduce costs, otherwise we will need to raise dues by X." and have some sort of proxy/vote. Of course, like you said, this will only appease the majority and some will be left out and may be forced to vote with their feet.

Maybe they needed to do this to subsidize the cost of free Internet!

I've agreed they could have handled it better but I don't agree that they should necessarily have waited until everyone got they're next magazine. Maybe change the recording, put in the the website, send out the emails through their list.

I think they should have pre-announced it at least. It's not like they haven't done that before. This was certainly done strangely.

I don't think the basic option of no minimum stay will go away but I suspect we haven't seen the last of changes that are in part intended to direct members to more structured stays and less phone calls and thus may reduce the availability of those shorter stays.

Still, it could be many many years before we see those changes, if at all.

 

[Inkmahm]

Luigi’s Girl

Good point

I was being generous, since I could not prove intent. The only problem with that is that the alternative is ignorance or incompetence.

I try to think the best of everyone until they prove otherwise.

bookwormde

My favorite new term learned in this thread is that they are "chowderheads." Still makes me giggle.

 

[Inkmahm]

The only differences for Marriott between resale and retail are the ability to trade for points and in some cases, the prevention of sales options and trade ins for sales on new retail purchases. They're rumored to be planning more, we shall see. They have ROFR on some properties, not on others. The 13 month reservation option is not tied to retail but is simply a matter of reserving concurrent or consecutive weeks. Apparently BG Platinum and Bronze levels went into effect today from what I'm hearing, yahoo. Can you imagine this thread if DVC did something like that.

I would't be an owner if DVC did something like that. I had no intention of EVER being a time share owner anywhere. I only bought DVC BECAUSE it was so different from the others.

 

[jdg345]

I'm also surprised they have done one reallocation over all these years. It seems like it would be necessary to do a tweek every year or two to keep things running smoothly. Also these smaller tweeks are less painful to the owners then one big change and gets them used to the change.

Personally I'm not adverse to min. stays of 2-3 days, but I don't think DVC can easily make that change due to how they have sold the property.

If they did have preferences for larger point owners (over all sub-contracts) it might encourage the add-ons that this new booking policy may discourage. What is a larger point owner? Maybe someone who can reserve a 2 bedroom for 2 weeks in Dream? 700pts? I'm not there!

I was thinking something tiered, like 500/1000/2500. What's the max amount of points per resort/total again? Does anyone know what the current average ownership total is?

 

[maminnie]

I have tried to stay out of this over the past few days but here I go.

If it is Disney's attempt to get members to stay for a week and on weekends then they should change the minimum purchase to a lot more points, they should be advising people to buy larger contracts, they certainly should discourage current members from buying smaller add-ons at different and new resorts, and they should minimize the use of the word FLEXIBILITY in their sales presentation.

As I have posted those of us with multiple contracts/multiple resorts (thank goodness I only have two to deal with) are now going to be at a distinct disadvantage. If I am booking a weeks stay with two contracts/resorts at the 11 month window, I will not be able to start booking the second half until 11 months from the second check-in date (this policy remains the same as before) but the BIG difference now is those dates for the second half of my trip could very well be locked up by those who are checking into that resort a few days before and for the entire week. This also holds true for the 7 month waitlist. I now can't get on the waitlist until 7 months from my second check-in date (as before) with again the big difference being that those with a check-in date sooner then mine can now get on the waitlist for the days of the second half of my trip before me. Guess where I am on the list for those days....very low. In my opinion those of us with multiple contracts/resorts are now going to face moving mid-week if we travel during busy travel periods. We quite possibly may not even get a reservation for the second half of our trip without immediately waitlisting at 11 months. I personally have not had this happen under the old policy.

I believe the new policy does not follow the terms of the contract for which we entered; a member cannot book at their home resort until 11 months and at another member's resort until 7 months. Check-in + 7 does not follow this rule. But of course there is likely a clause that says Disney can do what they want to "enhance" member's experiences!! Some members may be embracing this now as some Members Services reps have implied, but wait until everyone starts trying to book Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Years, Easter, etc.

I truly hope I am wrong and the new policy/system works wonderfully and "enhances" everyones experience but I wouldn't bet on it for those that unfortunately have to travel during busy times and those that have multiple contracts/resorts. Good luck to all of us.

Happy 4th to all!

maminnie

 

[alldiz]

Thank you. I am frankly surprised we've not seen more changes over time including a true minimum stay and reallocation. Also, I have wondered if DVC would ever join the ranks of formally giving retail buyers and/or higher point owners a formal preference or even limiting benefit for resale buyers. Obviously the internet was less of an issue at the time but my impression with the last reallocation was a similar response, esp from CAN members.

Honestly, I don't think DVC will do this. Disney has taken great pains for WDW to be a "different" and "special" destination. When you walk through those gates....EVERYONE is the same. No special fast pass for the rich....no extra money to do "special" things....etc. I think if they changed the "special" way that DVC works....ie, FLEXIBILITY....It would be a major mistake....and a very wrong direction to go in.....JMO.

I would't be an owner if DVC did something like that. I had no intention of EVER being a time share owner anywhere. I only bought DVC BECAUSE it was so different from the others.

Exactly.
Kerri

 

[maminnie]

I should have also added that those members with smaller contracts are going to potentially have problems too not just those of us with multiple contracts. How about all of the members who bought the 150 or 160 minimum with the intent of only travelling Sunday through Thursday night. Are those Sunday-Thursday night rooms really going to be available after all the members with enough points start booking the Friday or Saturday before for the entire week with one convenient phone call. Non-peak weeks probably, busy/peak vacation weeks, who knows??? I wouldn't bet on it.

The new policy I believe has created a lot of problems that the old system did not. As it has been stated over and over, EVERYONE had the option of making arrangements to call in day by day to secure reservations. The new system has caused unfairness to certain members simply by the nature of the type of vacation reservation they want to secure and when they want to secure it.

 

[jdg345]

I have tried to stay out of this over the past few days but here I go.

If it is Disney's attempt to get members to stay for a week and on weekends then they should change the minimum purchase to a lot more points, they should be advising people to buy larger contracts, they certainly should discourage current members from buying smaller add-ons at different and new resorts, and they should minimize the use of the word FLEXIBILITY in their sales presentation.

As I have posted those of us with multiple contracts/multiple resorts (thank goodness I only have two to deal with) are now going to be at a distinct disadvantage. If I am booking a weeks stay with two contracts/resorts at the 11 month window, I will not be able to start booking the second half until 11 months from the second check-in date (this policy remains the same as before) but the BIG difference now is those dates for the second half of my trip could very well be locked up by those who are checking into that resort a few days before and for the entire week. This also holds true for the 7 month waitlist. I now can't get on the waitlist until 7 months from my second check-in date (as before) with again the big difference being that those with a check-in date sooner then mine can now get on the waitlist for the days of the second half of my trip before me. Guess where I am on the list for those days....very low. In my opinion those of us with multiple contracts/resorts are now going to face moving mid-week if we travel during busy travel periods. We quite possibly may not even get a reservation for the second half of our trip without immediately waitlisting at 11 months. I personally have not had this happen under the old policy.

Couldn't you book 7 days at both, and then adjust 7 days later? Or do you not have enough points to do this?

I believe the new policy does not follow the terms of the contract for which we entered; a member cannot book at their home resort until 11 months and at another member's resort until 7 months. Check-in + 7 does not follow this rule. But of course there is likely a clause that says Disney can do what they want to "enhance" member's experiences!! Some members may be embracing this now as some Members Services reps have implied, but wait until everyone starts trying to book Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Years, Easter, etc.

I truly hope I am wrong and the new policy/system works wonderfully and "enhances" everyones experience but I wouldn't bet on it for those that unfortunately have to travel during busy times and those that have multiple contracts/resorts. Good luck to all of us.

Yup!

Happy 4th to all!

maminnie

And to you as well!

 

[jdg345]

Honestly, I don't think DVC will do this. Disney has taken great pains for WDW to be a "different" and "special" destination. When you walk through those gates....EVERYONE is the same. No special fast pass for the rich....no extra money to do "special" things....etc. I think if they changed the "special" way that DVC works....ie, FLEXIBILITY....It would be a major mistake....and a very wrong direction to go in.....JMO.


Exactly.
Kerri

Actually ... there is such a thing.