New policy for reservations based on check IN date

[Starr W.]

Squirrlgirl and Starr W......better get those flame suits on!! I've never taken mine off. I love the feel of diflection!

Wonder if I can get one of those AFLAC firesuits! Love the duck.

Coming in on Fri/Sat is how we roll.

It's pretty common in the T/S world. Though my ski week is a Sunday check in. My new purchase is a Friday.

 

[CarolMN]

Do rule changes such as this one have to be filed with the county/state and mailed to the members? Or does this not work anything like a condo assocation would?

As someone that firmly believes that a person that started their vacation 3 days before me has more right to an inventoried room than I do, I feel the new rules righted a problem. For someone else to move in the middle of their vacation because I had a faster finger seems wrong. For them to move in the middle of their vacation, possibly making someone else move in the middle of their vacation, which made someone else move in the middle of their vacation, which made someone else stay at SSR in the middle of their vacation just seems completely wrong. Makes much more sense to let everyone have their vacation, and the person at SSR can be happy and enjoy it (like me ) or waitlist for another resort. Think of all the mousekeeping being used when people resort jump due to room-sniping!

I also really think that the number of rooms in inventory will not change due to the booking change . The same number of people will find availability in the same number of rooms. And Jane Jumpingbean, who for the past 3 years booked DBD to get her special room and STILL ended up missing a night might not have to move on day 5 of her holiday reservation for once.

I disagree with you.

Keep in mind that we are not talking about a "vacation". We are talking about a stay in a very small number of specific room types during a very limited time of the year.

With the exception of New Year's Eve night, I do not believe there is any resort that fills completely during the first week the 11 month window opens. Under the old method, anyone who books at the 11 month window can get their complete vacation 99% of the time. Thus the new method just gives the high demand units to those who start their vacation first. Why do they have more of a right to the high demand units than members who prefer shorter stays?

Let's use BWV as an example. Why does the person whose stay starts 3 days earlier than yours have more of a a right to an early December stay in the SV or BW view category? If not moving in the middle of a vacation is important to me, I can simply book a PV villa. No problem! If the SV or BW view is more important, then I can call and take my chances, waitlisting if necessary.

How about the ded 2B w 2Q at the BCV? If I only want to make one call and if knowing I don't have to move is paramount, I can just book either a ded 2B with the sleep sofa, or a lock off 2B. No problem! If the 2Q is more important, than I can call, take my chances and waitlist if need be.

For those who wonder, I think the AKV concierge units arn't even relevant to this discussion. There are so few of them that they are/will be a problem no matter how they are booked. IMHO, DVC should have a lottery for them, similar to the "Special Seasons" process used in the past for Christmas - New Year's. But it should only be for AKV owners (SS process did not take home resort into account. All owners were treated equally. Thus an OKW owner could get NYE at BWV if OKW owner's name were drawn first).

DVC should not be making rules that favor one members' personal situation over another's. The system itself should be neutral. The new one isn't. And it will not stand as is without additional restrictions, because without additional restrictions, the new method will not stop DBD calling for the high demand units.

P.S. Anyone who disagrees with speculative rentals should be HATING this change. Makes it very easy for those folks to book multiple high demand weeks.

 

[waltfan1957]

P.S. Anyone who disagrees with speculative rentals should be HATING this change. Makes it very easy for those folks to book multiple high demand weeks.

this is great for them 10 phone calls, ten units on e-bay 9 dvc owners frozen out then the calls to MS will really start to be fun

 

[bookwormde]

Jarestel

Inequity mean that 1 member will consistently have a statistical preference for getting the same room/date based on the structural rules of the booking system over another member.

2 members want a reservation in the same Friday-to-Friday period. One wants 7 days starting on Friday; one wants 5 days starting on Sunday. The 7-day reservation member will have first chance to book the 5 days that the 2nd member wants. Pretty basic, if there are not enough rooms available who gets the days?

The only inequity in the old system was the home resort advantage and the ability to call at 9:00 am.

bookwormde

 

[simzac]

With the exception of New Year's Eve night, I do not believe there is any resort that fills completely during the first week the 11 month window opens.

If you truly believe this, then why would there be a problem with the new system, seems like according to you if they call during the first week at the 11 month window, they should be able to get what they want.

 

[jarestel]

Inequity mean that 1 member will consistently have a statistical preference for getting the same room/date based on the structural rules of the booking system over another member.

2 members want a reservation in the same Friday-to-Friday period. One wants 7 days starting on Friday; one wants 5 days starting on Sunday. The 7-day reservation member will have first chance to book the 5 days that the 2nd member wants. Pretty basic, if there are not enough rooms available who gets the days?

I agree this is pretty basic and first come-first served is how most of the "real" world operates. Don't see how it could be acceptable in most every instance except for DVC reservations. Again, I understand that self-interest motivates most of these arguments so I don't expect to change any minds.

 

[Dean]

Star W, Simzac, Squirrlygirl

No argument here, if you believe one group of members should be given preference over another then the change is OK.

I do think DVC should be “honest” about it and publicly recognize the inequity and change the POS and sales presentations to match, if that was their intent.

bookwormde

Actual reservation policies are not part of the legal documents so there is no need to change the filed papers. The legal documents give them the right to change the rules within what's stated in the legal documents (11/7 window, etc) whenever they want. They can even change the legal documents up to a point without input. DVC has never adhered to the notification requirements even when they would technically apply. Past AND future sales discussions have no bearing on the legal document but I'm sure you can expect a slightly change going forward though I don't think they'll be explaining the concern that's expressed in this thread.

 

[bookwormde]

Jarestel

If DVC were fully first come first serve I would be making my reservations for 2012.

There are rules with all things. For those 5-day members the new rules limit who can “ first come”.

One of my ideas was to use 11+7 check out day basis to allow booking to eliminate this preference.

Not trying to change minds, just trying to inform about the technical impacts.

bookwormde

 

[Dean]

Jarestel

Inequity mean that 1 member will consistently have a statistical preference for getting the same room/date based on the structural rules of the booking system over another member.

2 members want a reservation in the same Friday-to-Friday period. One wants 7 days starting on Friday; one wants 5 days starting on Sunday. The 7-day reservation member will have first chance to book the 5 days that the 2nd member wants. Pretty basic, if there are not enough rooms available who gets the days?

In this exact example the 7 day person should get priority IMO but I understand this is the heart of the matter for many. In the old situation they both got part of the days or one (possibly both) had to make alternative plans. The only difference now is you make one phone call and get it all or (at least for now) several and "walk" the reservation. What most have failed to acknowledge is if there is a loser now under this system there was at least as many losers (likely more) under the old system. The only question is who it is and I do feel one reserving a full 7 days should have priority over one for 5. I think you can expect 2 changes. One, not to be able to add on until 11 months out unless you do a new reservation and two, not to be able to drop from the beginning of the reservation. It'll take a few months for them to see what's going on, talk about it, make decisions then implement them. IF there are no changes, that means they didn't see enough issues to warrant worrying about it. Again I say, for anyone who this bothers, please NEVER look at other timeshares systems with the intend of buying as your heart won't be able to stand it.

 

[maminnie]

I disagree with you.

Keep in mind that we are not talking about a "vacation". We are talking about a stay in a very small number of specific room types during a very limited time of the year.

With the exception of New Year's Eve night, I do not believe there is any resort that fills completely during the first week the 11 month window opens. Under the old method, anyone who books at the 11 month window can get their complete vacation 99% of the time. Thus the new method just gives the high demand units to those who start their vacation first. Why do they have more of a right to the high demand units than members who prefer shorter stays?

Let's use BWV as an example. Why does the person whose stay starts 3 days earlier than yours have more of a a right to an early December stay in the SV or BW view category? If not moving in the middle of a vacation is important to me, I can simply book a PV villa. No problem! If the SV or BW view is more important, then I can call and take my chances, waitlisting if necessary.

How about the ded 2B w 2Q at the BCV? If I only want to make one call and if knowing I don't have to move is paramount, I can just book either a ded 2B with the sleep sofa, or a lock off 2B. No problem! If the 2Q is more important, than I can call, take my chances and waitlist if need be.

For those who wonder, I think the AKV concierge units arn't even relevant to this discussion. There are so few of them that they are/will be a problem no matter how they are booked. IMHO, DVC should have a lottery for them, similar to the "Special Seasons" process used in the past for Christmas - New Year's. But it should only be for AKV owners (SS process did not take home resort into account. All owners were treated equally. Thus an OKW owner could get NYE at BWV if OKW owner's name were drawn first).

DVC should not be making rules that favor one members' personal situation over another's. The system itself should be neutral. The new one isn't. And it will not stand as is without additional restrictions, because without additional restrictions, the new method will not stop DBD calling for the high demand units.

P.S. Anyone who disagrees with speculative rentals should be HATING this change. Makes it very easy for those folks to book multiple high demand weeks.

CarolMN:

Your point about speculative rentals is so true. How easy it is for them now. They just take all their points and book check-in +7 for all those peak weeks with one very convenient and easy phone call. Could DVC have made it any easier for them? They don't even have to call day by day anymore!

 

[jdg345]

I disagree with you.

Keep in mind that we are not talking about a "vacation". We are talking about a stay in a very small number of specific room types during a very limited time of the year.

With the exception of New Year's Eve night, I do not believe there is any resort that fills completely during the first week the 11 month window opens. Under the old method, anyone who books at the 11 month window can get their complete vacation 99% of the time. Thus the new method just gives the high demand units to those who start their vacation first. Why do they have more of a right to the high demand units than members who prefer shorter stays?

Let's use BWV as an example. Why does the person whose stay starts 3 days earlier than yours have more of a a right to an early December stay in the SV or BW view category? If not moving in the middle of a vacation is important to me, I can simply book a PV villa. No problem! If the SV or BW view is more important, then I can call and take my chances, waitlisting if necessary.

How about the ded 2B w 2Q at the BCV? If I only want to make one call and if knowing I don't have to move is paramount, I can just book either a ded 2B with the sleep sofa, or a lock off 2B. No problem! If the 2Q is more important, than I can call, take my chances and waitlist if need be.

Exactly! No one forced those people to move; it was their choice. They could have booked something else. How many people actually move when they have a hole in the middle versus just changing their whole stay? The waitlists eventually work out for the most part as those with the smaller share usually give way. For example, if I just have one day in the middle, I'm likely going to give that up and just book contiguous. That releases someone's waitlist who is waiting for that one day. If I *really* want to stay there bad enough, I'll move. Why should I complain about something that is my choice?

For those who wonder, I think the AKV concierge units arn't even relevant to this discussion. There are so few of them that they are/will be a problem no matter how they are booked. IMHO, DVC should have a lottery for them, similar to the "Special Seasons" process used in the past for Christmas - New Year's. But it should only be for AKV owners (SS process did not take home resort into account. All owners were treated equally. Thus an OKW owner could get NYE at BWV if OKW owner's name were drawn first).

I agree that they aren't relevant to the discussion, but I'm not sure I agree with the lottery scenario. Of course, I think all things should be considered here as these rooms seem to be in high demand all year around.

DVC should not be making rules that favor one members' personal situation over another's. The system itself should be neutral. The new one isn't. And it will not stand as is without additional restrictions, because without additional restrictions, the new method will not stop DBD calling for the high demand units.

EXACTLY! As another poster said, the other SYSTEM was more fair even if someone's PERSONAL situation was not. With a personal situation, you have a choice to remedy it (or not). With the changes to the system, you have no choice at all.

P.S. Anyone who disagrees with speculative rentals should be HATING this change. Makes it very easy for those folks to book multiple high demand weeks.

And I have said this many many many many [etc] times in this thread. How easy is it going to be to lock up Christmas to NYE for these folks with a couple few thousand points? The good news is that most people wanting to stay during this period will now be able to book online! They'll just be doing so via eBay instead of Member Services.

 

[jdg345]

this is great for them 10 phone calls, ten units on e-bay 9 dvc owners frozen out then the calls to MS will really start to be fun

They don't need to make 10 phone calls ... just one.

 

[jdg345]

If you truly believe this, then why would there be a problem with the new system, seems like according to you if they call during the first week at the 11 month window, they should be able to get what they want.

The PP said they could get a room, not necessarily exactly the accomodations they wanted. I'm pretty sure that if you take "anything, anywhere", you can get what you want at 11 months just about all of the time.

 

[bookwormde]

Dean

“In this exact example the 7 day person should get priority…”


Yes this is the basis most of the members who are posting are expressing for being in favor of the new preferences.

bookwormde

 

[simzac]

The PP said they could get a room, not necessarily exactly the accomodations they wanted. I'm pretty sure that if you take "anything, anywhere", you can get what you want at 11 months just about all of the time.

But there was no guarantee with the old system that you would get exactly what you wanted.

 

[waltfan1957]

They don't need to make 10 phone calls ... just one.

worse than i thought, still at least i know how to best use my points now thanks

 

[Mahusky]

subscribing to this thread... looks too fun to miss.

 

[jarestel]

One of my ideas was to use 11+7 check out day basis to allow booking to eliminate this preference.

I would support changes if the system truly doesn't work as planned. But for the VAST majority of DVC members, the new system should work just fine. Most don't book high-demand units or high demand periods, so we are only discussing possibly impacting a relatively small number of members anyway.

I suspect the folks who, under the old system, found it difficult and awkward to book a full stay in high-demand units or during high-demand periods are the very ones who provided all of the "feedback" to MS providing the basis for which this new system was supposedly justified. So in a way, the increasing number of members looking to book the hard-to-get times/units probably forced this change upon themselves. Ironic.

 

[waltfan1957]

I suspect the folks who, under the old system, found it difficult and awkward to book a full stay in high-demand units or during high-demand periods are the very ones who provided all of the "feedback" to MS providing the basis for which this new system was supposedly justified. So in a way, the increasing number of members looking to book the hard-to-get times/units probably forced this change upon themselves. Ironic.

no one ever asked us if we were unhappy with the old system we have always had to do DBD(xmas through NY HC room) so i think your latest comment has no basis

 

[CarolMN]

If you truly believe this, then why would there be a problem with the new system, seems like according to you if they call during the first week at the 11 month window, they should be able to get what they want.

The PP said they could get a room, not necessarily exactly the accomodations they wanted. I'm pretty sure that if you take "anything, anywhere", you can get what you want at 11 months just about all of the time.

But there was no guarantee with the old system that you would get exactly what you wanted.

Dean

“In this exact example the 7 day person should get priority…”


Yes this is the basis most of the members who are posting are expressing for being in favor of the new preferences.

bookwormde

My point is that we are "fighting" over who gets the high demand specialty units, not who gets their first choice of room size & dates.

Under either method, anyone who books at the 11 month window can get their first choice of room size and vacation dates. No moving required. The resorts just don't sell out during the first week of the booking window (except possibly for NYE night).

Under either method, 11 month bookers may NOT get the "specialty units" which are very limited in number (such as SV or BW view at BWV, or the 2B w 2Q at BCV). Note that there are no specialty units at OKW, SSR, VWL. IMHO, those who own at those resorts have no reason to worry. Not sure about the situation at VB or HHI.

My value is that every one of those specialty units should go on a first come, first served basis. Every owner should have the same opportunity to book those units. If it's a choice to have a "hole" in the reservation, why should someone get priority over someone else? The system should not give priority to some members over others for specialty units. If DVC wants to favor some members over others, they should have sold "specialty" points!

Above is JMHO. OK with me if others disagree. Just want to make sure we are all talking about the same thing - some seem to be panicking when the change won't even affect them.