New policy for reservations based on check IN date

[jarestel]

You can't possibly think those points are irrelevant right now......

On the contarary, I think they are very relevant to the reasoning behind the change in booking procedures. If the reservation in question is one that would have been booked DBD previously, then in this instance the new system achieved it's stated goals of reducing calls to MS and streamlining the booking process. What is irrelevant, IMO, is whether or not anyone believes the reservation in question was one of those that actually required DBD.

 

[jarestel]

I'm just tired of reading these same discussions over and over again. The horse died quite a few pages ago!

And yet here you are all saddled and ready to ride... I suppose quitting isn't as easy as it looks, eh? LOL!

 

[pilferk]

On the contarary, I think they are very relevant to the reasoning behind the change in booking procedures. If the reservation in question is one that would have been booked DBD previously, then in this instance the new system achieved it's stated goals of reducing calls to MS and streamlining the booking process. What is irrelevant, IMO, is whether or not anyone believes the reservation in question was one of those that actually required DBD.

Ah...so your perspective is if the system is best for Disney, it's the best system. That the ULTIMATE goal for the new system should be to reduce call volume, regardless of it's effect on the membership and it's ability to use it's points as fairly, as effectively, and as efficiently as possible. You seem to think the SYSTEM should be the method, rather than the onus being on the membership to know when something (DBD calling, for example) is necessary or not.

Fair enough.

I look at it as the system should be as fair as possible to the membership, even if that means an overall increase in costs (and thus, my dues). Since obviously my perspective is as a member....that's the system objective I concern myself mostly with.

I don't think we'll likely bridge that disconnect.

Of course, the point of the discussion you were commenting on (and, really, even the specific comment I responed to if you go back and read it) wasn't anything to do with reducing call volume, or whether the system was accomplishing THAT goal. As you pointed out, it likely did. I don't think that half....the half in Disney's best interest...has been as hotly debated.

It was on whether or not the system would work for the MEMBER in securing the MEMBERS desired access to inventory, which also needs to be one of the goals of the system. In that respect, the anecdotal example used to show that it would isn't a good one, since the suspicion is the changes will really have the most marked impact during busier times of the year and on extremely limited, short supply inventory (like AKV concierge rooms). Combine that with the fact that relatively few members know about the new system, and the point made (rather than the one you jumped to in this more recent comment) still remains.

Whether the system turns out to be a bane or boon to members is still up for debate. We likley won't know the full effect until December/January when we can really get an accurate gauge of what "busy times" turn into. As you can see above, we've had our first "anecdotal casualty" to go along with our first "anecdotal success".

Even seeing the inherent flaws, I'm willing to keep a somewhat open mind....I've expressed my concerns and displeasure already, because of my perception of how the system now works, or can be worked. We'll see if perception becomes reality or not.....

 

[Inkmahm]

No, Tuesday the 10th was not available, even though it obviously was yesterday when you reserved it a day ahead of me.


So because you called yesterday and reserved for 7 days, I could not get a Std View Studio at BWV for my desired 7 days. DBD I would have had an even chance. Exactly what many are trying to point out.

Agreed. The system wasn't fair to you, you didn't have an equal chance. And here we have our first known example of the new system causing a problem where you might not have had one under the old system. (You might still have not gotten the days you wanted...)

 

[LisaS]

No, Tuesday the 10th was not available, even though it obviously was yesterday when you reserved it a day ahead of me.

It's interesting that the night that was not available is a Tuesday night.

 

[jdg345]

First off, hope everyone had a good 4th...



You know, the more I think about this, the less this comment and others like it make sense. The overriding theme is that "people arriving before me will have the advantage over me". You use the example that folks arriving Friday or Saturday will have an advantage. Why? Won't folks arriving on Thursday have an "advantage" over them and so on? However, that is not really what has me thinking.

Here is my question. Let's suppose person A books 10 nights arriving on a Friday (Day 1) and leaving on a Monday (Day 11). This room CANNOT be booked by anyone at 11 months before on the Friday or Saturday (Days 8 or 9). The first time that this room will be available to be booked will be 11 months from that Monday, so the Monday person will HAVE THE ADVANTAGE in booking over the Friday or Saturday booking person in cases such as this, because this room is not in inventory for them to book.

Your logic only holds water if all checkouts are on Friday or Saturday and I am fairly sure that is just not the case. On our September 07 trip, for instance, we checked out on a Wednesday. So I don't think that the system decides who gets a room and who doesn't. It would be interesting to see what the distribution of checkout days are...

I believe the OP is referring to cases where members may book the Friday/Saturday that they don't need in order to be able to lock up the Sunday to Thursday stay. Those that have just enough points to book Sunday to Thursday may be at a disadvantage here.

So, basically, even though all of these people really want to arrive Sunday, some will be booking ahead of time and dropping the days to get a jump on the people waiting for their arrival date.

And yes, some people can then book on Thursday to get a jump on the Friday/Saturday bookers, and some people can book earlier, etc. Your post raises one of the issues with the new system and the walking of reservations in order to get your "foot in the door" during a non busy time and walking forward into a peak time.

You also mention that 10-11 day stay. How many people do you think are going to be able to book NYE with Christmas right before it? Those that wanted to arrive on NYE or the Day Before are now likely going to be completely out of luck -- unless, of course, they book their vacations via eBay.

 

[jdg345]

Which is what most will book, if they have enough points to "walk" the reservation. This is why this change will benefit me, but I still dont like it. I can start my ressie on a high point night because I have the points to do so. I can then book for a week and start adding on Day by Day. Once I have what I want, cancel what I dont need, keep what I do.

So while others are planning to stay at AllStars or Universal for those High Point Weekends, I'll be working the system with all my points Ex. An SSR 1 bedroom is 68 points over Christmas/NYE weekends. Put 2 of those together and you just shook a whole lot of folks off your desired stay at peak times.

There will only be crumbs left after all the cancellations have shook out.

Everything you thought you knew about booking, has completely changed. The slate has been wiped clean and as they say at H&R Block, "past performance is not an indicator of future performance"

All this is hypothetical of course

Exactly!

The same will occur with Thanksgiving Week.

And for those that think the WL is going to 'save them', they might want to think again. The WL checks are not automatic and they run at intervals as a batch process. What does this mean? Basically, it means that:

Person-A wants 12/23, and WL for it.
Person-B cancels their 12/23 Stay.
Person-C calls in to book 12/23.

If the WL check did not run between Person-B and person-C calling, guess who gets 12/23? Hint: It's not Person-A, even though they may have been waitlisting for weeks.

There was a case just recently in another thread where someone called in to check on availability for a day they were WL for. The room was available so they booked the room and cancelled their WL. Where they next on the list? Maybe ... maybe not.

Yet another reason why the WL change is only going to INCREASE call volumes to MS.

 

[jdg345]

But do you start walking the reservation the Friday/Saturday before your intended Sunday arrival, or do you start walking a week before - two weeks before? I believe there are plenty who can probably walk if needed, but where do you start - especially for the high demand times.

This is one of the biggest issues ... how soon is soon enough to be able to guarantee your stay. I've said it in this thread already: It's possible to begin booking Christmas 2009 right now. This is an issue that did not exist with the old DBD system as everyone had access to the same inventory at 9am. That is no longer the case.

I don't intend to walk my reservation. I think I will make out fine without doing that for the times I travel. I also think it does seem like more work than DbD to do that and even if not, it seems like the potential for a possible mistake on MS part that could cancel the whole reservation is more likely than with DbD. At peak times, I wouldn't want to risk that possibility.

And this is fine, it's up to you. Let me ask: If you try to book this vacation and don't get it because it's booked solid ... will you walk it next time around?

While you may not intend to walk, many do, and if there are enough of them, it can create a situation where the room you want is sold out at 8:55am before Member Services even opens.

 

[jdg345]

People have been suggesting that as long as you call before the 11 months mark of the end of your stay then your room should be available for you to continue on your stay. I do think that this reasoning is probably correct so once you have your reservation started you should be able to call just another 4 times (maybe it'll be 5?) to finish out your stay - assuming MS lets you add on days up to 7 out from the day you are calling. ie, you can call April 5th and add on 7 days, then April 12th and add on again.

According to the MST, the unit itself is not locked down; this would require you to book on Day-2 for Day-8. Waiting until Day-6 or 7 to add a day allows the potential for others to get in front of you via a WL trigger. It should almost always work, but there is the possibility that it will not.

But I do feel for you and and other's because you and they bought under a particular system and now that has been changed and it could possibly be difficult to get the reservation started if you bought with a particular room category in mind.

Me too.

However - can I be jealous and have no sympathy about your staying 5 weeks! Lucky you and I hope that it will work out ok.

Do you have any extra room for me?

 

[pilferk]

This is one of the biggest issues ... how soon is soon enough to be able to guarantee your stay. I've said it in this thread already: It's possible to begin booking Christmas 2009 right now. This is an issue that did not exist with the old DBD system as everyone had access to the same inventory at 9am. That is no longer the case.



And this is fine, it's up to you. Let me ask: If you try to book this vacation and don't get it because it's booked solid ... will you walk it next time around?

While you may not intend to walk, many do, and if there are enough of them, it can create a situation where the room you want is sold out at 8:55am before Member Services even opens.

Exactly. Even if you prefer NOT to have to walk, because you don't find it...I don't know...."within the spirit of the game"...if enough people do it, you'll either have to do it, or risk not getting what you want. Which means eventually the culture will shift from DBD booking, to ressie walking....it's the potential nature of the beast. Heck, if people DON'T walk en masse, but members find they're not getting the ressie they want and SUSPECT there's walking going on, locking them out...that PERCEPTION alone could create the culture.

Now, it might not happen. That's doomsday thinking, to be sure. But it COULD. And I think that's an issue, at least, that needs to be addressed.

I certainly prefer the prospect of DBD booking to the potential "culture of walking", personally. Guess we'll have to wait and see, eh?

 

[jdg345]

Form earlier in the thread, but I never got an answer. I asked: So how do I book our next vacation? I have 112 points left in 2009.

5 days at AKV (Sun-Thu) in a 1br at 22points each is 110 points and bank the final 2 points. It sounds easy enough. I just call 11 months out and request 5 nights at 22points each. Under the old system, I could call DBD and feel confident that I would get the room that I wanted.

But, under the new system, in order to give myself the best possible chance of getting the room that I want, I could call and reserve the Fri -Sat that I don't want plus the Sun that I do want in one call and use 110 points. That's 44 points a night for Fri-Sat and 22 points for the Sunday night. Total of 110 points. Of course, I don't plan on keeping the Fri-Sat nights. A couple of days later, I then call and cancel the Friday and then add the Mon-Tues.

I'm thinking that walking the reservation is the best way to ensure that I will get the room when I want it. If I wait until Sunday to call, then I run the risk of being shut out of my room at 11 months out at my home resort. Is there something wrong with the logic that I am using here? Can anyone tell me? Thx.

That sounds correct ... you could even start with something like this:
Day-1: Book Thu-Sat
Day-2: Book Fri-Sun, Cancel Thu
Day-3: Book Sat-Tue, Cancel Fri
Day-4: Book Sun-Thu, Cancel Sat

You might need to Cancel First to free up the points you need to extend.

 

[Dean]

Form earlier in the thread, but I never got an answer. I asked: So how do I book our next vacation? I have 112 points left in 2009.

5 days at AKV (Sun-Thu) in a 1br at 22points each is 110 points and bank the final 2 points. It sounds easy enough. I just call 11 months out and request 5 nights at 22points each. Under the old system, I could call DBD and feel confident that I would get the room that I wanted.

But, under the new system, in order to give myself the best possible chance of getting the room that I want, I could call and reserve the Fri -Sat that I don't want plus the Sun that I do want in one call and use 110 points. That's 44 points a night for Fri-Sat and 22 points for the Sunday night. Total of 110 points. Of course, I don't plan on keeping the Fri-Sat nights. A couple of days later, I then call and cancel the Friday and then add the Mon-Tues.

I'm thinking that walking the reservation is the best way to ensure that I will get the room when I want it. If I wait until Sunday to call, then I run the risk of being shut out of my room at 11 months out at my home resort. Is there something wrong with the logic that I am using here? Can anyone tell me? Thx.

Personally I'd just wait until 11 months from your first day. For non Concierge, I doubt it'll be an issue and even if it is, the chances of a match on the wait list are dramatically high.

On the contrary....it's just all we have to go on right now.

And since I think most people agree the change likely will effect busier times of the year a lot more (and certainly more noticeable), I think it's certainly prudent to take a "wait and see" approach.

It's not about spin, it's about reality. In REALITY, right now, there are two big hurdles to overcome with "anecdotal" success (which is tenuous anyway): the fact the 7 month window is for typically slow period, right now...and the 11 month window isn't for a particularly busy time right now, either. Also the system is so new that MUCH of the membership isn't aware of it and is operating under the "old" guidlines (but should quickly be told during their initial call to MS about the change).

You can't possibly think those points are irrelevant right now......

We're not "poo pooing" the success. But it's just not as compelling as, say, someone having the same success for an early December date would be.

We certainly should look at the overall success that people have or don't have to evaluate how this system might work for us though not necessarily as to it's "fairness". Just like the 7 month availability over the years, individual posts about success or lack of or even off time in general will really mean nothing, you've got to look at the overall.

 

[jdg345]

I'm not sure of other busy times, I bought DVC in Apr. SSR , I had no problem hooking up my Feb. (including Pres. week) in May. That was in between 9-10 months out, I got just what I wanted, I Also called back in June and switched from 2 bedrooms to 2 studios....No problem!
In May I also hooked up the coveted 1st week of Dec. again no problem, at the 7 month date I switched and got 2 studios @BWV for part of my vacation.
I'm not sure how other high demand times will be or if you own at one of the smaller resorts. I think if you call @ 11 & 7 months out you will get what you need.......somewhere!
You would think that people "walking" their reservation would cancel the day they don't need as they call in DBD to extend their reservation. This would make the days they don't need available almost immediately. I'm new to the DVC. I don't see where the big problem is. I hooked up both Pres. week and the 1st week of Dec. well inside 11 months with no problems.
Will it cause problems at different resorts? Maybe....No one knows yet! I'm just basing this on my limited personal experience......No problem!

It does make the day available immediately, but it does not necessarily mean it will go to the first person on the waitlist ... which is another issue with the system.

 

[pilferk]

We certainly should look at the overall success that people have or don't have to evaluate how this system might work for us though not necessarily as to it's "fairness". Just like the 7 month availability over the years, individual posts about success or lack of or even off time in general will really mean nothing, you've got to look at the overall.

I actually agree with you, with the emphasis being on "overall".

That's sorta my point (and it sound sorta like yours, too): One overall anecdote, especially from a time period that, traditionally, isn't all that busy anyway, just doesn't seem very compelling.

Now, we get a few dozen of them, every month, all the way through December and Janaury...THAT will be a bit more compelling, even though it's "tainted source" anecdotal data. Because it will show if the system is functioning roughly the same way the DBD system functioned for the membership. I think you can only truly gauge that during times when DBD was actually somewhat needed.

And you're right: None of those anecodtes are going to speak toward fairness, just overall functionallity. But I think there is a point where the two almost equate: The system can be set up so that it appears unfair (for all the reasons pointed out here) but functions to the point where the "unfairness" (again, speaking to the points brought up here) doesn't ever become noticeable to the membership. I think that's the best case scenario, here, with this system in place.

 

[Dean]

I believe the OP is referring to cases where members may book the Friday/Saturday that they don't need in order to be able to lock up the Sunday to Thursday stay. Those that have just enough points to book Sunday to Thursday may be at a disadvantage here.

So, basically, even though all of these people really want to arrive Sunday, some will be booking ahead of time and dropping the days to get a jump on the people waiting for their arrival date.

And yes, some people can then book on Thursday to get a jump on the Friday/Saturday bookers, and some people can book earlier, etc. Your post raises one of the issues with the new system and the walking of reservations in order to get your "foot in the door" during a non busy time and walking forward into a peak time.

You also mention that 10-11 day stay. How many people do you think are going to be able to book NYE with Christmas right before it? Those that wanted to arrive on NYE or the Day Before are now likely going to be completely out of luck -- unless, of course, they book their vacations via eBay.

Making each change a cancellation and rebooking or adding a modest fee makes this a non issue. And yes, if you have other reasons to change, it's still fair for everyone.

It does make the day available immediately, but it does not necessarily mean it will go to the first person on the waitlist ... which is another issue with the system.

I don't think we know exactly how the wait list is going to be adjudicated. It wasn't necessarily first come under the old system but rather the first person that their wait list was filled completely by the availability. If you were day by day, you would get if it first on the list for that resort and unit type but if you were looking for several days in a row, they would skip you. Given you're taking away the option to WL day by day (other than when you only need one day), the chances of filling a WL for several days will be higher. But the question I have is whether they'll still only fill things that the availability will fill completely or if they'll piece together the days as they come available. Either is OK, I simply don't know for certain how they're going to handle it. It will either be the first person looking for that day or the first person that the availability fills their WL totally, my guess is the latter given their past methods.

 

[Dean]

I actually agree with you, with the emphasis being on "overall".

That's sorta my point (and it sound sorta like yours, too): One overall anecdote, especially from a time period that, traditionally, isn't all that busy anyway, just doesn't seem very compelling.

Now, we get a few dozen of them, every month, all the way through December and Janaury...THAT will be a bit more compelling, even though it's "tainted source" anecdotal data. Because it will show if the system is functioning roughly the same way the DBD system functioned for the membership. I think you can only truly gauge that during times when DBD was actually somewhat needed.

And you're right: None of those anecodtes are going to speak toward fairness, just overall functionallity. But I think there is a point where the two almost equate: The system can be set up so that it appears unfair (for all the reasons pointed out here) but functions to the point where the "unfairness" (again, speaking to the points brought up here) doesn't ever become noticeable to the membership. I think that's the best case scenario, here, with this system in place.

I suspect we're very close from opposite ends. Obviously we'd define fairness differently, I wouldn't likely even use it unless one were outside the actual rules in some way. I've always been amazed how people would post "I got X at the 7 mo window" trying to say essentially you could get anything anytime because of their success, where X was either a lower demand resort or a lower demand time. Certainly the scope of the high demand has increased in the last couple of years and is likely getting close to 4-6 months of the year due in large part to SSR points flooding the system. Basically any and every system will work during the low demand situations for everyone. And likewise any and every system will leave good people who did everything they knew to do on the outside looking in. Those are givens to me and every system has to find the best balance between what's good for the members as a whole and what's good for the system. This change is about elements of both both served by cutting down on DBD calls. Some don't think the current change will do that, I know it will but not completely. Exceedingly few people are going to start days to weeks earlier and essentially call DBD and drop/add. And if they do enough to be noticable, DVC will figure out some way to put a stop to that as they should.

 

[pilferk]

Making each change a cancellation and rebooking or adding a modest fee makes this a non issue. And yes, if you have other reasons to change, it's still fair for everyone.

My ONLY issue is with this is with "long stays" and ADDING to an existing reservation.

It is NOT fair to tell someone who wants to stay 14 days that they have to book, cancel, and rebook, to get their stay...or to make them book 2 separate reservations in, potentially, 2 rooms. You're now really effecting the flexibility of the points system in terms of using your points for stays of varying lengths. I don't think it's "fair" to penalize those folks (and, for the record, I'm NOT one of them!).

Now, if you make the rule that only CANCELING a day on a reservation (begining, middle, or end) requires cancellation of the entire ressie and rebook....I'm right there with you. But not "any change"....

 

[jdg345]

I reserved a studio....

I am checking out on the 13th - the day BEFORE President's weekend really starts. Did they tell you which days the standards weren't available for - it is probably that weekend and they were booked before the 7 month window opened.

I knew b/c it was a slower time that it probably increased my odds of getting the standard. I have never been able to get the standard in the past even during slower periods.

NOW - one thing I think changes for me in this booking policy is that unless I REALLY REALLY wanted a certain resort, I didn't usually book until my check out day. This time I called to make my reservation on my check-in day instead of my check-out day. But I feel as long as everyone has the same rules as me, they don't have an unfair disadvantage.

I think if walking becomes a HUGE problem they will see it and address the issue. It seems like a fairly easy issue to address. Such as - reservations be modified within one week of booking will be completely canceled and rebooked.

But then you can't add days if you stay longer than a week ... that hurts another group of people. Maybe add, but not drop?

That's fine ... those with large enough point pools won't care about that, and those are likely the ones to walk anyways.

 

[pilferk]

I suspect we're very close from opposite ends. Obviously we'd define fairness differently, I wouldn't likely even use it unless one were outside the actual rules in some way. I've always been amazed how people would post "I got X at the 7 mo window" trying to say essentially you could get anything anytime because of their success, where X was either a lower demand resort or a lower demand time. Certainly the scope of the high demand has increased in the last couple of years and is likely getting close to 4-6 months of the year due in large part to SSR points flooding the system. Basically any and every system will work during the low demand situations for everyone. And likewise any and every system will leave good people who did everything they knew to do on the outside looking in. Those are givens to me and every system has to find the best balance between what's good for the members as a whole and what's good for the system. This change is about elements of both both served by cutting down on DBD calls. Some don't think the current change will do that, I know it will but not completely. Exceedingly few people are going to start days to weeks earlier and essentially call DBD and drop/add. And if they do enough to be noticable, DVC will figure out some way to put a stop to that as they should.

On the "definition of fairness", I agree. I spoke to that in a previous post to another poster. You seem to define "fairness" in a useage of the system point of view. I define it in a membership availability point of view. I doubt we'll ever bridge that disconnect.

My point on the change is I think the elements of DISNEY being served by the change are a heck of a lot more than the elements of the membership. I suppose that goes without saying, in some respects, but the system DOES need to serve both masters, and serve them well....because ultimately NOT serving the membership WILL cost more in Disney resources. It remains to be seen whether the system will "fail" the membership or not....we'll see.

On your perception of how wide spread walking will be....I have my doubts. I think that, at first, you're probably right. Very few will do it. But if it has a noticeable effect (and by that, I don't mean noticeable by Disney..I mean by a segment of the membership), or if it's PERCEIVED to have an effect by certain segments of the membership (and you can see that playing out right here), then it will become more and more wide spread. People will feel they have to do it to "compete". Disney, IMHO, would do well to nip it in the bud BEFORE that happens, rather than taking a wait and see approach.

 

[pilferk]

But then you can't add days if you stay longer than a week ... that hurts another group of people. Maybe add, but not drop?

That's fine ... those with large enough point pools won't care about that, and those are likely the ones to walk anyways.

But if you make the rule that CANCELING any part of the ressie means a cancel and rebook...they can't "walk". They start from scratch each day, anyway.

And they're not just going to add to the end, but never cancel from the front. Or, rather, if they do.....who cares? They're using their points...they just need to have someone check in for them. Whether they OCCUPY the room or not, their points are "functionally" out of the system for other times of year.

Now, that brings up the whole "Make a long ressie and rent out the first half" debate...but maybe that's for another thread?