New policy for reservations based on check IN date

[jdg345]

Then that is a flaw in the reservations system that DVC should address and it seems it would be easy to fix - but I don't know much about how their programming works so I could be wrong...

It has always existed; it's just that it will likely be exacerbated by the 'Full Period Waitlist' rule that went into effect. One could say the new reservation policy is flawed as well ... in fact, since in the last few pages we've been discussing what can be done to stop walking, it all but confirms that the new system cannot stand on its own.

I guess letters to DVC asking them how they plan to address these specific problems would be the best course of action for those who are really concerned about this.

Please let me know how this works out for you ... I haven't had much luck.

 

[Doctor P]

Not if the policy is that you may not modify in the first 10 days...this stops the walking but allows people to cancel nights later on in their reservations if they need to.

I guess I think that the people who read this board are a minority of DVC members and most members will never even think about walking their points...

Unfortunately, it does not take many people walking their points to game the system for others. When you consider the size of BCV and HH, or the small number of GV's or BWV accomodations, a handful of members is all it will take to unfairly game the system for others. I think you underestimate the creativity and/or general dishonesty people will use to get what they want.

Not modifying in the first 10 days does not solve the problem of people merely adding nights to get the ones they want. We have that a tourist resorts in our area for high demand periods like Labor Day and 4th of July. Most resorts have adopted a policy that you can add days to either side of a reservation, but you cannot subtract days on the front side of a reservation without cancelling (to avoid people booking a couple weeks ahead of a holiday weekend period and then cancelling the early days leaving them with the holiday reservation they wanted and got early by calling earlier than their intended check-in day).

 

[jdg345]

Unfortunately, it does not take many people walking their points to game the system for others. When you consider the size of BCV and HH, or the small number of GV's or BWV accomodations, a handful of members is all it will take to unfairly game the system for others. I think you underestimate the creativity and/or general dishonesty people will use to get what they want.

Not modifying in the first 10 days does not solve the problem of people merely adding nights to get the ones they want. We have that a tourist resorts in our area for high demand periods like Labor Day and 4th of July. Most resorts have adopted a policy that you can add days to either side of a reservation, but you cannot subtract days on the front side of a reservation without cancelling (to avoid people booking a couple weeks ahead of a holiday weekend period and then cancelling the early days leaving them with the holiday reservation they wanted and got early by calling earlier than their intended check-in day).

Exactly what the new system allows for which did not exist with DBD as with DBD, there was no need for that.

It just seems to me that the new policy needs more and more rules and regulations so that it can be less flawed that DBD was. IMO, it made more sense to leave well enough alone.

I maintain: If they want to reduce call volumes, implement online booking. That would solve the DBD calling demand. Adding online monitoring of WL's would be a good start, as well.

 

[jpolak]

Exactly what the new system allows for which did not exist with DBD as with DBD, there was no need for that.

It just seems to me that the new policy needs more and more rules and regulations so that it can be less flawed that DBD was. IMO, it made more sense to leave well enough alone.
I maintain: If they want to reduce call volumes, implement online booking. That would solve the DBD calling demand. Adding online monitoring of WL's would be a good start, as well.

Agree

 

[jade1]

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

I thought that as well-maybe because it is at 7 months and not 11. Someone can still check if they want-but it was not available first thing today and was yesterday.

This was an arrival on Sunday, so there is likely some folks planning to call day by day tomorrow (7 months out from check out) not on these boards that are going to be a little steamed they didnt know about this, and now the first thing you here is the new "enhancement" rules when you call. . Too bad we wont hear about it.

 

[jar]

Agreed. They should just keep it the way it was. It is tiring to hear people applying terms like "gaming the system" or "general dishonesty" when others are just trying to make a DBD-type reservation under the new system and thus be on equal footing for the same nights as those who arrive a few days earlier. Arriving earlier simply should not entitle anyone to a room for a later night over anyone else with the same home resort.

 

[DVCBELLE]

It has always existed; it's just that it will likely be exacerbated by the 'Full Period Waitlist' rule that went into effect. One could say the new reservation policy is flawed as well ... in fact, since in the last few pages we've been discussing what can be done to stop walking, it all but confirms that the new system cannot stand on its own.



Please let me know how this works out for you ... I haven't had much luck.

I can see the frustrations of the system with the holidays but it doesn't really affect me

Is this a problem you see with the 11 month booking window as well? or is it just at the 7 month window...

I guess the old Buy where you want to stay might mean more in the future now...

 

[dvcdisney]

(I'm not sure if this has already been brought up) Just wondering, if all DVC wanted to do is to cut down on the calls, why didn't they just put a restriction on the number of DBD calls. For example, each memberhip number can call DBD only once a year for the length of their vacation. So once you do this, whether you do it for 2 or 14 days, that is it for the entire year. This is easy for the system to keep track of. Once the member does it, they will be informed (hopefully) that they will not be able to book this way again for the rest of their UY.

This way, you will keep your DBD booking for the reservation that you feel requires this type of booking. You, as a member, have complete control of when you can use it.

What do you think?

Just curious. I posted this a long way back on this thread. And I'm not sure if anyone has commented on this.

Any comments?

 

[Dean]

But DBD did not work this way ... the consensus seems to be that many people DBD's because they thought they needed to, and continue to do so. It doesn't seem like they wanted to risk not getting their reservation, so they did not 'stop' doing it.

The difference is they likely did need to do that under the old system while it is likely not needed under the new system.

Not necessarily, not if someone calling in and grabs the room before the WL check runs ... and since many are going to be looking for periods and not just single days, it makes it even tougher.

Certainly any days freed up should to to the waitlist first but the question would be how they handle it if there's no exact match. If some can get days that should have gone to the WL that is a problem that should be corrected but doesn't impact the validity of the new system any more than it did the old one.

 

[waltfan1957]

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.

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.

with you having at least $45000 worth of points/weeks in other timeshares, what you would do personally really has no bearing to poster you replied to as you have many more options for your vacation. how would you feel if she followed your advice and then could'nt get a reservation

 

[Dean]

Just curious. I posted this a long way back on this thread. And I'm not sure if anyone has commented on this.

Any comments?

No way to do so, not reasonable given that MS does other things besides just reservations at 11 months out and likely something that would create many other complaints. Their stated goal was to reduce phone calls and the need for DBD bookings both.

 

[Dean]

with you having at least $45000 worth of points/weeks in other timeshares, what you would do personally really has no bearing to poster you replied to as you have many more options for your vacation. how would you feel if she followed your advice and then could'nt get a reservation

My options for DVC are the same. They could go out and buy whatever they wanted for other options if they wanted. My point was I could have complained but rather invested in the system to give myself the best options knowing full well the rule could change and make that portion of the reason for the investment (but not the investment itself) no longer of value. Remember that I've always said that there were benefits to having more DVC points as well and that was OK even though I'm no longer in the group with a lot of points. EVERYONE has a lot of other options, the feasibility or affordability for a given person has no bearing, IMO. I've also said that some won't get their reservation and that is life.

 

[disneydisneydoo]

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.

I think walking carries greater risk of errors by MS, such as accidental cancellations of the entire ressie. So, for me personally, I would probably first try to change my arrival dates - arriving on a Friday or Saturday going forward instead of Sunday. If that didn't work then yes I probably would try to walk. But, that being said, I really believe we will most likely see changes that eliminate the ability to walk a reservation.

I am going to give it some time and see how it all plays out. I truly expect the membership will meet my needs going forward, but at the point it doesn't, I'll sell.

 

[waltfan1957]

Not if the policy is that you may not modify in the first 10 days...this stops the walking but allows people to cancel nights later on in their reservations if they need to.

I guess I think that the people who read this board are a minority of DVC members and most members will never even think about walking their points...

If DVC told members to book DBD whats to say they wont tell them how to walk a ressie

 

[waltfan1957]

My options for DVC are the same. They could go out and buy whatever they wanted for other options if they wanted. My point was I could have complained but rather invested in the system to give myself the best options knowing full well the rule could change and make that portion of the reason for the investment (but not the investment itself) no longer of value. Remember that I've always said that there were benefits to having more DVC points as well and that was OK even though I'm no longer in the group with a lot of points. EVERYONE has a lot of other options, the feasibility or affordability for a given person has no bearing, IMO. I've also said that some won't get their reservation and that is life.

did'nt answer the question

 

[Dean]

did'nt answer the question

How would I feel, sad if they didn't get what they wanted and happy if they did. Would I feel responsible, absolutely not, which I assume is your not actually asked question. My post was what I would do, everyone has to decide their own course. But even if it had been a rec of what they should do it wouldn't change anything. If anyone makes major decision simply based on the rec. of a single member of this BBS they are a fool no matter who it is. As I've said, emotions have no place in governing policy decisions, we'd all be a lot better off if the government would learn that instead of trying to cater to small groups.

 

[jdg345]

I can see the frustrations of the system with the holidays but it doesn't really affect me

Is this a problem you see with the 11 month booking window as well? or is it just at the 7 month window...

I guess the old Buy where you want to stay might mean more in the future now...

I think it's more of an issue at the 7 month window for 'general times', and definitely an issue at the 11 month window for 'prime times'.

The issue with 'Buy where you want to stay' is exactly what has some people upset. They specifically purchased add-on contracts at BWV, VWL, BCV, etc so that they could stay there. But they only bought enough points for Sun - Thurs, because that's what they wanted. Now someone walking a reservation from the Friday before hand can very well lock them out.

 

[jdg345]

Just curious. I posted this a long way back on this thread. And I'm not sure if anyone has commented on this.

Any comments?

I don't think DVC could put such a restriction in place. There's really nothing that stops me from calling to check on my WL 42 times a day if I want to. Not sure why they'd not want me to book and book ... as many have said, DVC only cares that there are people in the rooms.

 

[jdg345]

The difference is they likely did need to do that under the old system while it is likely not needed under the new system.

But if the issue is truly of one of supply and demand, then why will they not need to do that under the new system? If the days are locked out, do you think people will just book elsewhere? Or WL and then call 'tomorrow' over and over? If they needed to DBD before to get days, why wouldn't they need to DBD now to get those same days? Albeit, a week in advance?

Certainly any days freed up should to to the waitlist first but the question would be how they handle it if there's no exact match. If some can get days that should have gone to the WL that is a problem that should be corrected but doesn't impact the validity of the new system any more than it did the old one.

I agree to a point that it doesn't impact the validity of the new reservation system; however, it certainly impacts the validity of the new waitlist system. And, frankly, if the new reservation system was put into place to reduce call volumes, the WL changes could increase them. So we're back to a situation where we could be talking more call volume than we had before!

 

[jdg345]

No way to do so, not reasonable given that MS does other things besides just reservations at 11 months out and likely something that would create many other complaints. Their stated goal was to reduce phone calls and the need for DBD bookings both.

Was it both? Or was it just to reduce phone calls?