New policy for reservations based on check IN date

[jade1]

jade 1:

I believe you and I agree that owners of multiple contracts/resorts at the 11 month window could face difficulties getting the second half of their stay. But IMHO, all members deserve to be on equal footing at both the 11 month AND the 7 month window. No one member should have an advantage over another member simply by the day they check-in at EITHER booking window or by how many points they have so they can now "walk" away and have the points to do so.

The DBD system, although not perfect, did give all equal footing. Members should not have to now change their desired check in dates to try and beat out members or buy more points so they can "walk" a reservation or have enough to now book at one resort (versus two with two contracts) at the 11 month window for their whole stay as that is not the flexible "do it your way" reservation system which DVC so freely and aggressively sold and many of us bought.

With that said everyone have a great afternoon.

maminnie

Agreed, and if you check a few pages back-you will see where DVCBELLE shut me out of BWV SV Studio because she took 7 days arriving Saturday Feb 7, when I called to srrive Sun the 8th at 7 months-Tuesday the 10th was not available-so I should have called Saturday and walked I guess.

 

[waltfan1957]

This could also backfire...we had thought about doing an add on at BWV or BCV, but it would have been a small one to use every couple of years. I'm not liking this new policy and all the unknowns so we will not be doing that now.

we were looking at buying AKV wont be doing so now

 

[waltfan1957]

it's a pretty major assumption, imo. While I agree that there are cases of calling DBD when it wasn't necessary, we don't know that because people were successful with DBD there is a direct relationship to whether or not it was necessary. Regardless, if they wanted to call DBD, so what? They wanted to give themselves the best chance at their reservation for LOS. They went through the extra effort, and deserve it more than someone else who didn't [imo].

we considered it always neccesary especially after MS advised us to, what chance would we have had waiting till check out day when we wanted xmas day to 11/12/13/ Jan depending on flight home. we have done DBD for the last 5 years and always worked for us, we have no idea how we are going to have to book in Jan to get what we want but we dont believe we will get it.
so we totally agree with you

 

[Dean]

How do you figure that? How could it possibly be any different for a BCV or VWL owner today than 3 years ago for example? Its the exact same number of members, the exact same number of rooms, and the exact same number of nights in a year. There is no way you can possibly convince me that these owners are now having a tougher time at 11 months out than ever before. Its exactly the same identical factors now as before. They will now have a much tougher time to link a stay together with the new policy (I say impossible for NYE but we will see), because you cant call and say you want 3 nights at VWL and the following 4 nights at BCV, but to say it was getting worse under the old system is completely false IMO and has always worked the same for me-prefectly fine.

I don't really care if you are convinced or not. The truth is it's been more difficult to make reservations in general the last 2-3 years PERIOD including 7 & 11 months out, in large part due to the influx of the extra SSR points for those who intended to use them elsewhere more than the owners at the resorts you quoted. I believe the major factor was that made the 7 month window far more difficult which drove many owners who had been in the habit of reserving at 6-7 months out, back into the home resort window. That in turn affected other owners who moved earlier still. The end result is more owners competing at the 11 month window. Of course there are only so many units and you can't really go back beyond the 7 month window (other than ? walking issue) so it will stop there. This item likewise may convince even more to compete at 11 months out that still wouldn't have under the old system, we'll see.

Personally we have never had a problem DBD at BCV or VWL and thats at premier times.

This brings up two realities. One that a single experience doesn't mean a lot and two, that those that plan and put the effort forth will have a great shot at success. But the rules have changed in such a way to favor those that stay 7 days over those with shorter stays, an appropriate change in my book.

 

[Dean]

Members should not have to now change their desired check in dates to try and beat out members or buy more points so they can "walk" a reservation or have enough to now book at one resort (versus two with two contracts) at the 11 month window for their whole stay as that is not the flexible "do it your way" reservation system which DVC so freely and aggressively sold and many of us bought.

DVC sold the system in place at the time and anyone who purchased either knew, or should have known, that the system could change. Thus the idea that one bought making certain assumptions really means absolutely nothing in this discussion IMO.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

But the rules have changed in such a way to favor those that stay 7 days over those with shorter stays, an appropriate change in my book.

This is brought up repeatedly by you but I don't know if you've ever mentioned why 1 week is such a magic number for you? I have never understood the reasoning, especially in a timeshare system that was set up for length of stay flexibility.

DVC sold the system in place at the time and anyone who purchased either knew, or should have known, that the system could change. Thus the idea that one bought making certain assumptions really means absolutely nothing in this discussion IMO.

But on the other hand I don't think it was unreasonable to assume that the basis of the system of being able to book the type of vacation you wanted was potentially going to change - especially when it's been such a major sales point, the setup of sales (points) was based on it and people didn't seem to be dumping it in droves b/c it was different in that aspect from other timeshares.

 

[Dean]

This is brought up repeatedly by you but I don't know if you've ever mentioned why 1 week is such a magic number for you? I have never understood the reasoning, especially in a timeshare system that was set up for length of stay flexibility.

1 week isn't the only option of course but encouraging longer stays, esp full weeks stays, has many benefits and savings to the system. You might want to ask DVC why they chose 1 week but I'm sure they had a reasons and the options are relatively limited. I'm starting to think that for anyone who this change puts them in a position to actually question their ownership had no business owning in the first place.

But on the other hand I don't think it was unreasonable to assume that the basis of the system of being able to book the type of vacation you wanted was potentially going to change - especially when it's been such a major sales point, the setup of sales (points) was based on it and people didn't seem to be dumping it in droves b/c it was different in that aspect from other timeshares.

On that we disagree but I think saying that DVC is no longer flexible is quite a stretch, this is a minor change in the overall scheme of things.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

1 week isn't the only option of course but encouraging longer stays, esp full weeks stays, has many benefits and savings to the system. You might want to ask DVC why they chose 1 week but I'm sure they had a reasons and the options are relatively limited. I'm starting to think that for anyone who this change puts them in a position to actually question their ownership had no business owning in the first place.

It has sounded like DVC has responded that it was the avg length of stay - I was just curious why you were so tied to that number other than the fact that many timeshares were established with one week stays. I could think of a few reasons on why Disney wouldn't mind shorter stays - although that would benefit Disney Parks/merchandise more than DVC, but then I don't believe that they each operate completely in vacuum's seperate from each other either. As far as DVC is concerned, the longer one single guests stays in a room, the better I would think, and that is what they are encouraging.

On that we disagree but I think saying that DVC is no longer flexible is quite a stretch, this is a minor change in the overall scheme of things.

I think you read more into my statement b/c I did not say that DVC is no longer flexible. Until such time that they designate certain lengths of stays (and from everything you state, that is what we should all assume will happen or at the very least, we shouldn't not expect it to happen) it is still flexibile, but it does now favor 7 days stays over others, and that is not how they have marketed it, or even operated it, until now.

 

[jdg345]

It has sounded like DVC has responded that it was the avg length of stay - I was just curious why you were so tied to that number other than the fact that many timeshares were established with one week stays. I could think of a few reasons on why Disney wouldn't mind shorter stays - although that would benefit Disney Parks/merchandise more than DVC, but then I don't believe that they each operate completely in vacuum's seperate from each other either. As far as DVC is concerned, the longer one single guests stays in a room, the better I would think, and that is what they are encouraging.



I think you read more into my statement b/c I did not say that DVC is no longer flexible. Until such time that they designate certain lengths of stays (and from everything you state, that is what we should all assume will happen or at the very least, we shouldn't not expect it to happen) it is still flexibile, but it does now favor 7 days stays over others, and that is not how they have marketed it, or even operated it, until now.

To be clear, it seems it favors 7 day stays that start on a certain day. IOW: Those that try to book Sunday to Sunday are likely going to have a tougher time than those trying to book Friday to Friday, imo. It'll be interesting when the Thanksgiving window opens and Thansgiving week is completely booked a week or more beforehand.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

To be clear, it seems it favors 7 day stays that start on a certain day. IOW: Those that try to book Sunday to Sunday are likely going to have a tougher time than those trying to book Friday to Friday, imo. It'll be interesting when the Thanksgiving window opens and Thansgiving week is completely booked a week or more beforehand.

Yes, I agree that certain check in days will have an even better opportunity over others.

 

[jdg345]

Yes, I agree that certain check in days will have an even better opportunity over others.

We need a 'walking' emoticon!

 

[Disney Kim]

I haven't been able to keep up with this thread..

At first I was unhappy about this change, But I'm going to hope for the best and give disney the benefit of the doubt that it works in everyones favor!

I love my DVC still!!!

 

[maminnie]

I think you read more into my statement b/c I did not say that DVC is no longer flexible. Until such time that they designate certain lengths of stays (and from everything you state, that is what we should all assume will happen or at the very least, we shouldn't not expect it to happen) it is still flexibile, but it does now favor 7 days stays over others, and that is not how they have marketed it, or even operated it, until now.

Kate4Disney:

Thank you for your well stated posts.

It is also my husband's and my opinion that Disney marketed, sold, and operated based on maximum flexibility no matter what one's ownership interest. The new system clearly gives advantages to those that stay 7+ days and have larger contracts. Ones check-in day may now dictate reservation success or failure at both the 11 and 7 month windows.

I think it is important for members to remember that Disney chose not to be a timeshare company that made a person arrive on a certain day or a certain week of the year or stay for a set amount of days and I and many other members chose not to buy that type of timeshare and bought Disney. So should it be a surprise to anyone on the boards or at DVC why some members whose travel plans may now be effected are concerned and upset?

maminnie

 

[jade1]

The truth is it's been more difficult to make reservations in general the last 2-3 years PERIOD including 7 & 11 months out, in large part due to the influx of the extra SSR points for those who intended to use them elsewhere more than the owners at the resorts you quoted.

I could not agree more for 7 months, but not 11. Oh yea...PERIOD.

 

[keishashadow]

We need a 'walking' emoticon!

Proud DVC Walker , not sure the fairy will be doling out that 'lil gem

back from lovely vacation, including DLH , missed most of this simmering mess , who is running the store?

reminds me of situation we ran into @ DL during Fantasmic. We were in the 2nd roped off section over a half-hour before the last show...all that was lefta standing section.

After Fantasmic started elderly gent in front of me sat down on the cement. He was approached by CMs who insisted he rise. Problem was, he didn't speak English. More CMs summoned, one who spoke the gent's language. He was told to stand, refused & was hustled away.

I asked the CM who appeared to be senior rep "why". She said she didn't know...but, would find out. She radioed in to "somebody" and relayed that it was because a person sitting takes up 3 places while a standing one only takes 1. A moot point when the CMs were prohibiting ANYBODY from ducking under the rope to join the standees a good 10 minutes before the show . We could have all sat & still enjoyed our own version of personal space.

I understand that the rules are the rules, preferably when they're honestly explained, posted & enforced consistently. Problem here is ala the day-by-day booking...unless it is specifically prohibited...all bets are off.

jmho, day-by-day booking is a commando (proud Disneyphile tradition ) way of increasing your odds of obtaining your DVC accommodations of choice; 'walking' toes the line . Glad i have a month to decide if im going to strap on my Nikes & sprint

 

[Dean]

I could not agree more for 7 months, but not 11. Oh yea...PERIOD.

Then this change would not affect you at all if there are no problems at the 11 month window.

 

[jarestel]

How do you figure that? How could it possibly be any different for a BCV or VWL owner today than 3 years ago for example? Its the exact same number of members, the exact same number of rooms, and the exact same number of nights in a year. There is no way you can possibly convince me that these owners are now having a tougher time at 11 months out than ever before. Its exactly the same identical factors now as before.

Actually there is one component in your argument that does change and that's the total number of owners. For high-demand resorts (VWL,BCV,BWV) small point add-ons do actually increase the number of owners over time. They are not fixed unlike the other components are (rooms, total points, total nights) so you do have more owners competing for the same number of rooms at 11 months.

 

[TenThousandVolts]

Actually there is one component in your argument that does change and that's the total number of owners. For high-demand resorts (VWL,BCV,BWV) small point add-ons do actually increase the number of owners over time. They are not fixed unlike the other components are (rooms, total points, total nights) so you do have more owners competing for the same number of rooms at 11 months.

There is a fixed number of points and if it is sold out resort- the number doesn't change. I am not sure I follow your point.

 

[dvcdisney]

I think I've lost touch of what's happening in this thread. I just wanted to say again, that although I don't believe this new policy would significantly affect me (I hope) in terms of getting the reservations that I want (since I try not to go at peak times), I am still not in favour of it.

However, that although reserving at Day 1 is an option and is NOT REQUIRED, I do feel compelled to do so at this point. I usually do my reservation with one or two calls for my summer vacation and a somewhat of a DBD for my Spring vacation. However, now I feel I need call at exactly 11 mths to check in day or else I will be out of luck. I do also feel that I will inevitable feel anxious, yes more anxious than when I called DBD, because there is a great chance that a member calling before me (whether their "walking" or not) will have priority over me. Now, although I don't want to "walk", I don't see a problem with it since DVC has provided a reason and thus some (or a lot) of members feel that they have no choice.

I will resign in saying that, although it is still in the "new" stage, I will see how my next few planning works out. I don't think we have much choice. Some of us have voiced our concerns with MS and have gotten a lot of call backs. I do like the idea that they have said that they will monitor any type of system abuse and will act accordingly. In the meantime, I think it'll be a mess. And whether they revert to the old system or make further adjustments to this new policy is at this point up in the air. Hopefully, they will do what they have to do in order that members are satisfied with the outcome.

As I mentioned again, I do not book for peak seasons, but I am against it since it does not provide equal footing for ALL members, personal experiences and circumstance aside. Again, I believe everyone has to deal with their own circumstances, it should not have any bearing on how the policy is implemented.

I emphathize with those who were not able to call DBD because of other priorities, but we all have circumstances that we deal with. I don't believe it would be correct for me to request that MS change their hours later because I have to take my children to school or go to work etc. We do what we can and we all set priorities. I don't believe anyone assumes that DVC takes priority over going to work on time (no matter how obsessed any of us are with Disney). That would be just ridiculous.

I bring this up because that's what MS said they did. They made changes because of members who complained that it was not fair that other members were able to call DBD and which created "holes" in their reservation. What MS should have done, imo, is to give them their options (book somewhere else, move etc) and leave it at that. I had called for my Oct vacation and I had to waitlist because a few days were not available. I didn't get upset with MS for allowing DBD, but instead, I told myself that if this was what I wanted then I'd call DBD (as they suggested) and if I couldn't get it, I would have no choice by to find alternative resorts. But at least I knew that all inventory was available to me each day.

Anyways, I will wait until the next few booking to see if the system worked for the "good" of members as a whole. But that doesn't mean that I'm fine with it. I just think that a lot of people have provided emails and had numerous discussions with MS to try to alleviate the potential for problems and I think our concerns have been noted and hopefully, they will come up with a great (or at least sufficient) solution.

I think it would be great if everyone posted their experiences with the new system for the next year or two, just so if we have to complain again, we will have a MUCH better understanding of the issues.

 

[jarestel]

There is a fixed number of points and if it is sold out resort- the number doesn't change. I am not sure I follow your point.

The point is the number of owners are not fixed at a given resort. (total number of points is fixed, but the number of people owning those points does change) Two common examples:

Member A buys a 150 pt BCV contract and a 75 pt BCV add-on from Disney while BCV is the currently selling resort. After some time and for whatever reasons, Member A decides they no longer want these contracts and offer them for sale on the resale market. There is no guarantee, and in fact is quite unlikely, that the same buyer will purchase both of these contracts. So New Member B buys the 150 pt contract and New Member C buys the 75 pt contract. Now, the exact same number of points as when Member A owned them, now belongs to two different owners. Ownership at BCV has effectively increased from this sale.

The second common scenario is when DVC acquires points through the ROFR process. Again, using BCV as the resort example, DVC acquires Member A's 150 pt contract through ROFR. Checking their BCV points waiting list, they find that SSR owners Member B, Member C, and Member D are all waiting for 50 point add-ons at BCV. Again, that original 150 points that was previously owned by a single member now belongs to 3 others who may now compete for reservations at the 11-month window.