New policy for reservations based on check IN date

[Goofy's apprentice]

Yikes ! Against my better judgement...I'll jump in.

Regarding changing the rules compared to what we bought in at....

Although we purchased with good advance research, and have good friends who have owned since the early days, the fact that booking was from day of departure vs day of arrival did not impact my purchase decision in the slightest. In fact, I thought it was quite strange... I can't believe that the majority of those purchasing did so because the booking was based on day of departure ! Now, home resort availability is another question....time will tell if the changes will result in 11 month bookings not being successful. I can't believe that this will be widespread.

Regarding booking changes over the years....

We own at SSR and stay there in spring but like BWV for Food and Wine. I was one of those owners that used my points to get on waitlists for every resort at the 7 months and then chose once something filled for the week and cancelled all the rest. That was clearly taking advantage. They changed the rules to auto confirm and I was worried that I would never see BWV again. But they changed the rules for everyone (because that is fair) and I continue to get the reservations I want by just setting one waitlist and taking what comes. Can it be that those new rules actually made my reservation activities simpler? They did and I was all set to hate them when they were instituted.

Amusing to see the SSR owner bashing make a cameo return again !

We own at SSR and stayed away in the early times because of all the negative posts on these boards. One vacation we decided to try it and amazingly enough we love it !! Still stay at other resorts but look forward to our home whenever we return.

Is the new policy fair?

To me fair means that the rules are available to everyone and everyone must abide by them. No special rules. I do agree that the old system provided a more level playing field. It will really depend on DVC monitoring abuse. As per my previous paragraph, I used to hold reservations I didn't want (and then realized I didn't need). When they changed the waitlist rules they stopped me. Regardless, the waitlist has continued to work for me. I think for the majority of owners, this new change will have similar results. DVC should monitor the specific times in which there will be difficult and deal accordingly.

What about the old lottery system for Christmas reservations?
Was that considered fair?

What about commercial renters?
I assume that many of the recent changes are meant to discourage commercial rental activity as it seems to be a focus lately. There are some posts that think that they will benefit from the change. I would think that the effort of 'walking' may frustrate some of them?


Basically, yes I do believe at peak times, for rooms in short supply, there will be some difficulties. I don't think this change will mean widespread grief or widespread selling of points. I do think that owners need to voice their opinions. If you believe that the new policy resulted in you not obtaining a reservation that previously was always available, you should definitely let your voice be heard. We'll have to see.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

Regarding changing the rules compared to what we bought in at....

Although we purchased with good advance research, and have good friends who have owned since the early days, the fact that booking was from day of departure vs day of arrival did not impact my purchase decision in the slightest.

To clarify....when ever I post about booking rules having played a part it means about day by day booking. I think that did factor in to small point add on's and into purchases at smaller resorts in order to have the best chance to get a particular reservation. To me, booking from day of check out vs. day of check in has essentially no difference. Under either system there were already people that could hold reservations by the time your reserved.

 

[jdg345]

DVC instituted charges for towel packs and extra supplies simply related to cost and an abuse of a relative minority, that is fact. My reference to parking was that most people don't valet and that most resort destinations such as WDW charge for parking in general, not necessarily a prediction of what will come, it may or may not. It certainly would be an easy target for revenue if they so chose. Still the main point was that for each and every situation that has cost involved, the system must make an active decision whether to distribute that cost to all owners or just those that use it. Usually this is made based on the significance of the cost vs the number that use a given option. If it's a high cost item with relatively little volume discounts and only a small percent take advantage, the system would be nuts to distribute that cost to everyone. Here's an example. There are resorts that include free golf. Obviously not everyone golf's but often everyone pays. Some of the resorts I know at HH pay upward of $400 per week extra for this option where for some lessor demand areas like Williamsburg, the costs are dramatically less.

I'm not disagreeing or arguing here, I just don't recall the issue. What was the abuse?

We've already established that individual circumstances should not affect the decision, I'd include number of points and financial abilities in that arena. I've also already stated that it is my opinion that if having more points gives you more options, the that is OK, obviously you disagree and that is fine.

But isn't individual circumstances of those that did not want to call DBD what effected this change? At least partially?

 

[Goofy's apprentice]

KAT4DISNEY - I understand the day-by-day advantage. We bought with the understanding that flexibility was important and we didn't have to book a full week. Although I don't see this as the first step to requiring full week bookings, I would consider that a major change from "what I bought in for'. Certainly, as some have said, DVC is identifying 7 days or less as the norm/average. That is somewhat dangerous as we know policy makers make and publicize their decision as to what the 'norm' wants or what will benefit the 'norm'.

 

[jdg345]

150. October. Just not for a couple months as I am starting a new business. Then we will buy 150 BCV to beef up the old 7 day ressie power and start walkin, split stays will not work for premier weeks anymore.

Ahhh ... but with 150, can't you walk a 1BR if you borrow?

We're looking to add a few 50 point contracts at VWL; pretty happy with what we have at BCV currently.

I might need to beef up at BWV though so I can get those NYE stays everyone speaks so highly about.

 

[jdg345]

Too funny!!!

 

[Starr W.]

I might need to beef up at BWV though so I can get those NYE stays everyone speaks so highly about.

 

[Doctor P]

I hope this is a desperate joke. All I can say is if reservations start with this type of a walk or gallop, then I truly hope Member Services disconnects the 800 number. I know we are only paying a certain percentage, but if people are going to abuse the system with a Gallop, then it needs to cost them (flame suit on) I am not for the new system, I think it is unfair, I stated so pages ago. This new system had to be put into place by Disney management that did not have a clue as to the abuse that can take place. I have my favorite time and place to stay, it is a hard sought after time and location, I am not happy with this new system... I have booked a new reservation under it for a regular stay at a regular time, it was very nice and easy to do so. I think for the normal times and locations this new system will work fine, it is for the Peak season or Concierge (all year) where the problem lies.

It's not a desperate joke given the stupidity with which this change was undertaken. I am only deciding how many months in advance I will start walking next year's Xmas/New Year's reservation. I actually considered starting to walk for Xmas 2009 this week, but think that I will probably do it just a couple of months in advance. I think that they have created a system where this is essential since our vacations are very limited in terms of the start dates and are almost always at the Xmas holidays. We will see how this plays out.

 

[Dean]

I'm not disagreeing or arguing here, I just don't recall the issue. What was the abuse?

The case that I heard that illustrated the issue was a lady who called and asked for 12 of each (soaps, shampoo, etc) and when someone showed up with them she said thanks, these are for Xmas presents for XYZ. Obviously there had to be more than just that going on to make a change, a change that I frankly disagree with, as IMO, there are legit reasons to need a few extra towels, esp for a studio. But it's DVC BBQ, they hold the cards.

But isn't individual circumstances of those that did not want to call DBD what effected this change? At least partially?

Certainly the system should consider the wants/needs of it's members as well as the system's needs and arrive at a happy medium. It's essentially averaging the issues. And it might need to change or adjust in response to changing needs or simply change things that are not working as well or even to reduce costs to the system or to encourage sales in some situations. But to take the personal situation of a group or individual and hold it up as a sacred block to any change is not appropriate. I was the first to say of the old system that if you couldn't book DBD that was a personal issue. The old system worked for many, not for others, the new system will do the same and it will not always be exactly the same group. That is essentially what each and every change will do, affect some more than others and those that it affects negatively (or those that think it affects them) will not be happy and will jump up and down. Those that favor the old OR the new version should all make their thoughts known to DVC.

IMO, there is essentially no chance the system will be reversed to DBD and any chance of the new system staying the way it is now was erased about page 2 of this thread. I see the choices to fix the concerns within the framework of the new system as pretty limited. They could limit the number of times you could make such a reservation (maybe one a year per master contract), make each change a cancellation and rebooking, simply refuse to allow drops and add ons until the actual 7/11 month window opens, lottery's and special season preference lists. They could be a little more radical and make it 7 days or nothing with no changes under this options or some type of formal minimum stay, possibly requiring a Fri or Sat night to make the 11+7 reservations. I'm sure there are many variations we could come up with. Given the setup and past history, making each change a cancelation and rebooking seems to make the most sense. It's stops walking, it potentially fills the waitlist first and it minimizes phone calls. It doesn't address the concern some have about having more trouble getting reservations that are less than 7 days and reduces but does not eliminate the issue of your chances being tied to which day you start. But it also alters the landscape for those that truly need to make changes later that would then likely lose a hard to reserve option.

Personally I can't think of a single approach that would have satisfied the need to allow reservations on one phone call, decreased phone calls overall, preserved the same availability as was found under DBD and did not give priority to a length of stay while also preserving the essence of what most people feel DVC is all about. I can't even think of a given system that would have made this group happy other than leaving it the way it was.

 

[jade1]

Ahhh ... but with 150, can't you walk a 1BR if you borrow?

NO, the only issue I really have with the new system is "Premier" weeks (and I include Thanksgiving even though I never go then-I have a thing for teachers and families with kids). I actually think it is fine for the other 49 weeks out of the year.

NY week 2009 1BR at BCV will require 350 points (so no 150 plus 150 borrowed is not enough). We need a 2BR wich will require 462 points. I have no intention in using all of our points for 1 week every 3 years. I do however intend to have enough BCV points to reserve this week (walking or not) by selling VWL and adding on BCV.

 

[Maistre Gracey]

It's not a desperate joke given the stupidity with which this change was undertaken. I am only deciding how many months in advance I will start walking next year's Xmas/New Year's reservation. I actually considered starting to walk for Xmas 2009 this week, but think that I will probably do it just a couple of months in advance. I think that they have created a system where this is essential since our vacations are very limited in terms of the start dates and are almost always at the Xmas holidays. We will see how this plays out.

Yup, I'm going to walk my "must have" dates early as well.
Sorry if some don't like it, but they set up this new system.. all we're doing is living within the rules they set up.

MG

 

[Kathi OD]

Huh??
The old system was perfectly fair. As others have stated, certain people may have to get up earlier in the morning, or get someone to cover their shift at work so they can make the phone call, but the SYSTEM itself gave exactly equal opportunity to every Member to book a ressie.

The new system can not say that. That is not an opinion..

MG

I'm sorry, but having to get someone to cover your shift so you can call early enough to get a ressie is absolutely insane. Besides, not everyone has that option.

The new system might not be "fair," but the old one wasn't either.

 

[Maistre Gracey]

I'm sorry, but having to get someone to cover your shift so you can call early enough to get a ressie is absolutely insane. Besides, not everyone has that option.

The new system might not be "fair," but the old one wasn't either.

The old SYSTEM was completely fair. All rooms were open for booking to every Member on day one.
That's not the case with the new system.

Old system, or new system, you will want to call first thing in the AM... That's a wash.
The only difference is with the new system some days may already be gone. This is especially true for specialy rooms such as beach cottages, or AKV concierge.

MG

 

[Kathi OD]

I just don't think it takes a rocket scientist to understand the old DBD method.
In addition, perhaps it's fair enough for your booking patterns, but not other Members.
A beach cootage, where there's only 6, may be difficult. Same can be said about AKV concierge with only 5 2br villas.

MG

The problem with DBD is that not every member knows about DBD booking. It's not something that is well publicized outside of websites like this one.

 

[Deb & Bill]

I'm sorry, but having to get someone to cover your shift so you can call early enough to get a ressie is absolutely insane. Besides, not everyone has that option.

The new system might not be "fair," but the old one wasn't either.

I don't think you understand. There is a big difference in 30-60 minutes ahead of me and 24-144 hours ahead of me. And if it was really worth it to me, I'd find a way to make that call when MS opened at 11 months out.

Now, unless I want to walk that reservation (and someone might still beat me because they call at 9AM and I call at 11AM), could be I'm out of luck with getting my hard to get reservation because it was totally booked six days ago.

 

[Maistre Gracey]

The problem with DBD is that not every member knows about DBD booking. It's not something that is well publicized outside of websites like this one.

Maybe, maybe not..
I actually learned about DBD from my mailman. He does not visit this site, or other similar sites.

MG

 

[dzorn]

Yup, I'm going to walk my "must have" dates early as well.
Sorry if some don't like it, but they set up this new system.. all we're doing is living within the rules they set up.

MG

I cannot ever see us walking a reservation (alas not enough points) , but if it allowed in the rules then have at it. I am more concerned with their possible solution of the problem. With making reservation 11 months out sometimes plans have to change because of travel arrangement are not firm. I would hate to see a total cancel and rebook becoming the norm. I also think days cancelled (but needed for someones waitlist) should be put into a 7-10 day hold account before release to rebooking to allow those with wait list to be filled first before someone calling in for a new reservation. This would also help wait list get filled for those cancelling days that they walked but did not want.

Denise in MI

 

[dzorn]

The problem with DBD is that not every member knows about DBD booking. It's not something that is well publicized outside of websites like this one.

Someones failure to do research should not ruin it for the ones that do.

Denise in MI

 

[abeyst]

The problem with DBD is that not every member knows about DBD booking. It's not something that is well publicized outside of websites like this one.

I actually learned about DBD booking from MS when making a reservation....

I think a lot more people know about DBD booking from MS than from any web site like this one.

 

[Bopsmom]

I am concerned about "walking" reservations too; from the standpoint that I have read this thread and think, "Wow, it looks like a lot of people plan to do this(walking) to get prime times and locations". I wonder what sort of restrictions will MS place on us to stop the practice before it becomes a "tool" for speculative renters? Might the restrictions like no alterations to a reservation or a cancel/rebook harm more owners in the long run who have real reasons to alter their reservation?

IMHO, I think that "walking", while not against the rules(yet), is dishonest in nature. It may be Pollyanna of me to feel this way, but it all seems so "un-Disney-like". If someone is making a reservation for days they know they have no intention of using then that is dishonest. DBD seemed more above board since you knew or intend to stay at that resort for that specific day/night that you were calling to reserve.

I would be fine if MS placed a limit on the number of times you alter your reservation to protect those people who don't have enough points to walk or to keep others from walking for weeks.
No flame intended:
My