"New" Rule Great

[kimberh]

How are the owner/renters getting all the rooms and the owners not getting any rooms? Just something I was thinking about. How many reservaions in one call does Member Services allow a DVC member to make?

 

[FLYNZ4]

If the issue is "converting" points from one resort to another during a credit transfer... why doesn't MS fix that problem. Why should the points change when transfered?

/Jim

 

[LenaN4fun]

How are the owner/renters getting all the rooms and the owners not getting any rooms? Just something I was thinking about. How many reservaions in one call does Member Services allow a DVC member to make?

I am figuring that that they just call and book as many weeks as possible nd definately grab the popular weeks as soon as they hit their window to do so. I know with us as owners, I do not know 11 months in advance of when we will be taking a vacation and I don't feel comfortable grabbing a week out of the blue "just in case". As far as reservation/member services, I am not sure they could limit because the renter has the points to use and the rooms at that point are being put in the renters name/s. Then again, if they do limit, they could just call back I assume????

 

[Judique]

I don't believe you - perhaps you left out some key pieces of info in your post?

If you had said you couldn't get a standard view at BWV for November 2005 when you called in January 2005, I might have believed you. It's just not believable that you couldn't book a November weekend at the BWV if you called at the 10 month mark. Those who want standard view rooms for popular times just need to call day by day - I sincerely doubt that renters are the reason for the popularity of the standard views. It's BWV owners like me who are booking them for their own use. There are lots of us!

Your post says you own at BWV & were trying to book at the 10 month mark and couldn't get anything other than SSR. Unless you own at all 5 WDW DVC resorts, you are not allowed to book anything other than BWV 10 months prior to arrival. FWIW, I just can't/won't believe that the BWV, BCV, VWL and OKW were all booked solid at the 10 month mark for a November weekend.

FWIW, I am also happy to hear MS is enforcing the transfer rules in the POS. As a BWV owner, I do not like it at all when a member transfers non-BWV points into his BWV account and uses them to make reservations before the 7 month window opens. That's just wrong! Stopping unlimited transfers will make that less likely to happen and I think that is a good thing.

I 'think' you read it wrong, CarolMn. After I read it for the third time, (don't ask why!) it appeared to me that the OP was trying to say that 'after' his 11 month window, he couldn't get anything at anywhere but SSR. Also, I read it as him trying to reserve a 'January' (read Marathon time) room as late as November, not at the 10 month mark. Trying to reserve at Marathon time less then 2 months in advance and not getting a room would be believeable. OP - could you chime in and say what you really were trying to do?

 

[rogerram]

I think one way to fix the transfer problem is to let people transfer as many times as needed, up to a certain point amount for the year(say 200 points or whatever) or a 1 time only transfer of a higher amount of points that is more than the lower point total. With this theory, lets say Bob has 300 points a year. He transfers 150 to Jane and he then can then transfer another 50 points to someone else that year for a total of 200 points, or instead he can transfer the whole 300, one time only or anything above the 200 point level for a single transfer. This helps the person who only needs 20 points to get the reservation points needed for a trip because they are short points and doesn't penalize the person who transfers the 20 points to them, because he can still transfer more up to a certain amount for the year. I think this might solve the problem.

 

[Doctor P]

I think one way to fix the transfer problem is to let people transfer as many times as needed, up to a certain point amount for the year(say 200 points or whatever) or a 1 time only transfer of a higher amount of points that is more than the lower point total. With this theory, lets say Bob has 300 points a year. He transfers 150 to Jane and he then can then transfer another 50 points to someone else that year for a total of 200 points, or instead he can transfer the whole 300, one time only or anything above the 200 point level for a single transfer. This helps the person who only needs 20 points to get the reservation points needed for a trip because they are short points and doesn't penalize the person who transfers the 20 points to them, because he can still transfer more up to a certain amount for the year. I think this might solve the problem.

This wouldn't work I don't think. Given the different sizes of contracts, a set absolute point amount would not work. I also don't think it helps with the problem of commercial renters exploiting the system, though it might reduce the number of weeks they could sell (200 points transferred would be as much as five weeks of reservations, for example).

 

[rogerram]

the reason I think it would work is it does not give the person who has 2000 points a way to break up the whole contract to multiple people for transfer, but it would help the person who needs only a few points and doesn't hurt someone who might transfer only 25 or so points to them, if there is a reasonable limit. It wouldn't help with rental problems, though, but it would help the transfer issue.

 

[cmoore]

Seems to me the real issue is the fact that the transfered points become attached to a different resort. As another poster pointed out, renting shouldn't be an issue. The points get used, either by an owner or by a renter. Maybe they should allow the transfers, but not let the points change resorts. So if I want to transfer my SSR points to someone I could, but they'd stay SSR points.

Now, the people that tie up dozens of weeks in advance and then sell them on ebay, that's another matter. I don't know how you can fix that problem, but it sure doesn't seem right. When someone does this - like the guy in the sample eBay listing - whose name goes on the reservation? Don't you need the name of the guests at the time you make the reservation?

Chris

 

[dianeschlicht]

Seems to me the real issue is the fact that the transfered points become attached to a different resort. As another poster pointed out, renting shouldn't be an issue. The points get used, either by an owner or by a renter. Maybe they should allow the transfers, but not let the points change resorts. So if I want to transfer my SSR points to someone I could, but they'd stay SSR points.

Now, the people that tie up dozens of weeks in advance and then sell them on ebay, that's another matter. I don't know how you can fix that problem, but it sure doesn't seem right. When someone does this - like the guy in the sample eBay listing - whose name goes on the reservation? Don't you need the name of the guests at the time you make the reservation?

Chris

The reason the transfered points changes resorts has more to do with the inadequacy of the MS computer system than anything else. They CAN do it by hand and have it come out correctly. The problem is that they haven't been doing that because of the computer program.

As to your second question, I'm sure what the commercial renters do is reserve all those popular times in their own name, and then change the names on them after they are rented.

 

[Dean]

As to your second question, I'm sure what the commercial renters do is reserve all those popular times in their own name, and then change the names on them after they are rented.

Many didn't before, they sure will now.

 

[cmoore]

As to your second question, I'm sure what the commercial renters do is reserve all those popular times in their own name, and then change the names on them after they are rented.

Ah...so maybe the solution to that problem is to prohibit the changing of names on the reservation. If they want to change it they should have to cancel and re-book the reservation, allowing anyone that's waitlisted to get in. But I suppose there are legitimate reasons for needing to change names on a reservation. Guess there's no easy answer.

Chris

 

[dianeschlicht]

Ah...so maybe the solution to that problem is to prohibit the changing of names on the reservation. If they want to change it they should have to cancel and re-book the reservation, allowing anyone that's waitlisted to get in. But I suppose there are legitimate reasons for needing to change names on a reservation. Guess there's no easy answer.

Chris

That probably wouldn't be fair either. We just called and added a name to our December ressie when an extra person decided to come along.

 

[bpmorley]

That probably wouldn't be fair either. We just called and added a name to our December ressie when an extra person decided to come along.

We've had to add names to a reservation too

 

[Kris517]

As a DVC member I agree 200% with your post...but I have been out of the loop, what exactly is this new rule?

Whatever the details, it sounds like it might help DVC members out!


Krista
Saratoga DVC member since 2003

 

[SoCalKDG]

Every month we get a newletter from the company that runs our association. One of the rules is that no cars can be parked overnight on the street. Cars must be parked in the garage or driveway. They repeat this monthly, state that cars will be towed, etc. Guess what, still cars in the streets.

I always thought you could only do one transfer, looks like that hasn't changed. Define frequent renters? Exactly. Occasionaly renting won't change. Maybe they start cracking down on people that hold 5-10 reservations at once, we shall see.

Maybe we even see the cost of points go up as there might be less supply? I guess thats another discussion.

 

[bpmorley]

Maybe we even see the cost of points go up as there might be less supply? I guess thats another discussion.

I was thinking the same thing.

 

[dianeschlicht]

You make a good point....It remains to be seen if there really is crack down on commercial renting.

 

[houseofmouse]

What rule???

 

[JimMIA]

Did I miss this
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

What rule???

 

[Barnum01]

What rule???

OP is referring to the enforcement of the one transfer in one direction policy. This has been around since the beginning, but was rarely enforced. In fact, the policy also states that any exchange of points may not be associated with a monetary exchange of any kind. The lack of enforcement of this policy coupled with the proliferation of commercial renters (thought by many to have coincided with the availability of SSR points) has created a reservation nightmare whereby DVC members are having difficulty booking their home resorts if they go past the 7-month mark because the availability is snatched up by the commercial renters, some of whom regularly solicited members to transfer their points to them for cash effectively eliminating the 7-month window completely because member services, for some reason, had never developed a working method to link home-resort status to exchanged points after the exchange.

The enforcement of the transfer policy came out about the same time as a notice that DVC intends to monitor the reservations for "patterns of rental activity" among members. Most of us have decided that this is a euphenism for commercial renters.

So technically, the "New" Rule is not new at all, hence the quotations!

HTH and regards