Raise Your Voice: Guaranteed Booking Categories at SSR

[bzzelady]

Good morning everyone! I just got off the phone with a member satisfaction representative to discuss the email I sent regarding this issue. The CM I spoke with seems to think that this is a really great idea and is going to forward this on to upper leadership.

I think that this could really work!

Springs for those who want to be close to the main areas
Congress Park for those who want to be close to DTD
Paddock for those who want peace and quiet (or a fire station view like my DH wanted )
Grandstand for those who want a feature pool not near the main areas

 

[jdg345]

I got a call back too! They left me a number to call them back at and told me that they were going to forward the details to the leadership group. I really think that the more people that call/email about this, the greater chance of it happening. After all, they already did it with OKW, why not with SSR too?

 

[jdg345]

Has anyone else heard anything on this subject?

 

[tjkraz]

Mark Goldhaber from MousePlanet asked a DVC rep about it in their recent podcast interview.

I'm paraphrasing, but the response seemed to indicate that requests for "near Hospitality House" had reached overwhelming levels, such that the category was necessary. She suggested that this is not the case at other resorts--member demand does not exceed supply.

In other words, about 20% of SSR rooms are in The Grandstand and DVC is suggesting that less than 20% of guests request The Grandstand. Therefore no problem exists.

If that's true, then the big issue seems to be how requests are handled. We've had experiences at SSR where our room appeared to be pre-assigned and was not in the area requested. Other times they use Room Ready and there is little consideration given to any of the requests.

My fear is that DVC management is looking at figures on a spreadsheet (specifically, percent of times a request is made vs. percent of available rooms that meet criteria) and assuming guests are always getting what they want.

 

[RLRDA]

Mark Goldhaber from MousePlanet asked a DVC rep about it in their recent podcast interview.

I'm paraphrasing, but the response seemed to indicate that requests for "near Hospitality House" had reached overwhelming levels, such that the category was necessary. She suggested that this is not the case at other resorts--member demand does not exceed supply.

In other words, about 20% of SSR rooms are in The Grandstand and DVC is suggesting that less than 20% of guests request The Grandstand. Therefore no problem exists.

If that's true, then the big issue seems to be how requests are handled. We've had experiences at SSR where our room appeared to be pre-assigned and was not in the area requested. Other times they use Room Ready and there is little consideration given to any of the requests.

My fear is that DVC management is looking at figures on a spreadsheet (specifically, percent of times a request is made vs. percent of available rooms that meet criteria) and assuming guests are always getting what they want.

Each of the sections represent 20% of the rooms (CP, Springs, GS, Paddock, Carousel - did I forget any?). If less than 20% of guests request the GS then everyone who requests the GS section should have it granted? I doubt they do. I'd love to know how many requests MS gets for CP and Springs because those 3 sections seem to be the most coveted in SSR. I'd also like to see figures on how often requests are met. We requested the Springs last time we stayed at SSR and there was nothing available - we stayed in the GS and loved it. What would they do if CP had a 40% request rate, make that one section a booking category and leave the rest of the resort as is??

 

[tjkraz]

Each of the sections represent 20% of the rooms (CP, Springs, GS, Paddock, Carousel - did I forget any?).

It varies. There are 18 buildings arranged in neighborhoods of different sizes:

CP: 22%
Springs: 16%
Paddock: 27%
Grandstand: 22%
Carousel: 11%

If less than 20% of guests request the GS then everyone who requests the GS section should have it granted? I doubt they do. I'd love to know how many requests MS gets for CP and Springs because those 3 sections seem to be the most coveted in SSR.

That sort of plays into my point. If Congress Park is 22% of all rooms and fewer than 22% of guests put that request on their reservation, DVC may be assuming that there is no need for guaranteed categories.

The disconnect, IMO, is that requests don't seem to be met all that often at the front desk. Particularly when the Room Ready system is used, some guests with no requests on their reservation could arbitrarily be put in an area like The Springs, while others who specifically made that request will find that section full by the time they arrive.

I'd also like to see figures on how often requests are met.

I doubt they track statistics on such things.

 

[RLRDA]

That sort of plays into my point. If Congress Park is 22% of all rooms and fewer than 22% of guests put that request on their reservation, DVC may be assuming that there is no need for guaranteed categories.

The disconnect, IMO, is that requests don't seem to be met all that often at the front desk. Particularly when the Room Ready system is used, some guests with no requests on their reservation could arbitrarily be put in an area like The Springs, while others who specifically made that request will find that section full by the time they arrive.

I would think it would make the Front Desk's CMs lives easier to have guaranteed bookings. How many times do guests ask to change rooms when a location request isn't met?

How is OKW set up, we've haven't stayed there yet? Do they have distinct sections like SSR? The fact that they now have "near HH" but no other categories wouldn't be a good omen for across the board booking categories at SSR. DVC could just make a "DTD view" category and not bother with anything else, for instance.

 

[tjkraz]

I would think it would make the Front Desk's CMs lives easier to have guaranteed bookings. How many times do guests ask to change rooms when a location request isn't met?

It would certainly increase the chances that guests will get the room they prefer.

I hope you aren't getting the impression that I'm against the categories because I certainly wish SSR had them. It's just that after listening to the podcast, my impression is that DVC feels there aren't any problems right now which would necessitate booking categories at additional resorts.

How is OKW set up, we've haven't stayed there yet? Do they have distinct sections like SSR? The fact that they now have "near HH" but no other categories wouldn't be a good omen for across the board booking categories at SSR. DVC could just make a "DTD view" category and not bother with anything else, for instance.

They simply placed 8-10 buildings in a category called "near Hospitality House." OKW does have different areas--South Point, Peninisula Road, etc. However OKW differs a bit from SSR in that there are rooms in several different regions which are now labeled "near HH."

Still, I agree DVC probably would not go so far as to set-up 5 different categories for the resort neighborhoods. At best, we might be able to get "near Carriage House" (I'd probably put all of The Springs plus the nearest two Grandstand buildings in that category) and a "DTD View" category.

That would still be a step in the right direction. In all fairness, allowing bookings by resort "neighborhood" doesn't solve all problems at SSR. Booking Congress Park wouldn't guarantee a DTD view.

 

[RLRDA]

I hope you aren't getting the impression that I'm against the categories because I certainly wish SSR had them. It's just that after listening to the podcast, my impression is that DVC feels there aren't any problems right now which would necessitate booking categories at additional resorts.

No, I'm not getting that impression from you at all. The last page or so of posts here seem to indicate a positive response from Member Satisfaction so it's disappointing to hear that the podcast reinforces the status quo.

 

[jdg345]

No, I'm not getting that impression from you at all. The last page or so of posts here seem to indicate a positive response from Member Satisfaction so it's disappointing to hear that the podcast reinforces the status quo.

+1 ...

 

[mwehttam]

I think if we keep sending emails and the like they will eventually come around. It might take time but I think it will happen.

 

[TenThousandVolts]

I was feeling really encouraged until this news of the podcast- anyone have a link to the podcast?

A poster on another board who usually has pretty good info about stuff said this was happening so I was all pumped- but this latest podcast sounds bad.

 

[JimMIA]

I just filled out our survey from our May trip and hit booking categories pretty hard. I think it would be a logical and welcome enhancement, and I can't really think of any downside.

 

[Dean]

It would certainly increase the chances that guests will get the room they prefer.

I hope you aren't getting the impression that I'm against the categories because I certainly wish SSR had them. It's just that after listening to the podcast, my impression is that DVC feels there aren't any problems right now which would necessitate booking categories at additional resorts.



They simply placed 8-10 buildings in a category called "near Hospitality House." OKW does have different areas--South Point, Peninisula Road, etc. However OKW differs a bit from SSR in that there are rooms in several different regions which are now labeled "near HH."

Still, I agree DVC probably would not go so far as to set-up 5 different categories for the resort neighborhoods. At best, we might be able to get "near Carriage House" (I'd probably put all of The Springs plus the nearest two Grandstand buildings in that category) and a "DTD View" category.

That would still be a step in the right direction. In all fairness, allowing bookings by resort "neighborhood" doesn't solve all problems at SSR. Booking Congress Park wouldn't guarantee a DTD view.

IMO, DVC and Disney in general tends to downplay issues they aren't ready to fix immediately. Thus saying everything was OK at present is predictably what they would say and doesn't make it so. Is it a huge issue with the current set up, of course not, but it is an aggravation for MS and the resort front desk staff. This could be an added value for owners at that resort. The only ones that lose are the ones that book later or don't own at that resort and they should lose out in this equation. The question on Disney's side is what is the "cost". It does make reservations and computer listings of the units a little more difficult but not that much given the size of the resort and the general nature of the divisions in question. It does complicate housekeeping somewhat and will cause some aggravation for the front desk from the low life that doesn't get what they wanted even though they knew when they reserved that they wouldn't. Overall very little cost and aggravation for an added value for SSR owners.

 

[TenThousandVolts]

LIFERBABE said:
Also, I ask at every DVC meeting I attend when will SSR get priority bookings for certain sections/views. They always say that if the membership was more vocal about it, they would consider it. I think its time to get vocal.

This was the quote that inspired this whole thing. I am wondering if anyone is planning on attending the annual meeting this December and if so would you be willing to ask about this issue during the Q&A.

 

[goingsouth]

Just read through many pages and became convinced that a point system would make me value my SSR ownership more. Which building I stay in would influence whether or not I rent a car. It would help me plan. I sent an email today.

Thanks

Joanne

 

[TenThousandVolts]

Just read through many pages and became convinced that a point system would make me value my SSR ownership more. Which building I stay in would influence whether or not I rent a car. It would help me plan. I sent an email today.

Thanks
Joanne

Great, this issue has been stirred up a bit lately. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. It would be so nice if I could secure a DTD view- I just love that view. Or when I have my parents with me I would like to be able to secure Springs so my dad could walk to the Carriage House easily... Just seems it would make planning easier. It would be a wonderful benefit to SSR ownership.

 

[DaveH]

I am against having categories at SSR as an owner. If DVC decides for categories please charge more points for DTD views and close to Carriage House rooms. That will make it nicer for us who enjoy the whole resort. I can stay longer in my nice room else where.

 

[TenThousandVolts]

I am against having categories at SSR as an owner. If DVC decides for categories please charge more points for DTD views and close to Carriage House rooms. That will make it nicer for us who enjoy the whole resort. I can stay longer in my nice room else where.

Can you explain why you are against it- if you like all of the rooms in the resort, how would this negatively affect you. If they actually change point charts (which I don't think they will) it sounds as if you would actually benefit.

 

[DaveH]

Can you explain why you are against it- if you like all of the rooms in the resort, how would this negatively affect you. If they actually change point charts (which I don't think they will) it sounds as if you would actually benefit.

I have enjoyed the views you are wanting guaranteed. I make most ressies at 11 months. I have also made ressies at the last minutes. I have been a DVC owner since 2001 and have made a total of 2 ressies at the last minutes, under 3 months out. So if generated sections are the only way to get all views can be a negative. Categories is not all pluses. I see more hassle and cost overall for us owners. We do end up paying for this through our dues. Having categories at the same cost all over will cause some problems. I have seen fellow owners try to change the rules at front desk many times. I also understand they are less than 10% of owners. I also think that the current room assignment policy causes the wants you are going for. I think one problem solver started a bigger problem in my opinion. There are things both of us are saying is right. The trick is finding what is best.