Raise Your Voice: Guaranteed Booking Categories at SSR

[DaveH]

First, Dean you and I will have to agree to disagree on 2 points. 1. The more categories the more chance of orphan rooms. 2. not all owners see categories as an enhancement.

Some reasons for me being against categories: 1 I do not see a value to add more point cost to certain areas of resort, so no need for categories. 2. If owners feel need to have categories for certain areas should be willing to pay more like at most if not all WDW resorts. All Stars charge more for near food courts and such. Grand Floridian charges more to be in main building.

I had this experience at OKW with current categories. I booked a last minute trip at around 20 days. I got a 1 br first night, studio the next 2 nights and a 1br last night. Was given a choice of both categories. I took away from HH figure it would be less hassle. First 2 check ins was mess. The CM was either not well trained or the category system was not working properly. Took over an half hour each time to find me a room. I checked in day 1 at around noon. The second day around 10 AM. The CM could not just put me in near HH because of categories.

About other categories. First I own at VWL and SSR. I have my feelings for where I own so I speak up. BWV: 1. I understand boardwalk view. I agree with more points. I have not been in a standard room. My first question is are they smaller than the others? If they are not, then they should not be another category IMHO. I do not own there so I don't ask for changes there. AKL: 1. I see Savanna view and concierge due to what they are. 2. I understand standard rooms are smaller so makes since. OKW: IMHO there is no need for the categories. If the demand is there they should charge accordingly, again IMHO. I will not go and holler for a change there. I respect the opinions of others here. I just disagree with you and I know there are others do too. I am like most I will live with and use whatever system is at the time. Now the food at Artist Pallet in selection and quality needs improving much more.

 

[Dean]

First, Dean you and I will have to agree to disagree on 2 points. 1. The more categories the more chance of orphan rooms. 2. not all owners see categories as an enhancement.

Some reasons for me being against categories: 1 I do not see a value to add more point cost to certain areas of resort, so no need for categories. 2. If owners feel need to have categories for certain areas should be willing to pay more like at most if not all WDW resorts. All Stars charge more for near food courts and such. Grand Floridian charges more to be in main building.

I had this experience at OKW with current categories. I booked a last minute trip at around 20 days. I got a 1 br first night, studio the next 2 nights and a 1br last night. Was given a choice of both categories. I took away from HH figure it would be less hassle. First 2 check ins was mess. The CM was either not well trained or the category system was not working properly. Took over an half hour each time to find me a room. I checked in day 1 at around noon. The second day around 10 AM. The CM could not just put me in near HH because of categories.

About other categories. First I own at VWL and SSR. I have my feelings for where I own so I speak up. BWV: 1. I understand boardwalk view. I agree with more points. I have not been in a standard room. My first question is are they smaller than the others? If they are not, then they should not be another category IMHO. I do not own there so I don't ask for changes there. AKL: 1. I see Savanna view and concierge due to what they are. 2. I understand standard rooms are smaller so makes since. OKW: IMHO there is no need for the categories. If the demand is there they should charge accordingly, again IMHO. I will not go and holler for a change there. I respect the opinions of others here. I just disagree with you and I know there are others do too. I am like most I will live with and use whatever system is at the time. Now the food at Artist Pallet in selection and quality needs improving much more.

For areas with almost 200 rooms each and at a resort that's almost never sold out at the 7 month window the chance of orphaned rooms is almost nonexistent other than last minute options where it happens without categories as well. But other than that concern and the loss of a "surprise", what other downside is there? I can see none. Given the specifics and DVC's history, I think we can safely assume the points would not change. That is an unwarranted concern IMO but even if it did I couldn't imagine it being enough to affect anyone in realtime other than the one who had planned to the last point for like any every 2 or 3 year trip.

Certainly CM training can be an issue in any situation but it seems your OKW example would not apply because the categories were both available, it was the room size that was the reservation issue. But anything after the rooms go into breakage inventory is really a non issue anyway IMO, you were lucky to find any room at 20 days out.

On BWV, the BWV rooms are not more points, SV is less. And not only are the rooms identical at BWV, there are a few of the SV rooms that are actually better and larger. In the beginning (early in sales) all BWV rooms were the same points but people complained about some of the views so DVC changed the points charts adding SV. It was SV and Preferred view, about 20%/80%. People kept asking for BW view but when DVC stopped any official efforts related to requests, that meant those that were owners and reserved 11 months out were not getting it and someone that was not an owner and reserved much later was. That lead to a lot of complaints and quite a few vocal confrontations at the front desk from what I understand. So DVC simply divided up the preferred view into Preferred and BWV. They did not raise the points for BWV nor did they lower Preferred View. Is BW view of sufficient demand to justify a higher point total and possibly a lower cost for other ares, you bet ya. But DVC is so complaint averse that they didn't change the points and haven't rebalanced points in general even though it's really somewhat needed.

The only situation where the room layout is applicable to points so far is the value room at AKV and this was simply due to the layout of the existing rooms there prior to the hotel conversion and the fact they will not accommodate the extra sleeper chair. The standard view rooms are not inherently different anywhere (AKV or apparently BLT). However, there are a few rooms here and there that are different and ? better that are not by category, esp for Inn rooms at VB. I'd agree that I felt the cat issue at OKW was not needed but I feel it was reasonable. I do feel the issue is a much larger one at SSR than at OKW and I will predict that we'll have some type of categories in the next few years.

And lastly, even if there were limited orphaned rooms, it wouldn't be owners booking at the beginning of the home resort priority, it would be those booking on much shorter notice as it should be.

 

[DaveH]

Dean we each have our opinion on if categories are a good idea at SSR. The other resorts are up to their owners. I truly understand all your reasons. I still believe they are a bad idea and more are worse than less. I just disagree with you and others that they are needed. Simple. This thread is for those who are for. I am trying to have others realize their are folks who disagree. I do not want to have to choose between a large number of choices you suggest. I can be happier with 2 or 3 instead of one for each area. If BWV want 80 categories that is up to those owners. I am against them for SSR. I honestly believe there is a segment at OKW get no enhancement from the categories there. I am sure there are owners at OKW who want near HH and those want away from HH and those who would not like to have to make choices at all. If there were a point difference for the categories there is a benefit from not going to preferred area. That is an enhancement to everyone staying there. Different view of enhancement.

 

[Dean]

Dean we each have our opinion on if categories are a good idea at SSR. The other resorts are up to their owners. I truly understand all your reasons. I still believe they are a bad idea and more are worse than less. I just disagree with you and others that they are needed. Simple. This thread is for those who are for. I am trying to have others realize their are folks who disagree. I do not want to have to choose between a large number of choices you suggest. I can be happier with 2 or 3 instead of one for each area. If BWV want 80 categories that is up to those owners. I am against them for SSR. I honestly believe there is a segment at OKW get no enhancement from the categories there. I am sure there are owners at OKW who want near HH and those want away from HH and those who would not like to have to make choices at all. If there were a point difference for the categories there is a benefit from not going to preferred area. That is an enhancement to everyone staying there. Different view of enhancement.

No question, it's an opinion from each and every one of us and nothing more. Still, other than the fear of orphaned rooms and the fact you don't want to have to make a choice, I'm wondering what other disadvantages you see as I see the first a non issue and the second a poor reason. My guess is that most that don't want some sort of categories are either members at SSR that don't plan ahead enough for it to be an advantage or members at other resorts that want to have a better chance at the better options. I'm all about benefits for owners at a given resort far more than choices for other members within DVC. Is it a big deal, of course it's not, SSR will function fine EITHER way, but it is an enhancement for the members there that plan early. If it's not for you, that's fine. It would actually hurt me when I stay there which I do periodically.

There is one other component of this that I don't think we've discussed on this thread. SSR is a large resort with somewhat lower points than most of the other on property resorts. As such and given that DVC is giving more and more units to II, that means that SSR is a LARGE percentage of the units II gets. That seems to be maybe 10-20% of the total units some times of the year. Having such categories would allow DVC to place those exchangers in the less desirable sections like the Carousel. Make no mistake, the requests for some areas like the Springs, CP & Grandstand are dramatic and the requests not to be in the other areas are also very common.

 

[DaveH]

Dean alot of your points go towards how DVD runs SSR and DVC rsorts in general. A non point to you may not be to others. The major points to some here and seems to you are non points to me.

 

[JaxDisneyFans]

We own at SSR and have, despite "booking requests", been placed in both the Paddocks (which we enjoyed) and the Carousel. While the Paddocks worked well for us as we were right next the bridge, the Carousel location was way too far for my Mom with her arthritic hips. I enjoy walking so anywhere in SSR is ok with me, but as a owner that books at 11 months, I would like to be able to secure a DTD view or closer Springs location to accomodate my Mom's mobility issues, instead of those rooms going to a cash customer or non-owner that "got stuck" at SSR because of last minute booking. However, either way it won't break the deal for me, I still love my SSR.

 

[Dean]

Dean alot of your points go towards how DVD runs SSR and DVC rsorts in general. A non point to you may not be to others. The major points to some here and seems to you are non points to me.

Fair enough, I take it there are no other reasons then.

 

[TenThousandVolts]

We own at SSR and have, despite "booking requests", been placed in both the Paddocks (which we enjoyed) and the Carousel. While the Paddocks worked well for us as we were right next the bridge, the Carousel location was way too far for my Mom with her arthritic hips. I enjoy walking so anywhere in SSR is ok with me, but as a owner that books at 11 months, I would like to be able to secure a DTD view or closer Springs location to accomodate my Mom's mobility issues, instead of those rooms going to a cash customer or non-owner that "got stuck" at SSR because of last minute booking. However, either way it won't break the deal for me, I still love my SSR.

I have a similar reason for wanting categories. Please let dvc know your feelings. Send an email to DVCMemberSatisfactionTeam@disneyvacationclub.com

 

[mello]

No question, it's an opinion from each and every one of us and nothing more. Still, other than the fear of orphaned rooms and the fact you don't want to have to make a choice, I'm wondering what other disadvantages you see as I see the first a non issue and the second a poor reason. My guess is that most that don't want some sort of categories are either members at SSR that don't plan ahead enough for it to be an advantage or members at other resorts that want to have a better chance at the better options. I'm all about benefits for owners at a given resort far more than choices for other members within DVC. Is it a big deal, of course it's not, SSR will function fine EITHER way, but it is an enhancement for the members there that plan early. If it's not for you, that's fine. It would actually hurt me when I stay there which I do periodically.

There is one other component of this that I don't think we've discussed on this thread. SSR is a large resort with somewhat lower points than most of the other on property resorts. As such and given that DVC is giving more and more units to II, that means that SSR is a LARGE percentage of the units II gets. That seems to be maybe 10-20% of the total units some times of the year. Having such categories would allow DVC to place those exchangers in the less desirable sections like the Carousel. Make no mistake, the requests for some areas like the Springs, CP & Grandstand are dramatic and the requests not to be in the other areas are also very common.

Dean, your reasoning is very sound (as usual). In this post you have put into words a phenomenon I have been noticing of late. It seems that most of those posting lately against booking categories at SSR are not SSR owners. (I could be wrong about that. I've actually been thinking in recent days that I should do a bit of research to see if my suspicion is correct).

 

[mello]

Agreed. I'm not for this whole "preferred" booking thing. I've always felt it's just a way for Disney to charge more. I say keep it all the same point value and then leave it to the room assignment roulette wheel (unless a change is available at check-in upon request).

We're not talking about reallocation or charging more. We're talking about allowing SSR owners who plan ahead to have a better chance than non-owners and II traders of staying in the areas that are already acknowledged as "preferred" by most guests - Springs, CP, and Grandstand. It wouldn't cost anyone any more points to do so.

 

[mello]

Ok guys, you all have given valid reasons against my reasons. Here is a challenge. Please list the categories you want and what is in them. I mean if you have preferred what areas and the like.

I would categorize by area: Springs, Congress Park, Grandstand, Paddocks, Carousel, and now THV. I believe this method would be far less open to debate or argument, ie; "I asked for 'close to Carriage House' and my room isn't very close", etc. When you book, you would know what section you're staying in. With a resort this size, there is really no disadvantage at all (unless you can't, don't or won't use the 11 month booking window).

I believe if you did a poll or called MS to ask, you would likely find that the 3 most requested areas are Springs, CP and Grandstand. THV will likely supplant those, at least for awhile, when they come online. And they will have to be a separate category by virtue of the type of rooms they are.

 

[edk35]

I have watched this thread for a very long time.....very long. I was on the fence and so therefore never posted. So here are my two cents. I have to AGREE finally that booking categories might just be a good thing. However I agree that it should be by sections too. I think the poster before me had a good idea with suggesting sections. WE have stayed 2 times and have our 3rd trip planned for Nov. We asked for Congress Park the first time (an Aug.trip) and got it and Grandstand (a Nov. trip) the 2nd time and got it. Now I have to say though....both of those trips were not done at the 11 month window. LOL The first one was 6 months and the 2nd one probably 8. I do think that if SSR home resort members call at the 11 month window..they should get their request. I think it is NOT fair if someone calls a few months out from their trip and gets the same location your requested and you didn't get it and you called at the 11 month window. The resort is HUGE so I would think if any of us called at our 11 month window.....our chances are very very good that we would get our 1st or 2nd choice.

 

[Dean]

Dean, your reasoning is very sound (as usual). In this post you have put into words a phenomenon I have been noticing of late. It seems that most of those posting lately against booking categories at SSR are not SSR owners. (I could be wrong about that. I've actually been thinking in recent days that I should do a bit of research to see if my suspicion is correct).

I think it's both but overall I think most that have posted against it are actually owners there which surprises me given that there really are no reasons not to from an owners standpoint and a huge potential benefits. The only two potential issues against it are simply the chance of orphaned rooms (not enough days in one cat to complete a reservation) and the loss of a surprise as a forced method to try other locations in the resort. The reverse is the loss of a potential guaranteed request for your preferred section or if you don't get it, at least you'll know and can go to your second choice. There may or may not be other computer, financial and management issues from DVC's side though I suspect those would be minimal as well. My guess is the real issue with those that don't want change is that they simply don't trust DVC to do it reasonably, to that I say that I'm supposed to be the distrustful one, not those that drink the koolade.

 

[DaveH]

I am an owner that does not want location categories. I am more against one for each area as compared to 2 or 3. I feel if we have to choose a location all the time forces folks to uber plan when they don't want to. There are many concerns folks have to want some booking categories. In this case my opinion is more is less. Others would think more is more. It is all about point of view.

 

[Dean]

I am an owner that does not want location categories. I am more against one for each area as compared to 2 or 3. I feel if we have to choose a location all the time forces folks to uber plan when they don't want to. There are many concerns folks have to want some booking categories. In this case my opinion is more is less. Others would think more is more. It is all about point of view.

Dave by "uber plan" do you mean you have trouble making a choice or you are booking last minute?

 

[doubletrouble_vb]

Well maybe people should also be given the option to say "anything but any one area".

At the moment I'm not a DVC owner but hopefully I'll be able to rectify that in the future. Most likely it'll be SSR (was a VWL owner). I really enjoyed my two SSR stays. One in Congress Park the other in Grand Stand. I know I'd probably like Springs but wouldn't be too happy with the Paddocks and definitely not happy with Carousel. I usually don't make any requests until I get to the front desk but if SSR became a resort where requests were a good idea my request would be "not Carousel".

In fact if I were setting up the point system Carousel would be standard view along with a locations that have great near views of parking lots. That way DVC owners for whom points are king would be falling all over themselves to reserve those locations. This would take Carousel out of the equation altogether allowing Disney to upgrade cash customers to the Paddock as well as place owners in the most popular locations. (Yes I know...two tiered point systems seem to be out of favor on this thread). SSR is big enough and Carousel is small enough that the impact of shifting a couple of points per night away from Carousel hopefully wouldn't be so bad.

 

[Dean]

Well maybe people should also be given the option to say "anything but any one area".

At the moment I'm not a DVC owner but hopefully I'll be able to rectify that in the future. Most likely it'll be SSR (was a VWL owner). I really enjoyed my two SSR stays. One in Congress Park the other in Grand Stand. I know I'd probably like Springs but wouldn't be too happy with the Paddocks and definitely not happy with Carousel. I usually don't make any requests until I get to the front desk but if SSR became a resort where requests were a good idea my request would be "not Carousel".

In fact if I were setting up the point system Carousel would be standard view along with a locations that have great near views of parking lots. That way DVC owners for whom points are king would be falling all over themselves to reserve those locations. This would take Carousel out of the equation altogether allowing Disney to upgrade cash customers to the Paddock as well as place owners in the most popular locations. (Yes I know...two tiered point systems seem to be out of favor on this thread). SSR is big enough and Carousel is small enough that the impact of shifting a couple of points per night away from Carousel hopefully wouldn't be so bad.

The problem is there's no way to do it as a negative booking, you can only book something by actually reserving the item in question. Certainly a request system would do it in the negative but DVC has both stated and demonstrated they they are not going to put any emphasis on requests. If that were not so, we would almost certainly not be having this conversation.

 

[mello]

My main point is I think there can be another way of doing this without categories.

Please write and give them some ideas then! I'm curious what other ways you've got in mind too. Perhaps if, when assigning rooms, they just took owners' requests into account before non-owners' that would be enough. I don't know

But the main thing is, If anyone views being in Carousel as a lovely thing - then great, more power to 'em. But if an SSR owner, who books far in advance, views it as being "stuck way out there", there ought to be a way to allow that owner at least a fair opportunity to be somewhere else and leave it to those who like it, those who don't care, or those who book at the last minute. I'm for any method that will accomplish that. So what other ideas have ya got?

 

[DaveH]

Dean by uber planning is what I use to do. I had every day planned to where and when we went to each park, when and where we ate and such. Before resorts went non smoking first request was always non smoking for medical because DW is allergic to smoke. Them would have 4 to 5 other requests. We got most of our request each time and all about half of the time. We make ressies at 11 month mark 90% of the time. Here are a few times we didn't. Bought in 2001 and first trip home Nov 2001. Last year 2nd add on at SSR and had developer points that could only be used 7 months and less. Did a trip in Jan. Trip for DW in May jun. One trip for me last minute chance in Jun.

Now under the Dean plan, category for each area same points. Current travel pattern, Grandstand nothing else. The OP asks for DTD, near Carriage House(Grandstand and/or Springs) all else. Same point value Grandstand again. Follow BWV 2 tier 3 view model. Standard rooms(BWV standard view) all others base point level. DTD and near Carriage House(BWV preferred and Boardwalk view) higher points. Would consider others to make trip longer for same amount of points.

Like several have said they do not see anything worth more points to them. I agree. Others say if small difference no problem to get what they want.

Understand some of us would like DVC to follow a policy to give home resort advantages that none have besides a room at 11 months though 8 months and all others 7 months and less. We agree there how is where we differ.

When I bought in 2001 my guide made it perfectly clear the chances of us ever getting a Boardwalk view or standard room at BWV was Nil.

Things have been pointed out on this thread that I would say we have covered 90% or more of the things that might happen. Who knows what this might start down the road. I don't. I just say we need to be careful what we ask for. The result may not be what we wanted.

 

[Dean]

Dean by uber planning is what I use to do. I had every day planned to where and when we went to each park, when and where we ate and such. Before resorts went non smoking first request was always non smoking for medical because DW is allergic to smoke. Them would have 4 to 5 other requests. We got most of our request each time and all about half of the time. We make ressies at 11 month mark 90% of the time. Here are a few times we didn't. Bought in 2001 and first trip home Nov 2001. Last year 2nd add on at SSR and had developer points that could only be used 7 months and less. Did a trip in Jan. Trip for DW in May jun. One trip for me last minute chance in Jun.

Now under the Dean plan, category for each area same points. Current travel pattern, Grandstand nothing else. The OP asks for DTD, near Carriage House(Grandstand and/or Springs) all else. Same point value Grandstand again. Follow BWV 2 tier 3 view model. Standard rooms(BWV standard view) all others base point level. DTD and near Carriage House(BWV preferred and Boardwalk view) higher points. Would consider others to make trip longer for same amount of points.

Like several have said they do not see anything worth more points to them. I agree. Others say if small difference no problem to get what they want.

Understand some of us would like DVC to follow a policy to give home resort advantages that none have besides a room at 11 months though 8 months and all others 7 months and less. We agree there how is where we differ.

When I bought in 2001 my guide made it perfectly clear the chances of us ever getting a Boardwalk view or standard room at BWV was Nil.

Things have been pointed out on this thread that I would say we have covered 90% or more of the things that might happen. Who knows what this might start down the road. I don't. I just say we need to be careful what we ask for. The result may not be what we wanted.

Dave, maybe I'm not reading your note very well this morning but I'm still not getting how this would affect you in relation to categories. One can make a decision on which section without planning every minute of every day. I get some don't like to plan THAT much but going to the other extreme is also not necessary. How would categories affect you in a negative and why? The only reasons I can see are the ones I mentioned, either your unwilling to book well in advance or you don't want to have to make a choice of location.