Should DVC eliminate walking?

[Bearval]

The quick and simple fix would be to require anything booked at 11 months requires a hold for 30 days, if not then the whole reservation needs to be canceled and rebooked. Then after the hold period or at less than 11 months you can alter and change as much as you want. Bottom line is if DVC wants to fix it they can, and in my opinion I think they feel they did by allowing everyone to book and modify online.

 

[jarestel]

Certain rooms are viable to be walked at 7 months. I just walked a VGC 1 bedroom for a few weeks and without walking I would 100% not have secured the reservation. I was able to get four consecutive nights during Star Wars Celebration by walking.

Sure but at anything less than 11 months, you're not guaranteed to be successful as home resort owners can book the dates in front of your walk and stop you cold. You would have your room but not your dates.

Walking to get a leg up on the 7 month window would help you against other non owners but you're helpless against owners snagging your dates before you get there.

 

[quandrea]

How about going back to the original 260 point buy in? The dvc system was designed for flexibility—stay in any size villa, at different times of year, bank, borrow, etc, etc.

I think much of the problem comes from people wanting only a studio during a specific time of year. If that studio with the budget view is unavailable, the member is stuck.

Now if every member had a minimum 260 points to play with, this isn’t such a problem. The member could upgrade the view or go for a one bedroom when necessary.

The trend toward small contracts does not allow the dvc system to be used as originally intended. This 260 minimum buy in has of course become untenable with the high per point cost Disney charges.

 

[Sandisw]

I agree that folks who employ this tactic are technically not breaking any rules and are certainly entitled to use this loophole as long as it exists. My argument is for the elimination of the loophole itself.

I don't argue from the perspective of what is the best system for jarestel, or Sandisw, or any other individual member. My point is that we all acknowledge that DVC's intent is to give home resort owners an 11-month booking window. It's in the documents and we all (I think) understand this. The fact that a loophole exists that allows a member to pervert the intent of the 11 month window into a virtual 12 month, 13 month, or who knows how many months booking advantage runs contrary to the spirit of the rule.

So if the booking process needs to become more restrictive in order to return to a true 11 month booking window, then so be it, I can live with it. OTOH, if DVC says they no linger care about booking windows and a member can book as far in advance as they want, I'm good with that approach as well.

Edited to add:
The 11 month home resort booking window is guaranteed by the POS when they sell the timeshare, while the process to implement the booking window is simply how DVC chooses to manage the windows. If one can demonstrate that the process violates the terms of the POS by allowing some members a longer than 11 months booking window, and by extension, depriving others of the 11 month booking window, I think DVC could be forced to change the process to become compliant with the POS.

But what has to be changed,,,which is a big one..is to take away and change the terms of the POS that modifications of a reservation more than 31 days out is restricted or now has a penalty..and forcing someone to cancel and rebook is a penalty.

It seems that all the ideas being thrown around are forgetting that this is what is at stake. And, as someone posted, that may not be something allowed under current law and the POS that can...and. I don’t believe it should..be changed,

Everything that can curtail walking is simply a complete change to the entire system.

It really would violate the terms that say rooms are first come, first serve and those rooms are being booked with eligible points.

 

[Sandisw]

The quick and simple fix would be to require anything booked at 11 months requires a hold for 30 days, if not then the whole reservation needs to be canceled and rebooked. Then after the hold period or at less than 11 months you can alter and change as much as you want. Bottom line is if DVC wants to fix it they can, and in my opinion I think they feel they did by allowing everyone to book and modify online.

So walking would be okay as long as long as the reservation is not booked exactly at 11 months?

Guess what? Walkers will then just a book a stay a few days into the 11 month window to avoid the rule

I want Dec 1st to 8th. So, I start my walk on November 3rd, by booking Nov 1st to 8th...now I didn’t book at 11 months. I booked at 10 months and 29 days..And, now I move it so that the first day is always a fews days less than 11 months.

Problem solved and walking still happening!

ETA: I bring these situations up for only one reason,,,to show how many things would have to be decided by Disney to institute a change to the system.

 

[KPeterso]

The quick and simple fix would be to require anything booked at 11 months requires a hold for 30 days, if not then the whole reservation needs to be canceled and rebooked. Then after the hold period or at less than 11 months you can alter and change as much as you want. Bottom line is if DVC wants to fix it they can, and in my opinion I think they feel they did by allowing everyone to book and modify online.

But what about the person who wants a 2 week vacation (like me!)? I book my first 7 nights and then walk the next week out each day to my full number of days that I want. I fully intend to use all of the nights I book and expect to have it all as one reservation. I sometimes book in my 11-7 month window, but usually at 7 months so I need to carry my days out to the end. I know you only suggested this for 11 months, but I should be able to book my whole trip by adding my days at the end as needed.

 

[SarahInMN]

So walking would be okay as long as long as the reservation is not booked exactly at 11 months?

Guess what? Walkers will then just a book a stay a few days into the 11 month window to avoid the rule

I want Dec 1st to 8th. So, I start my walk on November 3rd, by booking Nov 1st to 8th...now I didn’t book at 11 months. I booked at 10 months and 29 days..And, now I move it so that the first day is always a fews days less than 11 months.

Problem solved and walking still happening

I’m confused. If you book 11-3 for 12-1, isn’t that 13 months and not 10 months, 29 days? Wouldn’t booking 12/1 for a November date be 11 months?

I’m not hearing that anyone has issues with someone booking a room at 11 months to the day. Or someone wanting 10 nights to book the first 7 and then adding on the extra 3 to get the total 10. I’m hearing the concern is reserving a room that isn’t really wanted thus blocking someone else who wants that room.

I have to admit I do think people who walk are skirting the rules by taking up a reservation but I also agree that the Disney “fix” may be worse than the current situation.

In the example above though I’m not getting how that is 10 months, 29 days and not 13 months.

 

[Sandisw]

I’m confused. If you book 11-3 for 12-1, isn’t that 13 months and not 10 months, 29 days? Wouldn’t booking 12/1 for a November date be 11 months?

I’m not hearing that anyone has issues with someone booking a room at 11 months to the day. Or someone wanting 10 nights to book the first 7 and then adding on the extra 3 to get the total 10. I’m hearing the concern is reserving a room that isn’t really wanted thus blocking someone else who wants that room.

I have to admit I do think people who walk are skirting the rules by taking up a reservation but I also agree that the Disney “fix” may be worse than the current situation.

In the example above though I’m not getting how that is 10 months, 29 days and not 13 months.

Remember, I’m walking so I’m not booking my actual dates, but am Booking ahead of times. But, you did catch an error that made it confusing as imy example is for a 2 month walk and not 1 month,

Let me try again!

So, on November 3rd, I book at stay beginning October 1st, which is 10 months and 28 days ahead of time, not 11 months,

I would then be able to move my reservation because I didn’t book that reservation 11 months out. As long as I always kept the first day of the modified reservation a few days behind the 11 month markI’d fall within the rules that the poster had suggested...which was, all 11 month reservations can’t be modified for 30 days.

It is why there is absolutely no change that can be made to the rules that does not require an entire change to the POS. And, to do that, it would have to be out in place for any and all changes to reservations, no matter when they are made.

 

[TonyaG83]

In short, no. Sure, it makes getting certain rooms harder, but if someone has the time and wants to put in the effort required to ensure they have their room, they can have it.

It’s not for me because of the amount of work involved, but if you want it badly enough, go for it.

 

[EYL]

While I see the loophole, I would just leave everything the way it is. I've learned that every change has unintended consequences and people will find loopholes no matter what policy is put in place. Besides, give them too many ideas, it may become a resale restriction down the line. Imagine that?

 

[Orsino]

So if the booking process needs to become more restrictive in order to return to a true 11 month booking window, then so be it, I can live with it. OTOH, if DVC says they no linger care about booking windows and a member can book as far in advance as they want, I'm good with that approach as well.

I very much agree with this stance. Either eliminate the walking loophole or eliminate the 11 month rule itself!

 

[Sandisw]

I very much agree with this stance. Either eliminate the walking loophole or eliminate the 11 month rule itself!

No one is booking more than 11 months in advance. Walkers do not get to book rooms more than 11 months in advance of a check in date.

The change would not be about when to book but to eliminate changes and modifications to all reservations booked..making the system completely different as everything would be cancel and rebook all the time.

 

[Orsino]

No one is booking more than 11 months in advance. Walkers do not get to book rooms more than 11 months in advance of a check in date.

I think you are missing the point. Walking is a way to circumvent the 11 month rule. If the rule can be circumvented in this way, eliminating the rule is also a fair resolution.

DVC will never do it, of course. They don't want people booking years in advance and tie themselves up from taking things out of inventory for upgrades etc.

But from a theoretical standpoint, no 11 month rule is more fair in my opinion than an 11 month rule that can be walked around.

 

[Sandisw]

I think you are missing the point. Walking is a way to circumvent the 11 month rule. If the rule can be circumvented in this way, eliminating the rule is also a fair resolution.

DVC will never do it, of course. They don't want people booking years in advance and tie themselves up from taking things out of inventory for upgrades etc.

But from a theoretical standpoint, no 11 month rule is more fair in my opinion than an 11 month rule that can be walked around.

I am just clarifying that people are not booking a room more than 11 months from a check in date. because people read that and may think they are as I’ve seen that.

I am a technical person so when people say eliminating walking, they reall are advocating for the elimination of modifications more than. 31 days out with no penalty. .

 

[Orsino]

I am just clarifying that people are not booking a room more than 11 months from a check in date. because people read that and may think they are as I’ve seen that.

I am a technical person so when people say eliminating walking, they reall are advocating for the elimination of modifications more than. 31 days out with no penalty. .

No. I don't think you correctly understand what many advocate regarding walking.

I also don't think you understand what walking is. When someone walks a reservation, do you think they are checking in 11 months from when they started walking? Because they are not. That's the entire point of walking.

 

[Sandisw]

No. I don't think you correctly understand what many advocate regarding walking.

I also don't think you understand what walking is. When someone walks a reservation, do you think they are checking in 11 months from when they started walking? Because they are not. That's the entire point of walking.

I do understand it quite well. They book a reservation 11 months from a check in date, They then move a reservations check in date,

The fact That the check in date changes, doesn’t make It a reservation that booked before 11 months.

The point of walking is to secure one reservation at 11 months and then change that reservation to a different date.

Any date change to reservation is a date change. That is my point. Whether it is because they have decided to walk it forward or because they got different airfare, or simply changed their minds, People just don’t like this particular reason for changing a check in date,

New people read these boards all the time, and when others say people are booking reservations more than 11 months it causes confusion,

Its why I like people to know what is actually happening. They are changing reservations booked 11 months in advance to a new reservation starting at a later date. it may seem like a silly difference, but it helps people to really understand it.

Why? Because to fix it, DVC has to change the rules in the
POS/Home Resort Rules and Regulations that puts in a penalty or restrictions for modifying reservations.

I wonder if the question was “Should DVC change the rules and put in restrictions or penalties for changing or modifying reservations more than 31 days out, regardless of reason?” if people would respond the same way.

 

[Bearval]

How about going back to the original 260 point buy in? The dvc system was designed for flexibility—stay in any size villa, at different times of year, bank, borrow, etc, etc.

I think much of the problem comes from people wanting only a studio during a specific time of year. If that studio with the budget view is unavailable, the member is stuck.

Now if every member had a minimum 260 points to play with, this isn’t such a problem. The member could upgrade the view or go for a one bedroom when necessary.

The trend toward small contracts does not allow the dvc system to be used as originally intended. This 260 minimum buy in has of course become untenable with the high per point cost Disney charges.

Not enough buyers with that amount of disposable income to get a 260 point contract. Almost 50K to buy-in and over 2K a year for maintenance fees.

 

[Bearval]

But what about the person who wants a 2 week vacation (like me!)? I book my first 7 nights and then walk the next week out each day to my full number of days that I want. I fully intend to use all of the nights I book and expect to have it all as one reservation. I sometimes book in my 11-7 month window, but usually at 7 months so I need to carry my days out to the end. I know you only suggested this for 11 months, but I should be able to book my whole trip by adding my days at the end as needed.

You would not be impacted, you are adding days not canceling days.

 

[MamaBelle4]

I don't like walking as much as the next guy. To me, it's like when you know you have to switch lanes because of a split, but the lane you have to be in is slower, so you speed ahead of people diligently waiting their turn and then cut them off at the exit (thereby contributing to the slowness of the exit lane). I do not think it is fair, personally.

BUT I don't want DVC changing their system. I think inviting changes is equivalent to inviting a loss of freedom.

 

[TikiRob]

I don't like walking as much as the next guy. To me, it's like when you know you have to switch lanes because of a split, but the lane you have to be in is slower, so you speed ahead of people diligently waiting their turn and then cut them off at the exit (thereby contributing to the slowness of the exit lane). I do not think it is fair, personally.

BUT I don't want DVC changing their system. I think inviting changes is equivalent to inviting a loss of freedom.

We aren't supposed to drive like that?

Just kidding, but that is a great analogy!