Walking “fix” implemented? Problems booking a high value Villa.

[KAT4DISNEY]

I’ve never heard that people also drop at exactly 8:00 am.

I've seen that for a few years. I have guessed people don't fully understand what allows walking so they are on every morning making the change thinking they'll lose their last day if they don't. When I have picked up the day cancelled it's often left no availability for that previous day so I think it's very few doing it that way. You're also starting with a much smaller number of rooms available. It might be only be a couple that your competing for at 8am.

I did a combo of this for a Feb 2BR standard view at BWV. Sometimes at 8am I'd get the room and sometimes I'd be picking up the trailing night. Just depended on who got in 1st but I got all the days.

FWIW I see you speculated a bit further down that DVC might be doing something. That has crossed my mind for several reasons over the years.

 

[TCRAIG]

It's ridiculous that this is what it's like trying to book a room. It needs to be fixed. Limit the number of modifications to each reservation to one. One modification, then you must cancel and re-book. Or at least you must call into MS and have them make further modifications. That would put an end to the chronic walking that makes these rooms hard to book.

One modification gets a hard and fast ‘oh hell no’ from me - it would be a disaster -and I’m not a bot or a renter - I’m just booking for me with my points…

 

[HyperspaceMountainPilot]

One modification gets a hard and fast ‘oh hell no’ from me - it would be a disaster -and I’m not a bot or a renter - I’m just booking for me with my points…

Agree. Also, having fewer modifications would seem to give an even bigger advantage to commercial renters and/or bots. If you have automated software (or paid employees) scanning 24/7 for desirable reservation space, each time someone is forced to drop at an odd time it’s more likely to be picked up by a sophisticated entity.

 

[CarolMN]

Want to stop walking? Make every date change a cancel & rebook.

Want to stop spec renting? Make every change of lead guest a cancel & rebook.

Be careful what you wish for.

 

[BeachClub2014]

Want to stop walking? Make every date change a cancel & rebook.

Want to stop spec renting? Make every change of lead guest a cancel & rebook.

Be careful what you wish for.

Yeah, that would be not good.

You slow both down by offering one free date change and one lead guest change per membership per year and charging a fee for any additional changes.

 

[Chuck S]

Yeah, that would be not good.

You slow both down by offering one free date change and one lead guest change per membership per year and charging a fee for any additional changes.

Only one Per Membership per year? That sure wouldn't work for me. I often book rooms before the flights are even available, and will modify room days to get the best flight prices when the airlines start booking. And there are times I've had to modify because someone's time off from work changes, or downsize or upsize a room as guests can change during the 11 months after booking to when the trip actually takes place. I also generally have more than one active reservation at any given time, usually traveling two to three times per year. Plus it gives advantages to those that may own several smaller contracts spread through several memberships due to use years

Plus I doubt the State of Florida Timeshare division would be onboard with charging a fee to simply change a reservation for a resort we are deeded.

 

[muppets3d]

I was able to book my standard view deluxe studio at Riviera this morning, at 8AM. This typically works for me for all room types, except for the value studios and often the concierge studios as well - I often have to try for a week or so to book those. I'm sure bots play a role in these rooms going so quickly but it's also just that they're good points values, AKV is big with lots of owners, and lots of members want them.

Still not sure why the standard studios are all disappearing shortly after 8AM right now. That's not typical. Often weekends will be gone well within the 11 month window, but usually some dates survive into the 7 month window. But right now, all of May is being taken. That is somewhat unusual. I guess May is going to be a high-demand season, much like September is.

 

[wnielsen1]

Want to stop walking? Make every date change a cancel & rebook.

Want to stop spec renting? Make every change of lead guest a cancel & rebook.

Be careful what you wish for.

I can live with that.

 

[CWTC]

You slow both down by offering one free date change and one lead guest change per membership per year and charging a fee for any additional changes.

Suggestions of limiting changes comes up repeatedly in most walking, renting, availability threads. The issue is limiting changes will most likely be limiting for the bulk of the membership. For example, we have 8 total contracts all same UY so 1 membership and we travel 2-3 times per year and usually have 2-3 active reservations at a time. Maybe it wouldn’t be an issue for us if we only had 1 contract and went every other year. We fly to WDW and DL so we sometimes need to change our dates based on flights - for our upcoming BCV trip, we added a day (at around month 5, not month 11 or month 7). So, that would have been our 1 change for year. Or using another poster’s example we would have had to cancel just to add 1 day to our trip. I imagine people with more flexibility and larger travel groups have changes more often than we do which is fine with me.

Each time a suggestion of limiting changes or requiring a cancel/rebook for any changes comes up my first thought is to be careful what you wish for because the fix may be worse.

 

[muppets3d]

I can live with that.

I could too, but the point is some members couldn't and it's not fair to make let's say a Grand Floridian owner suffer because owners of AKV are frustrated they can't book concierge when they want it. DVC is an expensive product and part of the appeal is its flexibility. We can't lose the flexibility that attracted many of us to the product, or at least played a role in our decision to buy.

I think a better solution is for DVC to just go after the known commercial renters. Those owners who own thousands of points purely to rent them out. Tap on their shoulder and the message will get sent that rumpus time is over.

 

[BeachClub2014]

Suggestions of limiting changes comes up repeatedly in most walking, renting, availability threads. The issue is limiting changes will most likely be limiting for the bulk of the membership. For example, we have 8 total contracts all same UY so 1 membership and we travel 2-3 times per year and usually have 2-3 active reservations at a time. Maybe it wouldn’t be an issue for us if we only had 1 contract and went every other year. We fly to WDW and DL so we sometimes need to change our dates based on flights - for our upcoming BCV trip, we added a day (at around month 5, not month 11 or month 7). So, that would have been our 1 change for year. Or using another poster’s example we would have had to cancel just to add 1 day to our trip. I imagine people with more flexibility and larger travel groups have changes more often than we do which is fine with me.

Each time a suggestion of limiting changes or requiring a cancel/rebook for any changes comes up my first thought is to be careful what you wish for because the fix may be worse.

Yep, I know. I wasn't actually advocating for this change; I was saying that those fees are a way to stop walking, etc., which was the topic of discussion. I've read many of those same threads, and there are always folks who want walking totally stopped, some folks who don't think it's an issue at all, and then those who say, "That change won't work for me because..."

There is no solution to a perceived problem that everyone will support or want.

 

[BeachClub2014]

Only one Per Membership per year? That sure wouldn't work for me. I oftern book rooms before the flights are even available, and will modify room days to get the best flight prices when the airlines start booking. And there are times I've had to modify because someone's time of from work changes, or downsize or upsize a roomas guests can change during the 11 months after booking to when the trip actually takes place. I also generally have more than one active reservation at any given time, usually traveling two to three times per year. Plus it gives advantages to those that may own several smaller contracts spread through several memberships due to use years

Plus I doubt the State of Florida Timeshare division would be onboard with charging a fee to simply change a reservation for a resort we are deeded.

I'm sure that it wouldn't work for a lot of people, and I wouldn't like it either. I was just commenting on a previous comment that was an even more draconian "fix" to walking. I don't think @CarolMN was suggesting what she put into her post. There are several easy ways to address these issues, none of which will be popular with a subset of DVC owners.

I have no idea what the State of Florida Timeshare people think, feel, believe, want, like, don't like. I don't work for them and am not a lawyer specializing in Florida timeshare law. If you do, or if you are, then great! I might suggest that you point the reader toward the actual applicable policy or law so we can educate ourselves.

 

[Chuck S]

One thing that could help, or hinder the issue, would be to charge a $100 internal trade fee when booking a reservation for a resort with points that are owned at a different resort.
It is something I rarely do, but there are others who do so for almost every trip. It's not something I'd be particularly in favor of for those members that purposefully bought sleep around contracts. And It won't help with the 11 month issue, but it may cut down on walking spec reservations at non-home resorts.

All of the solutions I've seen offered are like the Magic in Once Upon A Time, they always come with a price.

 

[CWTC]

One thing that could help, or hinder the issue, would be to charge a $100 internal trade fee when booking a reservation for a resort with points that are owned at a different resort.
It is something I rarely do, but there are others who do so for almost every trip. It's not something I'd be particularly in favor of for those members that purposefully bought sleep around contracts. And It won't help with the 11 month issue, but it may cut down on walking spec reservations at non-home resorts.

Genuine question - is the 7 month non home resort availability/spec renting a big problem? I have only been following availability peripherally because we don’t own at BWV or AKL (where it seems to be the biggest issue at 11 months) but it has seemed to me the issue is rooms with small inventory (ie AKL concierge or value) at 11 months rather than X room at X resort at month 7.

 

[kes601]

Genuine question - is the 7 month non home resort availability/spec renting a big problem? I have only been following availability peripherally because we don’t own at BWV or AKL (where it seems to be the biggest issue at 11 months) but it has seemed to me the issue is rooms with small inventory (ie AKL concierge or value) at 11 months rather than X room at X resort at month 7.

I will say that we will "walk" at 7 months if we see something we like. We actually specifically picked SSR so that we wouldn't have to generally be worried about booking at 11 months (Christmas week not included). I don't see this being a "problem" since any owner can block somebody walking at 7 months if they would like. The most we'll do is probably a week at a time, anything more than that is a waste of time in my minds because of being blocked.

Can't speak for Chuck, but I never thought of 7 months being the problem. The problem (if you want to call it that) is the walking at 11 months....but even without walking there are going to be times of year that demand exceeds inventory (with or without rentals).

 

[Sandisw]

I could too, but the point is some members couldn't and it's not fair to make let's say a Grand Floridian owner suffer because owners of AKV are frustrated they can't book concierge when they want it. DVC is an expensive product and part of the appeal is its flexibility. We can't lose the flexibility that attracted many of us to the product, or at least played a role in our decision to buy.

I think a better solution is for DVC to just go after the known commercial renters. Those owners who own thousands of points purely to rent them out. Tap on their shoulder and the message will get sent that rumpus time is over.

I agree. The big benefit for us is how flexible DVC is and if you start making it so restrictive that you could lose access to staying at your home resort because you need to make modifications later on, even if it is multiple times, or have to pay a fee, it’s no longer be something people will want to the degree it is now.

I believe DVCs first responsibility is to the indivual owner and that they should have rules that are a positive for as many owners as possible in using their membership.

 

[Sandisw]

Genuine question - is the 7 month non home resort availability/spec renting a big problem? I have only been following availability peripherally because we don’t own at BWV or AKL (where it seems to be the biggest issue at 11 months) but it has seemed to me the issue is rooms with small inventory (ie AKL concierge or value) at 11 months rather than X room at X resort at month 7.

Those high demand rooms that get walked at 11 months get walked at 7 months for my CV of the year.

The issue that DVC has to face is how do you set the rules to capture what you want for that small set of rooms vs the system as a whole.

The nuisances of such changes could be huge. If you make a reservation right at 11 months, rules are X…but does that apply if you make it at 10 months and 3 weeks.

Should rules be stricter for home resort owners booking at 11 months than for those trading in at 7 months.

Is it really better for owners to have to cancel and rebook everything if something happens a month later? If changes are stopped within a short time of booking, then how does it work with those who need to book more than 7 days.

Does a rule change like no modifications benefit large point owners? Will someone hold more than one room when they have points to do so to cover staggered start dates to avoid it?

Maybe there are good answers to all those questions. I am just saying that DVC, when setting rules, is going to have to look at every situation and at least consider the outcomes and its impact on the every day owner.

So while it sometimes seems simple, it may not be and I would be surprised if there are a lot of owners who want less flexibility, especially when we are seeing, and DVC sees it too, that owners are not getting completely shut out at 11 months from their home resort..maybe not room size or view they want, but it always seems something is there.

 

[Tatebeck]

I at least want something that ensures I have the same chance as every other owner, I.E. something like a captcha that stops any bots or programs from snagging rooms faster than the human owners. There will be times where it is hard to book, and I get that. I just hate the thought of bots taking the most valuable rooms before legitimate owners get a chance at them. My idea would be a captcha or process that has to be completed by a human after selecting the room before they "hold" it for you to complete the reservation.

Search at 8:00 AM -> Select a room that is available ->complete human verification -> room is now "held" as you complete the reservation

Doesn't stop any legitimate owner from booking, but may hurt any commercial renters/bot users

 

[HyperspaceMountainPilot]

I at least want something that ensures I have the same chance as every other owner, I.E. something like a captcha that stops any bots or programs from snagging rooms faster than the human owners. There will be times where it is hard to book, and I get that. I just hate the thought of bots taking the most valuable rooms before legitimate owners get a chance at them. My idea would be a captcha or process that has to be completed by a human after selecting the room before they "hold" it for you to complete the reservation.

Search at 8:00 AM -> Select a room that is available ->complete human verification -> room is now "held" as you complete the reservation

Doesn't stop any legitimate owner from booking, but may hurt any commercial renters/bot users

I agree and hope 90-99% of owners would too— unfortunately I think it costs Disney a lot of effort to try to stay ahead of bots and they don’t seem inclined to do it.

 

[Chuck S]

I at least want something that ensures I have the same chance as every other owner, I.E. something like a captcha that stops any bots or programs from snagging rooms faster than the human owners. There will be times where it is hard to book, and I get that. I just hate the thought of bots taking the most valuable rooms before legitimate owners get a chance at them. My idea would be a captcha or process that has to be completed by a human after selecting the room before they "hold" it for you to complete the reservation.

Search at 8:00 AM -> Select a room that is available ->complete human verification -> room is now "held" as you complete the reservation

Doesn't stop any legitimate owner from booking, but may hurt any commercial renters/bot users

I doubt captcha would help much. The bot script would simply pause and wait for a hyman to solve the captcha, then continue. Imagine if it showed availabilty, but didn;t hold it for you while you do the captcha...there would surely be screaming claiming captcha cost me my reservation!