Should DVC eliminate walking?

[jerseyduke]

Full cancel would still be available, just not a partial cancel of the reservation. Partial cancellations are what drive walking. Full cancellation does not confer a walking advantage so I see no reason to restrict those.

In my view, walking circumvents the 11 month rule. The 11 month rules exists for a reason and DVC should enforce it.

There are very legitimate reasons to cancel a reservation partially, why penalize that?

If DVC said you can no longer partially cancel a reservation they would probably get sued.

Its such a minor problem.

 

[Orsino]

Walking also impacts only a small number of units, and it's unlikely that magically eliminating walking suddenly makes AKV Value easily booked. Too few of them. Same for BWV Standard, truthfully.

Perhaps. But it would eliminate the need to check in day after day to pick up the dates that the walkers leave in their wake (which I have done).

There is a certain dissonance between the discussion of walking, the complaining about walking and the assertion that it isn't a big deal.

 

[Orsino]

There are very legitimate reasons to cancel a reservation partially, why penalize that?

If DVC said you can no longer partially cancel a reservation they would probably get sued.

Its such a minor problem.

Sorry for using shorthand. I meant within the small window partial cancellations would be blocked. After the booking window passes the reservation, partial cancel would be fine of course. Also, partial cancels that do not include the first day would be okay too during the short block window. Then you could cancel the latter half to book a different room for a split stay. Really, I'm not seeing the huge number of needs (other than walking) to cancel the first day literally within days of booking it. All the examples so far either don't apply or misunderstand the timing aspect. I'm not saying one can never cancel the first day, just not during the time period when one could use those points to walk.

 

[DsneyDude1]

I've been a member for over 26 years and think your idea has merit.

 

[DVC_HK]

I say no due to it's how i'm getting my 50th room reservation

 

[jerseyduke]

Sorry for using shorthand. I meant within the small window partial cancellations would be blocked. After the booking window passes the reservation, partial cancel would be fine of course. Also, partial cancels that do not include the first day would be okay too during the short block window. Then you could cancel the latter half to book a different room for a split stay. Really, I'm not seeing the huge number of needs (other than walking) to cancel the first day literally within days of booking it. All the examples so far either don't apply or misunderstand the timing aspect. I'm not saying one can never cancel the first day, just not during the time period when one could use those points to walk.

and that small window is enough!
Just because you do not see the reasons does not mean they do not exist. What about booking a X view room because Y isnt available, but Y opens up? Nope, sorry you are stuck with what you booked.

You are probably right, but it only takes 1 angry person and a lawyer. Other people can chime in more than I can, but what you are suggesting could be a violation of the POS, but I am not sure.

And, who is going to pay for these IT changes? Members.

Your exact words were:
A simple way to eliminate walking with low impact on legitimate reservation changes is to not allow cancellation


It is only a low impact when its not your legitimate reservation. once its your legitimate reservation its a high impact

 

[Sandisw]

I would just restrict cancelling the first day of the reservation until the day after the last day of the reservation is bookable. Eliminate walking by removing the ability to shift points until after the next booking day is open. Remove the advantage. For example, if I book 1 March through 7 March. Don't let me cancel 1 March until 8 March. Now I can't recoup the March 1 points until 8 march is already bookable. No walking for me! I would have to get 8 March on the open market like everyone else.

But if I book 8 March with additional points, I'm okay because I'm keeping 1 March. But once I book 8 March, I can't cancel 1 March until 9 March.

I would also probably allow a full cancel of the reservation, since full cancel does not allow walking.

So, someone like me who has a boat load of points, could hold a reservation for weeks and keep adding days to the reservation ans and then adjust on day 8.

What about people who want to stay longer? No, I think that things are fine the way they are and I’d rather have the ability to adjust as needed then have restrictions out on; the systems,

I did some checking through the busy times of late November to December for studios. At 9 am, for the most part, every resort had studios still available for booking. Not all views, but something. The 3 exceptions were VGF, CCV, and RIV...although RIV was available About half the time still,,,

I think sometimes too that when someone can’t get a room it is automatically assumed it’s been walked vs. just being booked by people who want it,

I just walked a tower studio for 2 weeks so I could have it in January. Was on one night, it was still there and booked so I didn’t have to worry because I had just figured out my dates.

I also wanted to see what would happen if I just tried to book right at 11 months. Went on at 8 am and would have been okay. So, next year, I won’t worry or walk it because it isn’t probably needed.

 

[Orsino]

and that small window is enough!
Just because you do not see the reasons does not mean they do not exist. What about booking a X view room because Y isnt available, but Y opens up? Nope, sorry you are stuck with what you booked.

I'm trying to understand this example, but I don't. What I come up with either doesn't get affected by the proposed change or "is walking."

If you book a room at X for 6 nights, then want to change it to 6 nights at Y, that is a full cancel and would not be affected by the proposed change.

If you book a room at X for 6 nights, then want to change nights 4, 5, and 6 to Y, that is also allowed because Night 1 is not touched. (in other words, no change).

If you book a room at X for 6 nights, then want to change nights 1, 2, and 3 to Y, this is walking which is what the discussion is trying to eliminate. This reservation change would have booked night 4, 5, and 6 prior to the 11 month window. Options in this case would be to full cancel and rebook 4, 5 and 6 without the walking benefit. Also one could wait until the booking window passes day 6 and partial cancel then. I don't see any onerous problems here. If you don't agree that this constitutes walking, then we are in 'agree to disagree' territory.

Please let me know if I'm missing something.

 

[JETSDAD]

I'm not in favour of changing the system from being first come first served where everyone has the same chance at reservations to being one where people with the most points have the best chance at the reservations by being able to walk longer.

 

[Sandisw]

I'm trying to understand this example, but I don't. What I come up with either doesn't get affected by the proposed change or "is walking."

If you book a room at X for 6 nights, then want to change it to 6 nights at Y, that is a full cancel and would not be affected by the proposed change.

If you book a room at X for 6 nights, then want to change nights 4, 5, and 6 to Y, that is also allowed because Night 1 is not touched. (in other words, no change).

If you book a room at X for 6 nights, then want to change nights 1, 2, and 3 to Y, this is walking which is what the discussion is trying to eliminate. This reservation change would have booked night 4, 5, and 6 prior to the 11 month window. Options in this case would be to full cancel and rebook 4, 5 and 6 without the walking benefit. Also one could wait until the booking window passes day 6 and partial cancel then. I don't see any onerous problems here. If you don't agree that this constitutes walking, then we are in 'agree to disagree' territory.

Please let me know if I'm missing something.

Your last example is not really walking, since the goal is to not move it forward at all.

The problem with a change like this is that you have to make rules that can be consistently applied across the board and that will impact other situations that are not walking.

So, at 11 Months, your suggestion is no change to a reservation for 7 days. But what about a reservation made at 10 months, does the no changes for 7 days apply?

I make a reservation at 11 months for 7 nights, knowing I will only keep 4 since I won’t know about airfare. When would I be allowed to change this? Technically, if I drop nights 1, 2 and 3, even months later, it matches your situation as walking, when in fact, I haven’t walked. But rather booked more nights than I need with the notion that I can adjust later. That is a big plus of our current system.

There is no way to prevent walking unless you completely change the booking rules and if they do that, it will have to apply to all changes and adjustments.

I mean, someone who owns say 300 BWV points could technically book about 25 days in a SV studio in November into December, not touch it for months, and then drop the days at the front, when they decide the actual nights they want, which would be well past your deadline of 7 days..

 

[we"reofftoneverland]

Full cancel would still be available, just not a partial cancel of the reservation. Partial cancellations are what drive walking. Full cancellation does not confer a walking advantage so I see no reason to restrict those.

In my view, walking circumvents the 11 month rule. The 11 month rules exists for a reason and DVC should enforce it.

How does it circumvent? If I do not own at BWV, for example, I cannot walk there at 11 months.

The walking stuff doesn’t bother me.

 

[Sandisw]

Full cancel would still be available, just not a partial cancel of the reservation. Partial cancellations are what drive walking. Full cancellation does not confer a walking advantage so I see no reason to restrict those.

In my view, walking circumvents the 11 month rule. The 11 month rules exists for a reason and DVC should enforce it.

The 11 month rule is you are allowed to to book 7 days from check in. They do enforce this rule all the time. They won’t let you book more than that ever, and you can’t book a specific date until 11 month + 7 days out. ,

So, the rules are being followed. What you are discussing isn’t about the 11 month window, but about people booking dates They are allowed to book and then deciding to change the dates later.

 

[iheartglaciers]

I wouldn’t want the restrictions that would come with limiting walkers. Especially since it primarily affects a small amount of room categories. One of the things I love about DVC is the flexibility.

If they want to get rid of walkers without implementing restrictions, than change the point charts. Besides Boardwalk view and Copper Creek studios, walking is mostly done to get low point rooms.

 

[drusba]

A simple way to eliminate walking with low impact on legitimate reservation changes is to not allow cancellation of the first day of your reservation until the booking window has moved past the last day of your reservation. Need to cancel? No problem, just wait a few more days. Need to add days because you are staying longer than seven days? No problem, because you are keeping your first day.

Some walking could still happen if someone has a pile of points, but the constant cancel/extend type walking would be eliminated.

Doubt that is a valid solution. It would simply create a new system that would heavily favor those with a lot of points while the current walking system favors no one on the basis of number of points owned.

The current system works the same if the owner has enough points for four nights and another owner enough for 7. Assume they both want four nights, Jan 27-31. Today A could reserve Jan 12 -16 and begin walking and B could reserve Jan 12-19 and begin walking. A stands in just as much a favorable position as B because of why walking works for an 11 month out reservation. Once A reserves a room for four nights, no one else can get that room for any such nights or any nights thereafter. All A needs to do is to regularly modify his reservation to a new four day reservation until he reaches the dates he wants. B can reserve 7 nights today but he is in the same position to get the desired four nights. His room is locked in for those 7 nights and all nights thereafter The only difference between the two is that B can do fewer modifications to finally get to the actual dates he wants.

Under your proposal, A could not reserve the nights he wants, Jan 27-31, until Feb 27, while B, on Feb. 24, could reserve 7 nights, Jan 24 to 31, and then drop the first three nights March 1.

In other words, the current system is fair to all -- the difference simply boils down to whether one wants to do walking or not do it.

 

[Disney Dad ADL]

I wouldn’t want the restrictions that would come with limiting walkers. Especially since it primarily affects a small amount of room categories. One of the things I love about DVC is the flexibility.

If they want to get rid of walkers without implementing restrictions, than change the point charts. Besides Boardwalk view and Copper Creek studios, walking is mostly done to get low point rooms.

Right, walking happens because certain rooms/times have demand >> supply. Normally, the way you fix that is to increase the point cost of the popular times and decrease the point cost of the unpopular times. Walking is just a symptom of the underlying problem. But changing the point costs probably would not be a very popular solution either since lots of people purchase contracts with the idea that they will be always book those low cost rooms.

 

[Disney Dad ADL]

As a follow up, if you got rid of walking, then it would be the people who have fast fingers and fast internet connections who would have the advantage for popular periods. People who have work hours that prevent them from being at the computer at 8 AM Eastern also would be disadvantaged.

Actually if they really wanted to make it objectively fair (other than changing the point charts), they could designate the most popular periods to be "special seasons" and implement "Special Seasons preference lists" and then allocation reservations by some other means (like random raffle). This ability is actually exists in the DVC member agreement, though I have never heard of a time when they actually used it.

 

[Sandisw]

As a follow up, if you got rid of walking, then it would be the people who have fast fingers and fast internet connections who would have the advantage for popular periods. People who have work hours that prevent them from being at the computer at 8 AM Eastern also would be disadvantaged.

Actually if they really wanted to make it objectively fair (other than changing the point charts), they could designate the most popular periods to be "special seasons" and implement "Special Seasons preference lists" and then allocation reservations by some other means (like random raffle). This ability is actually exists in the DVC member agreement, though I have never heard of a time when they actually used it.

Brought up a good point. Those that live on West coast are forced to get up at 5 am To compete. People overseas could be in the middle of the work day. If one works a job that won’t allow you to be online at 8 am lose out.

All situations that prevent someone from getting a room which isn’t any less frustrating or different than those that walk,

First come, first serve means just that, As long as the system is the same for all, it’s the best option. There will always be winners or losers.

 

[TikiRob]

Here me out...
...
...
...AKV concierge boarding groups!

 

[sethschroeder]

I would just restrict cancelling the first day of the reservation until the day after the last day of the reservation is bookable.

Exactly and this does not impact anyone. If it does it means you are walking (sorry doesn't matter if its even a single day change).

There is zero reason not to have this. Someone will say "well I can book 4 months with all my points". Sure but now you have all your points tied up in to a single room so it severely limits the number of people walking and lets be honest that is a tiny group of owners.

Definitely agree with this. Any restrictions put in place will only cause other problems later. Once DVC goes down this path, it will only get worse with more and more restrictions until nobody likes it.

Great3

Except what the other poster posted.

Even if it's just for a week it's still no cancelling for a time.

Full cancel would still be available, just not a partial cancel of the reservation.

Including both because its the Q/A

There are very legitimate reasons to cancel a reservation partially, why penalize that?

No one is being penalized. Wait until the last day of your reservation is bookable and you can cancel away. Started booking the start of your vacation on the wrong day? Sorry should have been more careful either fully cancel or wait until the booking windows moves past your reservation and hope your primary option is still there.

 

[sethschroeder]

Here me out...
...
...
...AKV concierge boarding groups!

See honestly I know its a joke but one of the options could be a random drawing for your dates. At roughly 12 months out it notifies you if your reservation has been randomly selected. It basically works as your waitlist and if you don't get it you book another category room at 11 or 7 months.

Yes there may be more left over inventory but I suspect any category "selling out" would likely have straggling nights picked up anyways because they are cheaper or a special room type.