Reservation Walking Banned by Disney

[jvmbmc]

What dos everyone think about Disney instituting a ban on reservation walking? How could they implement that without affecting legitimate cancellations for inability to attend? Could there be a system or set of rules where only so many cancel and adds within a specific date window like 1 week aren't allowed? For example only allow this once per calendar year. What's everyone thoughts on this and how it would open up availability to people wanting to book a contiguous set of vacation days. I assume Disney has the ability to implement some rule like or similar to this for DVC members.

 

[Chuck S]

I think it would cost Disney/DVC $$$ in employee time to monitor it, or to re-write computer coding and since it really only affects non-walkers right at the 11 month window, would be a solution in search of a problem.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

What part of "walking a reservation" violates the POS? And that's coming from someone that's never done it.

 

[Chuck S]

I'll admit to walking. I walked a two bedroom and an accessible GV at OKW for Thanksgiving week a couple of years ago. And that was only because there are only 3 ECV Accessible GVs at OKW. All the other GVs require you to climb a flight of stairs to enter. It was a group trip of 11 people including myself.
That is the only time I've felt the need to walk a reservation.

 

[CarolMN]

DVCMC doesn't care who books and/or occupies a villa. Their goal is just to have every villa booked. There is currently no incentive for them to make more work for themselves - either for their IT or CMs. In fact, every 'solution' will cost them $$. Walking as it is done now costs them nothing and the booking process fills the rooms.

I'm not a fan of walking, but am a huge fan of "Be careful of what you wish for".

When there are only a few villas and many who want them, many will end up disappointed. Any implemented solution will just end up with a different set of disappointed members, and most likely, several others who are inconvenienced by the chosen 'solution'.

P.S. 'Fair' is a place to take your pig. It's virtually impossible for everyone to agree on what a 'fair' booking process might be.

 

[JackosinDIS]

As someone who books 14 consecutive days for our annual vacation, it is essential that I can modify the reservation twice to add the total nights required without getting blocked out of dates.

In addition to that, there may be a good reason I would want to further modify the dates to take account of other factors such as change in flight times or just a change of mind.

So for me it is essential that the ability to modify remains in place.

That said, the amount of walking happening at the moment does irk me a little. Not because it’s against any specific rule, but because the evidence I see suggests that it is done primarily by professional points renters, who do it purely to extract the biggest profits from their points. Totally understandable if that’s your business - but it’s not in the spirit of the DVC system. I see multiple owners on the rental sites, with value AKL studios, standard BWV and BCV studios lined up for practically every available date for the next 11 months. How are they getting those other than walking all year round??

For that reason, I would be happy to work with a more limited modification allowance, as I think it would enable me to actually get some of the dates I want at 11 months rather than watching them being grabbed and rented out for $25-30 per point! I don’t think it would be that difficult for DVC to limit the number of times that the start date of the reservation could be modified. If this was changed to say, a limit of 2 modifications of the start date, it would still allow people to extend the number of nights, but would hopefully curtail the amount of time that a res can be walked, or even put a stop to it if the owner knows that they may want to modify the start date other than by reason of walking.

I’m sure there will be arguments against doing this, but I do think it’s time to find a balance to protect the regular DVC owners who just want a fair chance at booking… otherwise it’s going to be a case of ‘if you can’t beat them, join them’…. I’ll start walking my CCV studio for Christmas ‘25 next month

 

[Sandisw]

Not a fan of any penalty outside of 31 days. I love being able to modify and change trips as much as I want.

I agree with others…any solution is going to have far greater impacts on those who make changes that are not walking.

 

[jvmbmc]

I think it would cost Disney/DVC $$$ in employee time to monitor it, or to re-write computer coding and since it really only affects non-walkers right at the 11 month window, would be a solution in search of a problem.

I would think most people are non walkers at 11months and writing a computer program is not that costly in my opinion as a former IT manager and Disney had the money.

 

[jvmbmc]

Not a fan of any penalty outside of 31 days. I love being able to modify and change trips as much as I want.

I agree with others…any solution is going to have far greater impacts on those who make changes that are not walking.

I'm not saying my suggestions are the best but I believe some modification and restrictions are warranted.

 

[jvmbmc]

DVCMC doesn't care who books and/or occupies a villa. Their goal is just to have every villa booked. There is currently no incentive for them to make more work for themselves - either for their IT or CMs. In fact, every 'solution' will cost them $$. Walking as it is done now costs them nothing and the booking process fills the rooms.

I'm not a fan of walking, but am a huge fan of "Be careful of what you wish for".

When there are only a few villas and many who want them, many will end up disappointed. Any implemented solution will just end up with a different set of disappointed members, and most likely, several others who are inconvenienced by the chosen 'solution'.

P.S. 'Fair' is a place to take your pig. It's virtually impossible for everyone to agree on what a 'fair' booking process might be.

Lets call it what it is, walking is essentially making reservations you don't want on a rolling basis that block other DVC members who could use those dates from using them

 

[Genie+]

There’s a good chance I’d be OK with the net outcome if DVC made changes specifically to combat walking and commercial renting, but I’m not counting on it anytime soon. There’s a long way between reasonable personal use and gaming the system. Walking and commercial usage is not protected in the contract. If both continue growing at recent rates and eventually the product is clearly suffering due to that, it will need to be addressed.

 

[Sandisw]

Lets call it what it is, walking is essentially making reservations you don't want on a rolling basis that block other DVC members who could use those dates from using them

Not really…because if it’s only walking causing the situation then all one has to do is waitlist or wait a few days when they are dropped and you will get the room.

If after a few days you don’t or the waitlist doesn’t work then it means more owners actually wanted those dates and kept them.

Walking doesn’t bother me in the least because owners have the right to secure rooms when they want.

Let’s be honest…some of us do book rooms they are not sure they are going to use and hold until later. Until I drop, I am blocking someone else.

Any booking blocks someone else who might want it. Walking has the biggest impact on popular rooms that have more guests wanting them then rooms available.

I hope the system does not change because large point owners, like me, will be at an advantage because we could hold rooms until such time a modification can be made without penalty.

 

[Sandisw]

There’s a good chance I’d be OK with the net outcome if DVC made changes specifically to combat walking and commercial renting, but I’m not counting on it anytime soon. There’s a long way between reasonable personal use and gaming the system. Walking and commercial usage is not protected in the contract. If both continue growing at recent rates and eventually the product is clearly suffering due to that, it will need to be addressed.

Walking is currently protected in the contract in the sense that it says there are no penalties for any changes 31 days or more.

Now, DVC can amend the home resort rules and regulations to penalize people for changing trips more often, or make everything a cancel and rebook, etc.

But that drastically changes the product and they have no reason to do that…nor would I want them to. This comes up every year and in the end, changes that could possibly be done to curb walking…it can never be stopped without making it that any changes require cancel and rebook..

No change will allow everyone who wants CCV studios in December to get them.

 

[BWoody]

What dos everyone think about Disney instituting a ban on reservation walking? How could they implement that without affecting legitimate cancellations for inability to attend? Could there be a system or set of rules where only so many cancel and adds within a specific date window like 1 week aren't allowed? For example only allow this once per calendar year. What's everyone thoughts on this and how it would open up availability to people wanting to book a contiguous set of vacation days. I assume Disney has the ability to implement some rule like or similar to this for DVC members.

I'd love to see restrictions of some sort on walking, and for what it's worth, walkers have never affected me before so its not a personal experience issue I have with it. I just detest the practice. It is not the way the system is intended to work. I suppose it is a current feature of the system but it is not the intention of the system to allow this. I get that all the rooms get filled at the end of the day, so someone is still getting the rooms, but it isn't right the way people have to one up each other all the time to make sure they get what they want even if it means screwing 3 other families in the process. And its not that someone got the preferred dates and someone else didn't. It's that you mucked up the room availability in the weeks before you finally stopped walking. Its the families trying to get rooms in those weeks I feel bad for. They shouldn't have to waitlist or follow walkers adding a day at a time and that gets messy trying to get one at a time. That's how you get broken up reservations where people are trying to get that 1 missing day. If the system could have just been used as it was intended to be used they could have just gotten the full booking when they should have and it wouldn't have been so much trouble. Then these broken up reservations increases the amount of split stays that occur so people can cobble together their whole trip. Then this results in more housekeeping costs because of increased check-out dates and rooms needing to be flipped.

I also do not share the same concern as others here that the solution would have ramifications we don't want. Sure the solution will have ramifications, but any such ramifications largely only affect mass-modifiers or spec bookings. Walking is an 11month on the dot issue. I get that people will book and then maybe want to modify by a couple days after they see flights or plans change, but that is a modification that does not occur during the 11 month booking window where walking creates issues. You're not making that legitimate modification 15 times over the course of a month at the 11 month mark on the dot before your initial window closes. For those who book longer than 10 days, that is fine. You can still modify and add, but the key is you are not dropping off the first night so this is legitimate. And sure, any solution won't completely eliminate the issue. Large point owners would probably be able to book initially and then just keep adding days to make it a 25 day booking and then later when they are out of whatever window drop the initial 20 days, but a solution would make a large dent in the volume of walking. Also, despite the impression you will get around here, 500-1000 point owners are the exception. Most owners have less than 500 points. You will likely find most owners in the 150-300 point level. So even though large point owners would likely still have an advantage with any restrictions on walking, restrictions of some sort would help limit the problem walking causes.

Having said all that, Disney could create a solution if they wanted, but the rooms get filled, Disney doesn't care, so nothing will happen.

 

[Sandisw]

I'd love to see restrictions of some sort on walking, and for what it's worth, walkers have never affected me before so its not a personal experience issue I have with it. I just detest the practice. It is not the way the system is intended to work. I suppose it is a current feature of the system but it is not the intention of the system to allow this. I get that all the rooms get filled at the end of the day, so someone is still getting the rooms, but it isn't right the way people have to one up each other all the time to make sure they get what they want even if it means screwing 3 other families in the process. And its not that someone got the preferred dates and someone else didn't. It's that you mucked up the room availability in the weeks before you finally stopped walking. Its the families trying to get rooms in those weeks I feel bad for. They shouldn't have to waitlist or follow walkers adding a day at a time and that gets messy trying to get one at a time. That's how you get broken up reservations where people are trying to get that 1 missing day. If the system could have just been used as it was intended to be used they could have just gotten the full booking when they should have and it wouldn't have been so much trouble. Then these broken up reservations increases the amount of split stays that occur so people can cobble together their whole trip. Then this results in more housekeeping costs because of increased check-out dates and rooms needing to be flipped.

I also do not share the same concern as others here that the solution would have ramifications we don't want. Sure the solution will have ramifications, but any such ramifications largely only affect mass-modifiers or spec bookings. Walking is an 11month on the dot issue. I get that people will book and then maybe want to modify by a couple days after they see flights or plans change, but that is a modification that does not occur during the 11 month booking window where walking creates issues. You're not making that legitimate modification 15 times over the course of a month at the 11 month mark on the dot before your initial window closes. For those who book longer than 10 days, that is fine. You can still modify and add, but the key is you are not dropping off the first night so this is legitimate. And sure, any solution won't completely eliminate the issue. Large point owners would probably be able to book initially and then just keep adding days to make it a 25 day booking and then later when they are out of whatever window drop the initial 20 days, but a solution would make a large dent in the volume of walking. Also, despite the impression you will get around here, 500-1000 point owners are the exception. Most owners have less than 500 points. You will likely find most owners in the 150-300 point level. So even though large point owners would likely still have an advantage with any restrictions on walking, restrictions of some sort would help limit the problem walking causes.

Having said all that, Disney could create a solution if they wanted, but the rooms get filled, Disney doesn't care, so nothing will happen.

DVCMCs responsibility is to ensure that the home resort rules and regulations benefit the membership as a whole and not micromanage every little aspect of the system.

So, it’s not about caring or not caring but it’s about whether or not changing the current rules for modifications to combat a very unique situation makes sense for the system as a whole.

 

[jvmbmc]

I would think that the vast majority of people that book a stay plan to use it, I know I do since I live out of state and have to arrange for pet care, plane flights, airport transportation. But things change and so do plans. That's really not walking a reservation for a week or so having no plan to use those dates. I still think there should be some limits even if they are still pretty flexible.

 

[jvmbmc]

Walking is currently protected in the contract in the sense that it says there are no penalties for any changes 31 days or more.

Now, DVC can amend the home resort rules and regulations to penalize people for changing trips more often, or make everything a cancel and rebook, etc.

But that drastically changes the product and they have no reason to do that…nor would I want them to. This comes up every year and in the end, changes that could possibly be done to curb walking…it can never be stopped without making it that any changes require cancel and rebook..

No change will allow everyone who wants CCV studios in December to get them.

I agree no change will allow everyone who wants CCV in Dec. to get it but at least everyone will be on equally footing in try to get one.

 

[BWoody]

DVCMCs responsibility is to ensure that the home resort rules and regulations benefit the membership as a whole and not micromanage every little aspect of the system.

So, it’s not about caring or not caring but it’s about whether or not changing the current rules for modifications to combat a very unique situation makes sense for the system as a whole.

I think many (obviously not everyone) would argue it would make sense for the system as a whole if they changed the current rules for modifications...but does Disney agree with that argument? They haven't changed anything yet so presumably they don't agree, but they could change their mind and make changes...or they won't...lol

 

[kilik64]

People complain about not getting a booking they want and usually attribute that to one of two things:

1) Walking
2) "Commercial" spec rentals.

Never to what it most likely really is, tough luck.

Its simple supply and demand, not everyone can book a standard view BWV studio for f&w, there is way more demand than rooms regardless of how they are booked.

Also as already stated but probably less bluntly. Disney does not care. The room was booked, they don't care how or for what purpose as they obviously don't care about "commercial" renting.

Adding any sort of limits on modifications is a solution in search of a problem.

 

[kilik64]

I agree no change will allow everyone who wants CCV in Dec. to get it but at least everyone will be on equally footing in try to get one.

You already are, you can walk just as well as anyone else can...