piccolopat
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2014
Do people walking or modifying a reservation do so before new reservations can be made each day?
They can't move forward to new dates until the 8am EST. The reason it works is because their previously booked dates will already have overlapped the dates you want by the time your window opens, since you can book a week of days at a time.Do people walking or modifying a reservation do so before new reservations can be made each day?
Please define what 'fair' means to you. I'd assume only some kind of lottery system will meet your definition. But would this be 'fair' to people who have a higher need for a specific date? Maybe they have less flexibility in travel dates than others?I'll say again, if the only way the booking system at 11 months can be fair is if everyone walks, it's a broken system.
Currently, member services will walk it for you.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.
Before online modifications were available, using MS was the only way to walk, and it was still done. Adding online modifications made it easier and removed any stigma or hesitation in talking to MS. Walking increased after online modifications were added, but I am glad to have the ability to modify online!!!Currently, member services will walk it for you.
I hear this argument a lot: Everyone is allowed to do it, so it's ok.
Can we agree that walking only works because most people don't do it? Whether that's by choice or because they are unaware of it or because they own too few point to make it practicable. If everyone did it, it would be worthless.
Walking exploits the majority who don't do it, by putting them at a competitive disadvantage at 11 months.
I'll say again, if the only way the booking system at 11 months can be fair is if everyone walks, it's a broken system.
I agree that fair is in the eye of the beholder, as is true with many aspects of DVC and Disney."Fair" is in the eyes of the beholder.
For instance, I always used FP+ and pre-booked up to 3 attractions per day of my visit, (at Epcot I usually only used 1 or 2) as an onsite guest. Remember, onsite guests pay a premium to DIsney's bottom line, whether they be DVC or cash rooms. One "reason" I heard for discontinuing the pre-booking of rides was to make it "fair" to day guests. You know, the people that stay off site and only go to Disney for a day or two out of their entire vacation.
Is it fair that onsite guests have access to the virtual queue system before off offsite guests do in the mornings?
Another example, before the HA rooms were a seperate booking category, people who needed them, and could not stay in a non-HA room, were competing with fully able bodied guests, who didn't know they were being booked into an HA room, and they who could stay in any room. Which system would be considered fair?
Is it fair that onsite guests can utilize dining booking that allows thwm to book all of their gining reservations on the first day the window opens, rather than day by day like other guests?
Was it "fair" that onsite guests could book their "park reservation" days without competing with day guests?
"Fair" is a circular arguement depending upon your indiviual needs and circumstances, isn't it?
It wouldn't make it more "fair" though for the people that don't have enough points to do that, or who only have enough points to walk one day at a time, would it? And it seems that "fair" is the criteria being used for the base of this discussion thread.I agree that fair is in the eye of the beholder, as is true with many aspects of DVC and Disney.
I think it would be fair for DVC to start charging a change fee to modify your reservation. You feel the need to "walk" a reservation? Fine. You can walk it as long and far as you want, but every change costs $$. You don't want to walk a reservation? Fine. Take your chances at 11 months.
This would be consistent with the evolution of FP to Genie+
I agree that fair is in the eye of the beholder, as is true with many aspects of DVC and Disney.
I think it would be fair for DVC to start charging a change fee to modify your reservation. You feel the need to "walk" a reservation? Fine. You can walk it as long and far as you want, but every change costs $$. You don't want to walk a reservation? Fine. Take your chances at 11 months.
This would be consistent with the evolution of FP to Genie+
I'm agreeing with you in the sense that "fair" is a ubiquitous concept and is generally only applied in support of one's position. The arguments, pros, and cons on the "walking" issue directly parallel all of the old debates about FP, right? Some people found loopholes to exploit the system to their advantage, all within the rules, yet enough people complained for us to get FP+.....and on and on.It wouldn't make it more "fair" though for the people that don't have enough points to do that, or who only have enough points to walk one day at a time, would it? And it seems that "fair" is the criteria being used for the base of this discussion thread.
No flexible booking system will ever be really "fair" to everyone no matter what policies are put into place, will it?
I don't know if charging is the answer, but I would definitely be willing to make things a little more difficult on myself, if it meant that the whole system was on a more even playing field in terms of competing for rooms.So, those that need to modify and change reservations for reasons other than walking should be forced to pay a fee because a handful of rooms during a few months of the year are being walked?
How would that even make things better for the membership as a whole?
I'm fine with that if your argument must be that extreme. I've made a crap-ton of reservations over the last 20 years and can think of only twice that I HAD to modify one. I'm willing to bet that absent walking, most people never HAVE to change a reservation. They may CHOOSE to do so.....So, those that need to modify and change reservations for reasons other than walking should be forced to pay a fee because a handful of rooms during a few months of the year are being walked?
How would that even make things better for the membership as a whole? Or change the nature of “fair”? Now, those who can afford to pay the fee will still walk, those with lare point contracts will have fewer fees, and those who can’t afford it are shut out.
I’d say that is the opposite of fair.