2025 Condo Meeting Information - Renting

[Sandisw]

I think that DVC is typically very very cautious in what they say so the fact they put a number to it, the % of exchanges. was what I find fascinating.

Not sure many, if any, here on the boards would have had that on our bingo cards!

 

[Brianstl]

Well it’s not easy to access because there is so much activity going back years. Yes, people can go look for themselves using advanced search.

I agree with the point that at least this is not Spec Renting, even if individual people are renting thousands of points annually.

It does make me wonder what the heck it takes for DVC to see something as ‘a pattern of rental activity’ that is not personal use.

While this may be excessive, I still don’t view nearly as detrimental as Spec Reservations are to a personal use timeshare system like DVC. At least this member is not holding the inventory while looking for a match.

Especially when there is at least one poster there who claims to be a private owner that has on multiple times over the years offered to rent out more points than an owner is allowed to own under DVC's rules.

 

[Cyberc1978]

Especially when there is at least one poster there who claims to be a private owner that has on multiple times over the years offered to rent out more points than an owner is allowed to own under DVC's rules.

We all assume that DVC checks if many/too many reservations has another leadname than the owner(s).

Either DVC has decided not to care (assuming they check) or they don’t check because they don’t care.

 

[Cyberc1978]

Given that any room that is available at 7 months at BCV is snapped in seconds, do you think many rooms go into breakage?
I bet 99% of breakage income at BCV comes from the lockoff premium.

Maybe I have misunderstood the lockoff premium, but given the popularity of BCV there shouldn’t be any breakage at BCV? The rooms not booked before 7 months are booked at 7
Except for the rooms that DVC can take because of their estimation?

 

[Sandisw]

Maybe I have misunderstood the lockoff premium, but given the popularity of BCV there shouldn’t be any breakage at BCV? The rooms not booked before 7 months are booked at 7
Except for the rooms that DVC can take because of their estimation?

The lock off premium creates extra availability in the sense that it uses points not declared to inventory because the charts are built only on what it takes to book as a 2 bedroom.

So, the more a lock off gets booked as individual rooms, it can eventually lead to extra rooms not booked

But, technically, is that the same as creating breakage?

Probably not since the income is supposed to be from rooms not booked by the breakage period, which is currently set at 60 days out, or taken sooner by that based on anticipated trends it’s there.

However, I think it may be more semantics than anything else…all we know is BVC owners are getting the cap and that, some level of owners are exchanging out which is taking BCV rooms out of points booking inventory b

The board did discuss the average being 20%, with BWV, being around 15%.

I think anyone who is interested in their specific resort, should contact DVC to the figure.

I just think that it’s still quite eye opening to know on average, only 80% of DVC inventory is being booked on points and the rest is being rented by DVC to pay for the exchanges.

 

[Cyberc1978]

The lock off premium creates extra availability in the sense that it uses points not declared to inventory because the charts are built only on what it takes to book as a 2 bedroom.

So, the more a lock off gets booked as individual rooms, it can eventually lead to extra rooms not booked

But, technically, is that the same as creating breakage?

Probably not since the income is supposed to be from rooms not booked by the breakage period, which is currently set at 60 days out, or taken sooner by that based on anticipated trends it’s there.

However, I think it may be more semantics than anything else…all we know is BVC owners are getting the cap and that, some level of owners are exchanging out which is taking BCV rooms out of points booking inventory b

The board did discuss the average being 20%, with BWV, being around 15%.

I think anyone who is interested in their specific resort, should contact DVC to the figure.

I just think that it’s still quite eye opening to know on average, only 80% of DVC inventory is being booked on points and the rest is being rented by DVC to pay for the exchanges.

But then it does not create breakage at BCV. But it creates the breakages elsewhere because members book BCV using points from other resorts.

 

[Sandisw]

But then it does not create breakage at BCV. But it creates the breakages elsewhere because members book BCV using points from other resorts.

Since BCV gets breakage income to offset dues, then there are rooms that fall into that category.

So, some rooms from BCV are being rented under the umbrella of breakage.

If it wasnt happening, the resort wouldn’t get the 2.5% offset. That isn’t something that can be shared amongst resorts.

The lock offs premium may be the reason that rooms are BCV go unbooked enough for DVC to take them to rent for breakage income.

The inventory at other resorts from owners trading in doesn’t impact BCVs figures at all when it comes to the income BCV owners get.

 

[VGCgroupie]

I can’t find the post where you said how to request the minutes from the June meetings. @Sandisw

 

[Sandisw]

I can’t find the post where you said how to request the minutes from the June meetings. @Sandisw

Just send an email vis the website and choose condo association as the reason.

Then you can request them!

 

[VGCgroupie]

Just send an email vis the website and choose condo association as the reason.

Then you can request them!

Great thanks!

 

[Sandisw]

Great thanks!

To add to this for others, minutes for the 2025 meetings from this week will not come out until they are approved at the 2026 meetings!

 

[Genie+]

To add to this for others, minutes for the 2025 meetings from this week will not come out until they are approved at the 2026 meetings!

Those minutes take years

 

[Sandisw]

Those minutes take years

Because they can’t be official until approved and now that we are back to one meeting a year, it won’t happen until then!!

Which, by next year, it will be very old news!!

 

[Genie+]

I think that DVC is typically very very cautious in what they say so the fact they put a number to it, the % of exchanges. was what I find fascinating.

Not sure many, if any, here on the boards would have had that on our bingo cards!

Could they be trying to get out in front of that controversial point? If the big players on the rental market are feeling threatened by DVC’s more recent moves, maybe they are pointing the finger back at DVC. These big players know this whole game better than us here. The 20% looks better coming out of DVC’s mouth than us seeing it as part of a defense from a commercial operation (like a confirmed reservation broker for example).

 

[VGCgroupie]

Could they be trying to get out in front of that controversial point? If the big players on the rental market are feeling threatened by DVC’s more recent moves, maybe they are pointing the finger back at DVC. These big players know this whole game better than us here. The 20% looks better coming out of DVC’s mouth than us seeing it as part of a defense from a commercial operation (like a confirmed reservation broker for example).

I would like it to be this. But I have a feeling it's opposite.

 

[Genie+]

I would like it to be this. But I have a feeling it's opposite.

Wishful thinking on my part

I’m wondering what lead to them into choosing to disclose it.

 

[Sandisw]

Could they be trying to get out in front of that controversial point? If the big players on the rental market are feeling threatened by DVC’s more recent moves, maybe they are pointing the finger back at DVC. These big players know this whole game better than us here. The 20% looks better coming out of DVC’s mouth than us seeing it as part of a defense from a commercial operation (like a confirmed reservation broker for example).

My opinion….I think it was to highlight for owners that 20% of the points are exchanged which plays a pretty big role in impacting availability on the system as a whole.

Whether people believe them or not, their position is that the amount of renting done by owners that rises for that owner to be in the commercial business small in comparison to what else is happening.

So, while there certainly appear to be specific owners who are renting a lot, well above what would make it fall within the rules, there seems to also be a lot of owners who take their rooms out of the DVC inventory.

The notion that DVC is the biggest commercial renter implies they do it for themselves…this supports the notion that it’s not for them, but on behalf of the owners who want to use their DVC differently.

Meaning…they are acting on behalf of owners and not themselves.

 

[airjay75]

And, IMO, it was a very smart prepared answer to the concerns about commercial renting, especially if there isn't a whole lot more you plan to do about it beyond what you're doing now. Basically, look, you, the DVC members, are giving your points to us, and we are just doing what we're allowed to do. If you don't like limited availability at 11 months, stop exchanging your points. In other words, a very subtle, polite way of saying YOU are the problem.

The question is, is it actually a defensible answer? Is that the primary reason 11-month availability is more difficult in certain rooms at certain resorts? Or, is it just a deflection because they aren't going to do much more to combat things like spec renting? Maybe both. I honestly don't know, but it certainly muddles the picture. I know not everyone feels this way, but knowing that 20% of points are being rented by Disney, it does make me just a little less angry seeing the FB spec renter - or, maybe not so much less angry as questioning whether stopping the people doing that would meaningfully change anything.

 

[VGCgroupie]

And, IMO, it was a very smart prepared answer to the concerns about commercial renting, especially if there isn't a whole lot more you plan to do about it beyond what you're doing now. Basically, look, you, the DVC members, are giving your points to us, and we are just doing what we're allowed to do. If you don't like limited availability at 11 months, stop exchanging your points. In other words, a very subtle, polite way of saying YOU are the problem.

The question is, is it actually a defensible answer? Is that the primary reason 11-month availability is more difficult in certain rooms at certain resorts? Or, is it just a deflection because they aren't going to do much more to combat things like spec renting? Maybe both. I honestly don't know, but it certainly muddles the picture. I know not everyone feels this way, but knowing that 20% of points are being rented by Disney, it does make me just a little less angry seeing the FB spec renter - or, maybe not so much less angry as questioning whether stopping the people doing that would meaningfully change anything.

Doesnt make me less angry

 

[Sandisw]

And, IMO, it was a very smart prepared answer to the concerns about commercial renting, especially if there isn't a whole lot more you plan to do about it beyond what you're doing now. Basically, look, you, the DVC members, are giving your points to us, and we are just doing what we're allowed to do. If you don't like limited availability at 11 months, stop exchanging your points. In other words, a very subtle, polite way of saying YOU are the problem.

The question is, is it actually a defensible answer? Is that the primary reason 11-month availability is more difficult in certain rooms at certain resorts? Or, is it just a deflection because they aren't going to do much more to combat things like spec renting? Maybe both. I honestly don't know, but it certainly muddles the picture. I know not everyone feels this way, but knowing that 20% of points are being rented by Disney, it does make me just a little less angry seeing the FB spec renter - or, maybe not so much less angry as questioning whether stopping the people doing that would meaningfully change anything.

In terms of spec renting, the board never even made comments about that, even when they discussed this topic last year.

It was large point owners, and from the reports that came out of BWV meeting, it was large point owners again.

I know people were hopeful that they would see that action part of the definition.

I mentioned already, the meeting is set up to answer questions asked…and that is it…and they stick very closely to the time alloted…

I don’t think the notion was to say that this is the only factor for availability and that people should stop exchanging.

But that things beyond the open rental market, play a role and that one big influence is the actions of owners who obviously like the flexibility of trading points.

I personally think the AP points exchange was done as a way to influence the open rental market because owners now have something to use their points for instead of having to rent if they can’t or don’t want to use.

The point chart adjustments at AKV may help to reduce those snagging them strictly for renting, just because it’s not as low as it was…but those rooms will always be difficult to get..but at least they did something to try and help.

The enforcement of the transfer rules was also done IMO to combat this and this new fee will add to the cost to flip contracts.

I think the new personal use language was to make people stop and think but it also indicates, at least to me, and matches the info I have gotten directly from management in all my conversations, that the enforcement is always going to be at the owner level and based on the cumulative actions of that owner in deciding to enforce the commercial use policy.