- Joined
- Aug 18, 1999
- Messages
- 32,504
My opinion is pretty much the same as that already expresssed by RWishbone. (Actually, I could have written it, since what he posts about renting personal points is also true for me). The only thing I don't agree with is the statement about dues going up - I think other things will happen if the resorts run at lower than planned occupancy.
Those members who want to book Christmas (or other popular times) should call at the beginning of the 11 month window. That's what those who rent out those weeks had to do to get the time. All members have the same opportunity to book those weeks. If someone chooses not to call at the beginning of the window, he/she cannot be assured of getting what they want even if the members who rent didn't rent. The times are popular for a reason and lots of members are competing for that time!
FWIW, I do not believe that DVC will ever prohibit the practice of renting out points. I do not believe that they legally can prohibit it, given existing laws and contract language.
It does matter! If DVC resort rooms consistently go vacant, then either:
*Some member(s) will end up losing points because the number of points sold (plus the % retained by Disney) was based on the resort being at a very high occupancy rate all year round. If the vacant rooms are from member inventory, the vacancy created "excess" points - i.e., now there are more points than resort capacity warrants. Because of that, at some point in time, there will be more points than there should be chasing the available inventory of rooms. If there are enough situations like that, someone is going to end up with points that expire before they can be used. IMHO, the members that lose will be those who choose (or are forced) to book closer to arrival date (rather than at the opening of the 11 or 7 month windows). This situation could also eventually result in an imbalance between banking and borrowing. If that happens, DVC may need to suspend or limit banking/borrowing.
*The cost of trading out will increase. If the rooms DVC turns over to CRO to pay for the non-DVC options go empty, then DVC will need to increase the number of points it charges to be sure of getting enough $$ to pay for the non-DVC options. We've already seen this effect due to the discounting Disney did in response to decreased resort bookings. As I recall, there were lots and lots of members who did not appreciate points going up for non-DVC options! The effect will only increase if enough rooms from the cash inventory go empty.
In summary, I would prefer that other members not rent out popular times as a way of earning income, but do not see them as doing anything wrong as long as they (and the people who stay in the rooms) abide by all the same rules as every other member. As far as price per point goes - the law of supply & demand will dictate the price. I care not what others charge or others pay.
*edited to remove personal attack contained in cut and pasted quote*
Those members who want to book Christmas (or other popular times) should call at the beginning of the 11 month window. That's what those who rent out those weeks had to do to get the time. All members have the same opportunity to book those weeks. If someone chooses not to call at the beginning of the window, he/she cannot be assured of getting what they want even if the members who rent didn't rent. The times are popular for a reason and lots of members are competing for that time!
FWIW, I do not believe that DVC will ever prohibit the practice of renting out points. I do not believe that they legally can prohibit it, given existing laws and contract language.
It does matter! If DVC resort rooms consistently go vacant, then either:
*Some member(s) will end up losing points because the number of points sold (plus the % retained by Disney) was based on the resort being at a very high occupancy rate all year round. If the vacant rooms are from member inventory, the vacancy created "excess" points - i.e., now there are more points than resort capacity warrants. Because of that, at some point in time, there will be more points than there should be chasing the available inventory of rooms. If there are enough situations like that, someone is going to end up with points that expire before they can be used. IMHO, the members that lose will be those who choose (or are forced) to book closer to arrival date (rather than at the opening of the 11 or 7 month windows). This situation could also eventually result in an imbalance between banking and borrowing. If that happens, DVC may need to suspend or limit banking/borrowing.
*The cost of trading out will increase. If the rooms DVC turns over to CRO to pay for the non-DVC options go empty, then DVC will need to increase the number of points it charges to be sure of getting enough $$ to pay for the non-DVC options. We've already seen this effect due to the discounting Disney did in response to decreased resort bookings. As I recall, there were lots and lots of members who did not appreciate points going up for non-DVC options! The effect will only increase if enough rooms from the cash inventory go empty.
In summary, I would prefer that other members not rent out popular times as a way of earning income, but do not see them as doing anything wrong as long as they (and the people who stay in the rooms) abide by all the same rules as every other member. As far as price per point goes - the law of supply & demand will dictate the price. I care not what others charge or others pay.
*edited to remove personal attack contained in cut and pasted quote*
