Acquire points by transfer for use in re-renting?

[DVCconvert]

I had seen another couple of posts on the rent board that started me to wonder if this can be (not should it be) done:

Member A, pays member B, $9.50 to have member B's points transferred into Member A's account.


After having acquired X number of points, Member A then makes ressies and rents them out to non-members at $11.

In this case, Member A would have realized $375 profit on a rental of 250 points.

I'm not in favor, nor against any such practice, I am simply wondering if it is able to be done, and wheather or not it is done. This question is not intended to offend, simply to inform me about this, as the earlier mentioned posts had struck me that it may be possible.

TIA

 

[Chuck S]

I would say it is certainly possible, but would it be worth the hassle of dealing with potential renters? I mean, setting up the rental payment, checking availability for the desired dates, booking the rooms, dealing with any potential changes...it just seems like a lot of hassle.

 

[pumpkinboy]

Consider this dead horse of a subject, already beaten...

 

[Doctor P]

There would appear to be a couple of people who actually regularly do this kind of arbitrage, so it is not that far fetched, IMHO.

 

[CarolMN]

I had seen another couple of posts on the rent board that started me to wonder if this can be (not should it be) done:

Member A, pays member B, $9.50 to have member B's points transferred into Member A's account.


After having acquired X number of points, Member A then makes ressies and rents them out to non-members at $11.

In this case, Member A would have realized $375 profit on a rental of 250 points.

I'm not in favor, nor against any such practice, I am simply wondering if it is able to be done, and wheather or not it is done. This question is not intended to offend, simply to inform me about this, as the earlier mentioned posts had struck me that it may be possible.

TIA

The $375 is profit only if you do not value your time. Renting takes time - it isn't as easy to rent points as one might think.

Best wishes -

 

[Johnnie Fedora]

Since it's been reported that transfered points take on the home resort/use year of the recipient, managing all those different use years and home resorts may not be a problem at all.

Transfering March 05 points to a December 05 use year probably means those points do not expire for 21 months (instead of normal 12 months).

It also means that you can have hundreds of VB, HH and SSR points transfered into your BCV/VWL/BWV account and take advantage of the 11 month window at those resorts for the high demand times.

 

[Y-ASK]

The $375 is profit only if you do not value your time. Renting takes time - it isn't as easy to rent points as one might think.

Yes it is a hugh waste of time and not worth it. You'd be better off putting your money in some other form of investment. One other downside is that you might buy points during a dry spell where there are few renters and many DVC owners wanting to rent.

Y-ASK

 

[CharlesTD]

Yes it can be done and if you can do it and make a profit on teh points go for it no harm in a little capital gain for your trouble.

 

[CarolMN]

...(snip).....Transfering March 05 points to a December 05 use year probably means those points do not expire for 21 months (instead of normal 12 months).

It also means that you can have hundreds of VB, HH and SSR points transfered into your BCV/VWL/BWV account and take advantage of the 11 month window at those resorts for the high demand times.

DVC needs to get that computer glitch fixed! Transfers must be making the MS CMs crazy - lots of work arounds and manual transactions. This is costing all members $$, since we all pay for MS (I don't know how significant it is).

IMHO, if this (transfers of points to gain an expiration advantage or a home resort advantage one is not entitled to) is happening on more than an incidental basis, DVC could be in violation of the law - the one that says they can't sell more points than they have the capacity / time to support.

FWIW, I know there are members who take advantage of the system problem who aren't doing it to rent points,but for their own advantage. So it's not just something those who rent points do. Even though it is "allowed" to happen, I think it is unethical.

Best wishes -

 

[RobDoc]

In some cases, there may be several "posters" asking about having points transferred into (and out of) their account(s) who are all posting from the same computer.

While there is nothing illegal about these practices and they do not violate any DIS or DVC guidelines or rules, it certainly does cause one to question the ethics of those who use the system (both the DIS and DVC) in this fashion.

I suppose as long as the MS computer system is unable to truly track the origin/resort/Use Year of transferred points, some will take advantage of the loopholes (some large enough for the Disney Magic to cruise thru) in the present system. I'm still confident that DVC will eventually devote the energy and financial support to having a system that truly reflects and upholds the rules of the program. Until that time, we will have those who wish to profit from the weaknesses in the current system.

It would seem that the issue may not be as widespread as it may appear, since about five of those wanting points transferred into their account(s) are actually all coming from one membership.

Caveat Emptor

 

[DVCconvert]

Posted by Webmaster Doc:

certainly does cause one to question the ethics of those who use the system (both the DIS and DVC) in this fashion.

Doc -- that was only a small part of why I asked the question -- although I did/do think that some would call the ethics of it into question. I guess I was just wondering if such a 'loophole' for profiteering had been left open by DVD/DVC.

Posted by Webmaster Doc:

It would seem that the issue may not be as widespread as it may appear, since about five of those wanting points transferred into their account(s) are actually all coming from one membership.

Doc--I was wondering as to how wide-spread this was. Are you saying/suggesting that those here who do post such inquires are "all" coming from just a few IP's ??

 

[yyzgurl]

There are a few eBayers who seem to always have multiple listings up for Disney Vacations. All are 5 night (Sun-Fri) stays and when calculated are getting at least $11 per point. I assume these are the very people who keeps asking for transfer points at $9.50 so they turn around and make a profit as there is no way someone can consistently have 3-4 listings going at all times.

JMHO

 

[DVCconvert]

yyzgurl

"thanks for your polite question"

 

[cruise-o-matic]

If someone wants to make $1.50 profit per point, more power to them. IMHO, they are providing a service by buying up points for $9.50, when the consensus is $10-12. For $.50 less per point, you don't have to go through the hassle of renting points....calling MS to make the ressies and collecting the $.

This subject has been brought up in the past but it was more concerning a particular individual looking for "distressed" points, about to expire, holding, etc. and paying $5-7 per point. I still say he was providing a service b/c the owner at least gets to cover their MF's.

But as Doc said, there may be some taking advantage of loopholes and and Johhny F pointed out (what I refer to as "laundering points"). These practices are unfair and DVC should find a better way to track points to stop this.

 

[RobDoc]

... I guess I was just wondering if such a 'loophole' for profiteering had been left open by DVD/DVC. ...

I don't believe DVC intentionally created any loophole to allow this. I think that transfers, in general, were a feature that DVC assumed would be a little used aspect (I even wonder why it was even included at all) and therefore didn't include any safeguards into the original system software to properly track home resort and Use Year information.

The internet itself (and this site to a great extent) has possibly influenced the current level of utilization (whatever that may be) simply by the level of information shared as a resource here. IMO, the fact that the "loophole" has been publicly identified has led to a greated use of the technique by some. In some cases, it just allows members to take advantage for their own vacation habits and for others, it has created an opportunity for financial benefit thru renting to others.

 

[crisi]

Doc,

Another board I'm on has a no-sock-puppet rule. They know posters who post from the same computer (husbands and wives), but if they have posters that pretend to be someone else, they ban them. They do it because its a board built around debate, and creating several puppets to agree with yourself in a debate isn't ethical.

You guys could do similar. You could selectively enforce it around unethical behavior on the rent trade board, or other unethical behavior (I'd think having a sock for the purpose of fanning flames in a hot thread would be a no no). I'm not sure if I have a problem with people honestly exploiting the transfer loophole, I know I have a problem when someone pretends to be two different people in order to get other DIS DVCer to rent them points and other DISers to rent those points at a markup. If that is ethical, do it on the up and up.

 

[RobDoc]

...
You guys could do similar. You could selectively enforce it around unethical behavior on the rent trade board, or other unethical behavior (I'd think having a sock for the purpose of fanning flames in a hot thread would be a no no). ...

We don't have the time or the manpower to cross-check everyone on the DIS. In this case, there is great similarity in the posts/resorts/timeframes involved in some of those requesting transfers into their accounts. A casual glance may not evoke any notice of these similarities, but when someone does read every post on that board over a period of time, the patterns do become apparent. (In this case, my curiosity about these patterns did push me to investigate the source of those particular posters to verify my suspicions.)

The Rent/Trade Board is based on individuals making decisions about any transaction they choose to become involved, so it's really up to each of us to decide what is a fair use of that forum within the site guidelines and the specific rules of that board. Ethics are sometimes in the eye of the beholder and can be debated in many instances from both sides - the Rent/Trade Board is not the place for such discussion or debate (but, the DVC Board is available for that purpose).

In this case, the opportunity to "buy low - sell high" is available only because of the individuals who choose to enter into those transactions on either end. Whether there are few or many people involved with such a practice has no effect on the transaction itself.

 

[Doctor P]

I would respectfully disagree with one thing though, Doc. Because of the glitches in point tracking or the transferring system, it creates opportunities for people to profit from the system. In my case, we bought an add on in April (our name finally came up on the waiting list) and it closed in mid-May with a June use year. DVC refused to make any concession on banking the points and there were limited things that points could be used for that late in the use year. This meant that the rental options were limited. To make a long story short, I found out that when the points were transferred the member was able to convert them to his own use year (which by all accounts it would appear that he did) thereby extending their use for about another year and renting them at a much higher rate than the transfer took place at. I do not fault the member, but I really am disappointed that a system exists that allows this to happen so that an owner can't use their points with as much freedom as a transferee! I hope they correct this glitch.

 

[crisi]

Doc, that's why I suggest you selectively enforce it. I know you don't have manpower (and appreciate all you do) but with such a rule in place, when the patterns become evident, you can give them the boot. I bet you wouldn't even need to be the one noticing patterns, they are picked up pretty fast by other DISer.

As to relative ethics, I suppose its up to the folks who run the DIS to decide whether its ethical or not. If you guys think it is, then it isn't a problem - your board, your rules. If you guys this it isn't, its your board and you can block IPs.

Personally, being at either end of the transaction with such a person, if I discovered it, would make me feel like I'd been "taken." If what we are doing is exploiting the transfer loophole to extend points past their expiration or to get home resort advantage, there is no reason to include the middleman as long as both ends of the transfer are DVC members. BTW, I think exploiting the loophole is ethically questionable, wouldn't do it myself because I think it has impact on other members, but if DVC felt strongly enough about it, they'd do what they could to close it.

 

[RobDoc]

I would respectfully disagree with one thing though, ...

No disagreement from my end. I feel the same way - it is DVC's responsibility to correct the shortcomings in their system. I have recommended those changes to DVC for several years now.

Doc, that's why I suggest you selectively enforce it. I know you don't have manpower (and appreciate all you do) but with such a rule in place, when the patterns become evident, you can give them the boot. I bet you wouldn't even need to be the one noticing patterns, they are picked up pretty fast by other DISer.

As to relative ethics, I suppose its up to the folks who run the DIS to decide whether its ethical or not. If you guys think it is, then it isn't a problem - your board, your rules. If you guys this it isn't, its your board and you can block IPs.

Unless it's something covered by our site guidelines (and it isn't), there is no way to "selectively" enforce anything and be consistent with everyone. As for the ethics involved - it doesn't violate any DVC rules, it doesn't violate any DIS rules and any ethical decision would become something based on personal subjectivity. Blocking IP's is not something easily accomplished and is generally ineffective for sites like ours.

We do have the ability to modify the policies we use and did so this past winter on the Rent/Trade Board. The changes were relatively minor and were in response to numerous complaints received over a period of months. The changes affected very few individuals and, while those few have voiced minimal displeasure over the changes, the overall effect has very positively affected the Rent/Trade board itself. The volume of complaints has dropped to zero since the changes. These changes were not based on ethics - only on the mechanics of using our board for rental posts. All were very black-and-white, easily defined and simple to administer. Making changes based on ethical posture could not meet any of those criteria - thus making the rule itself difficult, if not impossible, to enforce without making subjective decisions.