Am I the only one?

[Sammie]

Just out of curiosity....how do other timeshares handle this? Is renting generally permitted?

I've never owned any other timeshare, so I'm clueless.....I always assumed that renting was a typical timeshare thing.

Actually many not only allow it, they manage it for the owners. I am sure Dean and others can give more details.

We rent regularly from other timeshares when we vacation at locations other than Disney. We also rent directly from owners that list on VRBO.

 

[Dean]

Just out of curiosity....how do other timeshares handle this? Is renting generally permitted?

I've never owned any other timeshare, so I'm clueless.....I always assumed that renting was a typical timeshare thing.

Most allow it from what I know, many actually encourage it. It's fresh meat for them so it's a win/win. Most don't have the rental situation/feeder system that Disney does. That's one of the reasons Disney has such an issue with this. IF they decided to be more active getting renters to tour and possibly buy retail, you'd never hear anything from them on it. I gave a coworker time at a system I own at a couple of years ago, he ended up touring then buying. I hadn't prepped him well on resale prior but did after. He decided not to cancel and I felt I'd failed him but you can only push so much, ultimately others have to make the decisions for themselves.

 

[dismedvc]

There can be no rental unless an owner (in some form) has given up points for the reservation to be made.


I believe that from high to low, reservations at DVC resorts come from:
1) Members using their points for personal stays (this is by FAR the greatest source for reservations at DVC Resorts)

2) DRC cash reservations from DVC points used by Members for non-DVC options.

3) DRC cash reservations from DVC points made available by DVD.
4) DRC cash reservations from DVC inventory remaning 60 days out (Breakage inventory)
5) Members renting to other individuals.

A bit off topic, but my largest complaint is DRC using the points they acquire in #2 above to take the most popular dates. There is currently no availability at BLT for 12/31/13 in any category on points, but there is cash availability in almost every category except standard view. I know DVD owns a small percentage of points, but I suspect (without proof) DRC also used "trade out" points from #2 to get more rooms for that popular night.

I understand DRC wants nights it can sell most easily for the most money, but I wonder if they had to have someone go online at the 11 month mark to secure those rooms on those dates for points?

 

[disneynutz]

While I don't have problems with the situation personally, these are clearly businesses under anyone's definition no matter how lax. Technically it likely comes down to whether they are also members or not. It would be the business related entity that would be affected, not the member who used them assuming they didn't trigger the current definition independently. However, I think it will be very difficult to enforce this issue at all while this practice is allowed. I'd think a good lawyer could have a field day with the situation. And I do think this is completely different than an advertising option like redweeks, ebay, DIS, TUG, Craigslist, etc.

Rental brokers make it easy for owners to rent a reservation and their existence probably increases the number of rentals. The number of brokers is also increasing so that's another indication that rentals are increasing and there is money to be made as a broker.

Sales brokers are no different than rental brokers in my book, they are a middle man between sellers and buyers just like rental brokers are the middle men between owners and renters.

Bill

 

[Chuck S]

A bit off topic, but my largest complaint is DRC using the points they acquire in #2 above to take the most popular dates. There is currently no availability at BLT for 12/31/13 in any category on points, but there is cash availability in almost every category except standard view. I know DVD owns a small percentage of points, but I suspect (without proof) DRC also used "trade out" points from #2 to get more rooms for that popular night.

I understand DRC wants nights it can sell most easily for the most money, but I wonder if they had to have someone go online at the 11 month mark to secure those rooms on those dates for points?

Being able to trade to non-DVC Disney destinations really requires this. If they block out less popular times, and those rooms don't rent, then the cost to trade would be even more points, or the trade options would simply disappear.

It isn't that DRC necessarily wants them to sell, it is more like DVC NEEDS them to sell to offset the trade cost.

Plus there are the DVC Owners that book these times so they can rent them out. It isn't just Disney, but your fellow owners the pre-book speculative rentals that you are competing with.

 

[dismedvc]

Thanks Chuck. Good Points.

Interestingly, the restrictions on resale contracts will reduce the competition from DRC for the high demand nights, since points acquired under resale contracts will not be able to "trade out" and end up being used by DRC.

In trying to book a high demand night, I would rather take my chances against regular members, (including those who book on a speculative basis) as opposed to competing against DRC, who I assume is the most adept at walking reservations and/or logging in at the first possible moment to get those high demand nights. (Assuming DRC actually has to log in and compete under the same terms as the rest of us)

 

[Chuck S]

DRC does not log on and reserve units as members do. They simply block out rooms based upon several factors:

1) The points retained by Disney/DVD.

2) The number of points traded to the Disney Collection and other Disney destinations.

3) The number of points that are unsold, this includes points garnered by ROFR and points in "declared" units that are not fully sold (like Aulani.)

4) They also have room inventory that is not yet "declared" into DVC at Aulani. Until a unit is declared and point sales begin in that unit, it belongs to Disney/DVD.

Which of these inventories any particular room comes from is anyone's guess. But suffice it to say that Disney DRC has plenty of availability off its own that it can offer some rooms at 11 months out at DVC resorts.

 

[dismedvc]

DRC does not log on and reserve units as members do. They simply block out rooms based upon several factors:

1) The points retained by Disney/DVD.

2) The number of points traded to the Disney Collection and other Disney destinations.

3) The number of points that are unsold, this includes points garnered by ROFR and points in "declared" units that are not fully sold (like Aulani.)

4) They also have room inventory that is not yet "declared" into DVC at Aulani. Until a unit is declared and point sales begin in that unit, it belongs to Disney/DVD.

Which of these inventories any particular room comes from is anyone's guess. But suffice it to say that Disney DRC has plenty of availability off its own that it can offer some rooms at 11 months out at DVC resorts.

Chuck: Thanks for the further insight. I previously understood DRC had a priority in your categories 1, 3 and 4, but I did not know DRC had the advantage to simply block out rooms using traded points (your category 2). It seems to me DRC should have to compete on an equal basis with all the other members when booking rooms using those "traded points". However, for sold out resorts like BLT and BWV (the two where we own), there are no category 3 or 4 points (other than ROFR), and the category 2 points will go down over time as more resales occur, since those resale buyers will not be allowed to trade out. Therefore, for us, competing against DRC at the 11 month point is/will become mostly a moot point.

P.S. I have always been able to get the reservations I wanted at the 11 month mark, without ever "walking" a reservation, but I have logged in at 7:00 am (central time) on the first day allowed to get high demand reservations. If I ever do miss out, I just want to feel it was a fair competition.

 

[DougEMG]

DRC does not log on and reserve units as members do. They simply block out rooms based upon several factors:

1) The points retained by Disney/DVD.

2) The number of points traded to the Disney Collection and other Disney destinations.

3) The number of points that are unsold, this includes points garnered by ROFR and points in "declared" units that are not fully sold (like Aulani.)

4) They also have room inventory that is not yet "declared" into DVC at Aulani. Until a unit is declared and point sales begin in that unit, it belongs to Disney/DVD.

Which of these inventories any particular room comes from is anyone's guess. But suffice it to say that Disney DRC has plenty of availability off its own that it can offer some rooms at 11 months out at DVC resorts.

Blocking out dates...doesn't that sound like spec renting

 

[Dean]

A bit off topic, but my largest complaint is DRC using the points they acquire in #2 above to take the most popular dates. There is currently no availability at BLT for 12/31/13 in any category on points, but there is cash availability in almost every category except standard view. I know DVD owns a small percentage of points, but I suspect (without proof) DRC also used "trade out" points from #2 to get more rooms for that popular night.

I understand DRC wants nights it can sell most easily for the most money, but I wonder if they had to have someone go online at the 11 month mark to secure those rooms on those dates for points?

Historically DVC hasn't gone heavy on the most demanded dates but realistically they'll have to hit all times and resorts. They are competing with members though so anyone who doesn't book exactly 11 months out is taking a risk.

Rental brokers make it easy for owners to rent a reservation and their existence probably increases the number of rentals. The number of brokers is also increasing so that's another indication that rentals are increasing and there is money to be made as a broker.

Sales brokers are no different than rental brokers in my book, they are a middle man between sellers and buyers just like rental brokers are the middle men between owners and renters.

Bill

I understand what they do but I think to say they simply allow renters and rentees to connect is a gross understatement and I believe this is a LARGE difference between what they do and a site such as EBAY, TUG or Redweeks. I also think there's a big difference between sales and rentals because of the restrictions in question. Not hat I have a problem with the process, just that I see it as an impediment to them enforcing the issue when this does go on. In order to fit your definition, they'd have to limit their involvement to simply sending the info to the owner rather than actually making the reservation as an associate.

 

[disneynutz]

I understand what they do but I think to say they simply allow renters and rentees to connect is a gross understatement and I believe this is a LARGE difference between what they do and a site such as EBAY, TUG or Redweeks. I also think there's a big difference between sales and rentals because of the restrictions in question. Not hat I have a problem with the process, just that I see it as an impediment to them enforcing the issue when this does go on. In order to fit your definition, they'd have to limit their involvement to simply sending the info to the owner rather than actually making the reservation as an associate

To my knowledge rental brokers no longer can be listed as an associate. I was told buy Disney that they now watch for such activity and that it is now against the rules.

Bill

 

[Dean]

To my knowledge rental brokers no longer can be listed as an associate. I was told buy Disney that they now watch for such activity and that it is now against the rules.

Bill

I didn't realize they have made such a change but ultimately it depends on how involved they are and as I stated before, whether they are a member or not. Plus I still believe that as long as they allow these activities, it would be legally difficult to impossible for them to defend any restrictions even at the level they'd announced. That's my position, YMMV.

 

[dismedvc]

Blocking out dates...doesn't that sound like spec renting

I would say no, if they only took their percentage. If DVC/DRC owns 4% at a sold out resort, they should be able to "Block out" 4% of the rooms every night. If there was undeclared inventory of say 40%, they should be able to block out 40% of the rooms every night.

The only problem I would have is if DVC/DRC owned 4% of a sold-out resort and used that 4% of the total points to book a much larger percentage of the rooms on the most popular nights. In theory, (carried to the extreme) if DRC/DVC owned 4% of the total points at a particular resort, and could "block out" rooms before members had a chance to reserve, then at average point rates, DRC/DVC could use all of their points to book every room in the resort for a two week period, and there would be no availability for members during those two weeks. OR if points were double durring the most popular week, they could use all of their points to book every room in the resort for that most popular week. That would be spec renting, but they do not do that.

However, I still do wonder if they use traded points to get a higher than "normal" percentage of rooms durring the most popular times, and get those rooms by blocking them out before members have a chance to reserve them.

P.S. Love the icon at the end of your post

 

[Chuck S]

I didn't realize they have made such a change but ultimately it depends on how involved they are and as I stated before, whether they are a member or not. Plus I still believe that as long as they allow these activities, it would be legally difficult to impossible for them to defend any restrictions even at the level they'd announced. That's my position, YMMV.

Yes, a few years ago they changed it where any one person can only be an associate on a few (I think 4) DVC accounts.

 

[Dean]

Yes, a few years ago they changed it where any one person can only be an associate on a few (I think 4) DVC accounts.

Thanks.

 

[CarolMN]

If the broker is a member, they would have recourse. They also have collateral options related to pictures and copyrights. They could also manipulate associate rules. Plus, as I said earlier, it makes it very difficult to act on others with this going on.

As you now know, these brokers no longer operate by getting themselves added to an account as an associate. They just arrange for a member to make a reservation for someone else. Some also provide escrow services.

Since they are not using their own accounts to make the reservations, the rental activity the brokers generate would be nearly impossible for DVC to track. I don't see a legal basis for freezing a broker's personal account since none of the rental activity occurs there. In fact, the business model could work with just a minimum size account sufficient to access the online booking system or to call MS.

Yes, they have a website, but unless they are using copyrighted material, I doubt Disney could make them take it down. Surely it would be possible to set up a website without using copyrighted material - I don't think any is being used now on the sites I've seen.

My only point is that IMO, it would be very difficult for Disney to legally stop this particular business model under the present POS.

I'm not particularly crazy about renting, but I agree with you that it is allowed and part of what we signed up for. So I live with it. As long as the renters have to follow the same rules I do, it really doesn't hurt me much. It just means that I have to plan & reserve well in advance if I want to stay at my home resort during popular times

 

[Dean]

As you now know, these brokers no longer operate by getting themselves added to an account as an associate. They just arrange for a member to make a reservation for someone else. Some also provide escrow services.

Since they are not using their own accounts to make the reservations, the rental activity the brokers generate would be nearly impossible for DVC to track. I don't see a legal basis for freezing a broker's personal account since none of the rental activity occurs there. In fact, the business model could work with just a minimum size account sufficient to access the online booking system or to call MS.

Yes, they have a website, but unless they are using copyrighted material, I doubt Disney could make them take it down. Surely it would be possible to set up a website without using copyrighted material - I don't think any is being used now on the sites I've seen.

My only point is that IMO, it would be very difficult for Disney to legally stop this particular business model under the present POS.

I'm not particularly crazy about renting, but I agree with you that it is allowed and part of what we signed up for. So I live with it. As long as the renters have to follow the same rules I do, it really doesn't hurt me much. It just means that I have to plan & reserve well in advance if I want to stay at my home resort during popular times

I don't necessarily disagree with any of that, however, I think there are 3 issues. One is that IF DVD wants to go after them, they can find all types of ways to do so, right or wrong. Second, I do think they could go after the individual accounts for any principle in this situation if they so chose. Lastly, I cont to feel that it's difficult to impossible to enforce anything in the area of renting as long as this goes on. And I'm on the other side, I'm very OK with renting both because what people do with what they own is their business and that it's expressly allowed in the POS. And it's not that I have a problem with the practice being discussed, just that I think it creates certain realities.

 

[twoj]

When I read these posts about people not happy with renters, everyone seems to forget that disney keeps a percentage ofI the points and books cash reservations. Before I owned, I could book a villa anywhere as easily as a regular hotel room, there is even availability when DVC has none.

So, you will NEVER have an instance where renters are not at a DVC....

Disney is really the one with control here... They control the boards, points etc... If someone is going to block out a period in time because they can easily rent the room at high rates, it's Disney.

 

[CarolMN]

.....(snip)......So, you will NEVER have an instance where renters are not at a DVC....

Disney is really the one with control here... They control the boards, points etc... If someone is going to block out a period in time because they can easily rent the room at high rates, it's Disney.

What" boards" are you talking about? Disney certainly doesn't control the DIS and AFAIK, they do not control any of the many other internet forums.

 

[bobbiwoz]

I said this before when the topic came up. I read the POS, and it never occurred to me that you could rent and it not be commercial. I thought that since you could not get money for transfers, you could not get money for renting.

OK, I was wrong.

Bobbi