Commercial renting website

[tubtruck]

Yes you are missing something.

What about the owner who rents three or four studios with HIS/HER points and has family staying with them? Makes no difference if it is renters in those studios or family. Those rooms would still be booked.

Someone who owns 1500 points in entitled to book rooms using those 1500 points each and every year. It makes no diference whatsoever if they use them or rent them. Rooms still will be taken.

Commercial renters hurt no one despite what you'll read here on the DIS.

They were hurting owners of the small resorts by morphing points but that is an entirely different problem and one that has seemingly been eliminated with the one transfer rule and the propper tracking of transferred points so they maintain the home resort status intended.

Really if people would just think about this logically for a moment they would get off this bandwagon.

Commercial renters dont hurt anyone???????? Yes they do. They hurt all of us owners. The DVC is designed to be flexible allowing private non commercial renting therefore making ownership more flexible and for whatever reason you are not compelled to spend all of your points every year as you can offload a few so not lose out cost wise if you are unable to make the trip or trips. With this I have no problem and is whithin the sprit of our contracts and the way that Disney intended owners to be able to use our contracts. Where commercial renting DOES hurt all of us is not only from an availability booking point of view but also from a Disney profitability point of view. Commercial renters are poaching customers from Disney by deliberatly buying many more points than they require with the sole intention of selling cheap rooms at Disney. Some, infact a considerable percentage of the people renting these accomodations on the cheap off commercial renters would stay on property anyway although many would use the mods and value resorts. A rented room in a DVC is a potential lost reservation to Disney therefore at many times of the year a lower number of beds filled in non DVC Disney hotels therefore lower profits for Disney. Lower profits for Disney DOES hurt every one of us owners as lower profits for Disney = less investment in all parts of WDW. Less investment in WDW = lower standards of service, less investment in new rides and attractions, in fact less investment in everything. In a nutshell the more money Disney make out of WDW the more they will spend on it (especillay in the parks) and the better it will be for us all. Consider if the parks were not some of the best in the world the hotels would not exist and if they go downhill so will the value of our ownership.

 

[disneydisneydoo]

Do you think it's odd that the street address listed on www.getawaymagic.com for the purpose of providing driving directions (1780 East Buena Vista Drive, Lake Buena Vista, FL 32830) comes up as Wolfgang Puck Express At The Marketplace on www.whitepages.com? Could the commercial renter be an employee working out of Wolfgang Puck's?

 

[dianeschlicht]

Do you think it's odd that the street address listed on www.getawaymagic.com for the purpose of providing driving directions (1780 East Buena Vista Drive, Lake Buena Vista, FL 32830) comes up as Wolfgang Puck Express At The Marketplace on www.whitepages.com? Could the commercial renter be an employee working out of Wolfgang Puck's?

Now THAT'S interesting!

 

[rinkwide]

...A rented room in a DVC is a potential lost reservation to Disney therefore at many times of the year a lower number of beds filled in non DVC Disney hotels therefore lower profits for Disney...

Think about this; Somewhere in the world there's a child of a Disney executive who won't go to private school because her parents can't afford both that and the BMW.

But together we can make a difference. Won't you please make a generous donation to the Disney Profit Fund?

 

[Longhairbear]

There are other Ebay auctions for DVC prebooked vacations. I think the one I found may not be a commercial renter, but will still see a profit at some point. This bothers me, and would greatly upset me should a DLR DVC ever come to reality. As a CA resident, I might buy points there, but it is unlikely. Therefore I would stay there on points I already own. That means booking at a 7 month window or less. With the small area available in CA for a DVC, the resort would be small,thus bookings selling out quickly for desirable dates like Candlelight Procession there. If I couldn't book there because all the units and dates were full, but had seen the same dates at auction on Ebay I would have a fit, and certainly call MS to complain.
Perhaps Disney is working to avoid future problems with commercial renters. Hawaii comes to mind, as does the west coast DCL.

 

[Slakk]

There are other Ebay auctions for DVC prebooked vacations. I think the one I found may not be a commercial renter, but will still see a profit at some point. This bothers me, and would greatly upset me should a DLR DVC ever come to reality. As a CA resident, I might buy points there, but it is unlikely. Therefore I would stay there on points I already own. That means booking at a 7 month window or less. With the small area available in CA for a DVC, the resort would be small,thus bookings selling out quickly for desirable dates like Candlelight Procession there. If I couldn't book there because all the units and dates were full, but had seen the same dates at auction on Ebay I would have a fit, and certainly call MS to complain.
Perhaps Disney is working to avoid future problems with commercial renters. Hawaii comes to mind, as does the west coast DCL.

I have to agree - I hav no issue if you have extra points and make a reservation for someone but when you snatch prime weeks for the intent of selling them without a buyer I think that is crap.

 

[Starr W.]

Think about this; Somewhere in the world there's a child of a Disney executive who won't go to private school because her parents can't afford both that and the BMW.

But together we can make a difference. Won't you please make a generous donation to the Disney Profit Fund?

While owning DVC, I also indirectly hold Disney stock through some ETF's and mutual funds. Want to bet that WDW attendance & room occupancy(preferrably at rack rate) matter to Disney executives, Wall Street analysts and owners of Disney stock? Also economist look at it to gauge disposable income and the health of the economy.

It bugs me that if someone rents their points they do it for $10. Which according to most people here is too low of a number. Why not go for a higher price and put more money in your pocket? Or do they do it because no one can be bothered to get a calculator and figure the cost out at $14/pt. No way would I rent points out for $10, when you're taking on spending how much time on the phone with MS trying for the right "view" studios at BCV or BWV at busy times of the year, making calls for DDP & DME. Then throw in the trust issue on both ends of the transaction. No way does $10/pt cover your risk & work to make the ressie. Why do some let renters get a silk purse room for the price of a sow's ear.

 

[Disney MAINEiac]

There are other Ebay auctions for DVC prebooked vacations. I think the one I found may not be a commercial renter, but will still see a profit at some point. This bothers me, and would greatly upset me should a DLR DVC ever come to reality. As a CA resident, I might buy points there, but it is unlikely. Therefore I would stay there on points I already own. That means booking at a 7 month window or less. With the small area available in CA for a DVC, the resort would be small,thus bookings selling out quickly for desirable dates like Candlelight Procession there. If I couldn't book there because all the units and dates were full, but had seen the same dates at auction on Ebay I would have a fit, and certainly call MS to complain.
Perhaps Disney is working to avoid future problems with commercial renters. Hawaii comes to mind, as does the west coast DCL.

well add me to the list of "somebody who doesn't quite get it" I have to agree with you.

 

[Doctor P]

Why not go for a higher price and put more money in your pocket?

Because that is one of the elements of defining commercial renting (indeed, $10 per point may be too high to defend against a charge of renting for profit for many owners). Let's put it this way--a prima facie defense against a charge of commercial renting is that you are (clearly) not renting for profit. For most current owners, the rental range to unambigously say that one is not renting for profit would probably be somewhere between $6.50 and $7.50 per point.

 

[Doctor P]

I understand what you are saying, but there is more to the puzzle--I guess I would have LESS problem with commercial renting if the parties involved in it were abiding by all the rules of doing so. This means getting a business license (in some states, this will mean getting a real estate license), paying the requisite registration fees, paying Florida sales taxes, etc.

 

[tubtruck]

While owning DVC, I also indirectly hold Disney stock through some ETF's and mutual funds. Want to bet that WDW attendance & room occupancy(preferrably at rack rate) matter to Disney executives, Wall Street analysts and owners of Disney stock? Also economist look at it to gauge disposable income and the health of the economy.

It bugs me that if someone rents their points they do it for $10. Which according to most people here is too low of a number. Why not go for a higher price and put more money in your pocket? Or do they do it because no one can be bothered to get a calculator and figure the cost out at $14/pt. No way would I rent points out for $10, when you're taking on spending how much time on the phone with MS trying for the right "view" studios at BCV or BWV at busy times of the year, making calls for DDP & DME. Then throw in the trust issue on both ends of the transaction. No way does $10/pt cover your risk & work to make the ressie. Why do some let renters get a silk purse room for the price of a sow's ear.

Two great points here, the first one : of course it matters to Disney how many people are in their hotels, the people booking the hotel rooms are the bread and butter for Disney. Not only are they spending large amounts of money on the rooms but they are more likely to be spending the greatest amount of money whilst in the parks on both food and souvineers and clothes etc. Or put it another way which is most profitable to Disney, a group of school kids with a three day hopper, $10 for lunch and the price of a bus ticket back to the Motel 6 in their pockets or a family staying in a Disney resort for the duration of their stay.

The second point I dont think points will be renting at $10 for too much longer, reasons for this are :-the cost of annual dues are steadily rising i.e at some point many years in the future annual dues will actually be $10 per point, the cost of buying DVC has dramatically increased over the years and will continue to do so, the supply of available points to rent is finite and commercial renters are now been clamped down on. Word about getting delux accomadation for less money by renting is spreading quickly by both word of mouth and by the internet (the ebook which is talked about on this site etc). As demand to rent points increases so will the price attained by people renting out their points, a quick count today of the first page of the rental board shows 17 offers of a rental and 30 posts by people wanting to rent,(i.e more people wanting rentals than owners willing or able to rent) You can also guarantee that for every person posting a wanted request their are a whole load more who are simply sending PMs to people offering rentals (this was certainly my experience when I offered 68 points for rent or transfer last month) in the end I was able to cherry pick where they went and transfered the lot in one go to another owner saving me any hassel of making ressies for a renter.
There will always be a number of people out there who are, or claim to be thrilled to have been able to help someone get a reservation in a hotel that they may otherwise have been unable to afford but the majorty of owners, who have spent a great deal of their money on buying into DVC, want as much as they possibly can for their investment and if they think they can get more money for their unused points they will ask for more.

 

[zoomsharedisney]

I just wanted to add some opinions. These websites that Win Smith made are very poorly made!! Anyone else agree?? Also, I used to rent out my points (my first 2 years), because I went back to college (again) and quite frankly needed someone to pay the mortgage and dues. I didn't profit from them - I broke even. I rented them on a site called www.myresortnetwork.com. Win Smith also rented points on this site. I remember contacting him (anonomously) because he had some weird "additional charges" listed on his listing. He came up with all sorts of excuses as to why he had additional charges and once I told him that I was a DVC member he never responded back to me.

 

[Sammie]

As to whether Renting hurts anyone is very much a grey area not truly clear cut. There are parts of it that do hurt the total picture and some that don't.

DVC was never meant to be a commecial business for anyone. Certainly a member that does not use their personal points and wants to rent them to friends and family is no different than the member using them for their own personal use. For one then they are renting the points, not renting reservations for peak times, there is huge difference in that. Renting only peak times, with prebooked reservations messes with the natural balance of bookings. The system was not designed to support commercial renting, it was set up to support personal use by individual members.

However when you have someone that purchases large amounts of points, never with the intention of personally using all of them and makes a business out of it, then yes it changes the situation.

For one, if you live in a residential neighborhood and suddenly one by one the homes become rental, it does affect the neighborhood. Renters, and before anyone jumps on this, not everyone is going to be the same, but generally people who rent do not have any ownership pride in the property. Why should they, they have invested nothing in the community. Disney knows this too. If rental comprises a large portion of the bookings at Disney, do you think they truly care about those guests over Members staying there or cash guests. What is in it for them? Nothing. Sure a few will become members by renting, but people who are booking prime times at bargain prices are only looking for bargains they are not looking to buy.

Renters are not going to be concerned with contacting maintenance to get things that are minor repaired during their stay as a member would. Same with the changes to Olivia's. Long time members do not like the changes, they liked it the way it was, most renters will not even notice.

I think it would be wrong to say renting hurts everyone but also wrong to say it has no effect what so ever. Everything in some way effects something else. Sometimes it is positive and sometimes not.

 

[CarolMN]

I've posted this before, but I think the most important driver behind the crackdown on commercial renting is the 11.5% resort tax.

Anyone who is in the business of renting out resort rooms is obligated to pay the tax. Disney pays the tax on all the rooms its rents out.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if the government bodies told Disney that they expect Disney to collect the tax from the owners who also rent or prove that the amount due from this activity is negligible.

I don't think this is about member complaints about availability. I think it is about the money.

 

[tor]

I'm sorry, but I discount any opinion from a commercial renter on this issue. Based on your previous posts, there seemed to be pretty clear evidence that you could be considered a commercial renter by many definitions and, with due respect, I think that would color anyone's view on the issue. Goes to the credibility of the opinion. JMHO. BTW, I do think that the morphing issue was a big part of this. On that we certainly agree.

Discounting the opinions from the other side because they are on the other side What a convenient way to win an arguement.

I've posted this before, but I think the most important driver behind the crackdown on commercial renting is the 11.5% resort tax.

Anyone who is in the business of renting out resort rooms is obligated to pay the tax. Disney pays the tax on all the rooms its rents out.

Disney doesn't pay this the renter does.

 

[RobDoc]

...

Disney doesn't pay this the renter does. ...

Semantics, but Disney is responsible for collecting the tax from the renter and submitting it to the state. With the commercial renters the state is getting nothing and that was the point of Carol's comment. ... Unless you are suggesting that commercial renters ARE collecting the tax and forwarding it to the state?

 

[tor]

Semantics, but Disney is responsible for collecting the tax from the renter and submitting it to the state. With the commercial renters the state is getting nothing and that was the point of Carol's comment. ... Unless you are suggesting that commercial renters ARE collecting the tax and forwarding it to the state?

My point is the tax is to be paid by all renters in addition to the rent and is to be collected by all renters and fowarded to the taxing authority and this includes non commercial rentals as well. If anyone chooses to ignore the taxman they do so at their own peril wether or not you consider yourself commercial. So as I said the tax is not on Disney.

 

[RobDoc]

... So as I said the tax is not on Disney.

My point is that Disney has the responsibility to report and transfer all taxes required for their resorts. They may have covered themselves with the clause about "commercial activity", but unless they back that up with enforcement of the policy, they could still be held responsible for any uncollected/unreported/unpaid taxes to the state.

In this case, it's possible that they could simply provide the names of those they consider in violation to the state of Florida and allow the state to deal with enforcement - but I don't know if FL would do that or just go after Disney for any underpayment of the taxes.

Regardless, Disney DOES have the responsibility to collect, report and pay taxes at their resorts. Thus, the "tax" is on Disney. No one pays the "tax" directly to FL except Disney. If they don't collect it, they are still responsible - if they do collect it and don't submit it - they are still responsible. No question that the responsibility for the "tax" is on Disney.

 

[tor]

My point is that Disney has the responsibility to report and transfer all taxes required for their resorts. They may have covered themselves with the clause about "commercial activity", but unless they back that up with enforcement of the policy, they could still be held responsible for any uncollected/unreported/unpaid taxes to the state.

In this case, it's possible that they could simply provide the names of those they consider in violation to the state of Florida and allow the state to deal with enforcement - but I don't know if FL would do that or just go after Disney for any underpayment of the taxes.

Regardless, Disney DOES have the responsibility to collect, report and pay taxes at their resorts. Thus, the "tax" is on Disney. No one pays the "tax" directly to FL except Disney. If they don't collect it, they are still responsible - if they do collect it and don't submit it - they are still responsible. No question that the responsibility for the "tax" is on Disney.

From what I read of the law concerning the state portion of the tax it is not DVCs responsibility on rental agreements by members it is solely the members responsibility to collect and foward the tax. This may be the reason you are supposed to let them know if it is a rental so they report it or track it. I believe the state will find a way to get there tax just like they are figuring ways to get the sales tax on internet sales. In NY it started with cigarettes sold on line now they give the oppurtunity to come clean on your income taxes for use taxes that are due. Sales taxes are one area that the states like to make public displays of enforcement to keep compliance high.

 

[CarolMN]

From what I read of the law concerning the state portion of the tax it is not DVCs responsibility on rental agreements by members it is solely the members responsibility to collect and foward the tax. This may be the reason you are supposed to let them know if it is a rental so they report it or track it. I believe the state will find a way to get there tax just like they are figuring ways to get the sales tax on internet sales. In NY it started with cigarettes sold on line now they give the oppurtunity to come clean on your income taxes for use taxes that are due. Sales taxes are one area that the states like to make public displays of enforcement to keep compliance high.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this.

When/If the state and local governments decide to get serious about collecting the taxes they are owed in this area, I believe they will go after Disney. It's easier to demand that Disney collect it or at least identify those who owe it. Either way, it's a headache Disney/DVC won't want.

FWIW, I don't think your cigarette analogy applies. The DVC owners are "selling" a reservation at a "brick and mortar" location - they're not shipping something. Much easier to track and find scoflaws by concentrating compliance efforts at a brick and mortar location than to find them in cyberspace or in the shipping process. I doubt NY would be "allowing" residents the opportunity to pay sales taxes on their income tax returns if there were a better way to collect the taxes - surely they get only a small, small percentage of what is actually due from internet sales.

Again, I doubt we'll ever agree - except I do agree that those in the business of renting owe the tax and are ultimately responsible for paying it. But I think the taxing authorities will involve Disney when/if they decide to start collecting what is owed and not paid. Were I in the business, I would be worried.

Wonder if you'd be able to use your membership if it had a tax lien? I think you'd have trouble selling it.

DISCLAIMER: Above represents my opinion. I am not a lawyer and seldom even watch them on TV.