Commerical Use Policy Update - New Thread!

[Sandisw]

You could not win a vote on this thread with that policy, never mind the membership.

Plus, one has to read the POS…declaration explains…to understand how hard it is to even grt to the point that owners can ask the board for a vote.

As long as DVD owns a share, they have to approve any amendment that owners want.

So, pretty much getting the POS changed without the blessing of DVD? Pretty slim.

 

[Mouseforward]

And, one has to read the POS…declaration explains…to understand how hard it is to even grt to the point that owners can ask the board for a vote.

But, I simply don’t see very many owners out there who would vote to strip away their right to rent.

Plus, this vote would have to be at each individual resort and only resort owners would even be allowed to organize a vote.

Giving up rights is a hard sell, and outside of a few room classes it is not the issue with the general public that people think it is. Add up SSR and OKW and POLY owners and I bet none of them have an 11 month issue.

 

[JackosinDIS]

The more I think about this, the more pissed off I become. I’ll be sending daily emails to member services about this.

I’ll now be pushing for all renting to be eliminated. I will be pursuing a vote, and campaigning for the rank and file to vote to put a halt to all renting.

Life is too short! Don’t forget we still have a fantastic product in DVC and next time you are sat in your favourite villa enjoying yourself none of this will matter.

 

[zavandor]

I’m a little confused about this policy, in all honesty. We make well over 20 reservations a year for ourselves, including split stays three or even four ways in one trip, and rent out on occasion. So, if renting is allowed, how would they have the right to cancel any rentals that fall within the first twenty reservations of any given time period, when 95% of our overall reservations are only us? How is that in any way following the policy of cracking down on commercial renting, when the actual metric should be the overall percentage of self-named versus non self-named reservations?

100% agree with you, the rule as written is silly. I cannot see how someone like you with (say) 19 reservations in his name and 2 rentals is a commercial renter, while someone with 20 rentals is not.
But that is unfortunately how the rule is written.

 

[zavandor]

Interesting I just read that the dvcrentalstore.com is telling their guests if asked during checkin that they refer to themselves as guests of “DVC investments LLC” and not a renter.

I guess that’s how they skirt the rules.

For all the infighting in this thread members on members, saying if only 10% 30% or 60% of points could be rented for personal use, wouldn't crack down on LLCs bring better immediate results, be easier from a legal standpoint, and avoid anyone being caught in friendly fire?
DVC, just send an email to all LLCs saying that at checkin proof of employment is required. Then see what happens and re-evaluate.

 

[HyperspaceMountainPilot]

I’m in the same boat, I live here and I have three use years. The three use years works because I have the flexibility. I have zero interest in tracking my reservations so I don’t exceed an antiquated and arbitrary number that was established under a completely different set of circumstances. DVC is supposed to bring joy, not more work, and I’m completely uninterested in second guessing my reservations to preserve my ability to rent at some point in the rolling 12 months while LLC’s routinely conduct hundreds of transactions and walk away unscathed. The whole thing is starting to feel shady.

This this this. If they will be punishing those of us who go often and treat family/friends with extra rooms (year after year) when we need to rent 5-10% of our stranded points on occasion, especially instead of cracking down on the people renting 100% of their points spread across < 20 reservations year after year, they are going to have another legal problem on their hands from angry Disney owners who actually are engaging in personal use. I think the common wisdom on the thread is probably not what Disney will actually do, because it seems at odds with their fiduciary obligation to stop commercial renting.

Looks like I can buy/add-on a BWV resale contract and do nothing other than rent out standard view studio or 2BR, as long as I:

Keep my total number of reservations under 20 on a rolling yearly basis

Keep using half of my total annual points on reservations that are clear personal use.

That would keep me below both radars.

I can never tell if you are serious or tongue in cheek, but I think I see it the same way you do. If Disney were to officially bless up to half or more of total reservations being rentals up to 19 (or 20), I would seriously think about picking up 250 points at BWV, turning them into $6000-7000 a year in studio rentals, then take my remaining points and spend them on (much) fewer but larger villa trips.

I just be the Guinea Pig for the 20 rule…I counted last night, my My Dashboard has 29 reservations across all my (5) memberships…all but 4 are in my name as lead…the rest are for family or friends. I do mostly split stays and I book a night or 2 at DHHIR before and after my WDW stay to split the driving. I don’t charge family but my friends want to pay so I’m thinking something nominal ($7.) PP but if DVC has a problem with it, it’s free and they can reciprocate by getting me a nice chocolate sundae at Ghirardelli’s. All of the ‘not me’ reservations have a second reservation with me as the lead guest for the same time as my family.

Thank you for your guinea pig service.

In all seriousness, you are exactly the kind of owner who is using the program as Disney intended to maximize their bottom line…and the rumored policy “with new enforcement” would zero in on people like you for enforcement if you ever did need to rent.

Again, I am not throwing any shade, but I think people should do exactly what you've suggested and get the policy from dvc and read it for themselves.

I agree but I would go a step further and say that if you don’t have a background in contract law, ideally FL contract law and FL-specific timeshare law, you should not form any strong opinions of what Disney can and can’t do (let alone what they will do) without talking to someone who is…and no, us anonymous DVC owner lawyers on a message board don’t count.

20 is a lot if you fly here, but when you live here it really isn’t. Every year we do marathon weekend, July 3rd (we were at VGF yesterday), at least one night of wine & dine, the Halloween party, the Christmas party, Memorial Day, Mother’s Day, sometimes Labor Day, and now we may add Saratoga when we visit epic universe, plus Birthdays & our anniversary. If we have to book two studios or have extended family visiting we could easily hit 20. … I missed one, every year I have a mandatory work conference on I-drive and I stay at Saratoga because everyone goes to DS after for dinner and drinks.

For us, it’s about 10-12 at DLR (our local park, sometimes with a second room), plus maybe 6-8 stays at WDW (often bookending a cruise on each end), and then the once a year trip to AUL (that often ends up being 2 reservations if we split up rooms)— I’m not even that close to owning 1000 points. Wondering if the member cruise counts as well since it shows up in my dashboard.

 

[kristenrice]

Here's my random 3am thoughts...

I would like to see an end to the CONFIRMED rental listings that are more than 60 days out. If an owner wants to rent out their points to cover their dues, cool! They just have to have a confirmed renter before they make the reservation. I have no idea what DVC could do to control this without causing an issue with all members. I've read of the idea of limiting name changes on the reservation, making changes to reservations made at the 11-month window a "cancel/rebook" situation, and charging for changes and all of those ideas seem to do more overall harm than good.

We used to talk about renting "points", which then turned into "well, you're actually renting a reservation"....and now, you are ACTUALLY renting a reservation....and I think that has become the problem. If we regressed back to the system where people went online and said, "Hey, I want to stay at the Animal Kingdom Lodge in August of 2026. Can you find me an owner with points to rent so I can make a reservation?" I think the system would work a lot better. Instead, we have bots and commercial renters who are scooping up weeks at a time and now, renters have to go online and try to find weeks or clumps of days that work for them. At the same time, owners are seeing their dates sitting unavailable and waitlisted on their member dashboard while the rental sites list them available for thousands of dollars. Those dates were not scooped up by "someone". There is nobody staying in those rooms...yet...it is a "ghost" reservation. Owners should not be competing with "ghosts" at the 11-month window. If a renter wants to rent points for an AKV value studio and an owner books that room for them at 11 months out, GREAT! That's fine...as an AKV owner, I do not have an issue competing with other owners who are booking rooms for GUESTS at 11 months. I *DO* have an issue with booking reservations for GHOSTS. If an owner has points that are going to expire, or they have a "last minute" trip that they cannot take, then listing a confirmed reservation that is 60 days out would be acceptable. That follows the holding points guidelines that members have to follow so it seems fair to hold spec rentals to the same rules.

....that's the end of my 3am ramblings...must have coffee and head to real job now

 

[VGCgroupie]

Here's my random 3am thoughts...

I would like to see an end to the CONFIRMED rental listings that are more than 60 days out. If an owner wants to rent out their points to cover their dues, cool! They just have to have a confirmed renter before they make the reservation. I have no idea what DVC could do to control this without causing an issue with all members. I've read of the idea of limiting name changes on the reservation, making changes to reservations made at the 11-month window a "cancel/rebook" situation, and charging for changes and all of those ideas seem to do more overall harm than good.

We used to talk about renting "points", which then turned into "well, you're actually renting a reservation"....and now, you are ACTUALLY renting a reservation....and I think that has become the problem. If we regressed back to the system where people went online and said, "Hey, I want to stay at the Animal Kingdom Lodge in August of 2026. Can you find me an owner with points to rent so I can make a reservation?" I think the system would work a lot better. Instead, we have bots and commercial renters who are scooping up weeks at a time and now, renters have to go online and try to find weeks or clumps of days that work for them. At the same time, owners are seeing their dates sitting unavailable and waitlisted on their member dashboard while the rental sites list them available for thousands of dollars. Those dates were not scooped up by "someone". There is nobody staying in those rooms...yet...it is a "ghost" reservation. Owners should not be competing with "ghosts" at the 11-month window. If a renter wants to rent points for an AKV value studio and an owner books that room for them at 11 months out, GREAT! That's fine...as an AKV owner, I do not have an issue competing with other owners who are booking rooms for GUESTS at 11 months. I *DO* have an issue with booking reservations for GHOSTS. If an owner has points that are going to expire, or they have a "last minute" trip that they cannot take, then listing a confirmed reservation that is 60 days out would be acceptable. That follows the holding points guidelines that members have to follow so it seems fair to hold spec rentals to the same rules.

....that's the end of my 3am ramblings...must have coffee and head to real job now

Amazing 3am post. I agree with all of it.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

A check box at the beginning of any reservation indicating rental or personal use comes to mind.

Put it right out there for God and everybody else to see. Pop up an explanation/confirmation box before continuing in both cases and apply limitations accordingly. Force the commercial renters to lie about what they're doing, and then enforce the policy based on the lie.

Force us all the make a contractually binding choice when we start a reservation. And then enforce the policy.