Commerical Use Policy Update - New Thread!

[BeachClub2014]

And it’s possible that what they said is actually true?

This notion that they mislead owners is just not supported in fact.

They did not have to make any judgement statements at all and simply left it at yes, we want to stop commercial renting and we are focused on that.

But, we can agree to disagree and move on.

To be clear and fair, I have never suggested that DVC leadership has misled anyone. All I have said is that the answer they provided is meaningless without context or scale.

We can agree to disagree on this one.

Moving on......

 

[Sandisw]

I’d like to think nothing more is coming. That might be correct when it comes to updating policies etc but not when it comes to enforcement.

I’d like to see DVC enforce against the LLC, it should be an easy pickings. Then afterwards when we have seen the impact to availability etc if any, then we can have a talk about if more is required or not.

But to claim an owner with 500 or 1,000 points who either rents all or some points is hurting the membership as a whole is a stretch

Claiming that the same owners are violating the rules is fair - however the driver that goes 36mph in a 35 zone is also speeding.

Personally I don’t care about spec renting, have I done it my self, absolutely. However as stating in the original thread, I’ve always been able to get what I wanted even BWV SV - also less than 60 days. I’ll even go as far as to say I can do it for any time of the year. Admittedly it will be hard work with waitlisting and stalking but it can and have been done.

Heck the other day I even saw a studio p/g for 6 nights 2nd week of December. Could be the waitlist system didn’t work i don’t know but it was there.

The world is not black and white and definitely not DVC.

I think they will follow through with enforcement against those that they said they want to target.

I do think going at LLCs fit into those owners they are looking at.

I also believe that there will be grey areas when it comes to enforcement and my guess is there will continue to be case by case and some planned ignoring like they currently do with transfers for money.

My opinion is that If we get through another month or two with no changes to rules…then I think it’s a telling sign that they don’t plan anything further at this time.

DVC holds all the cards and can always change things when needed but they also have to be able to sell to the membership that changes made are grounded in being an enhancement to the membership.

There is a small part of me that still believes we may be seeing more bark than bite.

 

[DougEMG]

With the talk about the 20 reservations across all memberships being the new rule I went back and looked and saw I hit 21 in May. Guess I will have to start tracking that now.

Hope I don’t get a letter from DVC.

 

[lowlight]

If the DVC executives, who have an adopted policy in place for what defines commercial purpose, state this is not a widespread issue for the membership, then that is the offical view.

I still cannot find a DVC board member quote with the exact word "widespread" in it anywhere. If you have a better source, please clue me in. The only reference I can find when doing a google boolean search is, ironically, of YOU saying it about 400 times.

https://dvcnews.com/dvc-program-men...mmercial-renting-walking-during-condo-meeting

There is a large spec rental market and it has implications for certain owners, but that is not the same as saying it’s a big issue for the membership when doing it is not against the currebt rules because it’s not been identified by DVC as “commercial”.

You've glossed over my entire reply, yet again. A problem can be narrow in scope and also be a serious issue. They are not exclusive characteristics.

Personally, something is only a big issue when the bulk of owners are being impacted negatively.

That's an opinion, and unfortunately, not every situation allows for opinions. Think of how many parts of your body or pieces of your car make up a very small part of the overall mechanism, but the whole thing stops working when it fails. For some people, the heart of DVC has failed, rendering the product severely diminished. That's a narrow in scope big issue. You should feel blessed that you have the resources that you aren't affected by it.

DVC has all the data they need. They know exactly how many reservations are booked in the names of others.

They know which memberships are holding every single room. They know how often rooms are being walked.

They know which memberships are in the name of LLCs or brokers and what activity is happening.

They know which owners have been exceeding the 20 reservations rule, who changes the lead guests and how often, and everything in between.

DVC does surveys all the time so they have anecdotal data too.

I think it’s pretty safe to say that they have a pulse on where the membership is when it comes to the satisfaction.

One of your main concerns with enforcement of walking and commercial renting is that the average person doesn't accidentally get caught in a wide dragnet. If DVC is as omniscient as you make them out to be, enforcement of renting and walking should be a snap. This isn't DVC's Schrodinger's cat, where they are simultaneously omniscient enough to know everything about all the players, but also clueless and stupid enough to hurt ol' Sandi when she's making her 21st personal reservation of the year after walking it.

All true......and DVC ain't sayin'. They've only used the ubiquitous phrase "not widespread" in their public comments, which doesn't mean much in and of itself.

I have not heard the word widespread used in any quote except by Sandi. Google AI even forwards to her posts on the disboards as the source. The circle is complete. I welcome being wrong, maybe my Google Fu has waned as I've aged.

 

[xdan0920]

I like how we are back to, “actually renting isn’t really an issue” ….please ignore what any of you can easily see after two seconds of searching the internet. So what if there is hundreds of thousands of points for rent, along with thousands of confirmed reservations, at this very moment. It’s not “widespread” therefore it’s not an issue.

 

[Sandisw]

I still cannot find a DVC board member quote with the exact word "widespread" in it anywhere. If you have a better source, please clue me in. The only reference I can find when doing a google boolean search is, ironically, of YOU saying it about 400 times.

https://dvcnews.com/dvc-program-men...mmercial-renting-walking-during-condo-meeting




You've glossed over my entire reply, yet again. A problem can be narrow in scope and also be a serious issue. They are not exclusive characteristics.



That's an opinion, and unfortunately, not every situation allows for opinions. Think of how many parts of your body or pieces of your car make up a very small part of the overall mechanism, but the whole thing stops working when it fails. For some people, the heart of DVC has failed, rendering the product severely diminished. That's a narrow in scope big issue. You should feel blessed that you have the resources that you aren't affected by it.



One of your main concerns with enforcement of walking and commercial renting is that the average person doesn't accidentally get caught in a wide dragnet. If DVC is as omniscient as you make them out to be, enforcement of renting and walking should be a snap. This isn't DVC's Schrodinger's cat, where they are simultaneously omniscient enough to know everything about all the players, but also clueless and stupid enough to hurt ol' Sandi when she's making her 21st personal reservation of the year after walking it.



I have not heard the word widespread used in any quote except by Sandi. Google AI even forwards to her posts on the disboards as the source. The circle is complete. I welcome being wrong, maybe my Google Fu has waned as I've aged.

You are correct and I used widespread because that is in my personal notes…but I will correct it to match the word from DVC News to not cause confusion since I can’t prove my notes are accurate

I definitely go back and make it clear where it came from.

Again, you opinion is that there is an issue for the membership because you view spec rentals as commercial or you see walking as a process that should be stopped.

And, this is not about me so please let’s not make it personal. I do not rent. But I bought a product that allows me that right and I bought a contract that gives me extreme flexibility in how it’s used

That is importment to me and many others. And, the board member who answered me agreed wih that being a concern in making future changes.

The bottom line is that so far, DVC has not changed the rules and it’s been about 7 months since the December HOA meetings.

If they do, then all owners will have to accept them.

If they choose not to then it means they feel the current rules are in the best interests of the

We view the market differently because we define commercial purpose differently.

Right now, there is an offical document that defines commercial use and until that is changed or DVC further guidance, all owners can do is compare what is happening to it.

And that is how I will define it.

Since we should be accurate, the board has never said that the rental market is an issue.

They have only said commercial renting is…which they went on to define as large point owners renting and it’s a frequent occurrence and that is what they would be finding ways to stop as best they could.

 

[Sandisw]

I like how we are back to, “actually renting isn’t really an issue” ….please ignore what any of you can easily see after two seconds of searching the internet. So what if there is hundreds of thousands of points for rent, along with thousands of confirmed reservations, at this very moment. It’s not “widespread” therefore it’s not an issue.

See, this is why there is a difference because when people like me are talking about renting not being an issue for the membership we are talking about renting by owners who are not renting to the degree it rises. to the level of commercial purposes.

Every single owner out there offering rentals are not doing it against the contract.

Only DVC knows who is in violation and it’s on them to stop them.

So, while there are certain things that seem to be the particular owners who have a lot of spec rentals or rentals in general, there are also a large number that don’t appear to be that.

 

[Sandisw]

Update..I will go back and fix my posts. I have been using the word widespread and realize it exists in the notes I took at the meetings but doesn’t match DVc News.

I will use not common practice to stay consistent with the article many of us use to support boards statements.

ETA: I have added a clarification to all my posts. If I missed one, feel free to point it out.

 

[Sandisw]

—-

With the talk about the 20 reservations across all memberships being the new rule I went back and looked and saw I hit 21 in May. Guess I will have to start tracking that now.

Hope I don’t get a letter from DVC.

That is the thing… it’s not a new policy…it’s the same on that has been in existence since 2011

Even MS has been telling owners it’s not new policy…just now renewed/enchnaced enfofcemenf.

 

[HyperspaceMountainPilot]

I’d like to think nothing more is coming…But to claim an owner with 500 or 1,000 points who either rents all or some points is hurting the membership as a whole is a stretch.

I don’t see how anybody can possibly believe an owner with 1000 points renting all of their points doesn’t hurt the membership as a whole! That is enough points to take a studio out of inventory for three months! If just a small fraction of the membership (less than 5%, “not widespread”!) decides to rent 1000 points of studios a year, or even 10% (arguably still not widespread?) decides to rent half or more of their points on studios each year, it would be enough to block out the most popular rooms across all holidays and low points seasons.

The DVC system doesn’t work for small points owners (say under 200 points) who can only take one trip a year if even 25% of the points are used to maximize income from rentals…many owners seem to justify their own renting of half (or more) of their points without realizing that if everybody did that the whole system would stop working for everybody…essentially they want to be able to keep their own side hustle income at the expense of the middle class families using the program as it’s marketed.

Everybody wants to go after the commercial renters, but evidently some people don’t realize they are the commercial renters. Ultimately, it’s up to Disney to decide (within reason) what is or isn’t commercial renting, but only the most tortured reasoning would allow for renting more than half your points on average without crossing the line into commercial. I posit that if you think “your rental income need to stay below the total amount of your dues” is an unreasonable restriction, you are probably abusing the system.

 

[Mouseforward]

That is enough points to take a studio out of inventory for three months!

But you could take a studio out of inventory for yourself ( very expensive winter retreat) effect would be the same.

but evidently some people don’t realize they are the commercial renters. Ultimately, it’s up to Disney to decide (within reason) what is or isn’t commercial renting, but only the most tortured reasoning would allow for renting more than half your points on average without crossing the line into commercial.

The set of users who rent > 35% of their points could easily outstrip the " commercial renters" even by a 5 to 1 ratio. This has been the point of us folks arguing that while going after commercial renting will help it may be a small effect on hard to use rooms ( but still worth it) .

This is why many of us are encouraged by the only up to dues ( no profit) plan as that will cut out all of the Joe's and Sally's who bought BW for 85 a point in 1999 and used to go to WDW but kept the contracts and now rent the 1,500 points each year.

 

[AstroBlasters]

I don’t see how anybody can possibly believe an owner with 1000 points renting all of their points doesn’t hurt the membership as a whole! That is enough points to take a studio out of inventory for three months! If just a small fraction of the membership (less than 5%, “not widespread”!) decides to rent 1000 points of studios a year, or even 10% (arguably still not widespread?) decides to rent half or more of their points on studios each year, it would be enough to block out the most popular rooms across all holidays and low points seasons.

The DVC system doesn’t work for small points owners (say under 200 points) who can only take one trip a year if even 25% of the points are used to maximize income from rentals…many owners seem to justify their own renting of half (or more) of their points without realizing that if everybody did that the whole system would stop working for everybody…essentially they want to be able to keep their own side hustle income at the expense of the middle class families using the program as it’s marketed.

Everybody wants to go after the commercial renters, but evidently some people don’t realize they are the commercial renters. Ultimately, it’s up to Disney to decide (within reason) what is or isn’t commercial renting, but only the most tortured reasoning would allow for renting more than half your points on average without crossing the line into commercial. I posit that if you think “your rental income need to stay below the total amount of your dues” is an unreasonable restriction, you are probably abusing the system.

From ChatGPT on what % of DVC owners own more than 1000 points:

Disney does not publicly release detailed statistics about Disney Vacation Club (DVC) ownership, including how many members own more than 1,000 points. However, based on industry insight, resale market data, and anecdotal evidence from member forums and brokers, we can make an informed estimate:

Estimated Percentage of DVC Members with >1000 Points:​

• Likely less than 5% of DVC members own more than 1,000 points.
• Many estimates from brokers and long-time DVC members suggest the percentage is closer to 1–3%.

Why So Few?​

1. High Cost:
   • At direct pricing (often $200–$300+ per point), 1,000 points can cost $200,000–$300,000 upfront.
   • Annual dues would typically range from $7,000–$9,000+ depending on the resort.
2. Most Families Need Far Fewer Points:
   • The average DVC owner has between 150–250 points.
   • 1,000 points is typically overkill unless you’re:
     • Booking multiple large villas each year,
     • Traveling frequently,
     • Or renting points commercially (which DVC discourages).
3. Disney Monitors “Commercial” Ownership:
   • Owners with large contracts (e.g., multiple 1,000-point contracts) who rent frequently can be flagged.
   • Disney has recently cracked down more aggressively on commercial renting.

If you're interested, I can also break down what you can do with 1,000 points at various resorts or compare the usage to smaller contracts.

 

[Sandisw]

I don’t see how anybody can possibly believe an owner with 1000 points renting all of their points doesn’t hurt the membership as a whole! That is enough points to take a studio out of inventory for three months! If just a small fraction of the membership (less than 5%, “not widespread”!) decides to rent 1000 points of studios a year, or even 10% (arguably still not widespread?) decides to rent half or more of their points on studios each year, it would be enough to block out the most popular rooms across all holidays and low points seasons.

The DVC system doesn’t work for small points owners (say under 200 points) who can only take one trip a year if even 25% of the points are used to maximize income from rentals…many owners seem to justify their own renting of half (or more) of their points without realizing that if everybody did that the whole system would stop working for everybody…essentially they want to be able to keep their own side hustle income at the expense of the middle class families using the program as it’s marketed.

Everybody wants to go after the commercial renters, but evidently some people don’t realize they are the commercial renters. Ultimately, it’s up to Disney to decide (within reason) what is or isn’t commercial renting, but only the most tortured reasoning would allow for renting more than half your points on average without crossing the line into commercial. I posit that if you think “your rental income need to stay below the total amount of your dues” is an unreasonable restriction, you are probably abusing the system.

I think this is why we are more in agreement for the outcomes!

The more I think about it, the more I can see why they may not have bothered updating the 2011 policy …assuming there isn’t a new version in the works.

They really didn’t have to because the policy allows them to add metrics along with the 20 reservations and now that we know they can enforce against all points an owner is connected to, it should allow for easier enforcement.

Things like unusal number of lead guest changes and potential income above dues all seem like pretty reasonable ways to identify a pattern.

We already know that the updated transfer rules to say they can cancel or fail to confirm reservations made with transferred points if they suspect commercial purpose.

It’s why I am of the belief that DVC can do what they said they’d do…go after those large point owners..without making changes to the actual program changes.

I’m hopeful that I get further responses to my follow up questions and if they give me permission to legally post the post the documents publicly, I will share them!!

 

[Mouseforward]

From ChatGPT on what % of DVC owners own more than 1000 points:

Disney does not publicly release detailed statistics about Disney Vacation Club (DVC) ownership, including how many members own more than 1,000 points. However, based on industry insight, resale market data, and anecdotal evidence from member forums and brokers, we can make an informed estimate:

Estimated Percentage of DVC Members with >1000 Points:​

• Likely less than 5% of DVC members own more than 1,000 points.
• Many estimates from brokers and long-time DVC members suggest the percentage is closer to 1–3%.

Why So Few?​

1. High Cost:
   • At direct pricing (often $200–$300+ per point), 1,000 points can cost $200,000–$300,000 upfront.
   • Annual dues would typically range from $7,000–$9,000+ depending on the resort.
2. Most Families Need Far Fewer Points:
   • The average DVC owner has between 150–250 points.
   • 1,000 points is typically overkill unless you’re:
     • Booking multiple large villas each year,
     • Traveling frequently,
     • Or renting points commercially (which DVC discourages).
3. Disney Monitors “Commercial” Ownership:
   • Owners with large contracts (e.g., multiple 1,000-point contracts) who rent frequently can be flagged.
   • Disney has recently cracked down more aggressively on commercial renting.

If you're interested, I can also break down what you can do with 1,000 points at various resorts or compare the usage to smaller contracts.

When asked How knowledgeable is AstroBlasters ......

If you’re referring to AstroBlasters, the user “AstroBlasters” who’s active on forums like DISboards, ***********, or Reddit (and not an official Disney entity): they’re widely regarded in the Disney Vacation Club (DVC) online community as a highly knowledgeable member. Here’s a quick overview of what’s generally observed about their expertise:


Deep Knowledge of DVC Contracts & Rules
They often provide detailed, accurate answers on topics like:

• Resale vs. direct purchases
• Use Years, banking, and borrowing
• Point charts and maintenance fees
• Right of First Refusal (ROFR) trends

Strong Historical & Policy Context
They frequently reference past DVC policies, rule changes, and historical patterns, offering insights on how things have evolved and how Disney has enforced different policies over time.


Rental & Legal Nuances
They’ve posted extensive clarifications on:

• Whether or not renting points violates personal use clauses
• Commercial use implications
• County-level regulations (e.g., business tax receipts)

Market Analysis
They sometimes share market data on resale prices, availability, and trends in DVC ownership, reflecting a solid grasp of the economics behind DVC.

 

[Sandisw]

From ChatGPT on what % of DVC owners own more than 1000 points:

Disney does not publicly release detailed statistics about Disney Vacation Club (DVC) ownership, including how many members own more than 1,000 points. However, based on industry insight, resale market data, and anecdotal evidence from member forums and brokers, we can make an informed estimate:

Estimated Percentage of DVC Members with >1000 Points:​

• Likely less than 5% of DVC members own more than 1,000 points.
• Many estimates from brokers and long-time DVC members suggest the percentage is closer to 1–3%.

Why So Few?​

1. High Cost:
   • At direct pricing (often $200–$300+ per point), 1,000 points can cost $200,000–$300,000 upfront.
   • Annual dues would typically range from $7,000–$9,000+ depending on the resort.
2. Most Families Need Far Fewer Points:
   • The average DVC owner has between 150–250 points.
   • 1,000 points is typically overkill unless you’re:
     • Booking multiple large villas each year,
     • Traveling frequently,
     • Or renting points commercially (which DVC discourages).
3. Disney Monitors “Commercial” Ownership:
   • Owners with large contracts (e.g., multiple 1,000-point contracts) who rent frequently can be flagged.
   • Disney has recently cracked down more aggressively on commercial renting.

If you're interested, I can also break down what you can do with 1,000 points at various resorts or compare the usage to smaller contracts.

Thanks for sharing…a little ChatGPT is always good!

But, in all seriousness, this is why we need to remember that DVC has everything they need to make decisions.

And if, assuming this is close to accurate, that only 5% of owners are high point owners, being defined here as over 1000, then I have to imagine that DVC will use that when making decision moving forward.

ETA: I don’t even want to know what it says about me because I am sure the bulk of it would be ***** and ****** but *****. Lol

 

[DougEMG]

—-

That is the thing… it’s not a new policy…it’s the same on that has been in existence since 2011

Even MS has been telling owners it’s not new policy…just now renewed/enchnaced enfofcemenf.

Okay I reread the original post on page one.

 

[Sandisw]

I'm confused then.

The "enforcement" since 2011 is 20 reservations across all memberships which replaced the 2008 "enforcement" that was 20 reservations across 1 membership?

If that is the case I've been operating under a misunderstanding for a long time.

Correct…the documents I received were done in 2011…so that is when these rules went into effect.

To be honest I had no clue they even did a 2011 offical update but then again, I should have because when increased my ownership in 2012, I had conversations with them back then about all of this.

It’s obvious to me that DVC most likely hasn’t been enforcing even when it could have..either because they just didn’t…of when they did their reviewed, they determined that what they were seeing for particular owners was fine and so they never made contact even if technically DVC could have been strict.

 

[Cyberc1978]

From ChatGPT on what % of DVC owners own more than 1000 points:

Disney does not publicly release detailed statistics about Disney Vacation Club (DVC) ownership, including how many members own more than 1,000 points. However, based on industry insight, resale market data, and anecdotal evidence from member forums and brokers, we can make an informed estimate:

Estimated Percentage of DVC Members with >1000 Points:​

• Likely less than 5% of DVC members own more than 1,000 points.
• Many estimates from brokers and long-time DVC members suggest the percentage is closer to 1–3%.

​

If we assume of the 250,000 members a 100,000 is unique, then we have somewhere between 1,000 - 5,000 members who owns more than 1,000 points.

That’s still a lot of members and a crazy amount of points.

@AstroBlasters can you please ask ChatGPT how many LLC’s expectedly owns DVC?

 

[AstroBlasters]

If we assume of the 250,000 members a 100,000 is unique, then we have somewhere between 1,000 - 5,000 members who owns more than 1,000 points.

That’s still a lot of members and a crazy amount of points.

@AstroBlasters can you please ask ChatGPT how many LLC’s expectedly owns DVC?

Disney does not publicly release a full breakdown of ownership types within Disney Vacation Club (DVC), including how many memberships are held by LLCs. However, we can draw a reasonable estimate based on a combination of public data and industry observations.

Key Facts:​

• Total DVC Memberships: As of recent years, there are roughly 220,000–250,000 DVC memberships.
• Commercial Renters / LLC Ownership:
  
  • While many LLCs are small and set up for family estate planning or tax reasons, some are created for commercial rental purposes, like DVC rental companies.
  • Estimates from DVC experts and resale brokers suggest that 1–3% of all memberships are owned by LLCs, trusts, or corporate entities, either for legal structuring or commercial use.
  • That would imply approximately 2,000 to 7,500 memberships could be LLC-owned.

Commercial Impact:​

• The most visible LLCs in the space are large-scale renters like David’s DVC Rentals or DVC Rental Store. These companies may hold thousands of points, but that could be spread across many memberships (and sometimes structured to look like individuals or families).

At the Grand Californian:​

Given its small size and popularity, LLC ownership at the Villas at Disney’s Grand Californian Hotel & Spa might be more noticeable. Some speculate that 5–10% of points at high-demand resorts like VGC may be owned by commercial entities or structured LLCs.

---

Summary Estimate:

Roughly 2,000 to 7,500 DVC memberships are estimated to be held by LLCs — ranging from family LLCs to commercial rental operators.

Let me know if you want data specific to a resort or on how this affects booking windows or availability.

 

[AstroBlasters]

I notice chat GPT seems to believe that LLCs and commercial renters have a noticeable impact on the VGC availability because of the limited number of points.

If so, I doubt they are buying in at today’s prices, but anything purchased before 2020 would have a significantly lower buy in price.