DVC Commercial Use Policy added to POS

[DVC Mike]

And, it's important to recognize that that advantage is to both the renter and the owner. As an owner-client, the owner need do literally nothing. No mailing back and forth. No answering questions from folks who have no idea what they are doing. No dealing with folks who "change their minds" on a non-refundable reservation. No sitting on hold with MS. David deals with all of those hassles.

True, but you're paying for that by getting less per point than if you rented directly.

 

[JimMIA]

If he's no longer able to book as an Associate member on all of his owner-client accounts, he loses Advantage #1.

If he loses the ability to get on accounts as an associate, he loses most of his business model.

He can check availability, but he can't book. He can't make requests. He can't add DME. He can't add DDP. He can't make changes. IF DVC prohibits him from being an associate, he will be living in a brand new world.

 

[DBorges]

If he loses the ability to get on accounts as an associate, he loses most of his business model.

He can check availability, but he can't book. He can't make requests. He can't add DME. He can't add DDP. He can't make changes. IF DVC prohibits him from being an associate, he will be living in a brand new world.

I want this to happen and I want it NOW!!!! why should members have compete to get a reservation when(People like Da>>>>o is getting rich off us and making it tough for reservation too be made

Why is (he who shall not be named ) not running ramped on this board like th other??


Originally Posted by Brian Noble
And, it's important to recognize that that advantage is to both the renter and the owner. As an owner-client, the owner need do literally nothing. No mailing back and forth. No answering questions from folks who have no idea what they are doing. No dealing with folks who "change their minds" on a non-refundable reservation. No sitting on hold with MS. David deals with all of those hassles

No one win when this guys does anything but him .. Look at the money he is making for a simple process say he rests 150 point for you he gets 13 per point(he is robbing people at that rate) and keeps 3.00 per point that is 1950.00 then he give you the owner hafe up front(after he get the full amount up from oh yes remember that you have is cout of 1500 cause he took 450 for he so called trouble) then months later when the reservation is completed you get the 750 due after he got 6 months of intrest off your money.

Lets say he maks 8 ressies a week with a take of about 450x8+ 3600 weekly not counting I am guessing the escrowed money not paid out

Damn This should be banned period

 

[dianeschlicht]

If he loses the ability to get on accounts as an associate, he loses most of his business model.

He can check availability, but he can't book. He can't make requests. He can't add DME. He can't add DDP. He can't make changes. IF DVC prohibits him from being an associate, he will be living in a brand new world.

And if that's how DVC decides to deal with that type of problem, it will hurt all the owners too.

 

[Y-ASK]

I want this to happen and I want it NOW!!!! why should members have compete to get a reservation when(People like Da>>>>o is getting rich off us and making it tough for reservation too be made

I'm not sure what you mean by "getting rich off us", can you expand on that? How is he "making it tough for reservation too be made"? If he's not participating in speculative reservation renting then how is he "making it tough"? You have all the same chances at a reservation of your choice as any one else who owns DVC... We all adhere to the same rules unless you know something I don't .

Y-ASK

 

[JimMIA]

And if that's how DVC decides to deal with that type of problem, it will hurt all the owners too.

I don't have a dog in this fight. The only thing I've said about Daddio is that there is no question DVC could go after his operation if they chose -- not due to the information Mike posted, but because of the website. I don't have an opinion as to whether that would be a good thing or a bad thing.

In the post above, I was just pointing out that the implications of Brian's scenario were actually much worse than he thought.

 

[DBorges]

I'm not sure what you mean by "getting rich off us", can you expand on that? How is he "making it tough for reservation too be made"? If he's not participating in speculitive reservation renting then how is he "making it tough"? You have all the same chances at a reservation of your choice as any one else who owns DVC... We all adhere to the same rules unless you know something I don't .

Y-ASK

If he make a block of reservations on the same call to the same resort using who evers point and books up four weeks out of inventory then yes he is making it harder for the honest members too get one.

If you have only 150 points but he has a pool yes a pool of 2500 points what are your chanced then ZIP ZERO ZLICH

if the playing feild is even so somewhat ever yes it work but if he is stacked it meakes it hard for us honest members

 

[robinb]

Well I guess I am a Commercial Renter

I took my entire family to WDW last June, (+9) reservations, on top of our stay after they left (+1). Then I went back for F&WF (+2) then we went back for Christmas at AKV (+2) and SSR (+3) we added on nights so it was separate unique reservations. We have another Family gathering at Hilton Head in May because we all had such a great time last June (+8) then we are staying at BCV for a week over the summer (+1)

So my total from June 2007 to June 2008 is 26 reservations!

For me to answer 1 question about my point usage is 1 question too many.
I illustrated my own usage so that people see that 20 unique reservations are easily accomplished without being a comm. renter.

I wanted to touch on LIFERBABE's situation. You can see that she goes at traditionally busy times like Food and Wine and Christmas. If her contract gets "flagged" where she needs to have it OK'd by someone other than the Member Services CM then what happens to the reservation she wants to make? It will likely get snapped up by someone else while someone from DVC reviews her reservations to make sure they are on the up-and-up.

I always book day-to-day as soon as I can to get my NYE reservation and I would assume that LIFERBABE is experienced enough to do the same. If she had to wait for someone to approve of her reservation it would be gone by the time someone got around to it. Under these new rules, she probably would have had to kiss that 1BR in Concierge over Christmas at AKV good-bye!

And how much do you want to bet that DVC will be able to flag an owner with more than 20 rentals but won't be able to unflag them. Regular generous owners like LIFERBABE with lots of points may have to be OK'd for every single reservation they make! Wouldn't that be fun?

 

[DBorges]

I don't have a dog in this fight. The only thing I've said about Daddio is that there is no question DVC could go after his operation if they chose -- not due to the information Mike posted, but because of the website. I don't have an opinion as to whether that would be a good thing or a bad thing.

In the post above, I was just pointing out that the implications of Brian's scenario were actually much worse than he thought.

Well said Jim!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Y-ASK]

If he make a block of reservations on the same call to the same resort using who evers point and books up four weeks out of inventory then yes he is making it harder for the honest members too get one.

Not to defend the guy (I have no knowledge of him), but I can only see this affecting you if he is blocking out the same dates that you are looking for and if he's not involved in speculative renting then the chances of him having four renters wanting the exact same dates as you are pretty low. Or having four renters who want the exact same date for that matter. And wouldn't you think with all the talk about commerical renting that maybe he would limit the number of reservations for each call he makes. I'm sure a CM would take notice if he called to make four reservations using four different member accounts and used four different family names on the reservations other than those on the membership.

Y-ASK

 

[JimMIA]

There is often a tendency, when we talk about renting, to equate all renting with speculative bookings. That's just nonsensical. I'm sure the vast majority of rentals are actually not speculative -- they are a real owner, with a real customer, booking real dates, for a real vacation.

It's also important to realize that our interests are not the same as Disney's with regard to renting.

I think most of us would like to keep the door open to renting, whether we rent or not. I don't rent our points, but I wouldn't want to lose that right. What most of us do want is a level playing field, not the system being abused by speculation.

Keep in mind, though, that Disney objects to any rentals because they are competition for them. They can't prohibit rentals, so the next best thing they can do is forbid "commercial renting." To Disney, it makes no difference whether "commercial renting" is speculative or legitimate -- it's competition, and they'd like to stop it if they can.

The only interest DVC has in stopping speculative rentals is to stop the complaints from owners who can't get ressies in prime time. But their primary interest is stopping as much renting as they can.

 

[Brian Noble]

I don't have a dog in this fight either. I just find it interesting.

True, but you're paying for that by getting less per point than if you rented directly.

Sure. It's not a free service to the owner, but it is a service.

I hadn't thought about Jim's other issues, but that's of course correct. From an owner's perspective, Daddio's service is much much much less interesting if the owner has to do all the work.

...which leads me to ask, why is it that MS only takes calls from Members? Perhaps to discourage renting.

 

[DBorges]

Not to defend the guy (I have no knowledge of him), but I can only see this affecting you if he is blocking out the same dates that you are looking for and if he's not involved in speculative renting then the chances of him having four renters wanting the exact same dates as you are pretty low. Or having four renters who want the exact same date for that matter. And wouldn't you think with all the talk about commerical renting that maybe he would limit the number of reservations for each call he makes. I'm sure a CM would take notice if he called to make four reservations using four different member accounts and used four different family names on the reservations other than those on the membership.

Y-ASK

That is what he does do he double and triple books week from difrent members as he is listed on the accounts ..

He does this for profit and gain not for casual use like most if not all members do

The door should be shut lock and the damn key thown away and should be banned locked out and just told FORGET ABOUT IT!!!!!

I am not fighting with you I own a fair amount of points so it would not afect me but the small point owner would find it hard to compete..

 

[JimMIA]

...which leads me to ask, why is it that MS only takes calls from Members? Perhaps to discourage renting.

I don't think they minded that...

But I think the rationale was a combination of other pressures. For one thing, there were a LOT of calls coming in to MS from non-members, and that took a LOT of MS CM time and expense to manage. A simple cost-cutting initiative.

Secondly, many members complained that they couldn't get through to MS...because MS was busy answering questions for non-members. The old, "It is MEMBER Services...hello?" argument.

And I think the third issue was that some members felt that allowing MS to speak to renters was essentially having our dues subsidize other owners' rental businesses.

 

[Y-ASK]

That is what he does do he double and triple books week from difrent members as he is listed on the accounts ..

He does this for profit and gain not for casual use like most if not all members do

I guess I don't know enough about his opeation to agree or dis-agree with you on that one.

I am not fighting with you I own a fair amount of points so it would not afect me but the small point owner would find it hard to compete..

No problem, I understand where you are coming from but I'm just not sure it's as bad as you make it out to be. If it is then he'll probably get caught and his business model will change or he'll close shop.

Y-ASK

 

[JimMIA]

I wanted to touch on LIFERBABE's situation. You can see that she goes at traditionally busy times like Food and Wine and Christmas. If her contract gets "flagged" where she needs to have it OK'd by someone other than the Member Services CM then what happens to the reservation she wants to make? It will likely get snapped up by someone else while someone from DVC reviews her reservations to make sure they are on the up-and-up.

I always book day-to-day as soon as I can to get my NYE reservation and I would assume that LIFERBABE is experienced enough to do the same. If she had to wait for someone to approve of her reservation it would be gone by the time someone got around to it. Under these new rules, she probably would have had to kiss that 1BR in Concierge over Christmas at AKV good-bye!

And how much do you want to bet that DVC will be able to flag an owner with more than 20 rentals but won't be able to unflag them. Regular generous owners like LIFERBABE with lots of points may have to be OK'd for every single reservation they make! Wouldn't that be fun?

Robin raises a good point.

You would hope that MS would be able to figure out a way to check on these accounts prior to Liferbabe calling for a ressie -- especially for a ressie where she's calling first thing in the morning day-by-day. There's certainly no reason why they couldn't do it up front.

They could take a quick look at my account, for example, and see 15 reservations during the previous UY. All they'd have to do is look and they'd see every ressie was for one of the account owners. Problem solved.

If they looked at Liferbabe's 26 ressies, all they'd have to do is send her a nice email explaining the POS change and asking for clarification. All she would have to say is, "We had one family reunion and we're planning another. I was at the first one, and you'll note that I also have a ressie for the upcoming one." That would be the end of it.

But, given DVC's history of seamless implementations (do we need to list them...I think not), Robin has a legitimate concern. I can definitely see Liferbabe clearing up the issue on her first day-by-day call, and then having to continue to answer the same questions every day thereafter for a long time.

 

[tjkraz]

That is what he does do he double and triple books week from difrent members as he is listed on the accounts ..

He does this for profit and gain not for casual use like most if not all members do

That was not my understanding, but then I've never dealt directly with him before.

How do you know this to be true?

 

[DBorges]

I have stop ed to post due to It is no win situation.

Some people are basicly making money and getting rich off the members and I hit a never and I yeld !

 

[JimMIA]

I called him pertending to be a dvc member with points I need to sell .

And you're saying that he told you that he books multiple speculative reservations -- reservations he has no customer for right now, but hopes to rent later?

 

[tjkraz]

Daddio, as an associate on a contract, is an "owner". He is a member with all the rights and obligations that go with it relative to the contract.

That's not true. Associate does not = Owner. There are numerous distinctions between the two.

The Associate designation is simply an administrative one. It provides the right to manipulate the points within the contract. But there are no ownership rights.

Similarly, I could give you a set of keys to my car and permission to use it, but that doesn't make you the owner of the vehicle.

Call it a technicality if you will, but as the rules are written now the commercial use prohibition applies solely to the owner of the contract--one cannot OWN points for commercial purposes. Daddio is not an owner of the points that he rents. The fact that he created a commercial venture which exists to facilitate rentals is neither here nor there.

We could argue that the activity "should" be prohibited or that DVC may eventually change the rules such that the use of a broker to facilitate rentals is not permitted. But right now, I don't see that as being the case.