DVC plans to target commercial renters

[Chuck S]

Commercial Use - Add a checkbox when transferring to MDE that rentals must click to confirm they have a rental contract in place as required by DVC. Simple. Doesn’t bother anybody except the people using DVC for profit. Renters want legitimate reservations, so commercial renters would have a hard time trying to encourage renters to lie about nature of the reservation. By checking if rentals have a contract in place DVC can clearly see who is running a business. No guessing about which reservations are friends/family or commercial use, and for profit businesses will no longer be able to operate under the radar. If an owner never uses certain contracts for anything but rentals? That is NOT personal use.

DVC is a better judge than me though. They have the data to more clearly see where the negative impacts are most severe and/or consequential. They also have a much stronger understanding of the membership base. I think the time has come for DVC to better define what constitutes commercial use. The above system does not make that call, it just removes the grey area where commercial renters can claim they’re giving away 80+% of their points year after year.

DVC already requires in the paperwork that we inform them if a reservation is a rental, or at least they did in the original paper work. Do you think that happens regularly? How woiuld a check-box solve the issue?

 

[Genie+]

DVC already requires in the paperwork that we inform them if a reservation is a rental, or at least they did in the original paper work. Do you think that happens regularly? How woiuld a check-box solve the issue?

Renters want legitimate reservations, so commercial renters would have a hard time trying to encourage renters to lie about nature of the reservation. By checking if rentals have a contract in place DVC can clearly see who is running a business. No guessing about which reservations are friends/family or commercial use, and for profit businesses will no longer be able to operate under the radar.

 

[tom1944]

Every year I have some points left that I rent. Some years I have more points than others.

Anywhere close to 20 times a year?

 

[Brian Noble]

commercial renters would have a hard time trying to encourage renters to lie about nature of the reservation

Tenants already lie about the purchase in Paypal to save 2%.

 

[Genie+]

That seems like a really reasonable approach.

I fully agree. It’s protecting the experience of the membership. It still leaves open the ability for owners to rent out the occasional excess points.

 

[Chuck S]

I don’t have much else to add to this conversation since it’s been said 49 different ways from dozens of people but this is exhausting. There is literally 12 pages of options and examples people have given here. You might not like them because they don’t help you specifically, but it’s clear it’s something many others want changed. I know you tend to prefer the status quo for most of these “needs change” conversations, but if members on here and those emailing and doing surveys didn’t keep pushing for things to get better (and sometimes worse, before they got better) we’d never see growth in the resorts and parks.

Like you said, not every change will benefit every single person. I personally hate the new LLMP system and much preferred Genie+, and I know I’m probably in the minority and can accept that. The change was worse for me, worse for plenty of guests I’m sure, but it’s the change the greater majority wanted. So maybe this current system is now no longer benefiting the greater majority (it’s hard to accept potentially being in the minority, I totally understand). The changes you see as worse, perhaps many see as better for the membership so every idea doesn’t have to be shot down as a problem, because they’re a problem for you or a few very niche and rare cases people keep bringing up. There’s been dozens of real life examples that have been given of actual problems people have with this current system. I think those should carry more weight in this conversation than a few random hypotheticals.

The LLMP system has northing to do with DVC at all. The discussion is regarding DVC, and what they can legally do with the approval of the Florida Timeshare board that can inprove the situation. They can not legally restrict SOME members from reserving their home resorts. That was made clear when someone is banned from Disney property, but not from their home DVC resort, as it is an ownership interest.

 

[tx911]

I fully agree. It’s protecting the experience of the membership. It still leaves open the ability for owners to rent out the occasional excess points.

I think so too.

The risk/reward equation is very favorable for something like this to limit commercial renting. There may be a slight impact on everyday owners, but the benefit would vastly outweigh the cost.

 

[tom1944]

I would offer one possibility that I've grown to like: Wyndham's Owner Priority dates.

At several resorts, during the most in-demand times of year, an owner can:

• Book whatever they want with themselves as the lead guest
• Book as many other units as they want for their guests traveling at the same time*.
• Book up to two reservations per year for unaccompanied guests.

The limit of two is across all restricted resorts/periods.

For most small-scale owners, this is just fine--we are unlikely to rent more than once or twice a year, so this doesn't matter. It can make things a little complicated if you often send your adult children on vacation without going along, but the solution to that is to add them to one of the deeds/contracts. (Wyndham allows differently-titled properties in the same master account; the owners of "the account" are the union of all of the owners on each property.)

It can even work well for folks who rent more often; they just have to choose times/resorts that are not on the restricted list, and plenty of those exist.

When this plan was implemented, availability at some of the toughest-to-book resorts got MUCH better in a hurry. For example, it used to be next to impossible to get summer dates at Glacier Canyon in the Wisconsin Dells without owning there--and even that required effort. Now it's quite a bit easier.

Also: most of the large-scale Wyndham renters hate this, and many other rank-and-file owners (though not all of them) seem to think it is just fine. That tells me that it's targeted reasonably well.

-------
*: Last I knew, the dates did not have to line up exactly; as long as there is some overlap it is fine.

I am a big advocate of copying changes made by others that have worked and had time for people to challenge the changes via litigation and been found legal to do.

 

[Chuck S]

Anywhere close to 20 times a year?

If someone were renting out 350 points using 1/2 night studio reswervations it could easily reach 20 per yer. That SHOULD trigger an investigation by DVC. And I doubt DVC, and its members, are really impacted by 1/2 night reservation here and there,, especially if they are made outside the home resort priorty window. What they really need to look for are reservation used for rental that are made during the Home resort Priority window.

And DVC would have no practical way to prove they are actually rentals, and not friends and family. I really think the solution offered by

Renters want legitimate reservations, so commercial renters would have a hard time trying to encourage renters to lie about nature of the reservation. By checking if rentals have a contract in place DVC can clearly see who is running a business. No guessing about which reservations are friends/family or commercial use, and for profit businesses will no longer be able to operate under the radar.

A legal contract could be as simple as the conditions for payment you put forth in the post offering the rentals, and it is technically in writing, as DVC offers no sample contract to follow.

I really think the solution offered by @Brian Noble is the best so far, if it applies to reservations made within the Home Resort priority window, up to the 7 month mark, when everyone would have an equal opportunity to book. At 7 months, let them book whatever they want for rental, rather than sending a lot of unused points to cash reservations and making Disney, not DVC, more money...or increase the maximum allowed Breakage percentage in our resort budgets. The increased breakage would benefit all members.

 

[Genie+]

Tenants already lie about the purchase in Paypal to save 2%.

Yeah but that 2% off is a motive.

Most prospective tenants aren’t interesting in being part of an illegitimate rental. There’s nothing for them to gain in bypassing the system. If the commercial renter has to tell them ‘don’t check that box’, that’s going to feel like a red flag.

But I like your idea much better. Wyndhams or whoever lol.

 

[dcfromva]

I would offer one possibility that I've grown to like: Wyndham's Owner Priority dates.

At several resorts, during the most in-demand times of year, an owner can:

• Book whatever they want with themselves as the lead guest
• Book as many other units as they want for their guests traveling at the same time*.
• Book up to two reservations per year for unaccompanied guests.

The limit of two is across all restricted resorts/periods.

For most small-scale owners, this is just fine--we are unlikely to rent more than once or twice a year, so this doesn't matter. It can make things a little complicated if you often send your adult children on vacation without going along, but the solution to that is to add them to one of the deeds/contracts. (Wyndham allows differently-titled properties in the same master account; the owners of "the account" are the union of all of the owners on each property.)

It can even work well for folks who rent more often; they just have to choose times/resorts that are not on the restricted list, and plenty of those exist.

When this plan was implemented, availability at some of the toughest-to-book resorts got MUCH better in a hurry. For example, it used to be next to impossible to get summer dates at Glacier Canyon in the Wisconsin Dells without owning there--and even that required effort. Now it's quite a bit easier.

Also: most of the large-scale Wyndham renters hate this, and many other rank-and-file owners (though not all of them) seem to think it is just fine. That tells me that it's targeted reasonably well.

-------
*: Last I knew, the dates did not have to line up exactly; as long as there is some overlap it is fine.

One of the reasons we picked DVC was due to the flexibility in the program I know I would not like this change in flexibility. We don't rent our points, but at times we do share with family members. (Usually nieces and nephews) This is permitted.

I think there must be way for DVC to tell who is a commercial renter. I think one of the problems is the contract said you are permitted to rent your points, but commercial renters are not permitted. It was rather vague as to what that meant.

 

[Genie+]

A legal contract could be as simple as the conditions for payment you put forth in the post offering the rentals, and it is technically in writing, as DVC offers no sample contract to follow.

It really wouldn’t have anything to do with wording of the rental contract. It would just be getting renters to raise their hand and say yes I am a rental and have a contract in place as required by DVC.

 

[Sandisw]

If the bar to be cleared is zero negative impact to members, this can never be adequately addressed, nor can walking.

The fix for either one of these will necessarily involve some compromises in order to improve the overall quality of the product.

And there in lies the dilemma for DVC. Loss of flexibility to change reservations won’t be seen by everyone as an improvement to the product.

Some will see it was worse and some won’t. Only they know which one they believe can be spun the best.

 

[nalababybear]

I don’t think the special dates will be enough to curtail the problem.

I think certain patterns of rental behavior are obvious (anyone with eyes can easily identify the big offenders on Facebook, so I’m sure DVC could easily see the rental patterns if they wanted to). Normal members occasionally renting out points (whether it’s all their points or lower percentage) likely have rental reservations that look very different from the ones commerical spec renters have.

I encourage people to slowly infiltrate the Facebook groups and screen shot examples of egregious commercial spec rentals by the same group of people and send them to DVC. These low point times/rooms and desirable date spec rentals devalue the program for the rest of us. The argument that they would be booked either way is ridiculous in my mind. Obviously, they would get booked either way, but some unfair advantage is currently being used to book these rooms when the same “impossible to get” room type seem to be easily booked by this group of commercial renters over and over.

Go ahead and police away. That's not going to do anything but boil your own water. Disney already knows the high users; they don't need ground sleuths and to find them thinking renters are Carmen Sandiego.

There's no advantage those folk are getting more than any other DVC owner -- they get up at 8AM to grab rooms. They walk. They use waitlists. They troll the site for cancellations.

Let Disney define their cutoffs and remedies. Those rentors will adjust accordingly as will the rest of us.

I lament my inability to get Club at AKL as my home resort, sure. Not going to ruin my day nor my trip. I didn't buy specifically to have CL only.

Disney being TOO prescriptive will probably do more harm to the product than current situation of certain rooms being relatively unavailable.

IMHO I would rather have the choices of able to rent easily and be the rentee easily to get those Club rooms than having more rules and restrictions to follow and stare at my screen. We already do too much of that with MDE.

 

[Cyberc1978]

I really think the solution offered by @Brian Noble is the best so far, if it applies to reservations made within the Home Resort priority window, up to the 7 month mark, when everyone would have an equal opportunity to book. At 7 months, let them book whatever they want for rental, rather than sending a lot of unused points to cash reservations and making Disney, not DVC, more money...or increase the maximum allowed Breakage percentage in our resort budgets. The increased breakage would benefit all members.

THAT at least to me sound like a fair and workable solution. Any reservation made at or after the 7 month window could be rented.

I would hate to be limited in my options and should I need to rent points this would be fine.

 

[Cyberc1978]

Anywhere close to 20 times a year?

Haha no not even close.

 

[Disfamwa]

Go ahead and police away. That's not going to do anything but boil your own water. Disney already knows the high users; they don't need ground sleuths and to find them thinking renters are Carmen Sandiego.

There's no advantage those folk are getting more than any other DVC owner -- they get up at 8AM to grab rooms. They walk. They use waitlists. They troll the site for cancellations.

Let Disney define their cutoffs and remedies. Those rentors will adjust accordingly as will the rest of us.

I lament my inability to get Club at AKL as my home resort, sure. Not going to ruin my day nor my trip. I didn't buy specifically to have CL only.

Disney being TOO prescriptive will probably do more harm to the product than current situation of certain rooms being relatively unavailable.

IMHO I would rather have the choices of able to rent easily and be the rentee easily to get those Club rooms than having more rules and restrictions to follow and stare at my screen. We already do too much of that with MDE.

It kind of sounds like you don’t think speculative confirmed rentals are a problem, and that’s fine if you don’t—other people do think it’s a problem.

Showing the egregious offenders to Disney is not being any sort of sleuth. The offenders are doing it very publicly on social media. It is showing DVC you see the blatant behavior and expect them to enforce the rules.

I think some people are defensive on here because they worry the five confirmed reservations they rented with their extra points from their new loaded contract will be targeted. This is not what most upset people are referring to, and I think would look very different than the type of behavior I’m referring to.

 

[Cyberc1978]

I don’t know how the timeshare laws are worded, but should you be allowed to rent where you own? Or does it not matter?

I know Hilton allows you to rent your home resort time.

 

[nalababybear]

It kind of sounds like you don’t think speculative confirmed rentals are a problem, and that’s fine if you don’t—other people do think it’s a problem.

Showing the egregious offenders to Disney is not being any sort of sleuth. The offenders are doing it very publicly on social media. It is showing DVC you see the blatant behavior and expect them to enforce the rules.

I think some people are defensive on here because they worry the five confirmed reservations they rented with their extra points from their new loaded contract will be targeted. This is not what most upset people are referring to, and I think would look very different than the type of behavior I’m referring to.

Disney already knows who's doing what with their reservations and points.

I'm fine with the current setup as is, yes. Any changes that have a dampening effect on sales will be cautiously approached. The beauty of DVC is the elevator pitch is pretty much that.

I don't want DVC to become that overbearing entity like our HOA board members and nosy neighbors with their own opinion of what's appropriate or not from their lens.

 

[Disfamwa]

Disney already knows who's doing what with their reservations and points.

I'm fine with the current setup as is, yes. Any changes that have a dampening effect on sales will be cautiously approached. The beauty of DVC is the elevator pitch is pretty much that.

I don't want DVC to become that overbearing entity like our HOA board members and nosy neighbors with their own opinion of what's appropriate or not from their lens.

I totally respect people having different opinions and think hearing all opinions is helpful.

Only caveat is, if you have only read this board and have not seen how out of control the issue has become on social media or with a particular third party’s confirmed listings on their website, then you don’t a full a idea of the scale of speculative confirmed rentals for maximum profit and why some people are upset.