DVC plans to target commercial renters

[Genie+]

I'm still trying to get my (somewhat sore) head around the cognitive dissonance required to hear them say " "[w]e’ve got a whole team of folks focused on this.” while still maintaining that it is a small problem involving only a few members. Or, that the targets are relatively few and limited to only those with a high number of contracts or a high number of points.

DVC (and Disney as a whole) isn't going to create "a whole team of folks focused on this" if they thought that it truly is only a very minor number of offenders. If they did, it would be a handful of existing cast members who spend a couple of hours every other Tuesday working on it.

I think what may be going on is walking and commercial renting dont have tremendous impact across the entire system , the impact is huge in the specific areas they affect, and those areas are still quite large and meaningful.

Could be Walking and confirmed reservations have an outsized impact to high demand bookings, and those are a pretty important slice of the DVC experience.

 

[jcolvin5]

Walking is the manifestation of an underlying problem. I don't think Disney is looking at fixing symptoms (walking) as much as I think they are trying to understand them. Identify the problem in its current state. Determine what they want their future state to be/look like. Conduct root cause analysis of the perceived problem and develop countermeasures to eliminate or minimize the problem.They need to understand the symptom in order to fix the cause, which in large part may be these commercial renters.

 

[JackosinDIS]

Walking is the manifestation of an underlying problem. I don't think Disney is looking at fixing symptoms (walking) as much as I think they are trying to understand them. Identify the problem in its current state. Determine what they want their future state to be/look like. Conduct root cause analysis of the perceived problem and develop countermeasures to eliminate or minimize the problem.They need to understand the symptom in order to fix the cause, which in large part may be these commercial renters.

They’ve made a start on this by equalising the BWV points required across seasons…

 

[jcolvin5]

They’ve made a start on this by equalising the BWV points required across seasons…

Part of that root cause analysis perhaps. I'd love to be on their team that digs into this. It's a worthy project IMO and would benefit all DVC owners greatly.

 

[Brian Noble]

I’m not so sure we’ll end up with massive/major changes to DVC booking/modification rules

Here are some examples of what Wyndham has done, to give you a flavor of what is possible.

1: Limits on the number of a particular type of unit you can have per night. (I don't remember the details of this one.)

2: Any time an owner is not the one checking into the unit, you need to acquire a "Guest Certificate" in the name of the person who will. Each time you change the name, you need a new GC. You are allocated a few "free" GCs. After that, you must pay $100 per.

3: if two reservations overlap by even one night, an owner's name can only be on one of them. The other must have a GC applied---even if you don't know for sure who will check in.

4: At some resorts, during popular times of year, check ins are "restricted". An owner may send a guest on a restricted stay at most twice per year, unless the owner is also at the same resort in an overlapping stay. If the owner is at the same resort in an overlapping stay, the guest does not count against the two-per-year limit.

You'd think these would be wildly unpopular. But, for most owners, they are either neutral or positive, because most owners use their vacations themselves. For example, I've never had to buy a guest certificate, nor have I ever had to worry about my two "restriction exceptions," because I almost never travel without my guests.

On the other hand, availability at some of the restricted resorts/times got much better after these and some related changes were implemented. I think that's just great, even though my ownership is "less flexible."

There might be language in the DVC governing documents that constrains them in some ways that would make some of these difficult. I don't know them well enough off the top of my head to know for sure.

 

[DonMacGregor]

Well, at least in theory, it could be a team of 1 and (at least it’s not how I’m reading their statement) they could be tasked with other projects as well - in other words - blowing smoke…while I think we’ll get some action on shutting down a small group of known commercial renters - I’m not so sure we’ll end up with massive/major changes to DVC booking/modification rules….at least I hope not…but I could be wrong.

That would be in stark contrast to every other time a concern is raised and Disney simply says “we’re aware of it” or “we’re looking into it” and that’s all you get. Disney doesn’t even give you a good night kiss before they blow you off. They could have easily said “we have people looking into it” and ended it right there, yet they seem to have chosen to be a bit more proactive in their responses.

 

[Brian Noble]

Disney doesn’t even give you a good night kiss before they blow you off.

I have a particular moment from Full Metal Jacket in my head right now. Unfortunately, it is not appropriate for a family-friendly discussion board.

 

[Genie+]

Yes I think the choice of wording meant to imply they’re actively working on it and have resources devoted (as opposed to ‘we are aware’ and maybe we’ll get around to it when we have nothing better to do).

 

[DonMacGregor]

I have a particular moment from Full Metal Jacket in my head right now. Unfortunately, it is not appropriate for a family-friendly discussion board.

Gunny knew what I’m talking about.

 

[Brian Noble]

Kudos to you for figuring out a Radio Disney Edit way of saying it.

 

[Sandisw]

Here are some examples of what Wyndham has done, to give you a flavor of what is possible.

1: Limits on the number of a particular type of unit you can have per night. (I don't remember the details of this one.)

2: Any time an owner is not the one checking into the unit, you need to acquire a "Guest Certificate" in the name of the person who will. Each time you change the name, you need a new GC. You are allocated a few "free" GCs. After that, you must pay $100 per.

3: if two reservations overlap by even one night, an owner's name can only be on one of them. The other must have a GC applied---even if you don't know for sure who will check in.

4: At some resorts, during popular times of year, check ins are "restricted". An owner may send a guest on a restricted stay at most twice per year, unless the owner is also at the same resort in an overlapping stay. If the owner is at the same resort in an overlapping stay, the guest does not count against the two-per-year limit.

You'd think these would be wildly unpopular. But, for most owners, they are either neutral or positive, because most owners use their vacations themselves. For example, I've never had to buy a guest certificate, nor have I ever had to worry about my two "restriction exceptions," because I almost never travel without my guests.

On the other hand, availability at some of the restricted resorts/times got much better after these and some related changes were implemented. I think that's just great, even though my ownership is "less flexible."

There might be language in the DVC governing documents that constrains them in some ways that would make some of these difficult. I don't know them well enough off the top of my head to know for sure.

From the two meetings I attended, the statements reinforced the right of owners to rent coming and it didn’t seem as though major changes were coming but rather dealing with those who have found a way around what is in place.

Same with walking…definitely made statements that any changes that could happen would be carefully considered against unintended consequences that might not be good for the membership as a whole.

 

[BeachClub2014]

Assuming DVC does indeed clamp down on commercial renters, what impact (if any) do we see a clampdown having on these two things:

1. Resale contracts - will commercial renters begin dumping contracts on the market if they can no longer easily rent the points?
2. Rental market - will average rental rates go up, down, or remain static if commercial renting is reduced meaningfully?

 

[Sandisw]

Assuming DVC does indeed clamp down on commercial renters, what impact (if any) do we see a clampdown having on these two things:

1. Resale contracts - will commercial renters begin dumping contracts on the market if they can no longer easily rent the points?
2. Rental market - will average rental rates go up, down, or remain static if commercial renting is reduced meaningfully?

I think there would bound to be some uptick in contracts.

I do not think that the rental rates will change in a meaningful way because renters could be spooked away because of the crack down.

 

[Sandisw]

To add, it still will come down to how they decide to apply the whole “commercial” aspect and what that means.

It will be interesting to see how it unfolds.

 

[BeachClub2014]

To add, it still will come down to how they decide to apply the whole “commercial” aspect and what that means.

It will be interesting to see how it unfolds.

It will definitely be interesting. The definition of "commercial" has been widely discussed and debated here so will be interesting to see the approach DVC takes on the issue. Balancing the ability of the occasional renter to continue to do so while tamping down commercial renting. I suspect not everyone is going to like where this lands.

 

[bdrex28]

Assuming DVC does indeed clamp down on commercial renters, what impact (if any) do we see a clampdown having on these two things:

1. Resale contracts - will commercial renters begin dumping contracts on the market if they can no longer easily rent the points?
2. Rental market - will average rental rates go up, down, or remain static if commercial renting is reduced meaningfully?

I believe if commercial renting was 90% cut out you'd probably see some contracts dumped, until of course these commercial renters found a way around whatever Disney "may" put into place.

Rental market would be like any market, supply and demand. It may actually end up helping DVD. Of course, I don't know how many commercial renters there are truly, but let's say the rental market ticks higher due to supply and demand. Many were like me and I think quite a few of us who rented prior to buying into DVC. If the rental market was higher priced thus a reflection of higher demand and less supply, then more annual Disney vacationers would purchase DVC. At first that may point to resale contracts, but it would also eventually push towards Direct as well. Cause and effect.

 

[Genie+]

Assuming DVC does indeed clamp down on commercial renters, what impact (if any) do we see a clampdown having on these two things:

1. Resale contracts - will commercial renters begin dumping contracts on the market if they can no longer easily rent the points?

I think there’s a limit to how much prices can slump before bargain hunter activity starts offsetting. I don’t need 150 more BWV points but at $90pp or less I’d die without them

1. Rental market - will average rental rates go up, down, or remain static if commercial renting is reduced meaningfully?

Well they went up and came back down. We even saw this with how DVC priced their points. OTUP were $19, then moved to $22pp in 2023 and back down to $20pp soon after (along with Magic beginnings Direct rebate pricing). Rental pricing followed a similar up then down trend. They could go lower but I don’t think we’ll see alot lower, nothing more than a couple dollars. Like if you can post points on the rent/trade board here and offload at $18-$20pp without much hassle, I don’t imagine that could change beyond $16-$18pp. It probably can’t dip much further than that without more customers arriving that eat up the slack.

 

[HyperspaceMountainPilot]

I think there’s a limit to how much prices can slump before bargain hunter activity starts offsetting. I don’t need 150 more BWV points but at $90pp or less I’d die without them

Are we the same person? lol. The value at the older point-chart friendly resorts are so good it would be easy to justify buying more of them in the $80-90 range, even though I plan to go to WDW less for the next few years, I’d treat myself to bigger villas.

Like if you can post points on the rent/trade board here and offload at $18-$20pp without much hassle, I don’t imagine that could change beyond $16-$18pp. It probably can’t dip much further than that without more customers arriving that eat up the slack.

If a lot of “points for rentals” leave the system, it could actually increase point rental rates for the occasional renter—but if entire rental cos went under, it might make it much harder for a casual renter to unload points.

I love the idea of restricting renting at the most in demand room types and most desirable times of year. If you’re just trying to make enough to break in against buy-in and annual dues, you don’t need to be renting VGC, value AKV, and standard BWV at the holidays.

 

[Genie+]

If non-personal use and walking get corrections… does point washing come next?

Is this part of a long term recipe. DVD better protecting the member experience and redirecting paths of profiteering back to themselves. Keep the membership satisfied, lure more renters into buying, and differentiate direct enough to push more of those buyers into direct or upgrading to direct.

 

[Sandisw]

Are we the same person? lol. The value at the older point-chart friendly resorts are so good it would be easy to justify buying more of them in the $80-90 range, even though I plan to go to WDW less for the next few years, I’d treat myself to bigger villas.

If a lot of “points for rentals” leave the system, it could actually increase point rental rates for the occasional renter—but if entire rental cos went under, it might make it much harder for a casual renter to unload points.

I love the idea of restricting renting at the most in demand room types and most desirable times of year. If you’re just trying to make enough to break in against buy-in and annual dues, you don’t need to be renting VGC, value AKV, and standard BWV at the holidays.

I think it would be very hard, especially given the statements at the meetings, for them to say that certain room types can’t be reserved by an owner to rent.

I just don’t see DVC attempting to say that renting certain room types can be considered commercial but other room types are not.

Now, preventing owners from renting during certain weeks? That also seems unlikely but if it applies across the board to all resorts and rooms, maybe?

The statements did reinforce that owners can rent and that renting commercially is the issue, and not sure it would mesh with those statements

Since the rules already allow for the special seasons list, I could see that being used for those hard to get rooms during hard to get times, which would go a long way toward rentals but not sure owners would want that option.