DVC plans to target commercial renters

[nalababybear]

I’m in favor of anything that makes it harder for computer scripts to beat actual DVC owners, but I would not be surprised if the more sophisticated LLMs could successfully identify grids with bicycles or crosswalks better/faster than I can at this point.

I always take 3-4 attempts on those buses/bikes/lights and wonder should be clicking that little box with the edge of the bus or light leaking into it or not. Clearly haven't learned myself what the computer is looking for

 

[JackosinDIS]

It's so much like political discussions, right?
No one's minds are ever changed, it's just a huge circular discussion.

Very true. And my mind is not changed. However, it is useful to have these discussions as it helps us all to be a bit more understanding of others’ positions and sometimes to see things in a different light.

 

[Sandisw]

When it comes to offsetting costs - Is that in regard to unused points or vacation accommodations?

Is there a difference between reliably turning points into money every year vs selling off points on the occasions you don’t/can’t use them?

If DVC is like Tupperware maybe they should say so Sell some DVC points to pay for your own!

In terms of DVC, all that matters is that DVC has defined the term commercial purpose. It’s a pattern of rental activity that leads them to believe you are a commercial enterprise/practice.

What they get to be flexible with is what they use to define “pattern of rental activity” that is seen as reasonable for owners of the pre RIV resorts.

And why as my example showed they can have different degrees of where a membership lands in the word of commercial enterprise/practice.

Of course as an owner of pre RIV and RIV contracts, I could end to with different rules!!! Hahahaha

 

[Sandisw]

Very true. And my mind is not changed. However, it is useful to have these discussions as it helps us all to be a bit more understanding of others’ positions and sometimes to see things in a different light.

It also gives owners to have a reason to read through the contracts!

But, in all honesty, I think everyone here pretty much agrees that those using DVC as a commercial enterprise are in violation of the contract.

It’s the lower levels of use that people have different opinions, which does provide all of us with that insight!

 

[eticketplease]

In terms of DVC, all that matters is that DVC has defined the term commercial purpose. It’s a pattern of rental activity that leads them to believe you are a commercial enterprise/practice.

What they get to be flexible with is what they use to define “pattern of rental activity” that is seen as reasonable for owners of the pre RIV resorts.

And why as my example showed they can have different degrees of where a membership lands in the word of commercial enterprise/practice.

Is the “pattern” not a thing for RIV, VDH, CFW and future resorts?

 

[Sandisw]

Is the “pattern” not a thing for RIV, VDH, CFW and future resorts?

Pattern of rental activity is still required. What is missing is the word “reasonable”.

So DVC has the power to identify what pattern of rental activity is that the board can conclude that the membership to being used as a commercial enterprise/practice.

For RIV and beyond, without the word reasonable, it gives DVC more latitude when it decides to identifies that pattern.

Not that I expect them to ever have different rules, but that word removal and then all they added to the CFW POS is a move in the direction of increasing their ability to limit renting even further in the future.

It’s also why I am so against allowing DVC to attempt to define pattern of rental activity…which is required…in a very narrow and specific way and will always fight that enforcement needs to match the definition in the contract surrounding commercial purpose.

 

[Orsino]

My thoughts have shifted based on discussions here.
Ultimately I think I ( as well as others) fall into single tracks. The overall DVC picture has different facets that intertwine to make the issues more complex than I had originally thought. I was dismissive of the “more points advantage” arguments because I wasn’t thinking about commercial renters. I now see the problem with vast lopsided point advantages.
I think the “effort” argument is okay as long as bots get addressed, but fails on the “everyone can do the same thing” argument since if everyone put in extraordinary effort to get reservations, the whole system would be terrible for everyone. “Effort” only really works in a lopsided effort environment. (Or a lopsided information environment as the case may be)

I actually think DVC will do the right thing whatever that may be. I am 100% certain that whatever they do will irritate a great many people though. I’ve weathered the many changes to fastpass, which also created much gnashing of teeth. I’ll weather DVC booking changes too. I also never rent, so that certainly helps my outlook.

 

[nalababybear]

Is the “pattern” not a thing for RIV, VDH, CFW and future resorts?

What's interesting to see how these resale restriction resorts pan out once sold out.

Here in mammoth, marriott manages several timeshares where they will actively manage owner timeshares to rent out year round and take a direct management fee. Essentially replacing of the entire 3rd party rental environment, and doing with great success and happiness from the all stakeholders.

My cousin is part of this and they love the arrangement as it does exactly what many folk here do -- bridge the gap of ownership easily and reliably. I wonder if Disney would go that route as a possible lever to pull, especially with large resorts like RIV and VDH so not to impact their other operations and have more control over the market and rates that way.

 

[Tatebeck]

What's interesting to see how these resale restriction resorts pan out once sold out.

Here in mammoth, marriott manages several timeshares where they will actively manage owner timeshares to rent out year round and take a direct management fee. Essentially replacing of the entire 3rd party rental environment, and doing with great success and happiness from the all stakeholders.

My cousin is part of this and they love the arrangement as it does exactly what many folk here do -- bridge the gap of ownership easily and reliably. I wonder if Disney would go that route as a possible lever to pull, especially with large resorts like RIV and VDH so not to impact their other operations and have more control over the market and rates that way.

If they do, I would expect them to give the member around the same value they give for cruise/world collection swaps. So around the cost of dues. That is basically what Disney is doing there. Taking your points, then renting them out for you. It would be hard to take advantage of that when the rest of the rental market will give you around 2x that or more.

 

[eticketplease]

I actually think DVC will do the right thing whatever that may be. I am 100% certain that whatever they do will irritate a great many people though.

Absolutely many people will be upset whether Disney does something thing or not.

 

[eticketplease]

I also never rent, so that certainly helps my outlook.

Never is a strong word. Especially considering if bought new it is generally a time period of 50 years of “never”

I’ve only rented once but that is more than never and while I don’t see myself doing it again, I also don’t see my self only getting $7 a point when renting them to Disney for a cruise but hey it might happen one day as Disney makes it seemless with no stress.

 

[wdw_explorer]

Another option would be if people could "surrender" their points for a year. This would allow people a credit on the following years dues. Surrender could be a choice like banking, where you declare you are ceding points back to Disney.

I understand this is much less valuable to many people than renting but doing no work and just not having to worry about an upcoming dues bill could be a great alternative.

It would take some pressure off the rental market, just not sure how much. I am guessing many get into renting because they feel forced to as there is no viable financial alternative (they don't want to take a Disney cruise, they just don't want to owe dues that year) . If I am wrong then Disney has nothing to lose by offering this option as very few would take it.

I know this puts Disney back in the selling hotel rooms business, which is what they were trying to get out of by having a vacation club, but it may be better for them than the rental competition.

Just a thought.

 

[Sandisw]

Another option would be if people could "surrender" their points for a year. This would allow people a credit on the following years dues. Surrender could be a choice like banking, where you declare you are ceding points back to Disney.

I understand this is much less valuable to many people than renting but doing no work and just not having to worry about an upcoming dues bill could be a great alternative.

It would take some pressure off the rental market, just not sure how much. I am guessing many get into renting because they feel forced to as there is no viable financial alternative (they don't want to take a Disney cruise, they just don't want to owe dues that year) . If I am wrong then Disney has nothing to lose by offering this option as very few would take it.

I know this puts Disney back in the selling hotel rooms business, which is what they were trying to get out of by having a vacation club, but it may be better for them than the rental competition.

Just a thought.

If DVC buys back owners point to rent, it doesn’t change the rental market at all because renters would still be filling the DVC rooms.

I know that other timeshares may do it, but those have a lot more hotels in a lot more locations to absorb the use owners points.

I am not sure that it would work at WDW given its potential impact on the hotel division, not to mention it would eat into DVC own profits from renting their own points and extra they get from breakage.

 

[Brian Noble]

Yes those website tries to ensure you are a human and not a bot.

And they are worthless. It is easy to (mostly) automate them. You do not need fancy AI tools. All you need is a pool of people willing to solve them for a low price. It is not hard to build such pools of people. You can even pay a third party who has built the pool for you.

https://2captcha.com/for-customer

Here's a good piece of work that explores some of the issues. Note that this was published in 2010, so you can assume that things have gotten worse (or better, depending on your perspective).

https://www.computer.org/csdl/proceedings-article/sp/2010/05504799/12OmNwtn3CY

That's the archival version, but you can find free-access versions of it on e.g. the lead author's personal site.

 

[wdw_explorer]

If DVC buys back owners point to rent, it doesn’t change the rental market at all because renters would still be filling the DVC rooms.

I know that other timeshares may do it, but those have a lot more hotels in a lot more locations to absorb the use owners points.

I am not sure that it would work at WDW given its potential impact on the hotel division, not to mention it would eat into DVC own profits from renting their own points and extra they get from breakage.

I do agree it doesn't change the rental market from the owner's perspective. But is Disney 's concern the owner's perspective or their perceived competition?

People also tend not to be as upset if Disney is competing with their ability to get rooms for some reason. It is the sense of unfairness of commercial rentera that seems to rile people .

Many of the anti- rental posts don't seem to have a problem with points returned to Disney from concierge collection, MMB, Disney cruise, etc which has the same net effect on them.

I would assume Disney would be able to rent out those rooms at much more than the dues cost, just like a renter does so some of the other losses could be offset. Clearly one would have to go through the numbers to see if it was a net positive for Disney or not.

 

[wdw_explorer]

Addendum - this would also allow Disney to sell more OTUP, if they are basically transferring points from one owner to another at a profit

 

[Cyberc1978]

I was googling around trying to find information about the Florida stat that govern the condominium which our DVC owners ship are part of.

I found that in July of 2021 the rental rules was changed.

Can someone with knowledge about it inform me if we are actually covered by this or not.

Link: https://www.floridacondohoalawblog.com/2023/11/29/implementing-condominium-restrictions/

Fla. Stat. § 718.110(13) expressly limits amendments relating to rentals as follows:

(13) An amendment prohibiting unit owners from renting their units or altering the duration of the rental term or specifying or limiting the number of times unit owners are entitled to rent their units during a specified period applies only to unit owners who consent to the amendment and unit owners who acquire title to their units after the effective date of that amendment.

 

[Nabas]

I was googling around trying to find information about the Florida stat that govern the condominium which our DVC owners ship are part of.

I found that in July of 2021 the rental rules was changed.

Can someone with knowledge about it inform me if we are actually covered by this or not.

Link: https://www.floridacondohoalawblog.com/2023/11/29/implementing-condominium-restrictions/

Fla. Stat. § 718.110(13) expressly limits amendments relating to rentals as follows:

(13) An amendment prohibiting unit owners from renting their units or altering the duration of the rental term or specifying or limiting the number of times unit owners are entitled to rent their units during a specified period applies only to unit owners who consent to the amendment and unit owners who acquire title to their units after the effective date of that amendment.

This prevents managing entities from modifying the terms of the POS/contract to limit rentals without the consent of the timeshare owners.

It’s my understanding that the original POSs included a clause to prevent commercial renting, and that Disney gets to define within reason what constitutes a pattern of commercial renting. In other words, the clause limiting commercial renting predates this statute and so does not apply to DVC.

DVC always was intended for personal use, although Disney has acknowledged that some renting is acceptable.

This thread is as long as it is because of disagreements of what constitutes a pattern of commercial renting.

 

[Sandisw]

I do agree it doesn't change the rental market from the owner's perspective. But is Disney 's concern the owner's perspective or their perceived competition?

People also tend not to be as upset if Disney is competing with their ability to get rooms for some reason. It is the sense of unfairness of commercial rentera that seems to rile people .

Many of the anti- rental posts don't seem to have a problem with points returned to Disney from concierge collection, MMB, Disney cruise, etc which has the same net effect on them.

I would assume Disney would be able to rent out those rooms at much more than the dues cost, just like a renter does so some of the other losses could be offset. Clearly one would have to go through the numbers to see if it was a net positive for Disney or not.

Since I am indifferent to whether or not o another owner rents or not, it doesn’t make a difference for me….because we bought a contract that doesn’t treat who is using the room differently.

So, whether it’s the Disney or an owner, makes no difference. While DVC may want to curb owners who have turned DVC into a business, they can do that easily without providing other owners with an easy way to rent when that automatically eats into profits….not to mention adds more rooms to Disneys share of on site accommodations.

I simply don’t see it happening…an especially since I don’t see it being popular with the hotels division.

 

[Sandisw]

I was googling around trying to find information about the Florida stat that govern the condominium which our DVC owners ship are part of.

I found that in July of 2021 the rental rules was changed.

Can someone with knowledge about it inform me if we are actually covered by this or not.

Link: https://www.floridacondohoalawblog.com/2023/11/29/implementing-condominium-restrictions/

Fla. Stat. § 718.110(13) expressly limits amendments relating to rentals as follows:

(13) An amendment prohibiting unit owners from renting their units or altering the duration of the rental term or specifying or limiting the number of times unit owners are entitled to rent their units during a specified period applies only to unit owners who consent to the amendment and unit owners who acquire title to their units after the effective date of that amendment.

From what I have seen posted from others who have legal knowledge, it does. This is what I believe drusba has mentioned in the past that only owners who agree to the change are bound by the new rules…those that owners previously do not.

This would not apply to CFW because it’s not a leasehold condominium, but the rest are and we are governed by both condo and timeshare statues.