DVC plans to target commercial renters

[nalababybear]

They would cancel any rooms they felt were being used in a commercial way, up to possibly including every single reservation they made that was listed on a rental site. Just because they used to only look at any rentals after 20 reservations doesn't mean that they can't look at any rentals in the first 20 as well. It is clear that they are the ones that get to decide what is commercial use and what is not and that they have the ability to enforce or not at their own discretion.

A "pattern of rental activity" is not the same as "a pattern of rentals." Rental activities would include the actual act of renting, and other actions associated with the rentals.

Listing the reservations for rent is an activity that is related to the rentals. If they feel it is commercial and a part of a "pattern of rental activities," they could indeed enforce the rules as they see fit, even before the lead guests were changed on reservations.

IE if they noticed you have booked, immediately posted for rent, and rented out 10 reservations each year for the past few years for BWV standard and AKV value rooms during the first 2 weeks of December, they could make you cancel those or do something else to prevent you from completing the rentals, before you even request the lead guest change

The amount of oversight for this level is pretty high.

The desire for such policing of folk's membership is on par with some HOA tiktoks.

 

[Sandisw]

I started quoting the POS to eliminate any ambiguity, but I guess I made the mistake of reverting to colloquial language in this situation because the distinction is mostly irrelevant--we're discussing what factors the Board is allowed to consider when determining whether or not a pattern of rentals constitutes a commercial enterprise. Nonetheless, I'll go back to only using properly defined terms in future posts.

While I don't want to ask too much, I hope that @drusba can chime in as to whether or not they believe that the Board is prohibited from considering the types of rooms rented when determine whether or not a pattern of rentals constitutes a commercial enterprise. While you are mostly aligned with them, I feel like you are taking some logical leaps that aren't supported by the contract or case law but still using their arguments to try to bolster your own. But it's entirely possible that I'm the one misunderstanding.

She has weighed in on that before and I think the thread I linked yesterday might have that addressed in there.

IIRC, her positon is that it violated the FCFS rule of the contract that all owners have the same right to book any room within the booking rules, regardless of whether it is for themselves, a guest, or a renter.

Oh, and the reason I pointed out the language is because it was pointed out to me that I was shifting my stance because I was using different terms so I am trying to maker sure I am comsistent not assuming what others mean.

As an owner of both SSR and VGF, I don’t get how I can do the same thing with my SSR points as I do with my VGF points and be told one is being used as a business and one is not because one is high demand and one is not.

Obviously we shall see what happens but I would bet it’s more likely that if they want to stop owners from spec renting the high demand rooms, during those high demand times, the easiest way to do it has nothing to do with rental restrictions.

Just institute the special seasons preference list for booking and then it solves the problem without having to decide where it fits into the rental rules.

 

[Tatebeck]

The amount of oversight for this level is pretty high.

The desire for such policing of folk's membership is on par with some HOA tiktoks.

I am definitely not saying that they SHOULD be looking into everyone's reservations with a microscope. I am just saying that they COULD use room type/reservation dates if they wanted to as it can sometimes be indicative of a higher chance of commercial enterprise happening.

They may not look at your reservation details like that at all unless they think you have rented a certain large number of total points in the last few years for example, and then A LOT of smaller owners wouldn't even be looked at.

 

[Cfabar1]

Disney benefits from a rental market and a resale market.

The rental market exists because Disney charges absurd prices to the general public for their hotels.

Disney could just drop their rack rates to something reasonable and solve the problem that way..... but then they can't justify direct dvc prices that are out of whack with reality. The only reason they can sell DVC at the absurd prices they do is because rack rates are too high.

Without a solid resale market, Disney could not sell direct for what they do.

At the end of the day, Disney only cares that these companies are cutting into their bottom line.

I'm not sure I agree with both of these statements...

I think most people don't know about the rental market, and the vast majority of hotel rooms at Disney on property are being filled by people paying Disney's absurd prices.

No other timeshare system has a resale value/market like Disney's, and yet they continue on selling their products. Some have decent resale markets, but Disney's resale is much higher is my understanding. Plenty of people still want to buy from Mickey...

 

[Sandisw]

I am definitely not saying that they SHOULD be looking into everyone's reservations with a microscope. I am just saying that they COULD use room type/reservation dates if they wanted to as it can sometimes be indicative of a higher chance of commercial enterprise happening.

They may not look at your reservation details like that at all unless they think you have rented a certain large number of total points in the last few years for example, and then A LOT of smaller owners wouldn't even be looked at.

Reading this I have another thought…and maybe this explains my thinking a bit better.

High demand rooms are a priority for someone who has shifted to a commercial enterprise..or trying to…

So, I can see DVC flagging those memberships to monitor closely because of what they booked as you may find more memberships with those reservations are commercial enterprises

Where an SSR owner might not be as closely scrutinized until the volume of rentals becomes closer to whatever threshold they are using to look for a pattern.

But, once monitoring an account renting BWV standard rooms, that owner still needs to reach the same level as the SSR owner when it comes to enforcement.

So, if they see I rent only one per year, even if it is that BWV Standard, I do not beleive it isn’t enough to say I am in violation.

Even if I rent a few times a year and the only room I rent is a popular one, I don’t think that is enough.

 

[Sykes]

She has weighed in on that before and I think the thread I linked yesterday might have that addressed in there.

IIRC, her positon is that it violated the FCFS rule of the contract that all owners have the same right to book any room within the booking rules, regardless of whether it is for themselves, a guest, or a renter.

I read the same post(s) you did. Even if I agree with everything drusba said, I think you are making some logical leaps that aren't well-supported.

Just to clarify, I simply don’t belive that what one rents should matters in whether it makes your pattern of renting into a business.

As an owner of both SSR and VGF, I don’t get how I can do the same thing with my SSR points as I do with my VGF points and be told one is being used as a business and one is not because one is high demand and one is not.

Because it's you, as a whole person(/entity) that is being evaluated. They're not evaluating individual contracts, reservations, points, or rentals. The (undisputed portion of the) text indicates that they will look at a pattern of rentals to determine, given the totality of the circumstances, if the owner is engaging in a commercial enterprise. It's not that they're looking at SSR reservations this way and VGF reservations in another way. It's that they see the owner as a whole operation and evaluate it as such. It would be malpractice for them not to use all the information available to them (or at least whatever information they feel is pertinent) when making that determination.

 

[Tatebeck]

That’s not what I am talking about. I am talking about DVC setting restrictions that look at the room type as a way of determining someone has hit the threshold.

And that is what I don’t agree with. They don’t get to treat the BWV owner renting resort view rooms differently than the SSR owner if the actions of both and situations of both are exactly the same.

2000 point BWV owner, renting more than half their points in a BWV Resort View studio every year.

2000 point SSR owner, renting more than half their points in a SSR Preferred View studio every year.

Same exact actions. Enforcement should be the same. Sure, the BWV owner is making more profit than then the SSR owner but they both appear to be using DVC as a commercial enterprise.

Now flip it, a 500 point BWV owner rents three BWV resort view studios every December and uses only 150 points.

The 500 point SSR owner does the same thing in early December for the PV studio.

If I am understanding your position, the BWV owner is running a business but the SSR owner is not?

That’s what I am talking about.

They don't need to have different rules at different resorts.

Members at SSR and BWV have pretty much the same rules and wording from what I am aware of (No extra details like RIV or CFW). They are both capable of breaking rules. And I haven't seen any current specific rules and restrictions regarding booking and then renting other than what basically boils down to:

Use the points for personal use and don't do anything that makes us think that you may be running a commercial enterprise and if we think you may be running a commercial enterprise then we can do something about it.

It is vague by design as it gives them more control over the situation when they get to decide the final word about a vague situation.

And renting a ton of points at BWV in resort/standard view studios at certain times of the year is in my opinion much more suspicious than renting the same number and percentage of points across various views at various times of the year. Disney should be able to, (and I think they can) look at the BWV member closer than the SSR member.

None of the resorts are the exact same, so they have to look at each resort as it is. They aren't going to have the same number of life preservers at a land locked resort as they are a resort on the shore of a lake, and that is fine, even though they have the same rules at both resorts. One will be more likely to have a drowning guest..

 

[Sandisw]

I read the same post(s) you did. I think you are making some logical leaps that aren't well-supported.


Because it's you, as a whole person(/entity) that is being evaluated. They're not evaluating individual contracts, reservations, points, or rentals. The (undisputed portion of the) text indicates that they will look at a pattern of rentals to determine, given the totality of the circumstances, if the owner is engaging in a commercial enterprise. It's not that they're looking at SSR reservations this way and VGF reservations in another way. It's that they see the owner as a whole operation and evaluate it as such. It would be malpractice for them not to use all the information available to them when making that determination.

If the thread that I mentioned didn’t include that info then it was posted at a different time.

That is why I said I was t sure. Please tell me whst leaps I am making because if I am, Id like your take.

But my points are on different memberships, and one has different owners so its still unclear how that works because when I talked with them last year. It was implied that it is per membership and that if one is being used out of bounds and the other is not, then enforcement would match.

That is why I mentioned the different actions because my VGF points are houses differently than then SSR.

 

[HyperspaceMountainPilot]

They don't need to have different rules at different resorts.

Members at SSR and BWV have pretty much the same rules and wording from what I am aware of (No extra details like RIV or CFW). They are both capable of breaking rules. And I haven't seen any current specific rules and restrictions regarding booking and then renting other than what basically boils down to:

Use the points for personal use and don't do anything that makes us think that you may be running a commercial enterprise and if we think you may be running a commercial enterprise then we can do something about it.

It is vague by design as it gives them more control over the situation when they get to decide the final word about a vague situation.

And renting a ton of points at BWV in resort/standard view studios at certain times of the year is in my opinion much more suspicious than renting the same number and percentage of points across various views at various times of the year. Disney should be able to, (and I think they can) look at the BWV member closer than the SSR member.

Exactly. Commercial enterprises pick certain rooms and certain dates because they have the highest profit and Disney already has data to make the same calculations, so it makes sense that if they only have so much enforcement resources, they would start with the memberships that are almost always used (1) in names of non-owners and (2) at the most profitable rooms during the most desirable times. It’s not treating different resorts differently, but looking for clues someone is trying to use their membership to make money instead of take vacations. The “most profitable” rooms and dates and even resorts will change over time.

As a random aside, I would imagine that the FW cabins will be very popular as rental targets as they gain in popularity with Disney guests— they fit the bill of many beds and low point charts.

 

[Mouseforward]

I still think that discussing it at the meeting was the extent, and will be the extent of the action taken by DVC.

As with any cooperation , show me how making changes will make the quarter to quarter profits better and I will believe that they will take action.

All of the proposed solutions would cost in labor and lawsuits and not add any profit to DVC.

 

[Sandisw]

They don't need to have different rules at different resorts.

Members at SSR and BWV have pretty much the same rules and wording from what I am aware of (No extra details like RIV or CFW). They are both capable of breaking rules. And I haven't seen any current specific rules and restrictions regarding booking and then renting other than what basically boils down to:

Use the points for personal use and don't do anything that makes us think that you may be running a commercial enterprise and if we think you may be running a commercial enterprise then we can do something about it.

It is vague by design as it gives them more control over the situation when they get to decide the final word about a vague situation.

And renting a ton of points at BWV in resort/standard view studios at certain times of the year is in my opinion much more suspicious than renting the same number and percentage of points across various views at various times of the year. Disney should be able to, (and I think they can) look at the BWV member closer than the SSR member.

None of the resorts are the exact same, so they have to look at each resort as it is. They aren't going to have the same number of life preservers at a land locked resort as they are a resort on the shore of a lake, and that is fine, even though they have the same rules at both resorts. One will be more likely to have a drowning guest..

Again, I have said I am not talking about how they choose the owners to look at.

I am only talking about what happens once they review it.

Let’s make it simple…if I rent a BWV SV room every year in December and you rent an SSR room every year in December, should DVC apply the same standard when determining whether we are a business?

As I said, if one is looking for memberships breaking the rules, of course it makes sense to start with the popular resorts. I said that absolutely makes sense.

It is what they do that I don’t believe can be resort dependent.

This all started with the suggestions that DVC might be allowed to implement restrictions that prevent owners from renting high demand rooms.

Thst was the context in which my comments started.

 

[Tatebeck]

Again, looking at them closer and determining that the same actions by an owner of one resort means something different than the other does not seem within their purview.

Let’s make it simple…if I rent a BWV SV room every year in December and you rent an SSR room every year in December, should DVC apply the same standard when determining whether we are a business?

The standard is Does the booking/rental history make DVC feel that it is a business?

That's it.

If they decide that the BWV member seems like a business, but the SSR owner doesn't seem like one, then they are free to

They own at different resorts, and booked and subsequently rented out different rooms. They are by definition not doing the EXACT same thing. If you own at BWV, book at BWV, show up at BWV but they put you in a SSR room instead is that okay? No, because they are not the EXACT same and cannot be treated the EXACT same, even if both resorts have the same EXACT rules in all of their documents.

 

[Sandisw]

The standard is Does the booking/rental history make DVC feel that it is a business?

That's it.

If they decide that the BWV member seems like a business, but the SSR owner doesn't seem like one, then they are free to

They own at different resorts, and booked and subsequently rented out different rooms. They are by definition not doing the EXACT same thing.

Based on this, DVC would have the authority to make different rules for different resorts.

Maybe but honestly, I don’t see how.

 

[Tatebeck]

This all started with the suggestions that DVC might be allowed to implement restrictions that prevent owners from renting high demand rooms.

Thst was the context in which my comments started.

Right. And all I am saying is that while you are allowed to book and rent those high demand rooms for personal vacation use, but that it may put you on DVCs radar as a possible commercial enterprise if you do it too much.

 

[Sykes]

That is why I said I was t sure. Please tell me whst leaps I am making because if I am, Id like your take.

I'm a bit hesitant to further engage on this specific topic because trying to explain my interpretation of another poster's position (especially a poster who chooses words as carefully as drusba does) is wrought with peril (and it's already backfired before), but ...

(Simplifying significantly for the purposes of this specific issue) I believe that drusba's position (one of many positions) is that it would be impermissible for Disney to explicitly restrict renting of certain room types (for the purpose of curtailing commercial use). My position, which I think is compatible with that, is that Disney can still consider room types rented when evaluating whether or not a pattern of rentals constitutes a commercial enterprise as a whole. Even if you disagree, do you see how those are different?

 

[Tatebeck]

By your description, then, every resort owners limitations can be different.

Yeah, I don’t think they can so we can agree to disagree about that.

They ARE different. Can any resort owner book a Boardwalk view room at 11 months besides Boardwalk owners? No they can't. No other resort has that option, even though the others have the same rules as the Boardwalk. Same with Club rooms at AKV. If you want a Boardwalk view or Club level room regularly, you should buy at those resorts..

 

[Sandisw]

They ARE different. Can any owner book a Boardwalk view room at 11 months besides Boardwalk owners? No they can't. Even though the others have the same rules as the Boardwalk

That is true so I guess in that realm I can see what you are saying.

So, let me then apply only to BWV owners.

If you rent only SV and I rent pool/garden, do you believe they can hold each of us to a different standard?

 

[Sandisw]

I'm a bit hesitant to further engage on this specific topic because trying to explain my interpretation of another poster's position is wrought with peril (and it's already backfired before), but ...

(Simplifying significantly for the purposes of this specific issue) I believe that drusba's position (one of many positions) is that it would be impermissible for Disney to explicitly restrict renting of certain room types (for the purpose of curtailing commercial use). My position, which I think is compatible with that, is that Disney can still consider room types rented when evaluating whether or not a pattern of rentals constitutes a commercial enterprise as a whole. Even if you disagree, do you see how those are different?

I can see how it is different. I just have a hard time seeing how one BWV owner and another BWV owner can be seen by DVC differently simply because one is renting one type of room vs the other.

But. I admit that I am looking at this from the standpoint that pattern needs to include a volume that is high enough to appear to be a business first and foremost.

Meaning, if I choose to rent 100 points…out of my 900 in popular rooms every December year after year, I don’t think that is enough to say it’s a pattern that rise to the level of a commercial enterprise if there is another owner at my same resort renting that same 100 points out of 900 but is renting a different rooms or a different time of year and DVC concludes fhst does not.

 

[Tatebeck]

That is true so I guess in that realm I can see what you are saying.

So, let me then apply only to BWV owners.

If you rent only SV and I rent pool/garden, do you believe they can hold each of us to a different standard?

Yes, because those are two DIFFERENT rooms, so they can treat them differently. All it has to do is make DVC feel like it may be a commercial enterprise AKA "We'll know it when we see it."

If we had identical contracts and both of us rented ALL of our points out for the last 10 years at BWV for example, we would both likely be looked at closely.

But if one of us had rented ALL of our points as SV studios at peak times, while the other had rented a mix (P/G view studios, 1BR, 2BR, BWV studios, etc) or even just all P/G studios, I personally would think that the second member would be a bit less suspicious to DVC.

Commercial enterprises are profit-seeking. The first of example member out of the two could be seen as much more profit-seeking than the second, even though we rented the exact same number of points at the same resort over the same time period.

 

[Tatebeck]

I can see how those are different yes. And your right that is where I am not sure they can becuse then one owner st the same resort could be accused of running a business when someone else doesn’t.

But. I admit that I am looking at this from the standpoint that pattern needs to include a volume that is high enough to appear to be a business first before it matters what they are renting.

Meaning, if I am renting and only renting popular rooms, I think the volume of rental…whatever one would consider reasonable to look like it’s a business..has to be there, first and foremost.

It is just one or two variables out of many. Just renting a high value room doesn't necessarily have to put you up for "review"

A member renting 100% of their 1000 points almost every year at SSR may be more of a "commercial enterprise" target than a BWV member who rents 10% or 100 out of their 1000 points almost every year, even if they usually rent out the valuable SV studios.

It just ticks a possible box or adds a bit to the equation for them to look at.

Ex.
% of points rented this year + # of points rented this year + room type rented + number of years with rentals in the last 5 years + # of DVC "High season" rentals in the last 5 years, + etc...

I can see how it is different. I just have a hard time seeing how one BWV owner and another BWV owner can be seen by DVC differently simply because one is renting one type of room vs the other.

But. I admit that I am looking at this from the standpoint that pattern needs to include a volume that is high enough to appear to be a business first and foremost.

Meaning, if I choose to rent 100 points…out of my 900 in popular rooms every December year after year, I don’t think that is enough to say it’s a pattern that rise to the level of a commercial enterprise if there is another owner at my same resort renting that same 100 points out of 900 but is renting a different rooms or a different time of year and DVC concludes fhst does not.

A pattern can be made up of many things repeating themselves. Like blue dots, red squares, yellow triangles. Some members may make a pattern with a bunch of all blue dots (lets stay total points rented), while others may have a mix of all three (lets say total points rented, % of avg yearly points rented, and a number of known high profit rooms rented). Both are patterns. Made of different bits, but still patterns.