DVC T &C Personal Use - Only Thread to Discuss!

[KAT4DISNEY]

We can agree to disagree on all fronts.

I don’t believe Disney did this just because they want the rental market.

I don’t agree with “they are owners too”

Disney sees a benefit for themselves. That is why they are doing this. It's why any timeshare does things like this. What is your argument for why it's being done - because of owner complaints? If so that will likely to be used as the reason just as DVC has used similar arguments over the years when it actually will be of benefit to them.

They are owners too? How aren't they? They purchased the contracts and they pay dues just like you and I. They also are likely to be a lower cost ownership for DVC. There's basic costs of any owner and instead of it being one for ever 100 points it's one for every 5000 points (or whatever). That could instead translate into 50 owners and the cost of working with each of them. Now swap those 50 owners for the 1. 50 more potentially competing for those 5 Concierge studios vs 1 BOT. Statistically I'd prefer the 1 BOT.

I'm not stating that buying to run a commercial business fits the intent, nor even rules, of DVC but what I am saying is that the owners aren't going to see the benefits that are being hoped for from this and I'm also saying that there often are unintended consequences. A blank statement that DVC is declaring 100% discretion on this? We'll see.

 

[guy_incognito]

I posted about this earlier this year and got pounded by super-users. I was happy to see this news yesterday.

People can tell me until they are blue in the face that nothing is wrong, all you have to do is go to these sites and check daily for what's available, book early, walk the reservation, call your uncle... well that's the problem. It wasn't always this way. It was as clear as day to a lot of us that something was "hacking" the system. And here we are.

I am okay with owners renting points if they need to do it. But I don't think they should be able to book Christmas week (for instance) just to market it for a profit. I think they should be able to offer up points and that renter is at the mercy of availability like the rest of us.

I am not cool with people buying thousands of points and explicitly claiming important dates for profit.

But that's just me. We are only 13 years into this, but that 13 years is a whole lot of visits for people just a few hours away.

 

[Sandisw]

Maybe it will help availability maybe it won’t. But even if it won’t that doesn’t mean they should let the commercial renting continue. People are just stating how they feel when they can’t get a room they need, logically one would be mad if commercial renting was still happening and dvc was doing nothing about it.

I agree that whether someone cares about renting or not, DVC should have common sense rules to prevent owners from using memberships for commercial purposes.

But, it is fair for those of us who are not bothered seeing popular rooms being rented to no be bothered.

Let’s be fair…there are some who want to see DVC define commercial renting to cover almost any level of renting.

I’ve stated before, I want common sense and reasonable rules for using one’s membership for others, which includes rentals.

My hope is that enforcement that could be coming is targeted toward those owners who really have turned their DVC into a rental business.

 

[Kingkonig]

Maybe it will help availability maybe it won’t. But even if it won’t that doesn’t mean they should let the commercial renting continue. People are just stating how they feel when they can’t get a room they need, logically one would be mad if commercial renting was still happening and dvc was doing nothing about it.

I mean, it does reduce demand, even if incrementally (I would argue more than that).

Reduction of demand DOES allow other “real” members to get it. Not every member, but more.

 

[Cyberc1978]

.

Nobody is saying people are blocked out of entire resorts.

No they said they can’t book their home resort at 11 months. Since they didn’t clarify that it was ie a value room the understanding was it were the entire resort - which is wrong.

If they only meant a value room it had been mentioned.

 

[AnnaKristoff2013]

he reallocation of points on lock-off rooms which they did role back but only after much complaining from members here.

You wont' see that this time because this change benefits the vast majority of owners.

 

[AnnaKristoff2013]

I was not able to get a BW view for my week in may next year ( I got a GP studio ) I was clicking at the right second but this year no luck. I really don't think that is a popular week for renters ( not in the top ten)

Low points cost rooms are some of the most popular for mega-renters. The profit margins are higher. May is extremely cheap points-wise. Lot of profit to be made.

 

[DonMacGregor]

But some believe that if the commercial renters are stopped, that the availability of some of those same rooms will all of a sudden be easier or that your average owner won’t choose to rent a popular room occasionally.

I said that it is a statistical improbability, in the hypothetical given, that a cohort of several dozen discrete owners taking the place of a single "mega renter" entity, would organically match the precise renting pattern represented by the single mega renter.

If a single mega renter purchased numerous contracts for the sole purpose of renting the points out for profit, it is a logical assumption that those points will be utilized to rent the most desirable rooms, at the most desirable times, in the greatest quantity possible. 100% of the time, without exception.

If that single mega renter sells off all those contracts and they are purchased by a disparate cohort of individual owners, the likelihood that all of those owners will organically seek out the exact same rooms at the same times, and in the same quantities is statistically improbable.

I DIDN'T say that some of those owners won't be pursuing popular rooms. of course they will. Logic would dictate that the very nexus of the problem is normal folks wanting to rent those popular rooms. They are popular for a reason. What I DID suggest, is that not ALL of those new owners will want to book the same rooms as the mega renter, 100% of the time.

 

[bobbiwoz]

Low points cost rooms are some of the most popular for mega-renters. The profit margins are higher. May is extreme cheap points-wise. Lot of profit to be made.

The poster was trying to book Boardwalk View….not the cheaper Resort View.

 

[VGCgroupie]

Disney sees a benefit for themselves. That is why they are doing this. It's why any timeshare does things like this. What is your argument for why it's being done - because of owner complaints? If so that will likely to be used as the reason just as DVC has used similar arguments over the years when it actually will be of benefit to them.

They are owners too? How aren't they? They purchased the contracts and they pay dues just like you and I. They also are likely to be a lower cost ownership for DVC. There's basic costs of any owner and instead of it being one for ever 100 points it's one for every 5000 points (or whatever). That could instead translate into 50 owners and the cost of working with each of them. Now swap those 50 owners for the 1. 50 more potentially competing for those 5 Concierge studios vs 1 BOT. Statistically I'd prefer the 1 BOT.

I'm not stating that buying to run a commercial business fits the intent, nor even rules, of DVC but what I am saying is that the owners aren't going to see the benefits that are being hoped for from this and I'm also saying that there often are unintended consequences. A blank statement that DVC is declaring 100% discretion on this? We'll see.

I said before Disney will benefit from this, but I don't believe that is the sole reason.

I don't think anyone violating the terms of the contract should be seen as an equal owner.

 

[Judique]

This thread is moving way too fast for me
I think I'll just come back when there's more than the checkbox to discuss

I was thinking the same thing (moving too fast). Had to break away to water my garden, clean my kitchen, and eat lunch.

Now back to special programming....

 

[VGCgroupie]

I was thinking the same thing (moving too fast). Had to break away to water my garden, clean my kitchen, and eat lunch.

Now back to special programming....

I stopped to feed myself and the others of the house. I should stop all together since at this point I am just repeating myself

 

[DonMacGregor]

The poster was trying to book Boardwalk View….not the cheaper Resort View.

I don't think mega renters are booking up the cheapest rooms, but rather the cheapest rooms, point-wise, in the most sought-after categories.

 

[Sandisw]

I said that it is a statistical improbability, in the hypothetical given, that a cohort of several dozen discrete owners taking the place of a single "mega renter" entity, would organically match the precise renting pattern represented by the single mega renter.

If a single mega renter purchased numerous contracts for the sole purpose of renting the points out for profit, it is a logical assumption that those points will be utilized to rent the most desirable rooms, at the most desirable times, in the greatest quantity possible. 100% of the time, without exception.

If that single mega renter sells off all those contracts and they are purchased by a disparate cohort of individual owners, the likelihood that all of those owners will organically seek out the exact same rooms at the same times, and in the same quantities is statistically improbable.

I DIDN'T say that some of those owners won't be pursuing popular rooms. of course they will. Logic would dictate that the very nexus of the problem is normal folks wanting to rent those popular rooms. They are popular for a reason. What I DID suggest, is that not ALL of those new owners will want to book the same rooms as the mega renter, 100% of the time.

Of course not but right now, the question remains is how many current owners are getting shut against how many potential rooms will be a viable every morning if no commercial renters are in play.

I guess I am just not convinced that every BW SV studio or RIV tower studio, etc that is out there for rent is being offer by a commercial renter.

Even your average owner who has to rent for some unforeseen situation might decide to rent a high demand room.

I have no idea how it will play out but I do think those that think that whatever enforcement happens to commercial renters that the ease of booking hard to get rooms will go away.

My guess is you are still going to have plenty of disappointed owners locked out of rooms that commercial renters have targeted.

I still won’t be surprised to see brokers amend how they deal and advertise confirmed rentals.

If they don’t put out there what they have out there and change that aspect, then no one will even know who is booking the rooms.

 

[VGCgroupie]

I don't think mega renters are booking up the cheapest rooms, but rather the cheapest rooms, point-wise, in the most sought-after categories.

I have for sure seen many many Boardwalk view rooms for rent and not from an owner down on their luck needing to use up points. From someone who also had 25 other reservations available to rent at BW, Aul, VGC, Poly and even a VGF (yes I counted)

 

[bobbiwoz]

I think a real problem with the commercial renters has to do with the fact that they book rooms before there are actually people to put in the particular room.

An ordinary member will book what they need or want with a large probability they will be using it. I do think the probability for an ordinary member to get what they want will be better than what has been implied, IF the commercial renting is curtailed. After all, I DID get CL and value studios at Jambo many times before mega renting has become so widespread.

 

[mkatsy]

I said that it is a statistical improbability, in the hypothetical given, that a cohort of several dozen discrete owners taking the place of a single "mega renter" entity, would organically match the precise renting pattern represented by the single mega renter.

If a single mega renter purchased numerous contracts for the sole purpose of renting the points out for profit, it is a logical assumption that those points will be utilized to rent the most desirable rooms, at the most desirable times, in the greatest quantity possible. 100% of the time, without exception.

If that single mega renter sells off all those contracts and they are purchased by a disparate cohort of individual owners, the likelihood that all of those owners will organically seek out the exact same rooms at the same times, and in the same quantities is statistically improbable.

I DIDN'T say that some of those owners won't be pursuing popular rooms. of course they will. Logic would dictate that the very nexus of the problem is normal folks wanting to rent those popular rooms. They are popular for a reason. What I DID suggest, is that not ALL of those new owners will want to book the same rooms as the mega renter, 100% of the time.

Additionally the mega renter is doing it, presumably, as a source of income so booking is a high priority task. All of the other renters that take his/her place are living normal lives and become task saturated and won’t all remember to book at 8 am, some may even have conflicts or even catastrophes that force them to skip a vacation. They don’t function in the same capacity

 

[muppets3d]

I think a real problem with the commercial renters has to do with the fact that they book rooms before there are actually people to put in the particular room.

An ordinary member will book what they need or want with a large probability they will be using it. I do think the probability for an ordinary member to get what they want will be better than what has been implied, IF the commercial renting is curtailed. After all, I DID get CL and value studios at Jambo many times before mega renting has become so widespread.

Your average member doesn't have enough points to have a bunch of reservations sitting out there on the off-chance that someone may rent it. They don't have spare points to tie up in walking a boardwalk view studio for 6 months until it rolls around to Easter. etc.

When commercial renting is curtailed, things will get better. The same number of points will be in the system, but you won't have so many huge owners hogging up reservations.

 

[mickeymom629]

I don't know if it's because of renting but I am shocked at how the availability has looked for December and January, even into February. I am always looking for those months and have never seen availability so low.

 

[Brian Noble]

If the goal of this change is to stop large commercial renters, I am not sure this is going to work. DVC allows LLC to buy points and setting up a LLC is dirt cheap, like as cheap as $40. Won't a commercial renter just setup a LLC, run it till caught, shut it down, then start up another one?

You are correct. However, the end game is not to restrict supply. No developer has ever found a way to do that, because (a) it is a game of whack-a-mole and (b) the money is enough of an incentive for the pros to keep moving to new holes.

The end game is to collapse demand. The way to do that is to cancel some rentals---at the last minute and very publicly. It has worked for other developers. It will work for Disney if they choose to do it. And based on the langauge they are using, it sure seems like they are lining up the ducks to do so.

Disney may cancel a reservation last minute, and the rental company brand behind those multiple LLCs will be ruined. Starting new LLCs won’t matter if they have to rebuild their branding.

It's worse than that (or better, depending on your point of view): If a handful of very vocal guests complain about last-minute DVC rental cancellations, that will taint the entire market. All a prospective renter knows is that the could show up after a long day of travel to find that they don't have a room. That translates very quickly into constant reminders in the Disney online ecosystem that "DVC rentals are risky."

It does not take very much of that before the demand for DVC rentals drops precipitously. If you think this won't happen, go take a look at the we loooooove Club Wyndham Bonnet Creek thread on the Orlando Resorts board. It's long, and you might have to hunt around for the right point in the thread where it turned, but it is definitely in there. At the beginning of that thread, in the mid 2010s, it was the absolute darling of the offsite folks. Now? "It's too dangerous, don't risk it." In the meantime, a few of the very high-profile Bonnet Creek renters finally went out of business.

Wyndham tried many (many!) things to restrict supply, and had been doing so since I became an owner more than 20 years ago. Limiting (and eventually eliminating) point transfers, instituting very strict guest certificate rules and fees, eliminating developer perks on resale bookings.

None of them worked. Cancelling some reservations at the last minute worked. That combined with the targeted freezing of some very high profile renter accounts pushed a lot of landlords out of the public rental market. It is hard to fight a big corporation when you have a montly maintenance fee nut to make and suddenly cannot make any new reservations or put any guests names on existing ones.