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

[Sandisw]

There’s so many posts that I’m sure that is why you not are grasping what I was saying. TBH I’m too exhausted to break down why I said what I said and the rules have nothing to do with my post or theirs.

I added that to clarify for others because it did appear to me that others might interpret it that way.

So, now everyone knows! And I added that in to make it clear that the rules clarification wasn’t directed specifically at you.

 

[BeachClub2014]

^this

DVC can start by eliminating the biggest rental whales and keep going until the system stabilizes. No way to know for sure where that line will be.

This is an interesting comment. What does a stabilized system look like? I'm thinking that DVC's desired outcomes of cracking down on rentals do not necessarily align with those of the average owner. Both sides may want to impact the rental landscape negatively, but for very different reasons.

 

[muppets3d]

This is an interesting comment. What does a stabilized system look like? I'm thinking that DVC's desired outcomes of cracking down on rentals do not necessarily align with those of the average owner. Both sides may want to impact the rental landscape negatively, but for very different reasons.

That's the rub, none of us know at what point DVC will be satisfied. They may not decide to stop until the entire DVC rental market has collapsed. Nobody really knows. People are saying that DVC is only interested in commercial renters, the types that own thousands of points and rent out confirmed reservations - but nobody at DVC has gone on record saying that is their only target as far as I'm aware.

 

[Mouseforward]

There are 2 strategies for rentals. Matching up with an owner while availability exists, like your example. Most are happening with a lead time between 6-11 months, because after that the options are often slim to none. Especially during high demand months like fall and low point seasons.

The second way is to hold something relatively popular and wait for the above option to dry up, and usually by that point cash discounts/offers have dried up or hold little inventory. At 2 to 5 months out from the reservation date, that $400/nt CCV or $500/nt BCV studio starts looking much better if the only competition is over $300 for CSR/POR, over $350 for CBR, and over $400 for AKV/SSR.

Covid pushed so many points forward that availability got really tight, making it harder to rent the traditional way. Brokers started advising clients to book first, then find a renter later. Spec renting took off. But before that brokers typically only allowed them as last minute distressed reservations, maybe 8 weeks out. Probably as a measure to prevent upsetting DVC. Covid pushed the necessity to test the limits, which ushered in the normalization. The result was more places to run this activity, and more owners savvy to higher earnings of spec res. Cat out of the bag.

I agree, and when you rent, it is a huge time saving to book the spec rental. Trying to use some of the rental sites where you have to in two seconds respond to an email and claim a listing is pretty much impossible for someone who works.

But we’re getting lost into how much people are charging per point I’m guessing that to the person who lost out in the room you don’t care if they got $15 a point or if they got 35 you still lost your room.

I went through this in a recent post I think we’re missing the bigger issue. Even if all large commercial renters sold off their points. The effect would be a few percentage increase in availability. Still a positive but not the significant effect that people want.

The reason I say that is those point would be sold to someone else. I can see that a regular DVC owner would probably trade out some of their points therefore book less rooms at boardwalk but it would be a fraction less than an owner booking. So if commercial renters are booking 50 rooms in May. The new owners would maybe book 45.

I think the real problem is using assistive device to get an advantage at 8 AM to grab the room. I think we’d see a huge increase if we added two factor authentication or an anti-bot device. There is no way that anyone is booking 100 AK value rooms in the spring using their finger to click at 8 AM.

 

[BeachClub2014]

That's the rub, none of us know at what point DVC will be satisfied. They may not decide to stop until the entire DVC rental market has collapsed. Nobody really knows. People are saying that DVC is only interested in commercial renters, the types that own thousands of points and rent out confirmed reservations - but nobody at DVC has gone on record saying that is their only target as far as I'm aware.

Exactly.

I think DVC is interested in reducing the overall rental landscape, regardless of who is doing the renting. In for a penny, in for a pound, right? I think they will still allow the occasional renting of points, consistent with the POS, but in a more narrowly defined landscape.

 

[Sandisw]

This is an interesting comment. What does a stabilized system look like? I'm thinking that DVC's desired outcomes of cracking down on rentals do not necessarily align with those of the average owner. Both sides may want to impact the rental landscape negatively, but for very different reasons.

I don’t think you can even say there is a consensus on what an average owner wants either.

But, I definitely think that whatever happens will be based on the impact to DVC and the perception to upset owners that they took it seriously.

Here’s what they can point to:

We no longer allow owners to transfer points between their own memberships more than once…typically used by commercial renters lo flip contracts and rent in excess.

We have enhanced the transfer rules so owners who find themselves with points they can’t use that are banked and borrowed to allow them to give them to other owners.

We added the ability for owners to use points for the AP under our MMB program to help owners who may find themselves with extra points.

We have eliminated the $95 exchange fee for owners under MMB to make it more affordable to trade those extra points for things like cruises.

All that has happened and all of it seems pro owner to give them an alternative then renting points when they need to.

Think about it…every owner who trades for an AP yearly is indirectly renting those points because DVC will take rooms out of inventory and rent them for cash.

Take the example of an owner who has 300 points and rents half…instead, they now trade for yearly APs.

Same outcome in the sense that those rooms won’t be going to owners, but cash guests, but it certainly should reduce the number of rentals out there.

 

[muppets3d]

I agree, and when you rent, it is a huge time saving to book the spec rental. Trying to use some of the rental sites where you have to in two seconds respond to an email and claim a listing is pretty much impossible for someone who works.

But we’re getting lost into how much people are charging per point I’m guessing that to the person who lost out in the room you don’t care if they got $15 a point or if they got 35 you still lost your room.

I went through and in a recent post I think we’re missing the bigger issue. Even if all large commercial renters sold off their points. The effect would be a few percentage increase in availability. Still a positive but not the significant effect that people want.

The reason I say that is those point would be sold to someone else. I can see that a regular DVC owner would probably trade out some of their points therefore book less rooms at boardwalk but it would be like a fraction less than an owner booking. So if commercial renters are booking 50 rooms in May. The new owners would maybe book 45.

I think the real problem is using assistive device to get an advantage at 8 AM to grab the room. I think we’d see a huge increase if we added two factor authentication or an anti-bot device. There is no way that anyone is booking 100 AK value rooms in the spring using their finger to click at 8 AM.

The problem with the big-time commercial outfits is they have enough points and bots at their disposal to start walks for every boardwalk view studio and keep them going all year long if they want. Or every Animal Kingdom value studio. Or whatever room type you name it.

If all those commercial renter contracts were sold, they'd go to individual owners and each of those individual owners won't have the same desire to constantly walk the boardwalk view studios, for example. Some might for sure, but not all.

 

[Mouseforward]

Think about it…every own who trades for an AP yearly is indirectly renting those points because DVC will take rooms out of inventory and rent them for cash

This is a point most forget -

Also anyone who holds a reservation cause they might be going and leaves it on their account but then cancels it right before the deadline is also contributing to the problem. Because if you cancel it right before the deadline, you have a very short period where that’s just gonna dump right into breakage.

 

[Galun]

Wow, this is now up to 70 pages. I even had someone quoted me and said I wanted the last word I could have it lol.

To me this isn’t rocket science. The commercial renters know who they are and this puts them on notice. Everyone is free to interpret what personal use means when they check that box.

I own around 3300 points, we do around 2 weeks worth of 2BR once a year, we plan to go a lot more after the kids go to college, and until then we rent out our excess points. There was a time long ago when Disney had guidelines of 20 rolling reservations, 4000 points at one resort, 8000 points at total, and we are way below that. People may not believe how I use my points as personal use, but the only one that matters is Disney.

We dont own any other timeshare. Someone had brought up Wyndham cracking down bonnet creek so I looked to it. It looks like they used some algo to generate cease and desist letters, and took action on some real commercial renters by canceling reservations. What I see from that action though is that even the evil Wyndham give the owners a chance to explain themselves, and their ability to rent had not been affected after they did so.

If Disney thinks I am a commercial renter and sends me a cease and desist letter, I’m gonna explain exactly what I said above. If they consider that as commercial activity, I’ll sell all my dvc points out of spite, and Disney vacations will no longer be part of my plan going forward. I’ve only bought contacts over time and never sold any. I had planned on holding them all to expiration. It dvc wants me to sell, I will actually get some money back, and I’ll make my future vacation plans else where. Won’t affect my lifestyle one bit.

Commercial renters, the ones owning multiple LLCs spec renting and doing buy/strip/rent/sell multiple times, should be worried. If you rent out your unused points, then you have nothing to worry about. Just my opinion.

 

[Mouseforward]

The problem with the big-time commercial outfits is they have enough points and bots at their disposal to start walks for every boardwalk view studio and keep them going all year long if they want. Or every Animal Kingdom value studio. Or whatever room type you name it.

If all those commercial renter contracts were sold, they'd go to individual owners and each of those individual owners won't have the same desire to constantly walk the boardwalk view studios, for example. Some might for sure, but not all.

I agree with this, and I also believe that commercial renters are not gonna trade their points for cruises or book one bedrooms at boardwalk. So you have to estimate if a commercial renter has 1000 points and they are sold to five new owners at 200 each what percentage difference is going to be booked at Boardwalk in a studio? My guess is only about 20%. That is the only difference in availability you will get and I don’t think it explains what’s happening right now in May at BW

I still think they’re cheating with assisted devices to book these reservations. They must’ve found a way to have multiple bots firing at the same time at 8 AM.

 

[BeachClub2014]

I don’t think you can even say there is a consensus on what an average owner wants either.

Lol, that is very true!

But, I definitely think that whatever happens will be based on the impact to DVC and the perception to upset owners that they took it seriously.

All of the points you listed are relevant and will certainly enable DVC to claim that they are being responsive to member concerns in a legitimate manner. I question whether that is the ultimate goal of DVC, however. I think an argument can be made that DVC's effort (if that's what happens here) to reduce the overall rate of rentals would then become a profit-motivated process, rather than a customer satisfaction-driven decision.

Same outcome in the sense that those rooms won’t be going to owners, but cas guests, but it certainly should reduce the number of rentals out there.

Definitely, and those "rental" dollars are now going to DVC, not into someone else's pocket.

 

[muppets3d]

I agree with this, and I also believe that commercial renters are not gonna trade their points for cruises or book one bedrooms at boardwalk. So you have to estimate if a commercial renter has 1000 points and they are sold to five new owners at 200 each what percentage difference is going to be booked at Boardwalk in a studio? My guess is only about 20%. That is the only difference in availability you will get and I don’t think it explains what’s happening right now in May at BW

I still think they’re cheating with assisted devices to book these reservations. They must’ve found a way to have multiple bots firing at the same time at 8 AM.

Absolutely they have discovered an API to get into DVC's booking engine, or something is going on. There is too much money involved for them to just fat finger it and hope for the best, and the evidence of what owners are seeing happen to these rooms is too consistent.

 

[Sandisw]

This is a point most forget -

Also anyone who holds a reservation cause they might be going and leaves it on their account but then cancels it right before the deadline is also contributing to the problem. Because if you cancel it right before the deadline, you have a very short period where that’s just gonna dump right into breakage.

And I confess I am one of those people. I do not know who will be traveling with me at 11 months or what winter months I will definitely go.

Given where I own and what I like, I book what I might need and only when I know for sure, I don’t need something, it gets released.

Absolutely nothing to do with renting.

But, the new AP option is huge for me as I will trade points every year for them now since I am at a point where I don’t always need 900.

It’s win for me but it is a win for DVC because they will be able to rent it for far more than what they will pay parks for my AP!

 

[muppets3d]

This is a point most forget -

Also anyone who holds a reservation cause they might be going and leaves it on their account but then cancels it right before the deadline is also contributing to the problem. Because if you cancel it right before the deadline, you have a very short period where that’s just gonna dump right into breakage.

Sure but how many points does the average member hold? My guess is the majority of the membership doesn't have enough points to have reservations booked "just in case" - certainly many of us do here, but DVC has 250k members or so and we only represent a very small fraction.

 

[Sandisw]

Lol, that is very true!


All of the points you listed are relevant and will certainly enable DVC to claim that they are being responsive to member concerns in a legitimate manner. I question whether that is the ultimate goal of DVC, however. I think an argument can be made that DVC's effort (if that's what happens here) to reduce the overall rate of rentals would then become a profit-motivated process, rather than a customer satisfaction-driven decision.


Definitely, and those "rental" dollars are now going to DVC, not into someone else's pocket.

And let’s be honest…the standard advice here on the boards when people mention trades is rent and pay cash.

Same was the advice when restrictions came out…just rent your points and then pay cash or rent someone’s points.

So, in that sense, even taking the commercial renters out of it, this has contributed to the explosion of the rental market!

 

[PlutoNotPlanet]

Trying to summarize without AI... If anyone wants to utilize mine as draft, please feel free to.

DVC owners’ problem: People snagging popular rooms. Hard to book even at 11 month 8:01am.
Disney’s problem 1: People try to find DVC rental rather than book direct (at rack rate, even discounted).
Disney’s problem 2: Unhappy existing DVC owners exiting. Not enough new DVC owners.

Opinions on DVC rental

• Some dislike that renters take rooms away and make money. Some are fine.
• Spec rentals are criticized the most as it takes popular dates and popular rooms, and sell high to maximize profit.
• Definition of commercial renters and non-personal use various
  1. thousands of points who do spec rentals at popular resorts/rooms/dates
  2. thousands of points who rent more with 7 months regardless of resorts
  3. regardless # of pts who rent over a certain percentage
  4. regardless # of pts who ever rent to cover cost or make profit

Board tolerance on renting and concerns on ability to rent out in the future

1. never rent, only for family and friends
2. you can occasionally rent to cover cost
3. you can rent for a couple years if you mostly use for your own before
4. you can occasionally rent to make money
5. you can rent no more than certain number of points/reservations
6. you can rent no more than certain percentage of your points/reservations
7. you know you have enough to use for yourself and still buying to rent for profit
8. you buy DVC purely to rent for profit as it was allowed

Opinions on potential impact on availability at 11 month

• Most criticize extensive walking
• Some think it would not change the situation due to supply-demand at popular rooms such as AKV and BWV
  • Member number has increase. Owners are not commercial renters can also be interested in these rooms
• Some think it will make it slightly better
• Some think cracking down commercial activities will likely solve the problem
• Some suggest never buy to expect to always stay at rare rooms with lowest points

Bots

• Bots are there. Stopping all bots is challenging.
• But someone needs to be owning a lot of points to use bots to book a lot of rooms. So, it’s more a commercial renter issue

Action DVC has taken to crack down commercial activities

• New point transfer rule.
  • Before, they can buy a loaded contract, transfer the points to one core membership, then sell the contract which is already stripped (right away or in a couple years). In this way, they can have more points with less capital, and all points are in one membership making it easier to rent out.
  • Now: one membership can only receive one transfer per use year, making it a lot harder.

Action DVC can take

• Some suggests minimal changes on the rules
• Some suggests a clear line; some prefer current vague definition as it otherwise create loopholes
• Some suggests trying what other timeshares have down

Resale price

• The resale value of DVC differentiates it from other timeshares.
  • Owners who only consider going themselves don’t care. Some owners care because the investment property of DVC provides a way to exit.
  • Too low a resale price can make resale too appealing compared to direct. It could hurt the direct sales.
• Some hopes the commercial renters will dump contracts and drive down resale price; some think it won’t happen soon; some think it won’t happen

 

[Sandisw]

Sure but how many points does the average member hold? My guess is the majority of the membership doesn't have enough points to have reservations booked "just in case" - certainly many of us do here, but DVC has 250k members or so and we only represent a very small fraction.

The point is that people holding rooms that may be canceled later has some level of impact at certain times.

And, as already mentioned, DVC has now given a lot of owners to turn points every year they may have rented on the open market to an AP.

So, instead of the buy more so you can rent, now DVC gets to say, “buy extra and pay for your APs”

Do you not at least agree that this will still take rooms out of inventory? Especially since DVc gets to decide?

 

[DanCali]

Take the example of an owner who has 300 points and rents half…instead, they now trade for yearly APs.

Same outcome in the sense that those rooms won’t be going to owners, but cash guests, but it certainly should reduce the number of rentals out there.

But the "cash" stays are coming out of DVC inventory in this case since that's where the points originated from.

And I'm not sure competing with DVC for inventory is better than competing with commercial renters' bots.

 

[muppets3d]

The point is that people holding rooms that may be canceled later has some level of impact at certain times.

And, as already mentioned, DVC has now given a lot of owners to turn points every year they may have rented on the open market to an AP.

So, instead of the buy more so you can rent, now DVC gets to say, “buy extra and pay for your APs”

Do you not at least agree that this will still take rooms out of inventory? Especially since DVc gets to decide?

I'm just not sure of the impact. I can't go to a broker's site and see Aunt Erma's long weekend booked at Beach Club in case her niece can get off work, but I can see the 50 or so Boardwalk view rooms the commercial renter is hogging.

 

[speedyfishy]

I've never seen a stripped contract where the buyer is expected to pay dues on points they're not receiving.

But the buyer is paying because they aren’t due yet. The actual cost of the dues also isn’t always determined. That’s why it can be negotiated