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

[Cyberc1978]

Your missing that it is not 700,000 - the points wont disappear if the renters sell them

Maybe I don't understand what you mean, but I understand that when all BWV SV rooms are booked in May roughly 131,000 points have been used and taken out of the system.

 

[Cyberc1978]

They already have a different point cost when booked individually as components instead of being booked as a 2br. That is the lockoff premium. So as long as they make the individual component rooms match the normal dedicated studios/1br it would be doable I think?

I honestly don't know if that is true or not.

@zavandor do you know if the above would be allowed?

 

[Tatebeck]

What they really need to do (and it would be easier to do than balancing studios vs 1 bedrooms) is to balance the view categories of the studios. If the resort view is totally booked up ahead of time with walkers and being spec rented, but the other views are available well into the 11 or 7 month window, then the resort view is too cheap and/or the other views are too expensive. I have said it before, that DVC severely over promises and over values (AKA over-charges for) their views.

IMO AKV Value studios should be 1 point cheaper than standard studios. And the point spread between the lowest and highest view should be closer together. If the view upgrades cost less, more members will want to splurge for it. And less members will be competing for the resort view rooms. They can do all of this while keeping the average studio costs the same at any resort they adjust.

But of course it would increase the cost of the absolute cheapest rooms at the resort, which some members will have an issue with.

 

[Mouseforward]

What they really need to do (and it would be easier to do than balancing studios vs 1 bedrooms) is to balance the view categories of the studios. If the resort view is totally booked up ahead of time with walkers and being spec rented, but the other views are available well into the 11 or 7 month window, then the resort view is too cheap and/or the other views are too expensive. I have said it before, that DVC severely over promises and over values (AKA over-charges for) their views.

IMO AKV Value studios should be 1 point cheaper than standard studios. And the point spread between the lowest and highest view should be closer together. If the view upgrades cost less, more members will want to splurge for it. And less members will be competing for the resort view rooms. They can do all of this while keeping the average studio costs the same at any resort they adjust.

But of course it would increase the cost of the absolute cheapest rooms at the resort, which some members will have an issue with.

For BW they could make pool view and standard view the same points and just separate out boardwalk view.

Basically, that would make it like beach club

For RIV they should just get rid of categories or possibly make the first two floors a point lower. The view is irrelevant, there are plus and minus to both sides.

 

[Cyberc1978]

For BW they could make pool view and standard view the same points and just separate out boardwalk view.

Basically, that would make it like beach club

For RIV they should just get rid of categories or possibly make the first two floors a point lower. The view is irrelevant, there are plus and minus to both sides.

Didn’t they separate them in the first place due to requests for a specific view (not only for Boardwalk) and too many ended up disappointed?

 

[Tatebeck]

For BW they could make pool view and standard view the same points and just separate out boardwalk view.

Basically, that would make it like beach club

For RIV they should just get rid of categories or possibly make the first two floors a point lower. The view is irrelevant, there are plus and minus to both sides.

All true.

Some members would of course complain that the cheapest rooms have increased in price, but as long as the average studio price stayed the same, then I think those members really shouldn't really have much to complain about. We have said in this thread many times that you cannot guarantee that you will always be able to get the cheapest view category (outside of buying a favorite/guaranteed week). So over time if you only book studios your bookings should probably mirror the average cost of a studio across the different views anyway, and this could be done in a way that wouldn't change that number

 

[Mouseforward]

All true.

Some members would of course complain that the cheapest rooms have increased in price, but as long as the average studio price stayed the same, then I think those members really shouldn't really have much to complain about. We have said in this thread many times that you cannot guarantee that you will always be able to get the cheapest view category (outside of buying a favorite/guaranteed week). So over time if you only book studios your bookings should probably mirror the average cost of a studio across the different views anyway, and this could be done in a way that wouldn't change that number

As someone who owns 100 boardwalk point I’m selfishly agreeing with this because that would mean I can get a studio on most of my years. As it is now there will be some years. I’ll have to shorten the week if I don’t get a standard view every couple years and push the points over.

 

[Judique]

That's the thing, from what I've read here, there hasn't been much at all in the way of guidance from DVC. It may be decades old but the past guidance is the last guidance issued. To borrow from the speeding analogy someone else used, if you're on an interstate and pass a speed limit sign that is worn out, faded and a bit rusty but don't see another sign for the next 20 miles, do you continue along honoring that limit or make up up yourself?

*you know the lawman is waiting patiently right around the point where most people think it's safe to go a bit faster!

That may be an outdated analogy. My 2017 has a screen and it tells me what the speed limit is.

And now, as DVC is exposed to more and more technology, they have the means to monitor and act. One thing I learned back then: people were not jumping up and down that much and admitting their behaviors. Renting didn't just stop on a dime.

My opinion is that Disney will act, if and when their bottom line is impacted.
We may hear about it and we may not.

 

[Sandisw]

I agree that none of us can be confident our interpretation of the contract is correct until DVC starts to take action showing what they will no longer tolerate (so there is no basis to tell others whether their use is safe or dangerous, except in outlier cases), but it is incorrect to say no one is in violation until DVC tells them. There are absolutely people Disney currently believes are in violation (and it’s speculated that many AUL sellers have already been informed as such).

Just as we should not judge, we also shouldn’t reassure people who are renting regularly and frequently that they can’t possibly be in violation simply because Disney has not chosen to target them yet.

I seriously doubt that Disney would be doing anything at all if they thought the problem impacted less than 1% of the DVC points.

Disney has separate reasons to claim commercial renting is not common, and of course, common is in the eye of the beholder, like “frequently” and “regularly.”

I am nearly certain I’m worse at Captcha than the average bot, even before you consider the 5AM hour pre-caffeine. Having said that, I would be in favor of something that slows down automated scripts or spec renters before they can get to the availability page, even if it occasionally causes me minor annoyance.

Don’s post said it better than I could, this is not actually a tiny problem or they wouldn’t be dedicating headcount and resources to address it.

I would not assume that just because someone is doing commercial activity for profit that they are determined to maximize profit. You can still be a for profit corporation even if you leave money on the table sometimes. Believe it or not, even Disney sometimes charges less than the market will bear!

Let me clarify…unless DVC has specifically defined an act as a violation of the commercial purposes clause then the owner is not in violation

That’s the point…one can believe that doing XYZ should be commercial but if DVC has never stated that is the rule, then it’s not.

What rules has DVC actually identified as commercial that owners are doing but have been ignored?

Whats to say that the statement about resources and a team wasn’t overstated in a way to appease owners at the one meeting…who had the questions for them?

It’s not like they brought this topic up or that that statement was made to all owners. It didn’t get stated at the SSR one because the topic of renting was about a 3 minute conversation.

Owners there certainly weren’t as concerned as the owners who brought it up at VGF.

So, I still contend that owners are not breaking the commercial purpose policy if DVC has never added what they are doing as part of that policy.

I’ve said many times.., one has to make their own determination as to what they believe it means to rent within the rules of the contract and go from there.

Never told anyone they should or should not do thing, but if someone has been told by DVC renting half their points is not a violation of the commercial purpose clause, then it is not until DVC tells them the rule is different.

 

[Sandisw]

Then you aren't looking very closely. There was a big uptick in specific resorts (but not others) right after the box appeared. BWV and AKV both saw a big increase in contracts on the market. AUL had already had a huge uptick that was widely commented on here.

AUL is very popular with renters for renting certain categories at AUL, which again, has been widely discussed on these boards. AUL-S is popular for renting everywhere.

And if those contracts were all owned by just a few owners, wouldn’t it support DVCs statement and implication at the meeting that it is not a common practice in terms of # of owners commercially renting?

 

[Sandisw]

They already have a different point cost when booked individually as components instead of being booked as a 2br. That is the lockoff premium. So as long as they make the individual component rooms match the normal dedicated studios/1br it would be doable I think?

The point charts are based on 2 bedroom equivalents so the lock off premiums that were fed when created are extra.

But, when they tried to just raise those premiums, some owners…the group of 12…called them on it and they reversed it.

The fact they did at least supports that they didn’t feel confident enough they could withstand a court challenge on that one because if they really believed it was correct, they would have let owners try to take them to court.

 

[Tatebeck]

The point charts are based on 2 bedroom equivalents so the lock off premiums that were fed when created are extra.

But, when they tried to just raise those premiums, some owners…the group of 12…called them on it and they reversed it.

The fact they did at least supports that they didn’t feel confident enough they could withstand a court challenge on that one because if they really believed it was correct, they would have let owners try to take them to court.

So it's possible they don't think they can change the lockoff premium. So any rebalancing between studios and 1BRs at resorts with lockoffs could make them have to adjust the 2BRs as well it seems. Even more complicated! Oh boy

 

[Sandisw]

So it's possible they don't think they can change the lockoff premium. So any rebalancing between studios and 1BRs at resorts with lockoffs could make them have to adjust the 2BRs as well it seems. Even more complicated! Oh boy

Correct…now some think they can only rebalance studios to studios…I am not convinced of that because the charts are based on 2 bedroom equivalents.

But, for example, if the lock off premium for booking a studio and 1 bedroom independently is 5 extra points, then it can never be more than 5 extra points.

Some of the older resorts also have part of the POS Exhibit A that explain that square footage was used to determine initial point equivalents.

Based on how I understand it it’s like this. take BWV…the charts have to balance with the 2 bedrooms and the dedicated studios and dedicated one bedrooms.

Then, they can add back in the lock off premium that was initially decided.

 

[HyperspaceMountainPilot]

And if those contracts were all owned by just a few owners, wouldn’t it support DVCs statement and implication at the meeting that it is not a common practice in terms of # of owners commercially renting?

I don’t think we can know if the early June wave of contracts was a handful of owners or many…it did seem like it was concentrated in some UY more than others, but if it was just a few sellers selling a lot of contracts, I agree it would support the theory that they are focused on a small number of large players.

 

[Huskerpal]

Even with DVC which I think we can, all agree is the best of the timeshares. Buyer ignorance is a frequently used sales tool.

If you mean DVC has the best of the timeshare sales tactics and salespeople that do not use your typical high-pressure sales tactics I agree.

If you mean the best timeshare system, I disagree. My Worldmark points are good for two years and I can use them at any resort in the system when reservations open at 13 months. I have a July use year, and my 2025 points won't expire until July 31, 2027. Even better, on July 30, 2027 I can make a reservation with those points 13 months out. So effective the points can be used for 3 years. No banking deadline. No home resort. There are other owner friendly rules as well, like the ability to rent points from other users up to 2x the number of points you own. So if an owner will not use all their points they can rent them to another owner to use.

I would also note studios are not that much cheaper to book. The standard high season point chart for a week stay is:
Two Bedroom - 10,000 points
One Bedroom - 9,000 points
Studio - 8,000 points

Trendwest (now Worldmark) was the first points-based timeshare system when they started in 1989.

 

[muppets3d]

If you mean DVC has the best of the timeshare sales tactics and salespeople that do not use your typical high-pressure sales tactics I agree.

If you mean the best timeshare system, I disagree. My Worldmark points are good for two years and I can use them at any resort in the system when reservations open at 13 months. I have a July use year, and my 2025 points won't expire until July 31, 2027. Even better, on July 30, 2027 I can make a reservation with those points 13 months out. So effective the points can be used for 3 years. No banking deadline. No home resort. There are other owner friendly rules as well, like the ability to rent points from other users up to 2x the number of points you own. So if an owner will not use all their points they can rent them to another owner to use.

I would also note studios are not that much cheaper to book. The standard high season point chart for a week stay is:
Two Bedroom - 10,000 points
One Bedroom - 9,000 points
Studio - 8,000 points

Trendwest (now Worldmark) was the first points-based timeshare system when they started in 1989.

My experience with other timeshare systems is similar in terms of how points are allocated across units. DVC really discounts the studios which leads to outsized demand for them. If DVC's points system was closer to that, I don't think we'd have studios getting snapped up as quickly as they are. Demand would be more equalized. Yes that might mean someone can only book 4 nights in a studio instead of 7. That would lead to some upset members, I'm sure.

 

[IMMkXLVI]

If you mean DVC has the best of the timeshare sales tactics and salespeople that do not use your typical high-pressure sales tactics I agree.

If you mean the best timeshare system, I disagree. My Worldmark points are good for two years and I can use them at any resort in the system when reservations open at 13 months. I have a July use year, and my 2025 points won't expire until July 31, 2027. Even better, on July 30, 2027 I can make a reservation with those points 13 months out. So effective the points can be used for 3 years. No banking deadline. No home resort. There are other owner friendly rules as well, like the ability to rent points from other users up to 2x the number of points you own. So if an owner will not use all their points they can rent them to another owner to use.

I would also note studios are not that much cheaper to book. The standard high season point chart for a week stay is:
Two Bedroom - 10,000 points
One Bedroom - 9,000 points
Studio - 8,000 points

Trendwest (now Worldmark) was the first points-based timeshare system when they started in 1989.

Those are some relaxed rules. BUT, it isn't a skyline or monorail ride from Disney!

That alone is worth the price of admission. Just being soooo close. That and DVC isn't as restrictive as some either. There will always be ones with more relaxed rules and those with more stringent rules. DVC seems to be in the middle.

 

[Sandisw]

I don’t think we can know if the early June wave of contracts was a handful of owners or many…it did seem like it was concentrated in some UY more than others, but if it was just a few sellers selling a lot of contracts, I agree it would support the theory that they are focused on a small number of large players.

Absolutely, we have no idea how many sellers it involves.

Which is really the same with all reservations out there for rent.

We have no idea how many owners are doing the renting of all of those rooms and that will make a difference in what DVC can do.

 

[DougEMG]

It depends on how the units and declarations were done at each resort.

So if there were roughly the same number of 1brs and studios in each unit declared, then I believe they could actually manage to do it, as long as the total points in each unit are the same before and after the adjustments.

Correct my understanding is that points represent a share in a unit. That is what your actual deed says. That unit is declare at the time of sale and could for example be an entire building at OKW. Units are made up of rooms. Those rooms must add up to the total points that the unit had. So you can adjust room points provide they are in the same unit. What you can not do is adjust points across units.

So the SSR treehouses should never been able to have their points increased while decreasing the studios because they were never in the same unit. Most members though were happy about the changes so the was not much of a complaint.

At least that’s is my 2 cent opinion.

 

[zavandor]

I honestly don't know if that is true or not.

@zavandor do you know if the above would be allowed?

It's difficult to be certain, because the Florida law is written with traditional week timeshares and have only some references to point time systems. So it is subject to interpretation until someone challenges it in court.

I am convinced 100% they cannot raise the lockoff premium.
90% they cannot reallocate across units.
60% that they cannot reallocate between studios and 1BR within the same unit.

But, even if legal...
I have not studied all units in all resorts (because I have a life), but I think at most resorts units are made of different number of room types. A reallocation between room types would be possible (if legal) only if all units are declared with the same number of 1BR and studios. And since DVC would probably need to do it across all resorts, saves us from a reallocation.

There is also the opportunity for Disney of doing so. If studios cost more, then the cost of entry in the system is higher. Studios are the most popular because fewer people have the means (or the will to spend them) for 1BR.