Exploiting the Market - PIT Rentals

[jparilla]

Renting out more than one confirmed reservation 30+ days out isn't against DVD rules, yet the DIS has a rule against it. So it would seem the DIS is not beholden to the DVD ruleset like you seem to suggest. @Sandisw

 

[Sandisw]

See you are ignoring what I am saying to argue an unrelated point. This is what happened in that overly long thread months ago as well. Against rules or not is not what defines a commercial activity. This person has figured out how to do commercial activity within whatever rules they are working with. It's still commercial.
I didn't say the DIS has to police it, I'm just saying we should stop pretending we don't know it's commercial use, because even the faintest amount of common sense tells us it is.

But then wouldn’t renting even one reservation be commercial? If that is how you are defining it, then sure.

But when talking about rentals, using the term commercial in an arbitrary way that doesn’t match the terms of the contract muddies the conversation

Isn’t the main the reason people have these discussions is because they have decided that someone is violating the rules?

If someone is renting points within the rules and DVC is allowing it, then it’s not considered a commercial activity for purposes of the contract. They are renting under their right to rent within the personal use guidelines.

And my comments will always be related to the contract for purpose of these discussions…renting outside the rules, because that is why they occur.

 

[Sandisw]

Renting out more than one confirmed reservation 30+ days out isn't against DVD rules, yet the DIS has a rule against it. So it would seem the DIS is not beholden to the DVD ruleset like you seem to suggest. @Sandisw

That is a great counterpoint and one I wasn’t thinking about. But you are right.

The owners of the site could decide to put in rules that are stricter in limiting the number of points offered, regardless of whether it triggers the commercial threshold or not.

 

[mistysue]

But then wouldn’t renting even one reservation be commercial? If that is how you are defining it, then sure.

But when talking about rentals, using the term commercial in an arbitrary way that doesn’t match the terms of the contract muddies the conversation

Isn’t the main the reason people have these discussions is because they have decided that someone is violating the rules?

If someone is renting points within the rules and DVC is allowing it, then it’s not considered a commercial activity for purposes of the contract. They are renting under their right to rent within the personal use guidelines.

And my comments will always be related to the contract for purpose of these discussions…renting outside the rules, because that is why they occur.

This stance makes no sense because people break a rule before they get caught up to. By this logic nothing anyone does anywhere is ever illegal, because they didn't get stopped from doing it in the first place.
For real, what you are saying is a person could stand in front of a judge and say "but it wasn't illegal because I didn't get in trouble!"

There is definitely room for grey areas here, but it's beyond ridiculous to argue that someone who owns DVC for the sole purpose of renting the points isn't using it commercially because they've figured out how to get DVC to ignore them. Commercial purposes are commercial purposes, whether or not DVC is choosing to enforce it.

 

[Sandisw]

This stance makes no sense because people break a rule before they get caught up to. By this logic nothing anyone does anywhere is ever illegal, because they didn't get stopped from doing it in the first place.
For real, what you are saying is a person could stand in front of a judge and say "but it wasn't illegal because I didn't get in trouble!"

There is definitely room for grey areas here, but it's beyond ridiculous to argue that someone who owns DVC for the sole purpose of renting the points isn't using it commercially because they've figured out how to get DVC to ignore them. Commercial purposes are commercial purposes, whether or not DVC is choosing to enforce it.

I agree but the point is you have determined this person is breaking the rules when you know nothing about what is actually happening on their membership. We have no idea how much of the membership or memberships are being used personally.

Of course, someone offering that many should be being reviewed by DVC.

What I think IMO is that DVC has a pretty high threshold of what shifts a membership to commercia”, based on what they put in writing and have told owners and others don’t like it.

As I said, the assumption is this person is getting away with something and DVC is ignoring them and neither one of us can say that is true.

We can agree to disagree but ultimately, if things continue as they are, then DVc has decided things are working in a manner they have decide are okay.

And owners are only accountable to them. No one else.

 

[BeachClub2014]

Can this conversation just be had seriously? Come on, every one of us knows a person who is renting out 8,000 points per year every year is using their membership commercially. Whether or not they have found a loophole or trick to skirt DVC attention, we all know this person has a commercial use intent at that point.

We can all agree we don't know how they are magically not drawing attention to their actions, but that is blatantly what a commercial use is. It's a reasonable question when it's some portion of their points and/or not every single year. But we are all smarter than to pretend there is nothing sketchy about renting that many points every year.

I feel your pain and have tried to argue these points in previous threads. The more strident defenders never have, and will likely never, give an inch that commercial renting exists, that renting confirmed reservations for premium rooms/resorts/times can have a negative effect on owners, etc. It just isn't going to happen.

Of course, someone who rents 8,000 points per year, year over year, is engaged in commercial renting. This is likely just one of the more visible commercial renters.

 

[mistysue]

I agree but the point is you have determined this person is breaking the rules when you know nothing about what is actually happening on their membership. We have no idea how much of the membership or memberships are being used personally.

Of course, someone offering that many should be being reviewed by DVC.

What I think IMO is that DVC has a pretty high threshold of what shifts a membership to commercia”, based on what they put in writing and have told owners and others don’t like it.

As I said, the assumption is this person is getting away with something and DVC is ignoring them and you do not know they are.

We can agree to disagree but ultimately, if things continue as they are, then DVc has decided things are working in a manner they have decide are okay.

And owners are only accountable to them. No one else.

There it is again. You keep changing the topic to respond to what you want to say, not the comment you are responding to.

It is not DVC enforcing some rule that makes something commercial. Commercial does not mean "DVC decides it's business" - this is a word in the English language, and renting thousands of points year after year is a commercial enterprise. DVC obviously does not object to all commercial use, and that's their choice, but doesn't mean that it's not a commercial use because that's literally what the word means.

I am completely aware that you think nobody is breaking rules unless DVC has come down on them, and that's fine. You can feel that way, I'm happy for you that you are so content. (sincerely) That doesn't mean there aren't people who own contracts for commercial purposes under the radar. At no point has anyone said these people are accountable to the rest of us, so I don't know why you keep bringing that up as if it makes any difference in what it means for something to be commercial.

But this thing where you insist owning points as an income stream isn't commercial because DVC hasn't stopped people is insulting to the intelligence of every person who reads these conversations.

 

[Sandisw]

There it is again. You keep changing the topic to respond to what you want to say, not the comment you are responding to.

It is not DVC enforcing some rule that makes something commercial. Commercial does not mean "DVC decides it's business" - this is a word in the English language, and renting thousands of points year after year is a commercial enterprise. DVC obviously does not object to all commercial use, and that's their choice, but doesn't mean that it's not a commercial use because that's literally what the word means.

I am completely aware that you think nobody is breaking rules unless DVC has come down on them, and that's fine. You can feel that way, I'm happy for you that you are so content. (sincerely) That doesn't mean there aren't people who own contracts for commercial purposes under the radar. At no point has anyone said these people are accountable to the rest of us, so I don't know why you keep bringing that up as if it makes any difference in what it means for something to be commercial.

But this thing where you insist owning points as an income stream isn't commercial because DVC hasn't stopped people is insulting to the intelligence of every person who reads these conversations.

My last comment…if we are not going to discuss this in the frame of the contract and our rights as owners to rent then why do people bring it up as a concern?

Isn’t it because they are breaking see things and believe her is a violation of the terms of the contract?

There are a lot of new owners who may read these and think renters don’t count under the personal use clause and that is simply not true.

But if the argument I am missing is that renting is by definition is a commercial action, then I can agree with that and will use that to frame my answers in the future.

 

[tx911]

There it is again. You keep changing the topic to respond to what you want to say, not the comment you are responding to.

It is not DVC enforcing some rule that makes something commercial. Commercial does not mean "DVC decides it's business" - this is a word in the English language, and renting thousands of points year after year is a commercial enterprise. DVC obviously does not object to all commercial use, and that's their choice, but doesn't mean that it's not a commercial use because that's literally what the word means.

I am completely aware that you think nobody is breaking rules unless DVC has come down on them, and that's fine. You can feel that way, I'm happy for you that you are so content. (sincerely) That doesn't mean there aren't people who own contracts for commercial purposes under the radar. At no point has anyone said these people are accountable to the rest of us, so I don't know why you keep bringing that up as if it makes any difference in what it means for something to be commercial.

But this thing where you insist owning points as an income stream isn't commercial because DVC hasn't stopped people is insulting to the intelligence of every person who reads these conversations.

I guess technically any use of the points that results in money coming your way is commercial.

The real question is, why is DVC so loose with their personal definition of "commercial", and how to you police egregious commercial behavior while still allowing the more casual renting of points?

 

[Sandisw]

I guess technically any use of the points that results in money coming your way is commercial.

The real question is, why is DVC so loose with their personal definition of "commercial", and how to you police egregious commercial behavior while still allowing the more casual renting of points?

You said it better than I did in terms of my point.

A better discussion would be what threshold would owners want to see that shifts a membership from personal use to commercial use.

 

[Hubalorian]

You said it better than I did in terms of my point.

A better discussion would be what threshold would owners want to see that shifts a membership from personal use to commercial use.

I think with the right approach and management, that could be a fruitful and engaging thread

 

[mistysue]

I think with the right approach and management, that could be a fruitful and engaging thread

We recently did that thread, and it got repeatedly derailed by having to hear that "DVC hasn't gone after those owners, therefor it isn't commercial" which is why my comments about constantly derailing the actual conversation with that started.

 

[Sandisw]

We recently did that thread, and it got repeatedly derailed by having to hear that "DVC hasn't gone after those owners, therefor it isn't commercial" which is why my comments about constantly derailing the actual conversation with that started.

Be fair. Every conversation that occurs around renting when the word commercial is mentioned is followed by “which is against the rules”

That was the whole context surrounding the owner who advertises 8000 points here.

But. I admit, you are right that I need to use the terms more appropriately

Some things can be defined as commercial without meaning they are outside the rules of the contract. I get it now!!!

 

[mistysue]

Be fair. Every conversation that occurs around renting when the word commercial is mentioned is followed by “which is against the rules”

That was the whole context surrounding the owner who advertises 8000 points here.

But. I admit, you are right that I need to use the terms more appropriately

Some things can be defined as commercial without meaning they are outside the rules of the contract. I get it now!!!

DVC certainly has a limit before it hits their radar for commercial. Things easily are commercial before then. It would be nice if they made a line we could see/measure more easily, but I doubt they want a thousand of us trying to report on sketchy owners. Nobody wants to take those phone calls.

 

[Sandisw]

DVC certainly has a limit before it hits their radar for commercial. Things easily are commercial before then. It would be nice if they made a line we could see/measure more easily, but I doubt they want a thousand of us trying to report on sketchy owners. Nobody wants to take those phone calls.

The 20 reservations per membership in the rolling 12 month period is the most specific language they ever used.

Now, they refer you to the contract and it doesn’t say much other than pattern of activity on a membership…but will not define it for owners, but implied that I should use my own judgement on what it means.

 

[2010dvcfan]

I don't think DVC cares one bit about renting the points out. DVC makes the same money off the point either way, in fact instead of me there 6 weeks a year, they would probably prefer I only come down 3 weeks and rent the points to families who haven't bought all the merch yet, by 3rd trip each year I've bought it all.

I even mentioned it to my guide during an add on conversation that I was getting too many points, I like to stay at the moderates where I stayed with my child when they were young for nostalgia purposes on occasion. Guess what was suggested, rent out your points on the years you don't use them and pay for moderates..... all DVC is concerned about is the purchase of the points and the annual dues being paid. After that they don't care if I use them, rent them or let them expire. IMO.

for the original question, I disagree with confirmed reservations, the few times I have rented out points, I never do confirmed reservations, I always wait for an interested party with exact dates and get up early with everyone else and try to beat the crowd to the reservation, just like I would do if it was a room for myself.

I also don't agree with people charging such ridiculous price per point for the rooms, I'm all for profit but at a reasonable limit. There is still something to be said about integrity in business although it's getting mighty hard to find anymore, from brokers to Disney themselves. Again just my opinion.

 

[mistysue]

The 20 reservations per membership in the rolling 12 month period is the most specific language they ever used.

Now, they refer you to the contract and it doesn’t say much other than pattern of activity on a membership…but will not define it for owners, but implied that I should use your own judgement on what it means.

I know and pattern of activity is such a non-answer on their part. It's not far from saying nobody cares unless you somehow annoy someone in the wrong department. At that point a corporation could make the argument that it's not a pattern because they rent out different specific days each year.

 

[New Mouse]

The definition of commercial is defined by DVC. Whether we like it or not doesn't matter, we chose to join the club with that definition already established.

A DVC message board should hold similar standards on what is considered commercial.

Yes - the definition of commercial in a real world setting is much more stringent, but it doesn't matter because in this case the club wants the limit to be 8000 points and X rentals.

I do think that once a poster has crossed the DVC threshold then these boards should act.

I'm not a fan of all those confirmed rentals being allowed, but they are within the dvc guidelines.

 

[Hubalorian]

The definition of commercial is defined by DVC. Whether we like it or not doesn't matter, we chose to join the club with that definition already established.

Is Disney enforcing their own definition? If not, isn’t it our responsibility to advocate DVC does so?

 

[Sandisw]

Is Disney enforcing their own definition? If not, isn’t it our responsibility to advocate DVC does so?

According to DVC, they are. That is why I always point out that because enforcement is by membership and we have no idea how many memberships are involved in the number of points offered or confirmed reservations offered by a specific owner, it’s too hard to say something would or would not be seen by DVC as having crossed from personal use to commercial…especially since personal use is defined in the contract to encompass owners, friends, family, and renters