New rule enforcement on points

[Jeremy&Susan]

Steamboat, EXACTLY.

This issue with memory bit allocation may make it a bit more complex. If DVC uses 16 bit and the added text takes them out over 18 bits of info, then they need to jump of storage size of memory and how the programs search, store and change data.

Definitely doable in this age of cheap memory and high speed processors.

Just spend the moey once instead of every time somebody calls to transfer points.

That system change would also allow ......... Dare I say ...... SELF BOOKING!

OK I said it.

 

[calypso*a*go-go]

I'm one that feels you should be allowed to transfer more than once per year, as long as the transferred points retained their home resort/use year and can only be used to make ressies in the name of the DVC member getting them. That way they can't be used for rental purposes to non-DVC members but would be available to help out another owner that might be in a bind because they don't have enough points.

However, I feel this will never happen as DVC would rather have someone do an add-on and purchase more points than transfer them in from someone else. Basically what they (DVC) are doing is going to add even more inventory points available to renters by forcing people to get more points they may not need on a regular basis.

 

[Steamboat Bill]

I'm one that feels you should be allowed to transfer more than once per year, as long as the transferred points retained their home resort/use year and can only be used to make ressies in the name of the DVC member getting them.

How about allowing one transfer per 150 points owned per year?

Restricting the points to the named DVC owner is too complicated. I would like to see an elimination of the abusers, not the regular (non-professional) DVC owners.

 

[Shawn]

How about allowing one transfer per 150 points owned per year?

... or fraction thereof (for those of us who own 100 or 200 points or the like.

Since we're throwing out ideas, the one transfer will make it hard for those who want to help out a fellow DVC'er in a bind who needs only a handful of points.

Case in point, earlier this year a lady needed only 1 point. I happened to have just 1 point left over from last year, so I transferred it to her gratis. But if this rule had been in effect then, I may not have decided to tie up my only allowed transfer for the year by donating this single point to her.

The same scenario goes for people looking to sell or donate 10 points they happen to have left over. The number of points that expire should increase with this rule.

So back to the throwing out of ideas. How about not limiting the number of transfers, but rather limit the amount of points you may transfer IN in a given use year to be the same as the number of points you own (or some factor thereof).

So for example, with 100 points, I could bank, borrow, and use 300 of my own points in a given year. Putting a limit on the number of points I could transfer (out, in, or some combination thereof to 300 (or 3 X my actual number of points), may make sense.

With this in place, I could transfer out all of my 300 points if I chose to do so. Or I could transfer in 300 points (and have 600 points to use).

But it would put a hindrance on trying to run a business by transferring points in low and selling them high. Or simply transferring in 1000's of points to my account merely for the purpose of booking in-demand dates and ebaying them.

Thoughts on this?

-Shawn

 

[RobDoc]

I'm curious how everyone would feel about transferring multiple times if there was truly a way for DVC to police the monetary exchange prohibited in the POS.

If you absolutely could not receive any remuneration for your transfers, would you still be as vocal about the ability to allow more than one per year?

If the policy in the POS were honored by DVC members, it would seem (to me at least) that the only transfers that would occur would be between family members and personal friends, between accounts owned by a member and by individuals being generous with their points. I doubt we'd see 150 point transfers to internet strangers. In years past, right here on the DIS DVC Rent/Trade Board, there are many examples of members who have transferred points they could not use without any remuneration at all. In the past couple of years that number has significantly dwindled to the point where we've had very few recently. It is my opinion that the true spirit of DVC allowing transfers was for members to assist other members in the spirit of charity and good-will.

Recently, there have been multiple suggestions in these discussions that members wanting a few points transferred into their account will be unable to find anyone willing to use their one transfer for such purpose- while this was actually common a few years ago (and when the original limit of only ONE transfer per year was still in place).

It appears that the popularity of transferring large numbers of points and multiple transfers is primarily due to the willingness of individual members to knowingly violate the POS.

 

[Shawn]

I'm curious how everyone would feel about transferring multiple times if there was truly a way for DVC to police the monetary exchange prohibited in the POS.

If you absolutely could not receive any remuneration for your transfers, would you still be as vocal about the ability to allow more than one per year?
...
IIn years past, right here on the DIS DVC Rent/Trade Board, there are many examples of members who have transferred points they could not use without any remuneration at all. In the past couple of years that number has significantly dwindled to the point where we've had very few recently. It is my opinion that the true spirit of DVC allowing transfers was for members to assist other members in the spirit of charity and good-will.

Good question. I had to think about it rather than blindly respond. And after considering the question, I have to say, that if I could not receive any renumeration for transferring points, I would still like the ability to perform more than one transfer a year.

I have no problem donating handfuls of points to other DVC'ers that I would not otherwise use. If I can donate a few here and a few there to help someone out, I would like to have that as an option. But with the one transfer rule, I could only help out someone once a year.

And if I were to donate a few points early in the year, and then realize later in the year that I could use an extra few points from someone else, it'd be nice to be able to both give and receive a donation in the same year.

-Shawn

 

[mello]

and get to reading! I'm sure this sounds seriously naive, but did you all really read through all those reams of paper they gave you at closing? We didn't, but you can bet we're going to now. Seriously, I thought because so many here did point transfers as a matter of course that it was okay. All they told us when we bought was "They're your points. We don't care what you do with them". The idea of transferring to another responsible member seems so much more appealing on so many levels than renting them to a total stranger. Doesn't it seem incongrouous that it's actually okay to use your points to make a reservation and rent it out to anyone at all at an inflated rate, but it's not okay to transfer them to another member to complete their reservation and be compensated for just enough to cover dues?

ETA: I agree that the rules are the rules (even though some rules are dumb), and they should be applied fairly and equally to everyone, so knowing what they are, you can bet we won't be in this situation again. But yes, I would still like to have the ability to transfer more than once. And come to that, it would be just lovely if we could transfer banked points (I know, we can't and it's not likely to ever happen, but it would be nice since we've got 2 of those left in our account right now, and I would gladly donate those to someone else's vacation if I could). We do have some personal friends who are owners, and I could see working out a point trade with some of them at some point (after I read the fine-print of course lol).

 

[Beca]

Actually, that is not true.

I am only allowed one transfer per membership number (no matter how many contracts I have as that member). Thus, if I had 10 contracts for 200 points each, I am still only allowed one transfer for the entire year.

If I knew this, I would have put one DVC contract in my name and the other in my wife's name, then we could do two transfers.

I think the other poster was assuming you did have 4 different member numbers. If you had purchased resale, you likely would have 4 different member numbers, and be able to do 4 transfers. Of course, then you could not freely "pool" your points. It is a catch 22.

 

[DizneyNutz]

And I thought we were DIZNEYNUTZ
Jeremy&Susan -------- 130 SSR (???) $82, buyer pays closing (ROFR'd early June) - non-member
Jeremy&Susan -------- 130 SSR (???) $82, buyer pays closing (ROFR'd early June) - non-member
Jeremy&Susan -------- 150 SSR (???) $80, buyer pays closing (ROFR'd 06/14th?) - non-member
Jeremy&Susan -------- 150 SSR (???) $80, buyer pays closing (ROFR'd 06/14th?)- non-member
Jeremy&Susan -------- 300 SSR (???) $83, buyer pays closing (ROFR'd late June) - non-member

 

[keishashadow]

I'm one that feels you should be allowed to transfer more than once per year, as long as the transferred points retained their home resort/use year and can only be used to make ressies in the name of the DVC member getting them. That way they can't be used for rental purposes to non-DVC members but would be available to help out another owner that might be in a bind because they don't have enough points.

However, I feel this will never happen as DVC would rather have someone do an add-on and purchase more points than transfer them in from someone else. Basically what they (DVC) are doing is going to add even more inventory points available to renters by forcing people to get more points they may not need on a regular basis.

Agree 100% but with proviso that ressie can be used for guests who are family (legal adults but, still my children ) .

It's still considered okay to rent out a ressie (fine for large owners of bulks of points, possibly commercial) but, not for me to transfer in the few extra points I need to complete a ressie w/o invoking borrowing.

Certaily more profitable for DVC to have members buy more points & correspondingly pay more in dues each month too.

Why not just insist the points match both resort & that the UY alligns w/the ressie dates (which they have always cautioned me on when transferring in points) & resort. It would be more challenging but, enliminate the morph issue entirely.

 

[Jeremy&Susan]

And I thought we were DIZNEYNUTZ
Jeremy&Susan -------- 130 SSR (???) $82, buyer pays closing (ROFR'd early June) - non-member
Jeremy&Susan -------- 130 SSR (???) $82, buyer pays closing (ROFR'd early June) - non-member
Jeremy&Susan -------- 150 SSR (???) $80, buyer pays closing (ROFR'd 06/14th?) - non-member
Jeremy&Susan -------- 150 SSR (???) $80, buyer pays closing (ROFR'd 06/14th?)- non-member
Jeremy&Susan -------- 300 SSR (???) $83, buyer pays closing (ROFR'd late June) - non-member

Our mistake was believing the aftermarket and DVC worked totally independently.
Our DVC guide informed me multiple times that he was "Positive" ROFR would not pass up on SSR points I bid on unless they came in higher than the present offer DVC was giving my family. What do you know, he was right.

Amazingly though, people buying SSR before and after us were able to pass ROFR with offers at the same $/pt we made and some even lower.
My family just really wanted to get the timeshare; I was ready to buy a vacation home in NH on a lake.
Don't get me wrong, I love Disney also, but the timeshare buying experience through DVC and aftermarket left a bad taste in my mouth. It has the "appearance" of impropriety.


And Tom, before you PM me, this is in no way directed toward TSS, you or your team. Your people seemed to be just as confused as to why the offers I made, did not go through.

 

[dianeschlicht]

This thread is all very interesting. Some of you seem to "need" the transfers all the time. We have been members going on 10 years, and have never transfered in or out, and never felt the need to.

 

[keishashadow]

This thread is all very interesting. Some of you seem to "need" the transfers all the time. We have been members going on 10 years, and have never transfered in or out, and never felt the need to.

You're a lucky lady did you buy all your points @ once from DVC direct?

Lot of DVC'ers start out w/small resale purchase to "buy where they want to stay" & bank/borrow/transfer to cover their stays. Guess transferring will be crossed off that list; with the intent to add on as the spirit moves them (i.e. waiting for next best thing) or their budget allows.

DVC isn't one-size-fits all, the flexibility is a major perc. Realize this isn't a change in the rules per-se but, an enforcement; still comes as a bit of a shock to those of us who were able to implement this strategy for personal usage...time to rework the game plan I guess...come on CRV!.

 

[Mike]

This thread is all very interesting. Some of you seem to "need" the transfers all the time. We have been members going on 10 years, and have never transfered in or out, and never felt the need to.

Yeah and the whole world only likes chocolate ice cream too

I have seen you make similar statements several times over the past couple of weeks.

OK ... we get it. You don't need to make transfers. Congratulations. But some members like to have the option. Maybe not every year, but every 3 or 4 years - thus an add-on doesn't make sense. The flexibility is nice.

The cookie-cutter mentality doesn't always work for the majority.

 

[smjj]

Yeah and the whole world only likes chocolate ice cream too

I have seen you make similar statements several times over the past couple of weeks.

OK ... we get it. You don't need to make transfers. Congratulations. But some members like to have the option. Maybe not every year, but every 3 or 4 years - thus an add-on doesn't make sense. The flexibility is nice.

The cookie-cutter mentality doesn't always work for the majority.

I believe dianeschlicht was simply posting her comments like others here have, no more than that. Isn't that what this forum is all about??smjj

 

[calypso*a*go-go]

I'm with you smjj!!! It appears somebody on this thread needs more fiber in their diet.

 

[Mike]

I'm not trying to be harsh and I apologize if I came acreoss that way. I realize Diane has a lot of positive contributions to these boards and I understand that you guys want to defend her.

And I am all for allowing others to express their opinions. But I just do not see how these continuous statements add value to the discussion at hand. Peopla ARE affected by this and are discussing possible alternative solutions. The above statement, along with other similar responses such as this

Since I have never transfered in the 9 years we have been members, I can't figure out why it is a big deal. I think it just means folks will buy the correct amount of points and learn to manage them better.

are not, in my opinion, helpful.

I do not open a thread titled "Help -My lending institution has new strict lending guidelines" and state that I am debt free and haven't borrowed money in 9 years so I guess people have to manage their money better.

This is obviously affecting many members. I understand that Diane is not affected but I don't understand why she needs to keep stating that on all of these threads.

Just my opinion. No disrespect intended.

 

[Deb & Bill]

I'm not trying to be harsh and I apologize if I came acreoss that way. I realize Diane has a lot of positive contributions to these boards and I understand that you guys want to defend her.

And I am all for allowing others to express their opinions. But I just do not see how these continuous statements add value to the discussion at hand. Peopla ARE affected by this and are discussing possible alternative solutions. The above statement, along with other similar responses such as this



are not, in my opinion, helpful.

I do not open a thread titled "Help -My lending institution has new strict lending guidelines" and state that I am debt free and haven't borrowed money in 9 years so I guess people have to manage their money better.

This is obviously affecting many members. I understand that Diane is not affected but I don't understand why she needs to keep stating that on all of these threads.

Just my opinion. No disrespect intended.

Well, you did come off harsh. I thought the intent of this thread was to discuss the pros and cons of the enforcement of the policy? Diane was just stating that she had no problems with them enforcing it as it was written. Same for me.

Lot of DVC'ers start out w/small resale purchase to "buy where they want to stay" & bank/borrow/transfer to cover their stays. Guess transferring will be crossed off that list; with the intent to add on as the spirit moves them (i.e. waiting for next best thing) or their budget allows.

I don't agree with this statement. I think that until just recently most members started out with the minimum required by Disney until some found out they could just get a small contract and still be a member.

 

[FredS]

Yeah and the whole world only likes chocolate ice cream too

I have seen you make similar statements several times over the past couple of weeks.

OK ... we get it. You don't need to make transfers. Congratulations. But some members like to have the option. Maybe not every year, but every 3 or 4 years - thus an add-on doesn't make sense. The flexibility is nice.

The cookie-cutter mentality doesn't always work for the majority.

I TOTALLY agree! And I did not think you were harsh at all, although Diane's posts are quite abrasive. IMHO there is a big difference between an opinion and continually harping that people who view things differently are somehow wrong or bad, as repeatedly stated in the "you should just manage your points better" posts.

It is reasonable that DVC owners, especially those of us with many points and multiple contracts, being perturbed that the program has lost flexibility. And for the umpteenth time, which some choose to ignore, the POS many of us purchased under did NOT have a once per year limit!!! If someone else never plans to make a transfer, fine. But please don't keep on and on criticizing those who would like to have the option to make more than one per year.

 

[smjj]

Hey, why don't we all take a step back and relax. This is a important topic for discussion and I would hate to see it be closed due to it morphing into a "she said/he said" and I am tired of it thread...smjj