Newest Ms Change!

[lizziepooh]

I think most members who find themselves needing to rent out their points would rather transfer to another member. Transfers are done with a quick phone call. Now unless they find someone to take their exact amount of points, they will have to rent reservations which can mean numerous phone calls to Member Services checking availability for several people who may or may not follow thru with renting. It also means more calls to set up dining, magic express etc. How is that saving Member Services phone time? It seems like the transfer limitation hurts the average member who occasionally needs to rent out their points or transfer in points for a family gathering. The commercial rentors will find a way around it all. If they have numerous contracts, they can transfer in or out of each contract. Allowing only one transfer limits the flexibility of members who only have one contract. It seems like there should be another way to crack down on commercial renting.

 

[SuzanneSLO]

I have been wondering whether the limit of 1 transfer OUT per member will really have any effect to dampen the rental market.

It seems to me that most people who rent/transfer their points a lot will just switch to renting and not transferring. At the same time, by making it less attractive for a member to make a transfer of a small # of points to complete a reservation, it makes it more likely that the needy member will rent that last night (or just not stay at DVC on that night). Can you tell I am in this group of needy members?

So the new 1 transfer only rule seems to really be overkill when it comes to transfers OUT.

Also, I have been thinking that there should be a new exception to transfers IN that helps members doing occassional large gatherings/family reunions.

I would think that members using transfers for this purpose would be willing to live with some reasonable restrictions, such as designating a limited time period during which the transferred points could be used ("we're all coming during 2 weeks in June") and agreeing that a Member or an Associate must be named on at least one of the reservations. Such limitations would make it less attractive to those looking for transferred points to rent to 3rd parties. Of course, they would make more work for MS to track the Family Reunion Transferred Points.

-- Suzanne

 

[Dean]

I have been wondering whether the limit of 1 transfer OUT per member will really have any effect to dampen the rental market.

It seems to me that most people who rent/transfer their points a lot will just switch to renting and not transferring. At the same time, by making it less attractive for a member to make a transfer of a small # of points to complete a reservation, it makes it more likely that the needy member will rent that last night (or just not stay at DVC on that night). Can you tell I am in this group of needy members?

So the new 1 transfer only rule seems to really be overkill when it comes to transfers OUT.

Also, I have been thinking that there should be a new exception to transfers IN that helps members doing occassional large gatherings/family reunions.

I would think that members using transfers for this purpose would be willing to live with some reasonable restrictions, such as designating a limited time period during which the transferred points could be used ("we're all coming during 2 weeks in June") and agreeing that a Member or an Associate must be named on at least one of the reservations. Such limitations would make it less attractive to those looking for transferred points to rent to 3rd parties. Of course, they would make more work for MS to track the Family Reunion Transferred Points.

-- Suzanne

An exception for one member but not another? Can't have the cake and eat it to so to speak. If it's going to be this way, then it's going to be this way. I've already posted several times that it is likely to hurt all members to some degree or another and will have little affect on most who want to rent a larger volume of points other than to switch the tactics a little. IMO, it's likely this will lead to further increases in the exchange option costs like DCL, higher rental costs when members do want to rent extra or exchange in and more disparity of CRO cash reservations to DVC reservations during certain times of the year.

 

[snowbunny]

I think this will disadvantage "using" members more than most "renting" members, and its a little sad we won't be able to help each other with small transfers.

I would think it also more or less kills the resale market for small 25- to 50-point contracts.

 

[rinkwide]

...It seems like there should be another way to crack down on commercial renting.

There is, and it's very simple. All they have to do is back-up their tough talk by cancelling the reservations of the profiteers and the problem would be solved immediately. So why haven't they?

The question should be: Why are restrictions being placed on the membership when it's DVD's hesitancy to act that's the issue here? (And why are members are so darn happy about it?)

 

[Inkmahm]

There is, and it's very simple. All they have to do is back-up their tough talk by cancelling the reservations of the profiteers and the problem would be solved immediately. So why haven't they?

Exactly. I'd have no problem with that at all.

 

[Deb & Bill]

...The question should be: Why are restrictions being placed on the membership when it's DVD's hesitancy to act that's the issue here? (And why are members are so darn happy about it?)

The real question is why didn't people read their POS in the first place. This rule has been there forever. MS has been lax about enforcing this rule, but when has Disney ever been strict about enforcing any of their rules, ie. room occupancy, reusable mugs, tickets for 3 yr olds, child credit for adult meals, etc.

Now Disney is finally deciding to enforce a few rules because now their pocket is being affected enough and people don't get it. Some of us see rules as the way to make the civilization run more smoothly, others are anarchists at heart.

I would think it also more or less kills the resale market for small 25- to 50-point contracts.

There has been a lot of purchasers of these smaller point contracts who bought them solely to get all the DVC perks (I guess they perceive them to be the main part of DVC). DVC has been buying up a lot of these small point resales during ROFR, maybe, again to stop the assault on their pocket. Anyone who thought they could transfer in anytime they wanted to, as many times as they wanted to, didn't research the product enough. I wonder if Disney is buying the small point contracts to stop the professional renter from purchasing yet another new contract to give them more opportunity to buy those fire sale points and transfer them in.

Yes, Disney is to blame for not being able to track transfers good enough. But have you ever been to DL? Your room key there is merely your room key, until it becomes a luggage tag. To charge to your room (and there are only two locations in DTD there that allow you to charge to your room), you have to present a little piece of paper that they give you when you check in, plus your drivers' license. If they can't do at DL, what they can do at WDW, I'd say they are really in the market for some computer whizzes.

 

[littlestar]

Professional renting has tax consequences - there is the Florida resort tax issue and federal tax issues. I think that's why the language is in our DVC documents about Disney being able to stop a "pattern" of renting.

 

[Dean]

The real question is why didn't people read their POS in the first place. This rule has been there forever. MS has been lax about enforcing this rule, but when has Disney ever been strict about enforcing any of their rules, ie. room occupancy, reusable mugs, tickets for 3 yr olds, child credit for adult meals, etc.

Lets get one thing straight. This has not been the rule forever. It changed in 2003 to allow multiple in OR out but not both. If it's changed back so be it but it is not simply a matter of enforcing a rule that has been there all along. Those posting otherwise are either ill informed or have an agenda, or both.

 

[kimberh]

I am glad that Disney is buying up the 25-50 point contracts. Until this week, I never realized what was being done with them. I just don't think like that. For the life of me, I could not figure out why someone would want a 25 point contract at ANY DVC property. I have received transfers and I had figured out that they were taking on my home resort ID and UY. MS would say that they would not and then in a week or two I could make a reservation at my o resort. I had one MS rep tell me that it was my place to track all the transfers, I was getting some small ones, as I have already posted before, 7, 25,10. I couldn't remember where the Home resort were so how was I going to keep up with it? I am only saying this, to say, that I am being completely honest, If I was innocent on the transfers and didn't know ,until after the fact, to keep up with them, why would a heavy hitter ,that had figured out the LOOPHOLE keep up with them , or want to. I agree, that the LOOPHOLE has to be closed, but I honestly feel there has to be a happy medium to not hurt the honest DVC member. I only became a DVC member in April and I did not receive a POS with my purchase from the Timeshare Store (sorry Tom you guys were great to work with). It was when I bought a resale from Disney that I received all the Paperwork and that was just last month. I think there are many in my shoes, I have NEVER sat through a DVC presentation, didn't want to. I have learned ,what I know of DVC ,off of the Disboard. Even thou my join date says 2004, I really didn't start logging on daily (almost) until I became a DVC member.

I really hope this post is taken in the honesty I am trying to protray. I am not making a excuse for anything, just stating how it was, right or wrong, as Disney is now saying. I did book several family trips for those that may be curious.

 

[50 years Too!]

In response to only commercial renters snapping up small contracts:
I live in Oregon. I would love to buy a 50 point contract to use every 3rd year. Going to Florida every year isn't practical for me like it would be for those of you who live closer. A 150 point contract would be overkill.
Just wanted to state it isn't only the renters wanting those contracts....

 

[SuzanneSLO]

An exception for one member but not another?

Actually, I don't think that treating transfers IN differntly then transfers OUT is an exception for one Member but not another. It is treating different kinds of Transfers differently for every Member.

I do admit that my exceptions for multiple transfers IN for family reunions would treat the same kind of transaction differently depending on the intended use by the Member.

Just for the record, I can't see myself ever benefitting from such an exception, but I do think that many DVC Members have thought about using their points in this manner. Having to rent points for some nights/rooms just adds a further level of complexity to what is often already a very complex undertaking.

-- Suzanne

 

[JimMIA]

Professional renting has tax consequences - there is the Florida resort tax issue...

Actually, there is a Florida sales tax of 6% statewide. Some counties have a local-option for a slightly higher sales tax (here in Miami-Dade, our sales tax is 7%). Many tourist destination counties have an additional resort tax, and Orange County is one of those who do.

I'm not sure of the exact breakdown between state sales tax, local-option sales tax, and resort tax in Orange County, but the total is going up to 12.5%.

 

[littlestar]

In response to only commercial renters snapping up small contracts:
I live in Oregon. I would love to buy a 50 point contract to use every 3rd year. Going to Florida every year isn't practical for me like it would be for those of you who live closer. A 150 point contract would be overkill.
Just wanted to state it isn't only the renters wanting those contracts....

We just gave my mom and dad (quit claim deed) enough points to stay in a BCV/VWL studio 6 nights every year. They are so excited. It's the perfect amount of points for them. You're right, everybody has different circumstances for their situation. Mom said if they want to stay longer, they'll just rent some more nights from Disney.

Good luck. I hope you find your small point package - or maybe DVC will have something closer to home for you in the near future -

 

[JimMIA]

I would think it also more or less kills the resale market for small 25- to 50-point contracts.

I doubt that. Most of the small contracts I've seen were bought by folks who couldn't afford 150 points and didn't want to finance. Their strategy was buy small and add on as additional money becomes available.

It is certainly possible that a commercial renter could buy a small contract, but that's not the common type of purchaser I've seen on the ROFR thread.

 

[littlestar]

Actually, there is a Florida sales tax of 6% statewide. Some counties have a local-option for a slightly higher sales tax (here in Miami-Dade, our sales tax is 7%). Many tourist destination counties have an additional resort tax, and Orange County is one of those who do.

I'm not sure of the exact breakdown between state sales tax, local-option sales tax, and resort tax in Orange County, but the total is going up to 12.5%.

Thanks for the info. I wasn't sure about all the percentages and who is supposed to get what.

 

[JimMIA]

Actually, there is a Florida sales tax of 6% statewide. Some counties have a local-option for a slightly higher sales tax (here in Miami-Dade, our sales tax is 7%). Many tourist destination counties have an additional resort tax, and Orange County is one of those who do.

This system we have in Florida is actually a potential Trifecta of trouble for renters, because they have three tax-collection agencies to worry about -- the IRS, the Florida Department of Revenue, and the Orange County Tax Collector's Office. One of the tools available to DVC is to report commercial renters to those agencies so they can check to see if they're paying their taxes.

 

[keishashadow]

I go to the shore for a few days, come back & find a tix price increase & a clamp down on point laundering...who was asleep @ the wheel?

As one with meager resale/add-on's who relied on transfers in (to multiple accounts), I'll certainly have to rethink my vacation strategy. Was waiting for the next best resort to be offered before we rounded out our DVC holdings, still holding out for CRV though.

Has anyone called MS to see if transfers prior to the announcement date of Aug. 1st(?) count toward our annual UY quota of 1?

Anyone else look @ this scenario as a smack-down to members transferring amongst other members ala a courtesy vs a wink & a nod to rentals to non-members? Unless I'm not getting the big picture, quite likely-feeling mighty blonde today; a rental is not a transfer if it's in the owners name with occupants added on @ a later date Or is the ressie I made for my DS's honeymoon in Jan. now considered a transfer as opposed to a standard reservation?

 

[Dean]

Actually, I don't think that treating transfers IN differntly then transfers OUT is an exception for one Member but not another. It is treating different kinds of Transfers differently for every Member.

I do admit that my exceptions for multiple transfers IN for family reunions would treat the same kind of transaction differently depending on the intended use by the Member.

Just for the record, I can't see myself ever benefitting from such an exception, but I do think that many DVC Members have thought about using their points in this manner. Having to rent points for some nights/rooms just adds a further level of complexity to what is often already a very complex undertaking.

-- Suzanne

I don't think they could easily do it one way vs the other. And given that your idea was to engineer the system to benefit some owners but not others, I don't think it's a reasonable one though I do understand the thinking and don't necessarily disagree with it.

In response to only commercial renters snapping up small contracts:
I live in Oregon. I would love to buy a 50 point contract to use every 3rd year. Going to Florida every year isn't practical for me like it would be for those of you who live closer. A 150 point contract would be overkill.
Just wanted to state it isn't only the renters wanting those contracts....

And I think that is the main direction that independent small contracts are going. Those that think the most small contracts are going to people trying to buy them then transfer in a massive number of points to cheat the system, are simply deluding themselves. I'm not saying it hasn't happened, only that it's likely only 5 or 6 people at most in that circumstance.

But I do believe that smaller contracts alone are more costly for DVC to administer and feel they should have been buying every single one of them all along that was not going to an existing members current Master contract.

 

[Inkmahm]

Lets get one thing straight. This has not been the rule forever. It changed in 2003 to allow multiple in OR out but not both. If it's changed back so be it but it is not simply a matter of enforcing a rule that has been there all along. Those posting otherwise are either ill informed or have an agenda, or both.

Exactly! I'm getting tired of hearing it's been a rule all along when we just joined in 2006 and the paperwork WE got allows multiple transfers in or out but not both. I DO know how to read.