Official Thread - New commercial use policy published 03/31

[disneylandtour]

The law and the contract do give you the right to rent. The board has acknowledged that many times.

And this has been the problem for years and years. DVD refuses to define what is an what is not allowed in terms of renting in a clear and comprehensive way. The best quantifier right now is the 20 bookings with 51%+ rentals. That is something that is clear, fair, and likely enforceable for the most part. (But are we talking 51% of points, days, reservations???). All of the other stuff, sadly, is in imprecise language that probably won't hold up. And (from above) all it will take is one angry DVC owner who is also a lawyer to take DVD to court and then the "regularly" and "frequently" language will fall apart and then there will be a precedent. And for everyone here, if that happens, we'll be pretty close to being back to square one. It would be far better to have something that was less sloppy and more exact.

 

[Tatebeck]

Advertising is a violation of the letter of the rules. That bullet point doesn't say "more than once" or "less than twice", or anything else to define the frequency, it simply says advertising is the action that can trigger a review for commercial activity. We can obviously assume that doing it once or twice (or maybe even more often) might not trigger any enforcement, but the advertising is still the action that violates the rules, depending on how often DVC will allow it.

This simply is not true. You are ignoring/removing an important word that changes the meaning. And it's nothing like speeding because exceeding the speed limit itself is against the law. Advertising/renting DVC is not.

It specifically says that only regular (according to Disney's discretion) advertising/renting allows that they "may reasonably conclude" if they wish that you are using DVC commercially.

"Regular advertising by an Owner, Associate, or someone else at the direction of an Owner (such as anemployee, principal, officer, director, contractor, or agent acting on behalf of an Owner; collectively“Owner Agent”) of the availability of Vacation Ownership Interests and/or Vacation Homes for rental, including but not limited to use of a dedicated website, social media account, page, post, third-partyservice provider, or on any other media or platform now known or hereafter devised"

If you regularly do it more than DVC would like -> they have the option to look and determine if they want to consider your level of renting/advertising as commercial ->final judgement and punishment or allowed continued use as is

is just very different than "this is not allowed"
_________

From their own FAQ
"Q: Can a Member rent out Points using a third-party website?

A.
Renting points is allowed on occasion. Frequently or regularly renting/selling reservations is strictly prohibited. Disney Vacation Club is not affiliated with any third-party rental websites. Members who use third-party websites assume responsibility for any resulting consequences."

And the short answer for their long winded answer is "Yes, but we are not responsible if anything goes wrong"

If they meant to say it was banned, they would have said it was banned

 

[dcfromva]

You answered your own question unless they aren't actually family and you are fibbing. (not saying you are) Family use is personal use plain and simple.

Well, not really....
By seeing how this goes what I mean is
1. If DVC institutes some sort of software limitation indiscriminately after you reach 20 reservations over the past(?) moving 12 months? (Not sure if it includes the reservations you have already taken or just 12 months forward from now on).
2. Or, if you have made all the reservations in your name instead of your spouses name (and your spouse is the primary person on the contract)--which is the case for our BWV contract--DH is always the second name on the reservation just in case he drops out.
3. Even though family use is permissible, we'll see if family use gets questioned. Or, if they send a letter. Or, they indiscriminately shut down your online access.
That is what I mean.

 

[DanCali]

Same thing there though - if people can't as easily rent points every time they want to go to Disney, they'll buy them from DVD.

Yes, restricting rentals may increase cash rentals from Disney.

But from an owner's perspective, if you completely took away a legitimate use (like renting) would you think twice before that next add-on? Would you have bought as many points from DVD if the policy for each use year was "use it or lose it"? Would you rave about the product to friends if you had a bunch of points go unused each year?

Things like banking and (the ability to) rent when not using all your points in a given year create more flexibility in the ownership which increases sales, or allows DVD to extract a higher sales price. If you add too many restrictions, or create bad publicity with these types of policies, it can also hurt sales. It's a fine line...

 

[VGCgroupie]

My point is that Disney isn't trolling every HOA community message board, trying to find, between the complaints about kids skinny dipping in the spa and the revised tree trimming guidelines, any random posts about my DVC points I want to unload. "Forums and groups dedicated to renting DVC points" are something entirely different and would obviously be ripe for scrutiny and easily found with even a basic search engine (which is exactly what my point was).

I think helping a neighbor by renting to them is personal use. No way a commerical broker can sustain by renting in their local HOA community group. This is about DVC rental dedicated social media platforms.

 

[VGCgroupie]

Well, not really....
By seeing how this goes what I mean is
1. If DVC institutes some sort of software limitation indiscriminately after you reach 20 reservations over the past(?) moving 12 months? (Not sure if it includes the reservations you have already taken or just 12 months forward from now on).
2. Or, if you have made all the reservations in your name instead of your spouses name (and your spouse is the primary person on the contract)--which is the case for our BWV contract--DH is always the second name on the reservation just in case he drops out.
3. Even though family use is permissible, we'll see if family use gets questioned. Or, if they send a letter. Or, they indiscriminately shut down your online access.
That is what I mean.

You are way over thinking this if you are not actually renting. Grasping at straws really.

 

[Memorymakerfor4]

One thing I thought was very interesting is the prohibition on filming in DVC locations so as to advertise points for sale or rent. I think that could affect DVC sale and rental brokers.
“Without limiting the discretion of the Board and Management Company, the Board and/or Management Company may reasonably conclude that an Owner is using or occupying Vacation Ownership Interests and/or Vacation Homes for commercial purposes based on any one or more of the following activities (which are a non-exhaustive list of examples and without limiting any other possible factors):….

An Owner, Associate, or Owner Agent conducts photography, videotaping, or recording on Resort property that is used to market the availability of Vacation Ownership Interests and/or Vacation Homes for rental activity.”

I wouldn’t want to be in the brokerage business right now as it looks like a tough business moving forward.

This caught my attention too. There's a lot of videos out there "sponsored by _____." I wonder if they'll have to take them down.

 

[DonMacGregor]

I've seen it estimated that there are between 225,000 and 250,000 DVC owners. That's a lot.

In the US, about .5% of the adult population has a law degree and maybe .3% practice law.

The bigger questions is what is the percentage of DVC owners who are practicing lawyers. As DVC HEAVILY targets the upper-middle-class (i.e right where laywers are) I'd expect this to be around .6%.

So all Disney needs to do is piss off a few people related to lawyers (or even a few lawyer themselves) with this, then there's a self-interested lawyer putting in some papers to court.

I've sorta thought the whole OWK/OWK-e would likely go the same way, with a couple of lawyers who happen to also be DVC OWK owners.

Disney also told an entire cohort of guests in wheelchairs (and the vast majority of other guests seeking DAS accessibility accommodations) to go pound sand. If they have no problem taking on an EXTREMELY outspoken and well-funded handicapped community with very strong lobbies in state houses and DC, then they likely aren't sweating the possibility that some DVC owner will try to sue them over their inability to book that bungalow at PVB.

Any potential accessibility litigation will be expensive and carry the serious risk of turning into a broader PR nightmare, but Disney isn't showing any signs of blinking.

 

[dcfromva]

You are way over thinking this if you are not actually renting. Grasping at straws really.

Thus, why I said, "we'll see"....

 

[VGCgroupie]

Disney also told an entire cohort of guests in wheelchairs (and the vast majority of other guests seeking DAS accessibility accommodations) to go pound sand. If they have no problem taking on an EXTREMELY outspoken and well-funded handicapped community with very strong lobbies in state houses and DC, then they likely aren't sweating the possibility that some DVC owner will try to sue them over their inability to book that bungalow at PVB.

Any potential accessibility litigation will be expensive and carry the serious risk of turning into a broader PR nightmare, but Disney isn't showing any signs of blinking.

100%

 

[disneylandtour]

Disney also told an entire cohort of guests in wheelchairs (and the vast majority of other guests seeking DAS accessibility accommodations) to go pound sand. If they have no problem taking on an EXTREMELY outspoken and well-funded handicapped community with very strong lobbies in state houses and DC, then they likely aren't sweating the possibility that some DVC owner will try to sue them over their inability to book that bungalow at PVB.

Any potential accessibility litigation will be expensive and carry the serious risk of turning into a broader PR nightmare, but Disney isn't showing any signs of blinking.

There's a huge difference between what qualifies as disability access support at a theme park and possibly denying property owners rights associated with their ownership.

 

[VGCgroupie]

So does this mean the points for rent forum at Disboards will be discontinued?

Am I interpreting this correctly to mean that the DIS DVC Rental/Transfer board is now out of policy?

No but I do think those who are renting thousands of points on that area of the board should take note, they could be in trouble.

 

[DonMacGregor]

I think helping a neighbor by renting to them is personal use. No way a commerical broker can sustain by renting in their local HOA community group. This is about DVC rental dedicated social media platforms.

I have no idea what you are talking about. In the original post that you (sort of) quoted, I only made reference to my local HOA as a counterpoint to my comment about the prohibition on using any websites or social media to advertise points for rent. In other words, I was admitting (clarifying?) before the argument was even made, that even though it says "any", they obviously DON'T mean literally any website or message group, and likely would only focus on larger, DVC-centric websites 9and NOT something like a local message board).

To that end, I said "Now, obviously, DVC isn't going to be trolling my local community message board looking for DVC contracts for rent, but a site dedicated to listing points and reservations for rent with "DVC" in its name? That's some obvious and low hanging fruit."

I'm not sure how you managed to get from that to:

I think helping a neighbor by renting to them is personal use. No way a commerical broker can sustain by renting in their local HOA community group. This is about DVC rental dedicated social media platforms.

I never said, or even suggested in any way conceivable, that a commercial renter would be renting on a local HOA board. That would be ridiculous.

 

[VGCgroupie]

I have no idea what you are talking about. In the original post that you (sort of) quoted, I only made reference to my local HOA as a counterpoint to my comment about the prohibition on using any websites or social media to advertise points for rent. In other words, I was admitting (clarifying?) before the argument was even made, that even though it says "any", they obviously DON'T mean literally any website or message group, and likely would only focus on larger, DVC-centric websites 9and NOT something like a local message board).

To that end, I said "Now, obviously, DVC isn't going to be trolling my local community message board looking for DVC contracts for rent, but a site dedicated to listing points and reservations for rent with "DVC" in its name? That's some obvious and low hanging fruit."

I'm not sure how you managed to get from that to:


I never said, or even suggested in any way conceivable, that a commercial renter would be renting on a local HOA board. That would be ridiculous.

I guess I misunderstood or my ADHD made me skip part of your post (very plausible) I thought you were saying DVC wont be patrolling forums/groups. I was just pointing out that there is a high probability they are/will.

 

[Brian Noble]

Disney also told an entire cohort of guests in wheelchairs (and the vast majority of other guests seeking DAS accessibility accommodations) to go pound sand. If they have no problem taking on an EXTREMELY outspoken and well-funded handicapped community with very strong lobbies in state houses and DC, then they likely aren't sweating the possibility that some DVC owner will try to sue them over their inability to book that bungalow at PVB.

Not only is that group well-funded and active, but in general they have the sympathy of most disinterested parties. Big Mean Disney is making life even harder for those poor folks who already have it so hard!

I can guarantee you that if Disney follows e.g. Wyndham's playbook, there will be very little sympathy for the owners they choose to make examples of, because those owners (a) will appear to even the most casual observer to be running a rental business and (b) the casual bystanders whose opinions matter most---the rank and file owners---are already blaming the large renters for availability problems.

It doesn't even matter that those large renters are probably not the biggest contributor to those availability problems. It only matters that the average owner thinks they are.

Here's an example of how this has played out for Wyndham. One of the things they did was institute a hard upper bound on how many guest reservations could be made for non-owners at some resorts during high-demand times. At a few resorts, those high demand times are "all year." Each owner can make two such reservations, total, for an entire year---the only exception is if that owner is physically also traveling to that same resort at the same time.

You might think that the rank-and-file owners would be upset about this in a baby-with-the-bathwater way. Not only were they not upset, but most of them cheered from the sidelines for sticking it those Evil Mega-Renters.

 

[DonMacGregor]

There's a huge difference between what qualifies as disability access support at a theme park and possibly denying property owners rights associated with their ownership.

This is Disney. The Happiest Place on Earth, making dreams come true, Make a Wish. If you think Disney is more concerned with a handful of pissed off DVC owners complaining about limiting access to their timeshare that 95% of Disney fans/guests have no idea about and don't care about, versus the optics of children in wheelchairs sitting outside a courthouse on Good Morning America waving "Mickey Doesn't Love Me Anymore" banners, well...

If Disney is willing to take on the global handicapped community (because that's how the ripple effect will work), they'll take on some DVC owners in a heartbeat.

 

[Brian rhymes with dyin]

A lot of DVC owners doth protesting a bit too much about this.

 

[VGCgroupie]

A lot of DVC owners doth protesting a bit too much about this.

Normally I speak/read fluent typo... but not with this one.

 

[dcfromva]

It's baffling how some people are bound and determined to be a victim here.

I think it is more like some people are afraid DVC is going to net the dolphins as well as the tuna. My suggestion is perhaps they need another type of net?

What is baffling to me is how it can be so difficult to define commercial use and what is permitted. It has been suggested upthread that Disney already knows (or has a good idea) as to who these folks are. Why go through all these machinations ?

 

[Brian Noble]

Normally I speak fluent typo... but not with this one.

It's from Hamlet. "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_lady_doth_protest_too_much,_methinks