Response from DVC legal about renting/transfers!!! READ THIS

[minnie61650]

If they use their points in accordance with the rules, I'd guess they will escape Disney's wrath. However, I'm not sure anyone can really make that much profit with 18,000 points or whatever they have. It's an awful lot of work for a few bucks per point of margin. If you're working the transfer scams and letting someone else buy the points and pay your dues, the economics are much better.

Regardless of Disney's attitude, I'll personally always remember them as the unethical people who used multiple screen names to dupe naive DIS members, and give themself compliments that were probably just as phony as the feedback on their website.

 

[Oreo Cookie]

If they use their points in accordance with the rules, I'd guess they will escape Disney's wrath. However, I'm not sure anyone can really make that much profit with 18,000 points or whatever they have. It's an awful lot of work for a few bucks per point of margin. If you're working the transfer scams and letting someone else buy the points and pay your dues, the economics are much better.

Regardless of Disney's attitude, I'll personally always remember them as the unethical people who used multiple screen names to dupe naive DIS members, and give themself compliments that were probably just as phony as the feedback on their website.

I agree with you 100%. I think the crackdown on the points transfering will have a much greater impact financially on them.

 

[spiceycat]

ect!

One thing that burns me up too, is the assumption that it would take too much technological change to have this problem fixed. Disney as a company has vast resources and access to the brightest and most creative IT minds in the business. If folks can figure out how to "work" the system by transferring all these distressed points, then DVC CAN figure out how to track the points and fix the problem. IE, no more buying up SS points that expire Sept 06 to make a reservation at BCV for July 07!

I also criticize DVC for putting the "Ban" on more than one transfer. Why should someone who needs a bunch of points for a GV at BW be penalized for occasionally trying to gather up enough points? There has to be a better way.

first of all Disney does not paid for anything to be done with DVC. YOU DO.
that is what maintence and operations fees are for - I don't want higher fees to pay for this problem. Do you really? I don't. Limiting something only a few members do is much, much cheaper.

for the GV at BW it can still happen - just ask the BWV member to get one night, then the next get one night and so on - link them all together.

or find someone with a bunch of BWV points (there are such members) and just do one transfer.

-----------------------------

Dumbo71 - you are my HERO!!!! thanks so much for doing this!!! Great work and thanks for sharing it....

you don't how much you helped!!!! I was a little considered....

also thanks for explaining it so well - this is a complicated matter.

 

[cseca]

Finally!!!
Thanks OP for posting this info.

 

[ScooterL]

OP - thanks so much for your persistence in getting this information and passing it on to the rest of us!

 

[Joni]

So what do you think the people will do that have well over 5,000 points? They rent them because I have talked to one of them. I'm sure they don't need all those points and they used renting to pay for the contracts and maint. I think I would considered them commerical renters. I don't know if they buy distressed points but I don't think so. So if they have all these points and can only transfer once what will they do with all their points? Do you think the they will start selling their contracts. Interesting maybe there will be a BCV's for sale. Just curious. I guess they will have to stay for a couple months.

 

[JimMIA]

So what do you think the people will do that have well over 5,000 points? They rent them because I have talked to one of them. I'm sure they don't need all those points and they used renting to pay for the contracts and maint. I think I would considered them commerical renters. I don't know if they buy distressed points but I don't think so. So if they have all these points and can only transfer once what will they do with all their points? Do you think the they will start selling their contracts. Interesting maybe there will be a BCV's for sale. Just curious. I guess they will have to stay for a couple months.

The way I read the original post, DVC is not concerned about people renting out their own points. I understand OP to be saying that they are trying to curtail the commercial renters who are abusing the system by excessive transferring.

 

[JandD Mom]

first of all Disney does not paid for anything to be done with DVC. YOU DO.
that is what maintence and operations fees are for - I don't want higher fees to pay for this problem. Do you really? I don't. Limiting something only a few members do is much, much cheaper.

I would prefer to pay for something that works the way it is supposed to. If it means that someone can actually stay where they bought then I would prefer to pay to have the problem fixed. To save a penny and never be able to book where I want if I call at 9 months, that bothers me more than the penny. That's why I bought a "top rated" timeshare instead of a bargain-basement one.

Incidentally, DVC and Disney are not that separate. In corporate name, yes, but they are not THAT separate. DVC is listed as one of the the assets of Disney in the report to shareholders. Employees with certain expertise "transfer" between the companies (I personally know someone who did this). They are still cast members and still have all the same rights and benefits.

Disney has its own IT people. DVC is NOT a small startup home-based business. It has the assets and expertise of Disney available to is and it does use that (look at transportation as an example, building design and decoration, purchasing, etc). Disney also sold most of us on DVC because the "Disney" name is attached. Disney does and has put other parts of the organization behind the product.

 

[crisi]

Disney actually laid off a lot of its IT staff and outsources much of it now. I wouldn't say they have the best and brightest - they have a bunch of Wipro contractors like a lot of other large businesses turning in varying quality of work depending on if you get talented contractors or not talented contractors.

(I may be bitter, having a project timeline TRIPLED and the budget doubled due to incompetence from Wipro).

It wouldn't surprise me if the current crackdown was on the point transfer abusers and then - in good Six Sigma fashion, they move down their Perato to the next abusive situation.

 

[Barak's Disney]

Thanks for the info!

 

[Dis13]

It wouldn't surprise me if the current crackdown was on the point transfer abusers and then - in good Six Sigma fashion, they move down their Perato to the next abusive situation.

Which would be..... room capacity perhaps?

 

[JandD Mom]

Disney actually laid off a lot of its IT staff and outsources much of it now. I wouldn't say they have the best and brightest - they have a bunch of Wipro contractors like a lot of other large businesses turning in varying quality of work depending on if you get talented contractors or not talented contractors.

(I may be bitter, having a project timeline TRIPLED and the budget doubled due to incompetence from Wipro).

It wouldn't surprise me if the current crackdown was on the point transfer abusers and then - in good Six Sigma fashion, they move down their Perato to the next abusive situation.

I agree with you Crisi. Shame on Disney then. It's terrible to see these "cracks" in the armor exposed.

I then stand corrected.

 

[keys2kingdom]

It wouldn't surprise me if the current crackdown was on the point transfer abusers and then - in good Six Sigma fashion, they move down their Perato to the next abusive situation.

I'm sitting here picturing Disney as a finely honed Six Sigma machine........and now I'm sitting here laughing.

Thanks Crisi!!

 

[Beca]

I would prefer to pay for something that works the way it is supposed to. If it means that someone can actually stay where they bought then I would prefer to pay to have the problem fixed. To save a penny and never be able to book where I want if I call at 9 months, that bothers me more than the penny. That's why I bought a "top rated" timeshare instead of a bargain-basement one.

Incidentally, DVC and Disney are not that separate. In corporate name, yes, but they are not THAT separate. DVC is listed as one of the the assets of Disney in the report to shareholders. Employees with certain expertise "transfer" between the companies (I personally know someone who did this). They are still cast members and still have all the same rights and benefits.

Disney has its own IT people. DVC is NOT a small startup home-based business. It has the assets and expertise of Disney available to is and it does use that (look at transportation as an example, building design and decoration, purchasing, etc). Disney also sold most of us on DVC because the "Disney" name is attached. Disney does and has put other parts of the organization behind the product.

ITA!!! Any organization that makes rules, should be able to enforce those rules. If not, they are breaking the promise they made to all members when the members purchased.

I also agree with Jim. I am upset that one person could create "trusts" to gain control of 18,000 points. Surely, DVC has known this. It would've been easy to stop this at the point of sale. A simple, "We know you already have 5,000 points under your control....therefore..no, we won't sell you more points." Or, even better....they just could've ROFR'd their resale contracts, and had to provide no explanation whatsoever. But, the thing that really makes me mad is the lying that the did to the people here on the dis, so advertise their business for free!!!

Again....thanks to the OP for checking this out!! I am really glad to hear what legal told you. I think it is the right approach to take.

 

[JandD Mom]

ITA!!! Any organization that makes rules, should be able to enforce those rules. If not, they are breaking the promise they made to all members when the members purchased.

Beca,

You said it better than I did! In fact, by not enforcing the rules (particularly with respect to morphing), DVC has misrepresented its product to us.

 

[3DisneyKids]

First, thanks OP for doing the work on this and posting your findings here.

While I agree that this crack-down (if it truly materialized) should greatly curtail the point-morphing issue, it will not stop commercial renting. It will make life for the commercial renters a bit more confusing and time-consuming, but with the whole banking/borrowing system, they will still be able to do as they wish.

The "W" family, with 18,000 points cannot necessarily morph all of those points to BVC or BWV (or VWL at Christmas, etc.) anymoe, BUT they still have contracts there and will use the contracts (banking and borrowing as needed) to book peak weeks at the 11 month windows. Moreover, when it comes to eBay--MANY of the eBay auctions are for OKW stating that winners get to "stay on property" and that is what is most important to the non-DVCers who are bidding on these auctions.

So, b/c the W's own at every resort (and multiple contracts at every resort, I would assume, given the number of points) they can still rent their hearts out...and just have to be a bit more detailed in keeping track of things because they can no longer morph (at least not as much....if they choose they can still more once per contract...and again, given the number of contracts, that will still be a lot of morphed/transfered points).

While I am glad that DVC is cracking down on this (or seems to be), I do not think it will stop the commercial renters. It is going to take more than limiting the number of transfers....

 

[Longhairbear]

With all of this info and the enforcement of transfer limits, I am wondering if there is an increase in listings for resale of points.

 

[Anjelica]

but what is the difference between someone who transfers in points then rents out (for commercial purposes) vs. the person who has thousands of points, doesn't do any transfers, but still rents out (for commercial purposes)?

I look at these folks as the same - they are renting for commercial purposes regardless of how they acquired or owned the points - right? I don't think DVC intended on someone owning 18,000 points just to rent a majority of those out each year.

DVC, at least I thought, was advertised as a way for your family to enjoy "a lifetime of cherished memories at affordable prices". It goes on to advertise this as a member benefit. If a majority of your points are used year after year on renting - how is your (member) family enjoying anything?

 

[JimMIA]

I do not think it will stop the commercial renters. It is going to take more than limiting the number of transfers....

I agree, but I also agree with OP. I don't think DVC is even trying to stop commercial renters...including those who use multiple registrations to acquire a lot of points.

I think what they are trying to do -- without going to the expense to fix their computer glitches -- is to stop the morphing of points by transferring. There are a certain number of points per resort, and as long as those points are used in accordance with the POS, I don't think DVC really has any legitimate quarrel with renters.

BUT...when renters change the allocation of their points by taking advantage of DVC's weak computer system, that DOES throw the balance all out of whack. The imbalance is especially severe if the morphing occurs at smaller resorts and only during peak times. By doing that, an unscrupulous renter really can cheat legitimate owners out of their legitimate booking rights.

That practice, IMHO, is what all the fuss is about

And except for pleading ignorant of morphing (which is simply not possible for someone so conversant with every other DVC renting issue), that is pretty much what the DVC attorney told OP.

 

[JimMIA]

but what is the difference between someone who transfers in points then rents out (for commercial purposes) vs. the person who has thousands of points, doesn't do any transfers, but still rents out (for commercial purposes)?

The difference is the commercial renter who owns 5,000 points at BCV, for example, has every right to use those 5,000 points to make ressies at their home resort within the 11-month booking window.

The person who owns 100 points at BCV, transfers in 4,900 from other resorts (which magically morph into BCV points once transferred) is not using their legitimate rights. They are making ressies with points they do not own at that resort (and often with points they don't own at all!) -- and if you are losing a ressie to that person, you've been cheated.

If you get beat out by a commercial renter who lives on the phone, they are just doing what they have a right to do -- book with their points at their real home resort.

***
Incidentally, I don't rent points, and don't really care whether people rent or not, as long as they are not depriving other members of things to which they are entitled..