Rumor: Disney shutting down rental brokers

[ziravan]

They can certainly reallocate past the fixed week 10% pad but doing so would give a bargain to the fixed week owners.

Because there are so few of them, about 4.5% at VGF and currently about 2% of Poly, that wouldn't be a big deal overall. I don't think it'd stop Disney.

It's another reason why a fixed week is such a great deal.

I own a fixed week Poly Lake View. I'm protected from a reallocation to lower cost of bungalows, a reallocation to make F&W dates more expensive, and a redesignation of first floor away from Lake View.

No matter what DVC might address at Poly, the fixed week is a good deal that protects from the fallout of those kinds of changes.

 

[evenrude]

OK I might be in the minority but I like the Ideal of doing away with rental market and letting Disney Handle it and only allow members to "rent" the points which will probably be more like increasing the number of One-Time Use Points available.

1. I'm probably deluded but I think the condition of the DVC Resort rooms is due in part to people who don't care or have any vested interest in the upkeep of the property. Like one time renters with no relationship to the member. I'm sure there are a number of DVC members who don't care as well, however, I know when I use the resorts I'm mindful of the investment that I and others have made to enjoy the property for a long period of time, and also the impact damage has to maintenance/housekeeping costs and treat it like I do my house. I've let family/friends "rent" my points because I know the caliber of people they are I would never blindly rent to somebody not vetted out of respect for the other owners. Owners can still make reservations for whomever, and rent blind but maybe if they have to deal with it they would be more selective.

2. Allow owners to pay for Dues with Points. I think this is a primary driver for renting points for a lot of folks anyway. Disney can then offer these in one time points.

3. I personally would like the opportunity to pay for big one-time point grabs, when that big bonus comes through and you can't borrow enough for that Poly Bungalow one year even at $15/point it beats $3000/night depending on season for both I guess....

 

[disneynutz]

Some people feel that while on vacation, they can do things that they don't do at home (or maybe they do).

We were is a GV just after the guests checked out and the mess left behind was unbelievable. Food on the floor, air beds, strollers, giant balloons, flowers, left behind. Furniture moved, food left out on the kitchen counter, dirty dishes and plastic water bottles everywhere. This was a large group with several small kids, (dirty diapers).

Bill

 

[freediverdude]

Wow. Strollers left behind? Air beds? How many people did they have in there, lol.

 

[Dean]

OK I might be in the minority but I like the Ideal of doing away with rental market and letting Disney Handle it and only allow members to "rent" the points which will probably be more like increasing the number of One-Time Use Points available.

1. I'm probably deluded but I think the condition of the DVC Resort rooms is due in part to people who don't care or have any vested interest in the upkeep of the property. Like one time renters with no relationship to the member. I'm sure there are a number of DVC members who don't care as well, however, I know when I use the resorts I'm mindful of the investment that I and others have made to enjoy the property for a long period of time, and also the impact damage has to maintenance/housekeeping costs and treat it like I do my house. I've let family/friends "rent" my points because I know the caliber of people they are I would never blindly rent to somebody not vetted out of respect for the other owners. Owners can still make reservations for whomever, and rent blind but maybe if they have to deal with it they would be more selective.

2. Allow owners to pay for Dues with Points. I think this is a primary driver for renting points for a lot of folks anyway. Disney can then offer these in one time points.

3. I personally would like the opportunity to pay for big one-time point grabs, when that big bonus comes through and you can't borrow enough for that Poly Bungalow one year even at $15/point it beats $3000/night depending on season for both I guess....

I don't think there's any evidence to support the idea that renters are more abusive to rooms than owners. DVC is but a rental car for even the largest owner. The only timeshare situation that's likely different is where there are fixed units. I have a friend who's managed several Marriott's including 2 timeshares and I've asked his experience/opinion on this issue. The only situation he felt made a difference was as spring break type of group but he did not feel owner vs renter vs exchanger made any difference. While I'm OK with dues for points I doubt it'd make sense. It'd likely be about $5-6 for each point used.

 

[DebbieB]

I doubt Disney/DVC would be interested in more rooms to sell through CRO. They have enough trouble filling the ones they have. During free dining, they have offered people free upgrades from All Star to SSR and OKW because they have rooms they can't fill there and want more rooms available at the values that they can fill.

 

[intertile]

This thread really went off in a lot of directions.

1) I don't think disney cares about rental brokers, as they don't effect disney's bottom line. If anything they enhance it by ensuring there are bodies in the rooms, and this puts wallets on property.
2)ssr,akv, and rental brokers have absolutely nothing to do with availability during the home resort window (8-11 months out). These issues are coming from members purchasing points for units that are in short supply (standard view studio at GFV). It's a simple supply and demand issue. Making matters worse are members with large contacts using those contacts to unfairly (even though it's currently within the rules) walk reservations a week in advance of a member with a minimal contract that can't do the same thing. We always stay in 1 bedrooms, but for those that do not walking is becoming a major problem.

There is a fairly easy solution to "walking". They should just not allow any alterations to reservations within a 48 or 72 hour window. So it allows a member to book 7 days at time, but it doesn't allow them to call every day and change their reservation. If they want to make a change, they would need to wait 1 or 2 days or cancel and re-book. That would effectively stop the benefit of "walking" for the most part, and still allow members to alter there plans if the need arises.

 

[Dean]

This thread really went off in a lot of directions.

1) I don't think disney cares about rental brokers, as they don't effect disney's bottom line. If anything they enhance it by ensuring there are bodies in the rooms, and this puts wallets on property.
2)ssr,akv, and rental brokers have absolutely nothing to do with availability during the home resort window (8-11 months out). These issues are coming from members purchasing points for units that are in short supply (standard view studio at GFV). It's a simple supply and demand issue. Making matters worse are members with large contacts using those contacts to unfairly (even though it's currently within the rules) walk reservations a week in advance of a member with a minimal contract that can't do the same thing. We always stay in 1 bedrooms, but for those that do not walking is becoming a major problem.

There is a fairly easy solution to "walking". They should just not allow any alterations to reservations within a 48 or 72 hour window. So it allows a member to book 7 days at time, but it doesn't allow them to call every day and change their reservation. If they want to make a change, they would need to wait 1 or 2 days or cancel and re-book. That would effectively stop the benefit of "walking" for the most part, and still allow members to alter there plans if the need arises.

The easy solution is to make all changes a cancelation and rebooking. It wouldn't stop the option completely, it would just change it to a cancelation and rebook immediately situation. To stop it completely one would have to institute sufficient financial penalties to make changes or at least hold all cancelations for the wait list combined with all changes being cancelations & rebooking.

 

[CarolMN]

....(snip)....... Making matters worse are members with large contacts using those contacts to unfairly (even though it's currently within the rules) walk reservations a week in advance of a member with a minimal contract that can't do the same thing.

A large contract is not an advantage over a small contract for the purpose of walking (at 11 months). It's more work - you'd have to call more often, but if you get at least 2 nights on the day you decide to walk, you will also be able to add on nights ahead of the window opening for the "crowd". The trick is to get that first reservation and all the owners have a shot at that.

There is a fairly easy solution to "walking". They should just not allow any alterations to reservations within a 48 or 72 hour window. So it allows a member to book 7 days at time, but it doesn't allow them to call every day and change their reservation. If they want to make a change, they would need to wait 1 or 2 days or cancel and re-book. That would effectively stop the benefit of "walking" for the most part, and still allow members to alter there plans if the need arises.

FWIW, you would need a longer period than 48 or 72 hours for the "blackout period" for reservation modifications. (If I were implementing that, I go with 1 month, but cancel/rebook wood be easier to administer and many of us would hate that - we often add or drop nights once airfare is booked)

Doubt DVC really cares about walking at this point. Someone will fill the rooms. They don't care who that is or when they made the reservation. Plus for WDW, it really is only impacting studios at VGF, concierge & value at AKV and the standard views at BLT & BWV. Some of those impacts are only for high demand dates as well. There may be a few others, but the point is that walking is NOT impacting availability for the VAST MAJORITY of DVC villas.

Once the complaints or the number of calls start to negatively impact MS staffing, DVC may decide to do something about it. IMO, whatever "solution" they choose will almost certainly be worse than the problem ever was.

 

[intertile]

A large contract is not an advantage over a small contract for the purpose of walking (at 11 months). It's more work - you'd have to call more often, but if you get at least 2 nights on the day you decide to walk, you will also be able to add on nights ahead of the window opening for the "crowd". The trick is to get that first reservation and all the owners have a shot at that.

Wouldn't a larger contact allow someone to start walking 7 days in advance? This giving them availability before the smaller contracts? I don't walk reservations, so I'm trying to see if my understanding of the concept is flawed.

FWIW, you would need a longer period than 48 or 72 hours for the "blackout period" for reservation modifications. (If I were implementing that, I go with 1 month, but cancel/rebook wood be easier to administer and many of us would hate that - we often add or drop nights once airfare is booked)

Again, wouldn't a day or 2 effectively block the walk? The idea as I understand it is to add a day at the end and remove a day from the beginninguy to get a head start on the 11 month window. If you had to wait 2 days, or even 3...wouldn't that be enough to eliminate 90% of the benefit?

The cancel/rebook idea is the easiest, but I feel it punishes everyone for the practice of a few.

whatever "solution" they choose will almost certainly be worse than the problem ever was.

Agreed.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

Wouldn't a larger contact allow someone to start walking 7 days in advance? This giving them availability before the smaller contracts? I don't walk reservations, so I'm trying to see if my understanding of the concept is flawed.

Once you have a room you have a lock on it until the new 11 month window which is why 2 days is enough to walk. The person who is walking 7 days has a lock on a completely different room. So, a small contract can walk and the only requirement if they are walking for a long period will be enough points to hold a weekend. But, other than a few small categories walking is not even close to a necessity for most times. What one can see is that often after walkers go past the rooms are there and available.

 

[SgtTibbs]

1) I don't think disney cares about rental brokers, as they don't effect disney's bottom line.

In my case I booked a trip via Disney, found out about renting points, booked the same vacation using rented points and canceled the trip booked directly with Disney. Worked out to about $2,500.00 back in my pocket.

 

[Deb & Bill]

I don't think the problem is so much renters who don't have a vested interest in the resort, but in DVC allowing stuffing studios by adding the murphy bed. But since they are pricing themselves out of many buyer's ability to buy, they have to offer the stuffed studio solution.

 

[Dean]

Wouldn't a larger contact allow someone to start walking 7 days in advance? This giving them availability before the smaller contracts? I don't walk reservations, so I'm trying to see if my understanding of the concept is flawed.



Again, wouldn't a day or 2 effectively block the walk? The idea as I understand it is to add a day at the end and remove a day from the beginninguy to get a head start on the 11 month window. If you had to wait 2 days, or even 3...wouldn't that be enough to eliminate 90% of the benefit?

The cancel/rebook idea is the easiest, but I feel it punishes everyone for the practice of a few.




Agreed.

This is not a function of contract size but rather how many points one owns. Having more points does give more and sometimes better options. Personally I don't see cancelation and rebooking as a punishment, to me it's the way should be in general. And it is for every other situation including villa types, booking categories and for other resorts. It's just this single situation where it's treated differently. The problem with trying to fix it without changing it completely is it never works and almost always creates other issues. Just keep it simple and do what every other timeshare I know of does. If they don't, eventually there will be additional fees.

 

[CarolMN]

[QUOTE="intertile, post: 55258472, member: 112952"........
Again, wouldn't a day or 2 effectively block the walk? The idea as I understand it is to add a day at the end and remove a day from the beginninguy to get a head start on the 11 month window. If you had to wait 2 days, or even 3...wouldn't that be enough to eliminate 90% of the benefit?........[/QUOTE]No, 2or 3 nights wouldn't be enough. If I have 7 nights booked, I do not have to call until the day before the window opens for the 8th night. (Because no one else can book that 8th night until then. I can call the day before and drop the first 6 nights and add on 6 more nights).

 

[ziravan]

You can end walking by placing a 30 day hold on any changes to a reservation that include dates that cross the 11 month window. Within that 30 days, you can only cancel/re-book.

That would ONLY affect walkers. I believe I read somewhere that this is what the National Park system does with its reservation system.

If you're not walking and need to make a change to a reservation that crossed the 11 month threshold (includes dates in advance of 11 months at time of reservation), you have plenty of time to make changes from 10 months on.

It does mean that if you want to stay longer than a week, you'll have to make separate reservations and link them later. Allowing more than a week in advance of 11 months would just create a different type of walking, a system that held up room releases for a month.

 

[tjkraz]

1) I don't think disney cares about rental brokers, as they don't effect disney's bottom line. If anything they enhance it by ensuring there are bodies in the rooms, and this puts wallets on property.

If "wallets on property" were all that mattered, Disney wouldn't be charging $400-1000 per night for traditional hotel rooms.

Disney wants to have its proverbial cake and eat it, too. They don't just want restaurant and souvenir income, they also work hard to make money on theme park tickets and hotel rooms.

When a non-member stays at a Disney hotel, they get 100% of the revenue from that room reservation. When a non-member rents points, Disney gets 0% of the hotel revenue. So yeah, it does impact Disney's bottom line.

That said, I don't think there's a whole lot Disney can do to eliminate rental brokers. However they have--and will--apply tweaks and adjustments to program rules which are designed to make rentals more difficult. Every bit of hassle or uncertainty that Disney can introduce into the rental process has the potential to lead customers back to their hotels.

 

[malba2366]

I don't know how disney could shut down rentals of the points. Since timeshares are legally considered real estate, unless there is some sort clause signed at purchase saying you can not rent/transfer your points to others, Disney would have a lawsuit on their hands if they intentionally made it difficult for people to rent out their shares.

 

[ziravan]

I don't know how disney could shut down rentals of the points. Since timeshares are legally considered real estate, unless there is some sort clause signed at purchase saying you can not rent/transfer your points to others, Disney would have a lawsuit on their hands if they intentionally made it difficult for people to rent out their shares.

There is a clause that says points have no value. Disney can declare that any business paying for points in violation of its contracts that say points have no value is disallowed.

How would they know? They don't have to know. All they need do is state that any reservation made through a broker will be cancelled with points not refunded. If you break the rules with your points, you aren't entitled to them back.

That would permafrost the broker market.

Or, Disney can assert that it won't honor brokered reservations AT CHECK IN. That way, both sides of the transaction will fear using a broker.

 

[BWV Dreamin]

If "wallets on property" were all that mattered, Disney wouldn't be charging $400-1000 per night for traditional hotel rooms.

Disney wants to have its proverbial cake and eat it, too. They don't just want restaurant and souvenir income, they also work hard to make money on theme park tickets and hotel rooms.

When a non-member stays at a Disney hotel, they get 100% of the revenue from that room reservation. When a non-member rents points, Disney gets 0% of the hotel revenue. So yeah, it does impact Disney's bottom line.

That said, I don't think there's a whole lot Disney can do to eliminate rental brokers. However they have--and will--apply tweaks and adjustments to program rules which are designed to make rentals more difficult. Every bit of hassle or uncertainty that Disney can introduce into the rental process has the potential to lead customers back to their hotels.

If keeping hotel rentals up were a priority then why is Disney converting the hotel rooms to DVC? I don't think they want to bother going after the DVC rental process but rather just fill it with DVC owners and let them rent the rooms. Shifts the upkeep and occupancy away from Disney.