The "rippling" effect is starting

[goofydad99]

5. You acknowledge that your purchase of an Ownership interest is for your personal use as a vacation experience and not for the purpose of acquiring an income or appreciating investment. Vacation Points have no value other than being a vehicle to use your Ownership Interest to reserve accomodations.

Does this not conflict with the next one?

6. You may rent, sell, transfer, or will your Ownership Interest. DVD has a right of first refusal to repurchase your Ownership Interest on the same terms and conditions, including financin, that your buyer has offered. DVD currently provides no assistance in resale or rental of your Ownership Interest. In the event you attempt to resell or rent your Ownership Interest, you would compete with DVD for buyers and renters at a substantial competetitve disadvantage.

Ok I am seriously showing my ignorance. Sorry guys.

Goofydad's Wife

 

[BurkeTribe]

Since Disney is more responsible than anyone for the myths, I think they *owe* it to the lemmings to make it up to them. Just use one for the "wacky sidekick" character in a movie and call it even.

I can just see it:
Coming soon to AK-- Those Wacky Lemmings, a ride event like no other ("the end will kill ya"

 

[hoopsrob]

5. You acknowledge that your purchase of an Ownership interest is for your personal use ...

Does this not conflict with the next one?

6. You may rent, sell, transfer, or will your Ownership Interest.
Goofydad's Wife

I don't think these conflict. They are stating that it is for your personal use NOT for renting all of your points and making a business out of it.

However, in the course of events in your personal situation, you may have a need to rent, sell, or transfer, which is allowable by them.

Their statement earlier about clamping down on those that show a pattern of rental behavior seems to confirm this----they are just trying to make it harder for the commercial renters.

 

[Deb & Bill]

I don't think these conflict. They are stating that it is for your personal use NOT for renting all of your points and making a business out of it.

However, in the course of events in your personal situation, you may have a need to rent, sell, or transfer, which is allowable by them.

Their statement earlier about clamping down on those that show a pattern of rental behavior seems to confirm this----they are just trying to make it harder for the commercial renters.

That's how I interpret it also, hoopsrob.

 

[rinkwide]

5. You acknowledge that your purchase of an Ownership interest is for your personal use as a vacation experience and not for the purpose of acquiring an income or appreciating investment. Vacation Points have no value other than being a vehicle to use your Ownership Interest to reserve accomodations...

There's no conflict. The above statement is required by Florida law because unscrupulous sellers would often tell lemmings, err... I mean prospective buyers that they could turn their ownerships into steady sources of rental income or that their interest in the property would appreciate.

It's ironic that the disclaimer really doesn't apply to Disney.

 

[Dean]

I don't think these conflict. They are stating that it is for your personal use NOT for renting all of your points and making a business out of it.

However, in the course of events in your personal situation, you may have a need to rent, sell, or transfer, which is allowable by them.

Their statement earlier about clamping down on those that show a pattern of rental behavior seems to confirm this----they are just trying to make it harder for the commercial renters.

And that would be incorrect. The correct interpretation is that you acknowledge that it's likely not feasible to rent or resell, basically that you may lose money if you do so. This section is mandated by FL law to be included because of past baiting by timeshares sale people. The second part is that you have the right to try if you want to.

It's ironic that the disclaimer really doesn't apply to Disney.

Ah, but the way I read section 721 of the FL statues, it does apply to Disney in many ways.

 

[rinkwide]

...Ah, but the way I read section 721 of the FL statues, it does apply to Disney in many ways.

To clarify: I find it funny, this "profitability" clause was put into the contract to protect buyers from the questionable tactics of timeshare developers. How ironic that it's now being used by a developer to try and protect itself from the questionable tactics of it's buyers.

 

[greenban]

Okay, all you neigh sayers, here is proof positive that the ripple effect has started:

I HAVE A 2 BEDROOM AT BCV FOR 12/25/2006 TO 2/2/2007 A TOTAL OF 492 POINTS A T $2.00 PER POINT.

Over one full month at DVC for only $2.00 a point!

I would post the thread link, but I don't know how to directly link to the specific post in the thread.

I'm gonna see if I can rent those points right now!



-Tony

PS Here is the thread link: http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=1187130&page=1&pp=15#post13895926

 

[LisaS]

Okay, all you neigh sayers, here is proof positive that the ripple effect has started:

Over one full month at DVC for only $2.00 a point!

I would post the thread link, but I don't know how to directly link to the specific post in the thread.

I'm gonna see if I can rent those points right now!



-Tony

PS Here is the thread link: http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=1187130&page=1&pp=15#post13895926

Too bad it's not really a month for $2 per point. Given the poster has calculated the stay as a 492 points for a 2 BR starting Christmas Day and including New Years Eve then I assume the end date is actually Jan 2nd, not Feb 2nd. And I would imagine the real price is $12/pt not $2. But it's fun to dream...

 

[missymouse]

Poor Gregg it looks like he has been trying to rent this out for awhile but all the other posts he says 1/2/07 and $12 a point. Wonder if he is panicking or if he is just a really bad typist. Most likely a typo, however I bet he gets lots of responses.

 

[Mike]

Poor Gregg it looks like he has been trying to rent this out for awhile but all the other posts he says 1/2/07 and $12 a point. Wonder if he is panicking or if he is just a really bad typist. Most likely a typo, however I bet he gets lots of responses.

I think it's sabotage by the DVC Rental Police ::cop:

 

[fishermouse]

let me get this straight....disney creates a system that has rules and regulations....people follow those, and the spin now is that there was "loopholes" pardon me while i laugh out loud...I love it how disney reserves the right to make others lives more difficult....I share a contract with my sister after our mom passed away last year...the way it works now she would transfer points from her and my moms contact into my contract each year. I also have a separate add on we purchased....guess i am S.O.L on this one....sorry I decided to rely on the rules they created only to see them change it at their convenience......and no excuses about how this was a rule before and they will now enforce it...if it was not enforced before it was not a rule....after my mom passed MS told me directly I could transger more then once

The rule was there when I bought in and explained by my guide (salesman) if MS told you different they were mistaken, always get things in writing if they are important to your decision. As far as enforcment goes, they will probably continue to "let it slide " as long as you are not abusing it, problem may arise if one of the "power renters" decides to fight it then it may become a everyone or no one situation. Then the real losers will be us folks just trying to have great vacations the best way we can.

 

[drakethib]

I am no lawyer....but when you have a contract...the minute you are willing to "bend" a rule...the rule itself becomes null and void, especially at the levels that the rule was " bended"

Not sure I agree with this thought.

For instance, if the speed limit is 70 MPH on the highway, most cops will not give you a ticket for going 73, but they could indeed do so as the "rule" is 70 MPH.

 

[drakethib]

"I am no lawyer....but when you have a contract...the minute you are willing to "bend" a rule...the rule itself becomes null and void, especially at the levels that the rule was " bended"
-----------------------------------------------------------------

I disagree.

Just because a cop doesn't pull you over when you're going 10 mph over the speed limit doesn't mean he can't give you a ticket whenever you are in that situation. Just because he doesn't enforce it once doesn't change the law or the fact that you are breaking the law and there are consequences for you doing so.

If non-members can't rent cheaply, they will rent directly from Disney OR decide to purchase DVC OR not go to WDW at all.

It should help resale values of members because there will be less discounted inventory available to the general public.

And it should also help members making reservations because rented points won't be holding the space that they currently occupy.

Oops.

I pretty much said they same thing on my post as I didn't read the whole thread.

Didn't mean to copy cat.

Great minds do think alike though.

 

[drakethib]

Bad analogy - in this case the cop (MS) was in the car with us and stepping on the accelerator and the dispatcher was answering phone calls from the public and telling them that it is ok to speed. Also, the laws were re-written recently to add ambiguity on whether or not there is a speed limit.


Sorry - your over-simplification of the issue doesn't hold water.

How many times have speed limits been changed on roads or highways so that "traffic" flows accordingly?

I can recall where speed limits went from 75 down to 55. So yes at one time the police were in fact telling you it is ok to drive 75 and if you called the dispatcher they would tell you 75 is ok and then it went down to 55 after the police had previously allowed to drive faster.

 

[Mike]

How many times have speed limits been changed on roads or highways so that "traffic" flows accordingly?

I can recall where speed limits went from 75 down to 55. So yes at one time the police were in fact telling you it is ok to drive 75 and if you called the dispatcher they would tell you 75 is ok and then it went down to 55 after the police had previously allowed to drive faster.

Wow - talk about tangential spin .....

Ok - forget the analogies .... how about some facts.

- The original POS stated there was a limit of one transfer per UY per member

- Around 2003, the revised POS removed the wording around the limit of one and stated that transfers were essentially limited to one direction per UY

- MS was telling people (including myself) that there is no limit to the number of times you can make a transfer as long as they are in the same direction in a given UY

This has nothing to do with people doing something wrong or getting away with something that they weren't supposed to.

 

[doubletrouble_vb]

I don't know if I've noticed something or not but it seems like the rentals are disappearing from Ebay. Maybe that's the target since Ebay is such a prominent sales outlet.

 

[LIFERBABE]

I don't know if I've noticed something or not but it seems like the rentals are disappearing from Ebay. Maybe that's the target since Ebay is such a prominent sales outlet.

You know, that would be interesting to track if I had the time. It would have been great to know how many renters had listings before and after the change.
Do you think they will set up shop elsewhere? Like here?

 

[drakethib]

Wow - talk about tangential spin .....

Ok - forget the analogies .... how about some facts.

- Around 2003, the revised POS removed the wording around the limit of one and stated that transfers were essentially limited to one direction per UY

- MS was telling people (including myself) that there is no limit to the number of times you can make a transfer as long as they are in the same direction in a given UY

This has nothing to do with people doing something wrong or getting away with something that they weren't supposed to.

We can turn it around anyway you want. You started the spin and I fliiped it around as well.

So POS was revised, I ll buy that. On paper. Sounds great.

MS "tells" people that there is no limit. Wonderful. They let some things slide. However, they decide it is not working and revert back to the POS on paper.

I am not sure what the issue is.

Personally I am glad to see this change. Honestly, I don't see where maybe 2 or 3 max transfers would be a problem. Any more then that should be charged $100 per transfer or something to that effect.

This is MHO. YMMV.

 

[rinkwide]

*Jeopardy theme music*

Alex Trabek: Welcome back ladies and gentlemen. Josh is our leader and has control of the board.

Jeopardy Contestant: Alex, I'll take "Twisted Words" for 1000.

Alex Trabek: The answer is:

tangential spin

Jeopardy Contestant: What would you call the Flying Dumbo ride if it was at a nudist colony?

Alex Trabek: I'm sorry, that's incorrect...