Rental Rates/Concerns

[tigger2esq]

Count me as one of the guilty!

I was planning a large family gathering for Next January at BWV. At the time the 11 month window opened, I had NO idea how many family members would be joining us or how many rooms I would need-- knowing full well BWV rooms go fast (esp. studios) I booked as many rooms as I could with my available points--knowing full well that I would probably end up canceling one or two (which i did as soon as it was apparent my sisters would not be joining us). I am still sitting on one studio that may or may not get used (friends of ours have tentatively stated they would come but wont know thier vacation situation for next Janaury until at least June (I told them they had until August to decide--the last date I could get the points back and banked into next year!)). I guess I dont see how this is any different from holding 2 rooms for a renter and then releasing one as soon as they find out what their needs are. thats why there is a wait list right? ( I may feel differently about a person who deliberately books a "hot" week like Xmas or Easter knowing full well they are not going to use it and then posting it on the rent board-but that is clearly not the situation here). to each his own...

[pauld2]

As long as the DVC points are worth so little for exchange into Disney cruises and the Concierge Collection, DVC points must be able to be rented out for market value in order to keep vacation options open on a fair financial basis. For those who want to limit the possibility of renting out points, you would need to press just as hard to improve the currency of DVC points for exchange.

[TheRustyScupper]

1) Let's look at DVC for what it is - a floating timeshare.
2) For that matter, let's look at any "floating" timeshare.
3) The idea is flexibility.
4) With flexibility, there is sometimes uncertainty.

5) People have to sometimes book a ressie "on spec".
6) People then cancel or confirm based upon their final needs.
. . . It doesn't matter if they keep the ressie.
. . . It doesn't matter if they cancel the ressie.
. . . It doesn't matter if the ressie is given/rented to another.
. . . It doesn't matter if the week is booked and left vacant.

11) We all knew the rules when we bought.
12) We accepted the flexibility.
13) We acepted the possible occupancy scheduling problems.

14) The bottom line is
. . . There is a set amount of points sold at DVC.
. . . How they are used is the owners right.
. . . Some will use and some will seemingly abuse the rights.
. . . You take the good with the bad.

PS - Just so my opinion doesn't seem from left field. I own DVC as well as fixed-week timeshares (the fixed weeks are for the same time week, just multiple units). The fixed-week is to guarantee a time so we can schedule family vacations from work/school. The DVC allows last-minute-type flexible trip scheduling.

[chrispoponak]

Supporting a rule that would dictate how people can use THEIR property?

Spoken like a true liberal marxist. I am surprised at you.

[Johnnie Fedora]

For those of you that think renting hurts members, have you considered this:

If Disney would stop point gouging DVC members for Disney collection trades, members wouldn't find it necessary to rent out so many points.

Additionally, when a member rents out points, those points stay in the member inventory. Those points can still be used by other members if plans change, and fewer points are required.

When DVCers trade them out (DCL/DC), they go to the CRO inventory and are lost for member use all together, unless you book cash through CRO.

Therefore it is better for DVCers to rent points out themselves, than to trade an inflated number of points to MS/CRO.

DVCers who rent out there own points (for DC trades):
1) Use far fewer points than trading through MS
2) Keep points in the member inventory:

[tripletvan]

There is a company( not private person) online that says it owns points at several DVC on site resorts and they have already booked rooms (standard view included) for numerous high season weeks that can be rented.
Free enterprise?

I hate the waiting list!

[erikthewise]

Well, it seems we have a whole continuum of sins, from venial to mortal:

(1) making a reservation which includes an additional day or two that you probably won't use, to provide flexibility in travel dates. When you're sure you won't use them, you cancel the extra days.
Comment: Hey, I've done this myself! Can it really be so awful? But it *does* temporarily reduce the inventory available to other members. Wasn't this Rich's main point? Maybe it's OK because the intended use, however unlikely, IS for a member. And it is probably the main reason why wait lists work so well.

(2) making a complete reservation (for yourself) which you possibly/probably won't use, just to have it available in case it works out.
Comment: This would appear to still be within the bounds of legitimate use, but is a more serious tie-up of inventory.

(3) making duplicate reservations (for yourself) on the same dates to provide flexibility in room or resort selection.
Comment: Legal but IMNSHO crossing over the boundary into rude and inconsiderate. Uncertainty about travel dates (as in 1 and 2) often involves things you can't control. But room size or resort selection is just a matter of making up your damn mind, and doesn't justify tying up inventory that other members would like to use.

(4) making duplicate reservations for a renter on the same dates to provide flexibility in room or resort selection.
Comment: As in (3), only double strength. This is what was raised in the OP. What is the solution? Not sure that I can think of a cure that isn't worse than the disease; you can't legislate against rudeness. Richyams suggestion (rent only for dues) seems extreme, and would likely create a really nasty black market for rented points, as they would be fewer in number but *really* valuable to those nonmembers able to acquire them.

(5) buying several hundred points for the sole purpose of renting them.
Comment: Should be hung from a meathook. This is what we/DVC should try to legislate against rather than lesser infractions. I recall last spring seeing a number of posts offering e.g. "300 BCV points for rent", obviously points they never intended to use for themselves.

How about restricting renting points only in that you can only rent them *to other members*? Very likely another unworkable idea, but I'll toss it out anyway.

[CaptainMidnight]

Sorry, but I think there is a difference between adding some extra reservation dates because your unsure of your travel plans, or to accomodate some potential friends and family members, and deliberately tying up extra dates because your renting out points for profit. Those are two different scenarios for me.

I do think that those who rent out DVC regularly as a private business as opposed to the original intent of family vacation ownership are detrimental to DVC members using DVC for it's intended use, family vacation ownership. I also do not agree that the private business use by a group or individual through regular rental of DVC points is clearly provided as being allowed in the contract. DVC could clamp down on this issue private business renting of points if they chose to and would still be within the bounds of the contract we signed.

[CaptainMidnight]

(5) buying several hundred points for the sole purpose of renting them. Comment: Should be hung from a meathook. This is what we/DVC should try to legislate against rather than lesser infractions.

Good point, although I wouldn't have chose the 'meathook' phrase.

I recall last spring seeing a number of posts offering e.g. "300 BCV points for rent", obviously points they never intended to use for themselves.

Unknown, especially given the layoffs, downsizing, etc. The purchaser may have thought that if they could just cash in one vacation, they could keep thier ownership during a financial struggle.

I do not think that private business regular DVC point rental by an individual is in the best interest of DVC members overal.

[r8ingbull]

I would love a members ONLY resort.

Why? How would this possibly matter to anyone? Who cares who else is staying there. Do you know all 60,000 members and their families?

As to the original post. I bought some ceramic tile at Lowes the other day. I bought a few more pieces then I needed and returned the leftovers. Should this be made illegal too?

[Jen D]

Sorry, but I think there is a difference between adding some extra reservation dates because your unsure of your travel plans, or to accomodate some potential friends and family members, and deliberately tying up extra dates because your renting out points for profit. Those are two different scenarios for me.

They may be two scenarios to you in some sort of universe where you assign value to who is using the reservation, but in terms of points and inventory, it is exactly the same thing. A room is held by points, and later cancelled. Points are being used to take the rooms out of inventory. When the cancellation is made, the room goes back into inventory and the room is available. Lucky wait-listers. I'm sure some people don't have enough points to hold multiple ressies but this person does.

It is done all the time, by members, for many different reasons.

[TIdoublegaER]

There is a company( not private person) online that says it owns points at several DVC on site resorts and they have already booked rooms (standard view included) for numerous high season weeks that can be rented.

To me this is seems to be the biggest problem. To reserve blocks of rooms over peak travel times solely to rent out is wrong. I see no problem with offering your points for rent, dates subject to availability.

I also have no problem with members reserving an extra unit that they think they will need or reserving extra nights due to uncertainty about travel dates. These will be released back into inventory or the member loses their points if unused.

[joepoe]

whatever they want with their points as far as booking rooms, as long as they stay within the rules. I don't get this whole argument. There is enough room for everyone at DVC. Booking them on behalf of someone else, or yourself, it makes no difference!

[joepoe]

Originally posted by TIdoublegaER
To me this is seems to be the biggest problem. To reserve blocks of rooms over peak travel times solely to rent out is wrong. I see no problem with offering your points for rent, dates subject to availability.

I also have no problem with members reserving an extra unit that they think they will need or reserving extra nights due to uncertainty about travel dates. These will be released back into inventory or the member loses their points if unused.

Also, the DVC owner who wants to rent would have to book at 11 months at peak times, just like the rest of us. We are on a level playing field with our points.

[Disneyaholic]

Originally posted by erikthewise
you can't legislate against rudeness.

This pretty much sums up the issue, IMHO. It's like so many other of the highly-debated issues that appear from time to time on this board. Sometimes people bend the rules for their own benefit. It happens with actual rules and it happens with rules of courtesy and etiquette. I doubt that's going to change.