DVC plans to target commercial renters

[Chuck S]

I care because I signed a contract. Well, honestly, I didn't - I bought resale and inherited the T&Cs from the previous owner. But I'm expected to adhere to those terms. And I expect others to adhere to those terms. One of those terms is "no commercial renting."

As someone who administers contracts for a living now, I don't think you get to decide which terms you are going to hold to and which you are not. You signed a contract. I expect you to live to that because DVCs functionality is dependent on us all upholding the terms - not "just some of us paying our dues while other people decide they don't wanna" or "some people make reservations before eleven months while others are required to wait until their contracted window opens." I expect Disney to uphold their end of the contract. AND I expect Disney to enforce their terms and conditions that they have on their membership.

If people wanted to make money off of DVC, they should have signed a different contract. Of course, they couldn't because Disney does not offer a commercial use contract. But you are only entitled to what the contract guarantees. And that does include some personal renting - but it does not include using your contract as a commercial enterprise.

Actually, though, we agreed to abide to no commercial renting by DVC definition of commercial renting...which the ONLY definition we've seem is 20 rentals per year, and/or a "pattern" that has not been defined at all. Now you can certainly abide by the 20 rentals per year for a definition. But anything, even on rental per year consitently, can be a "pattern." They need a hard definition and stick to it.

 

[tx911]

Actualy, though, we agreed to abide to no commercial renting by DVC definition of commercial renting...which the ONLY definition we've seem is 20 rentals per year, and/or a "pattern" that has not been defined at all. Now you can certainly abide by the 20 rentals per year for a definition. But anything, even on rental per year consitently, can be a "pattern." They need a hard definition and stick to it.

We already know what commercial use is. If you are using your points to make money rather than book a room, that's commercial use.

The question becomes, when is it too much? A certain percentage of your total points?

 

[theww228]

After reading through all the pages it has become clear to me that the concern being discussed is not commercial renting. If a “commercial renter” booked hundreds of nights at SSR in 1 bedrooms there would be crickets in this group.
The concern is that “commercial renters” are “unfairly” scooping up rooms that are allocated too few of points for the perceived value of them. Do owners who rent often pick up these dates? Yes. Why wouldn’t they, they sell the best. In fact many of the brokers encourage owners to book these “in demand” reservations.
In my view a large rental community has helped with the expansion and improvement of DVC. There are many owners who have purchased more points than they would have because they know they can rent out some of their extra points. I wonder if we would have had the expansion if it wasn’t for owners buying some extra points (VF2, Poly tower, cabins, lakeside, etc)?
In the end if they can prevent a membership from booking up multiple rooms in certain categories over a certain period of years I will consider it a success. If someone books 10 value studios for many days, it probably a problem. If someone books 3 std, sorry resort view, studios for Dec for one year, it might a family trip.
My suggestion is to create a list of special rooms and if there seems to be excessive bookings over a period of time it should flag a limit on the number of name changes. Let’s forces on the problem areas not creating broad brush restrictions that affect the average owner. If someone wants to rent 100% of their points I don’t care. If we don’t think the rooms that they are booking is fair then go there first.

 

[nalababybear]

There is a difference between defending it and being indifferent to it.

I am indifferent to it but also know that DVc, and DVc alone get to define what it means in the context of DVC usage

If they want to crack down, perfect. If they want it to have a high threshold, that works too…

I am simply not bothered one way or the other in terms of how they choose to define and enforce it.

I care because I signed a contract. Well, honestly, I didn't - I bought resale and inherited the T&Cs from the previous owner. But I'm expected to adhere to those terms. And I expect others to adhere to those terms. One of those terms is "no commercial renting."

As someone who administers contracts for a living now, I don't think you get to decide which terms you are going to hold to and which you are not. You signed a contract. I expect you to live to that because DVCs functionality is dependent on us all upholding the terms - not "just some of us paying our dues while other people decide they don't wanna" or "some people make reservations before eleven months while others are required to wait until their contracted window opens." I expect Disney to uphold their end of the contract. AND I expect Disney to enforce their terms and conditions that they have on their membership.

If people wanted to make money off of DVC, they should have signed a different contract. Of course, they couldn't because Disney does not offer a commercial use contract. But you are only entitled to what the contract guarantees. And that does include some personal renting - but it does not include using your contract as a commercial enterprise.

True. Disney needs to define 'Commercial use" first. There's a very wide range just within this group on what that means. To date, Disney has deferred on clarifying it as to have the their cake and eat it too.

 

[Sandisw]

We already know what commercial use is. If you are using your points to make money rather than book a room, that's commercial use.

The question becomes, when is it too much? A certain percentage of your total points?

That may be the general definition of it but the contract states that DVC is the one who determines what that means in the context of the contract.

What we do know is that DVC has set that threshold high…which is why things are where they are.

More and more owners now rent and I think that is a big reason behind the changes we are apt to see.

IMO, I think it’s going beyond what some even define it as. I walked away from the meeting last week thinking it wouldnt impact the average owner who rents, but then I remembered the comment that “by next year, we hope this conversation will be very different “

That leads me to believe a crack down on renting is coming and that the rules will become very strict.

I won’t be surprised to see it limited to a few reservations a year, regardless of number of points owned.

 

[tx911]

That may be the general definition of it but the contract states that DVC is the one who determines what that means in the context of the contract.

What we do know is that DVC has set that threshold high…which is why things are where they are.

More and more owners now rent and I think that is a big reason behind the changes we are apt to see.

IMO, I think it’s going beyond what some even define it as. I walked away from the meeting last week thinking it wouldnt impact the average owner who rents, but then I remembered the comment that “by next year, we hope this conversation will be very different “

That leads me to believe a crack down on renting is coming and that the rules will become very strict.

I won’t be surprised to see it limited to a few reservations a year, regardless of number of points owned.

Yes, it goes back to the point that when people abuse permissive rules, the rules become a lot more restrictive.

 

[Sandisw]

Yes, it goes back to the point that when people abuse permissive rules, the rules become a lot more restrictive.

I don’t know if it is some much abusing the rules as it is that the internet has made it so easy for owners to rent.

When DVC first started, finding renters wasn’t easy to do and there were not as many owners.

Now, it’s a piece of cake to find one and so more and more owners are renting, even casually, which is make it look like a lot of commercial renting is happening when it may not be that but simply an exploding rental market.

There are probably somewhere in the areas of 75k memberships…if each one of those did just two rentals a year, that is 150k rentals a year! That’s a lot without any of those owners renting what most would consider commercial.

 

[Boopuff]

The thing that bothers me is the fact that commercial renters use bots to book the rooms, re-dialers, all sorts of tools that many of us everyday folk do not possess. Us regular folk have to jump at 8am and hope for the best.

 

[tx911]

I don’t know if it is some much abusing the rules as it is that the internet has made it so easy for owners to rent.

We can call it taking advantage of very loose rules surrounding renting points. Which may soon lead to tighter rules.

 

[nalababybear]

The thing that bothers me is the fact that commercial renters use bots to book the rooms, re-dialers, all sorts of tools that many of us everyday folk do not possess. Us regular folk have to jump at 8am and hope for the best.

And you're certain that's happening with DVC bookings?

Perhaps Queue it should happen every morning at 800AM to stem that practice.

Disney does it for their other portals when they believe it's an issue. Since they haven't, it probably hasn't risen to the point where they it is necessary to deploy.

Disney isn't some fly by night company. Their IT surely can be suspect and subject of jokes from us all the time, but one thing they definitely have is data and ability to act on it if they so choose.

 

[Mirabell Rose]

If the DVC “system” worked as intended the points would be balanced by demand. There wouldn’t be a special rooms, BW std and boardwalk views, AK value rooms, CL. It is obvious that the points are not the correct amount and should be adjusted to make them “fair”. The usual responses are, “well there are just a few of them and that is also why they are so hard”. There are only a few bungalows as well, but they generally have availability. However they were allocated a reasonable number of points to not make them a great deal, so the supply and demand balances out. It is crazy that a standard view room is so many fewer points when they have better views than many other resorts, facing the road at the beach club or the dumpster view at BRV. The next response is, “I like those high value / low point rooms, don’t rebalance to take them away”. Yes, everyone likes those rooms and that is why they are so hard to get, but those rooms are small population in the overall ecosystem. Adjusting points better by season needs to happen as well. If you look at the calendar there are definitely months that have demand that does not match supply. The first half of December points are way too low for the demand. September is low for the demand, August is high for the demand. Adjust the calendars, they have the data.
RIV is out of whack with the number of points between std and premium views, for studios it is 4-5 points difference. I am sorry, the views are different enough to justify that big of a difference, more like 2 in my opinion. If you look the standards are always booked up before the standards. If they were set up correctly, they would both book very similar to each other. Who is at fault for the imbalance? The owners or DVC for how they set up the point charts?
The other elephant in the room is folks changing at the seven month window. I hear so many complaints about people not being able to get what they want at the 7 month window, but they want something that is in high demand. “I can’t get a full week at the beach club at 7 months like I could years ago”. Most of the year there is availability at beach club between the 7-11 months. If you want to stay at BC, buy there and plan ahead. As DVC has expanded there are more and more people trying to move to the “better in their eyes” rooms/resorts. When there are so many people saying by at SSR but don’t plan on staying there, it creates an imbalance in the system. If SSR would have come on line with point requirements that were 1/3 the requirement of a room at beach club it would be very difficult to get a room at SSR.
Bottom line: if the points requirements match demand the system works itself out, if the points requirements allocations do not match demand there are reservations that everyone wants and others that no one wants. I am not saying that they should try the lock-off grab they tried years ago, but either balance the system or realize there will be a few “gems” that will always be difficult to get and only get harder over time.

You make excellent points.

 

[Mirabell Rose]

And you're certain that's happening with DVC bookings?

Perhaps Queue it should happen every morning at 800AM to stem that practice.

Disney does it for their other portals when they believe it's an issue. Since they haven't, it probably hasn't risen to the point where they it is necessary to deploy.

Disney isn't some fly by night company. Their IT surely can be suspect and subject of jokes from us all the time, but one thing they definitely have is data and ability to act on it if they so choose.

Fly by night, no. But I have never encountered so many ‘sorry not working’ pages on any other reservation, or any website for that matter. I really don’t think they are even middle of the pack when it comes to IT.