DVC plans to target commercial renters

[MICKIMINI]

Many OP's speak of not being able to use points due to illness, time constraints and other situations. All valid. For a product most owners hold for what, twenty years or so, that will likely happen to most at some point in their lives. We should not face interrogation or have to list a reason for renting points and quite frankly, that must be illegal. I don't ever see DVC imposing a draconian rule like that.

That brings up the situation that you give points to your children who may have a different last name, or friends who have different last names. How nosy does DVC want to get with determining who is booked on your contract and how they acquired the points? It again reeks of overreaching management.

It seems people saw untapped opportunity and started these rental businesses to make money and relieve members of the responsibility and effort it takes to secure a renter by paying them a few dollars a point to handle it. Seems reasonable. It has morphed into a money grab for the most profitable villas using technology and/or employees to hit the "update" button continuously. Since many cancellations show before they move to waitlist requests, these villas are literally stolen right out from DVC members. What is being stolen is the opportunity to compete for a vacation! That is what we bought knowing we have to compete with other DVC members. Fair enough.

The sticky wicket IMO is the DVC members who have crossed over from covering their own trips by renting those most desirable, high profit villas. In order to make any kind of profit it takes high volume and lots of points So which came first the owner bought a gazillion points thinking they were going to stay a month in a GV every year and then life got in the way or the owner that starting renting their extra points and decided to make a go of it as a side hustle and bought a thousand points in five contracts The member who owns one thousand point contract is now potentially stuck with a contract they can never sell without a major loss vs the member who can sell five two hundred point contracts. Is it fair to distinguish between the two because of the obvious disadvantage to the owner reluctant to take a huge loss and therefore keeps renting? DVC will have to get in the weeds and decide EXACTLY what the rules of the road are. Oh, and please define commercial in DVC terms.

DVC has to get it together and find a fair way to handle this situation. It has been going on way too long and has hurt many DVC owners unable to have a fair chance to use their points at their own resorts and yet afraid to rent because it may draw undo attention. We need clearly written rules for this one DVC, not the usual vague language. We also need to understand if these big rental businesses will be able to continue renting or not. Members need to understand if by handing over their unused points to a company to rent on their behalf is in the same category as renting to friends and family. An unwitting person who rents from a big company only to potentially be stuck in the parking lot with no reservation as DVC has shut down the big rental company. Or for that matter, the member that goes one over to 21, renting all their points at MF cost to friends and family in order not to lose any points. Could they be stuck as well?
No answers here, just food for thought. My brain dump this morning after two cups of coffee.

 

[Sandisw]

Many OP's speak of not being able to use points due to illness, time constraints and other situations. All valid. For a product most owners hold for what, twenty years or so, that will likely happen to most at some point in their lives. We should not face interrogation or have to list a reason for renting points and quite frankly, that must be illegal. I don't ever see DVC imposing a draconian rule like that.

That brings up the situation that you give points to your children who may have a different last name, or friends who have different last names. How nosy does DVC want to get with determining who is booked on your contract and how they acquired the points? It again reeks of overreaching management.

It seems people saw untapped opportunity and started these rental businesses to make money and relieve members of the responsibility and effort it takes to secure a renter by paying them a few dollars a point to handle it. Seems reasonable. It has morphed into a money grab for the most profitable villas using technology and/or employees to hit the "update" button continuously. Since many cancellations show before they move to waitlist requests, these villas are literally stolen right out from DVC members. What is being stolen is the opportunity to compete for a vacation! That is what we bought knowing we have to compete with other DVC members. Fair enough.

The sticky wicket IMO is the DVC members who have crossed over from covering their own trips by renting those most desirable, high profit villas. In order to make any kind of profit it takes high volume and lots of points So which came first the owner bought a gazillion points thinking they were going to stay a month in a GV every year and then life got in the way or the owner that starting renting their extra points and decided to make a go of it as a side hustle and bought a thousand points in five contracts The member who owns one thousand point contract is now potentially stuck with a contract they can never sell without a major loss vs the member who can sell five two hundred point contracts. Is it fair to distinguish between the two because of the obvious disadvantage to the owner reluctant to take a huge loss and therefore keeps renting? DVC will have to get in the weeds and decide EXACTLY what the rules of the road are. Oh, and please define commercial in DVC terms.

DVC has to get it together and find a fair way to handle this situation. It has been going on way too long and has hurt many DVC owners unable to have a fair chance to use their points at their own resorts and yet afraid to rent because it may draw undo attention. We need clearly written rules for this one DVC, not the usual vague language. We also need to understand if these big rental businesses will be able to continue renting or not. Members need to understand if by handing over their unused points to a company to rent on their behalf is in the same category as renting to friends and family. An unwitting person who rents from a big company only to potentially be stuck in the parking lot with no reservation as DVC has shut down the big rental company. Or for that matter, the member that goes one over to 21, renting all their points at MF cost to friends and family in order not to lose any points. Could they be stuck as well?
No answers here, just food for thought. My brain dump this morning after two cups of coffee.

The POS does say that owners do not need DVCs permission to rent and the terms of rental are up to the owners but the contract needs to includes language about the rules for being a resort guest.

So, I am sure that what they do to help enforce the violations will take those aspects into consideration.

 

[theww228]

Many OP's speak of not being able to use points due to illness, time constraints and other situations. All valid. For a product most owners hold for what, twenty years or so, that will likely happen to most at some point in their lives. We should not face interrogation or have to list a reason for renting points and quite frankly, that must be illegal. I don't ever see DVC imposing a draconian rule like that.

That brings up the situation that you give points to your children who may have a different last name, or friends who have different last names. How nosy does DVC want to get with determining who is booked on your contract and how they acquired the points? It again reeks of overreaching management.

It seems people saw untapped opportunity and started these rental businesses to make money and relieve members of the responsibility and effort it takes to secure a renter by paying them a few dollars a point to handle it. Seems reasonable. It has morphed into a money grab for the most profitable villas using technology and/or employees to hit the "update" button continuously. Since many cancellations show before they move to waitlist requests, these villas are literally stolen right out from DVC members. What is being stolen is the opportunity to compete for a vacation! That is what we bought knowing we have to compete with other DVC members. Fair enough.

The sticky wicket IMO is the DVC members who have crossed over from covering their own trips by renting those most desirable, high profit villas. In order to make any kind of profit it takes high volume and lots of points So which came first the owner bought a gazillion points thinking they were going to stay a month in a GV every year and then life got in the way or the owner that starting renting their extra points and decided to make a go of it as a side hustle and bought a thousand points in five contracts The member who owns one thousand point contract is now potentially stuck with a contract they can never sell without a major loss vs the member who can sell five two hundred point contracts. Is it fair to distinguish between the two because of the obvious disadvantage to the owner reluctant to take a huge loss and therefore keeps renting? DVC will have to get in the weeds and decide EXACTLY what the rules of the road are. Oh, and please define commercial in DVC terms.

DVC has to get it together and find a fair way to handle this situation. It has been going on way too long and has hurt many DVC owners unable to have a fair chance to use their points at their own resorts and yet afraid to rent because it may draw undo attention. We need clearly written rules for this one DVC, not the usual vague language. We also need to understand if these big rental businesses will be able to continue renting or not. Members need to understand if by handing over their unused points to a company to rent on their behalf is in the same category as renting to friends and family. An unwitting person who rents from a big company only to potentially be stuck in the parking lot with no reservation as DVC has shut down the big rental company. Or for that matter, the member that goes one over to 21, renting all their points at MF cost to friends and family in order not to lose any points. Could they be stuck as well?
No answers here, just food for thought. My brain dump this morning after two cups of coffee.

Great post and thoughts. Well said.

 

[DanCali]

I’m almost certain they are walking. Most of the big renters on FB have 3 or more Sunday to Thursday reservations advertised for BWV standard view during September. These obviously produce the highest profit at any time of the year. I know from experience (I.e trying myself to start a walk during that period) that each of these reservations was walked in from June.

June through September is wild and also suggests that people with Aug/Sep UY don’t even have the possibility of getting those rooms. If the problem gets slightly worse, Jun UY won’t be able to book them either.

If you owned at BLT would you really want to take your chances and wait for August 4 to try to grab a Theme Park View at BLT for 4th of July next year? In my opinion, many owners walk (sometimes unnecessarily) to make sure they get their desired dates. I say "unnecessarily" because, if you wait 7 days, that inventory gets dropped and just sits there for several more weeks.

So in the case of BWV standard studios, how do you know these are not owners walking reservations to make sure they get their desired reservation dates (say for July or August), but have zero intention to rent? I don't think you can really distinguish that hypothesis from the one you raise about speculators walking from June to September for speculative rentals unless you check every day at 7:55am (not 8:00) and see nothing available at 11 months out, and only if that happens every single day which would indicate everything is walked and nobody ever stops walking for actual summer reservations they may desire.

But from my experience, that's definitely not the case with BWV standard view since I've had reasonable success snagging BWV standard view reservations for summer months, and not by picking up scraps from the walkers.

There are 52 standard view studios at BWV (as opposed to just 29 boardwalk view). To suggest that all 52 studios are walked from June to September for speculative rentals is, in my opinion, way of an overstatement. Yes, there may be days where everything is reserved 11 months in advance, but with 52 units it's not hard to eventually see something available right before 8am ET, which suggests someone finally got to their dates and stopped walking. The problem you raise is maybe more prevalent with other types of rooms with much lower inventory like AKV value (18 studios) or Aulani hotel rooms (8 units) where it's hard to even pick up days when they are dropped.

 

[BuzzLightyr]

I am glad dvc is taking action. It looks like the are going after the most clearly commercial renters. The ones with dedicated businesses buying points, walking for optimal reservations.

It looks like aulani commercial renters are exiting. I am hoping the boardwalk and animal Kingdom renters are next.

I think fixing some of the point charts is well needed. Balancing across seasons, weekday vs weekend.

Boardwalk in particular. Boardwalk view should cost more than pool and garden view. I think the split in units is tricky as the location of boardwalk views are likely concentrated in more units. Perhaps a fourth category of preferred rooms can be in between pool and garden and standard, drawing from units paired with boardwalk view where you can increase the cost of those rooms and offset with a subset of others.

 

[JackosinDIS]

If you owned at BLT would you really want to take your chances and wait for August 4 to try to grab a Theme Park View at BLT for 4th of July next year? In my opinion, many owners walk (sometimes unnecessarily) to make sure they get their desired dates. I say "unnecessarily" because, if you wait 7 days, that inventory gets dropped and just sits there for several more weeks.

So in the case of BWV standard studios, how do you know these are not owners walking reservations to make sure they get their desired reservation dates (say for July or August), but have zero intention to rent? I don't think you can really distinguish that hypothesis from the one you raise about speculators walking from June to September for speculative rentals unless you check every day at 7:55am (not 8:00) and see nothing available at 11 months out, and only if that happens every single day which would indicate everything is walked and nobody ever stops walking for actual summer reservations they may desire.

But from my experience, that's definitely not the case with BWV standard view since I've had reasonable success snagging BWV standard view reservations for summer months, and not by picking up scraps from the walkers.

There are 52 standard view studios at BWV (as opposed to just 29 boardwalk view). To suggest that all 52 studios are walked from June to September for speculative rentals is, in my opinion, way of an overstatement. Yes, there may be days where everything is reserved 11 months in advance, but with 52 units it's not hard to eventually see something available right before 8am ET. The problem is maybe more prevalent with other types of rooms with much lower inventory like AKV value (18 studios) or Aulani standard studio/hotel rooms (18/8 units of each type).

So, I agree with you here.

I am not saying that all 52 studios are walked constantly… I know that some people stop the walk when then hit their dates prior to September. I too picked up a room at the 11 month mark in August.

What I am saying, is that all those September BWV standard view confirmed reservations were walked to a greater or lesser degree. They didn’t just stumble on an opening every Sunday in September for 5 nights.

 

[DanCali]

So, I agree with you here.

I am not saying that all 52 studios are walked constantly… I know that some people stop the walk when then hit their dates prior to September. I too picked up a room at the 11 month mark in August.

What I am saying, is that all those September BWV standard view confirmed reservations were walked to a greater or lesser degree. They didn’t just stumble on an opening every Sunday in September for 5 nights.

That's probably 100% true.

But I also think that many (50%+) of BWV summer reservations in standard or boardwalk views that will be used by the owners and not intended for rent were probably also walked to some degree (maybe needlessly) which makes the walking "problem" seem worse than it actually should be.

 

[tom1944]

I don't believe it will have any impact of me or how I make a reservation, but I am interested in seeing what happens.


I hate popcorn so that doesn't even come into play.

 

[crisi]

Its nice to see Disney taking action to uphold their end of the contract I signed, as they have a responsibility to do.

 

[tjkraz]

It seems people saw untapped opportunity and started these rental businesses to make money and relieve members of the responsibility and effort it takes to secure a renter by paying them a few dollars a point to handle it. Seems reasonable. It has morphed into a money grab for the most profitable villas using technology and/or employees to hit the "update" button continuously.

That's not really how rental agents work. They don't have control over members' points. Yes, they monitor for availability. But then they have to reach-out to members with points available to rent, and coordinate with someone to book the available accommodation. There's little chance of a run-of-the-mill, private use member missing out on 8am availability thanks to a rental broker.

Now if someone actually owns / controls a large block of points and is able to complete those transactions for themselves, that's an entirely different story.

 

[DonMacGregor]

The "but I often rent out my points to friends or family and my name isn't on the reservation and any changes will negatively impact me" straw man is so old it's been dug up a dozen times, just to be beaten to death again.

Back in the world of logical arguments, no one has said (in this or any other thread) that personal rentals should be banned. No one. I went back through a dozen previous threads and can't even find anyone proffering the argument that the mythical 20 rentals are too many (although I'd seriously argue that no one needs to make 20 rentals per year, regardless of reasoning). Every example I found of purported commercial renters provided screen grabs (until they were deleted by mods) or references to specific social media posts evidencing renters listing dozens of confirmed reservations, many on a rolling basis (meaning the real annual number would be even higher). If the low-level, advertising on Facebook, commercial renter has 24-36 or more confirmed reservations listed, then any more sophisticated entity inarguably has multiples of that number.

So, let's drop the whole blanket idea that any curtailing of commercial renting will prove to be negatively impactful on the non-commercial member simply renting out their points as we are allowed to do under the POS. There's little to no reason why DVC can't set the cap at 10-12 rentals per year, with the ability to request any additional rentals through a simple appeals process. You have a dozen opportunities to rent out to your friends or family or to recoup dues, and some number beyond that in case an emergency arises.

 

[DanCali]

There's little to no reason why DVC can't set the cap at 10-12 rentals per year, with the ability to request any additional rentals through a simple appeals process. You have a dozen opportunities to rent out to your friends or family or to recoup dues, and some number beyond that in case an emergency arises.

I'll give you a reason because I don't think I ever saw the logic in that type of restriction...

Someone renting out points may be doing 10 two-night reservations of studio units. Is that a lot? The answer is probably subjective, because it may be just ~150 points out of 500+ points they own. Put in that restriction in, and those rentals immediately just turn into 4 five-night reservations or 3 seven night reservations, or maybe just a single reservation of a 2BR unit. It changes almost absolutely nothing at least as far as the volume of point rentals.

 

[DonMacGregor]

I'll give you a reason because I don't think I ever saw the logic in that type of restriction...

Someone renting out points may be doing 10 two-night reservations of studio units. Is that a lot? The answer is probably subjective, because it may be just ~150 points out of 500+ points they own. Put in that restriction in, and those rentals immediately just turn into 4 five-night reservations or 3 seven night reservations, or maybe just a single reservation of a 2BR unit. It changes absolutely nothing.

True. I may find next year that I need 120 one-night studio rentals too. Reductio ad absurdum arguments are a slippery slope.

ETA: are those people making all those reservations in their own name? If you're renting just to recoup dues, there's zero reason to make 10 reservations, when you can just make 3 or 4. But, we're talking about 20 reservations which again, no one has suggested be changed (I simply doubt you need that many, but it's not my call so...). Heck, an Orlando local member can make a one-night reservation every week of the year if they want, as long as their name is on the reservation, and I'm cool with that.

 

[MICKIMINI]

I'll give you a reason because I don't think I ever saw the logic in that type of restriction...

Someone renting out points may be doing 10 two-night reservations of studio units. Is that a lot? The answer is probably subjective, because it may be just ~150 points out of 500+ points they own. Put in that restriction in, and those rentals immediately just turn into 4 five-night reservations or 3 seven night reservations, or maybe just a single reservation of a 2BR unit. It changes almost absolutely nothing at least as far as the volume of point rentals.

Pretty much my thought of a member renting out 1000 points over one weekend to 21 friends and family (say for a wedding). That puts the member over the limit of 20, vs renting a bungalow that could eat up those points easily on one reservation.