DVC plans to target commercial renters

[lowlight]

See, you have made a very big assumption and that I am the only one who got a Resort view studio today by neither walking nor intending to rent.

And that is what is difficult in these conversations because we seem to be mixing renting and commercial renting as though they are the same thing.

Even if I decided tomorrow to offer this for rent…I won’t…and priced it slightly above market value…to offset the cost of an AP…instead of using points through MMB…and it becomes my one and only rental for 2025…it makes no logical sense that DVC can accuse me of being a commercial renter.

Of course, commercial renters book these to take advantage of the extra profit…but that is because they are already a commercial renter.

If you listed it for sale tomorrow, how could you not be assumed to be a commercial renter? It would mean within 24 hours of booking a very difficult to get room at a difficult to get resort on the busiest DVC week of the year, you not only changed your mind, but instead of rebooking a different week, you sold it. There are maybe 1 or 2 reasons this could happen outside of booking a room for profit, but they are highly unlikely. Could DVC prove that? Of course not. That isn't what I'm arguing here. If you do the same thing next year, is it now easier to prove? Sure is. If you do it twice a year, first week of December, and maybe Easter, every year? That's a pattern of activity. The number of people doing this that aren't large scale commercial renters is vastly underestimated, that's my point in regards to cracking down on non-LLC (mediumish) scale renters. You are trying to play a game of semantics here. I respect that we have a disagreement on a foundational level of what constitutes commercial renting. You think it's a threshold, and I think it's intent and pattern of activity. What DVC can enforce as commercial renting is another thing altogether.

 

[sethschroeder]

Then if you don't walk, you've taken the room they wanted anyway. So the net effect is the same.

Well its not the same net.

Walking disrupts people on every single day you dont keep along the way. It disrupts them from booking at 11 months, disrupts if the room will become available, and disrupts other by then that person switching to a different room type.

So now you have someone who signs on randomly or has a waitlist in 1/2/3/4/5/6 days later getting a room that is supposed to be open for grabs at 11 months for first come first serve booking.

They wont fix it in the end likely so better to understand how walking works.

 

[lowlight]

You could as well with the help of AI if you wanted to. This took 30 seconds for me to get.


How to Walk a DVC Reservation
●
Book a reservation 11 months in advance for a time period that is easier to book at your desired resort. For example, if you want to visit in November, book your reservation for September.
●
Wait until near the end of the booked time period.
●
Contact Member Services or modify your reservation online to change the reservation dates. For instance, if your reservation is from September 25th to October 1st, move the reservation to be from October 1st to October 8th.
●
Continue to move the reservation in 7-day increments until you reach your desired dates.
Why Walk a DVC Reservation?
●
To secure reservations during popular or hard-to-get time periods.
●
To book specific room types with limited availability, like studios or value rooms.
●
This strategy is most effective at the 11-month booking window because DVC members have priority access to reservations.

Walking reservations allows DVC members to bypass the limited availability at the 11-month mark by essentially blocking off future dates with an existing reservation. As they "walk" the reservation forward, rooms become available that would otherwise be unavailable. However, this practice is controversial as some DVC members argue that it unfairly blocks availability for others trying to book at the 11-month window.

Sorry, it was part of a struggle session I'm in with that OP, but thank you for taking the time to do that. Let's make this a pretty cartoon with catchy colors and graphics and then DVC can post it on the booking webpage as a pop up for everyone to learn.

 

[Sandisw]

Untrue. If I rent to my buddy Mark, I wouldn’t use David’s or whatever. I’d just book his trip and take his money. Rental. Easy peasy.

But say I don’t have a friend to rent to…so I rent to one stranger the same exact room you rent to your friend but I used a broker and took less money.

Explain how one is commercial and one it not? It only works if you are defining renting to friends and family as the only thing that counts.

Unfortunately, the current language of the contract includes the words “pattern of rental activity” and even DVC would have a hard time trying to explain how the same exact reservation for you counts and for me does not… not to mention it’s pretty much impossible to enforce.

So, let’s try to go back to what level of definition matches the purpose of the limitation. To not use DVC as a business.

Here are the options that currently exist as options within the that would be very easy for DVC to implement.

1. Go back to window opening on check out day. Might cause owners to do day by day, but stops walking and makes it harder to book a hard to get room to rent.

2. Require all owners to submit their rental agreements to DVC when they rent. If it is not submitted, and a guest other than the owner checks in, require the guest to sign it at when they get there..

3. Prevent owners from transferring for money. Expect owners to validate on the phone call that money has not exchanged hands.

4. Use the special seasons list for times of the year and rooms that are difficult to book.

5. Enforce the rules in the contract that limits LlLCs and business who own to make reservations for only those named in the contract.

6. Monitor accounts that have owners submitting a lot of rental contracts and apply the “pattern of rental” actively in a way that most would see as reasonable…or rather can be convinced by DVC it’s reasonable.

If they do all, which already exists, it will address the commercial renting concerns, walking, and high demand rooms.

I bet most of us would be okay with all of these since the current t contract allows for it. May not like it…but no one can certainly say it doesn’t address the issues at hand.

 

[Sandisw]

If you listed it for sale tomorrow, how could you not be assumed to be a commercial renter? It would mean within 24 hours of booking a very difficult to get room at a difficult to get resort on the busiest DVC week of the year, you not only changed your mind, but instead of rebooking a different week, you sold it. There are maybe 1 or 2 reasons this could happen outside of booking a room for profit, but they are highly unlikely. Could DVC prove that? Of course not. That isn't what I'm arguing here. If you do the same thing next year, is it now easier to prove? Sure is. If you do it twice a year, first week of December, and maybe Easter, every year? That's a pattern of activity. The number of people doing this that aren't large scale commercial renters is vastly underestimated, that's my point in regards to cracking down on non-LLC (mediumish) scale renters. You are trying to play a game of semantics here. I respect that we have a disagreement on a foundational level of what constitutes commercial renting. You think it's a threshold, and I think it's intent and pattern of activity. What DVC can enforce as commercial renting is another thing altogether.

Because the contract says I am allowed to rent if I need to…board even stated the occasional rental is fine.

You want that to count as using my membership being used commercially because you personally don’t want owners, including yourself, to be allowed to rent any room,,,you seem to want it to be a system that only certain situations count for appropriate renting.

Even in my example, maybe my reason for renting that now could be because I need that money to help pay down my dues, which are due next week?

And that is the problem for me …you are no longer talking about the intent of the commercial purpose clause and why it was written the way it was.

Who knows what DVC will do, but I’d bet a lot of money they are not going to define commercial as one rental.

Patterns are definitely important and that threshold is what helps DVC define that pattern.

But even with your example, it’s still counting those medium sized renters as an issue because of how often they are renting and not the specific room, even though it’s frustrating that certain rooms are chosen by owners to rent.

Take the hard to get room out of it. My guess is you’d want the same rule applied to an SSR owner renting a 1 bedroom that hardly ever books up quickly?

Which completely changes the nature of it all.

ETA: And, as an owner, you certainly have a right to want to see an owners ability to rent curtailed. Not trying to dismiss your feelings and should certainly share that with them.

 

[chicagodisneyguy]

I respect that we have a disagreement on a foundational level of what constitutes commercial renting. You think it's a threshold, and I think it's intent and pattern of activity. What DVC can enforce as commercial renting is another thing altogether.

This is the real question in my opinion...threshold vs intent & pattern. The large LLCs that rent thousands of points per year should be pretty low hanging fruit for DVC if they decide to crack down on commercial renting. What will be interesting is if/when they go after them....do they stop there. After cracking down on the large point renters I could see DVC then looking at the smaller fish that show a pattern of renting. Personally, if you have say 400 points and rent 200 out every single year I view that as commercial. That shows a continued pattern of using those points for something other than personal use. While I don't really have much skin in this game as I don't really care about renting one way or another....I think if Disney wanted to label this type of owner as commercial they could.

I don't think DVC would go that far to target such 'small fish" but think if they really wanted to crack down they could.

 

[tx911]

The large LLCs that rent thousands of points per year should be pretty low hanging fruit for DVC if they decide to crack down on commercial renting.

That fruit is lying on the ground, just waiting to be picked up.

 

[AstroBlasters]

Thought as much. And look, I get it. If I’d bought 750 points with the idea that I could rent 500 and take “free” vacations. I wouldn’t want anyone messing with that.

Nothing is “free” about it. We put up a large amount of capital upfront and have an obligation to pay dues on an ongoing basis with no guarantee that we will be able to use the points or be able to find a renter.

We plan to use our points most years, but wouldn’t have purchased into the program if there wasn’t some flexibility to rent out in years where we don’t think we will use all of our points.

If the system didn’t work this way then we never would have bought into it because what hooked us was the unholy trifecta of staying in a spacious 2BD at BLT on rented points through a 3rd party broker, paying cash for a room at Aulani, and never being able to justify paying cash to stay at the Grand Californian.

IMO, 3rd party brokers provide a valuable middle man service for the overwhelming majority of owners who end up renting some of their points in any given year.

I bet many other owners first tried out DVC by renting. And, renting is also a pretty darn good deal for the renters because they don’t have the upfront capital outlay and ongoing financial commitment.

The issue is entities that exist for the sole purpose of directly renting for profit as a business and have no intention of using the points themselves. Spec renting makes it worse.

However, if someone in my family has a major medical event after my banking window then I am grateful that we could try to rent out the reservation to recoup some of our costs.

 

[DonMacGregor]

Walking disrupts people on every single day you dont keep along the way. It disrupts them from booking at 11 months, disrupts if the room will become available, and disrupts other by then that person switching to a different room type.

Nah, that room will simply be available the next day, or maybe the next, or maybe 4 days later. It's really easy: you just follow the walkers, licking the floor behind them for their droppings. Just keep that tongue to the floor 24/7 for the 6 day window in which they might walk, and you'll get your room. Easy, and really no inconvenience to you at all.

 

[tx911]

Nothing is “free” about it. We put up a large amount of capital upfront and have an obligation to pay dues on an ongoing basis with no guarantee that we will be able to use the points or be able to find a renter.

We plan to use our points most years, but wouldn’t have purchased into the program if there wasn’t some flexibility to rent out in years where we don’t think we will use all of our points.

If the system didn’t work this way then we never would have bought into it because what hooked us was the unholy trifecta of staying in a spacious 2BD at BLT on rented points through a 3rd party broker, paying cash for a room at Aulani, and never being able to justify paying cash to stay at the Grand Californian.

IMO, 3rd party brokers provide a valuable middle man service for the overwhelming majority of owners who end up renting some of their points in any given year.

I bet many other owners first tried out DVC by renting. And, renting is also a pretty darn good deal for the renters because they don’t have the upfront capital outlay and ongoing financial commitment.

The issue is entities that exist for the sole purpose of directly renting for profit as a business and have no intention of using the points themselves. Spec renting makes it worse.

However, if someone in my family has a major medical event after my banking window then I am grateful that we could try to rent out the reservation to recoup some of our costs.

I agree with everything you’re saying here.

Where we might disagree is an owner that rents 50% or more of their points year after year after year. I would argue that this constitutes a pattern of non-personal use for monetary gain.

 

[AstroBlasters]

I agree with everything you’re saying here.

Where we might disagree is an owner that rents 50% or more of their points year after year after year. I would argue that this constitutes a pattern of non-personal use for monetary gain.

I will agree with the pattern of non-personal use, however I would question if the dollar amount after federal and state income tax, depreciation, and expenses being received is a material monetary gain.

I realize that depreciation is wonky with DVC, but eventually it will be worthless and so it should be accounted for. That’s why depreciation recapture exists if the contract is sold.

 

[tx911]

I will agree with the pattern of non-personal use, however I would question if the dollar amount after federal and state income tax, depreciation, and expenses being received is a material monetary gain.

I realize that depreciation is wonky with DVC, but eventually it will be worthless and so it should be accounted for. That’s why depreciation recapture exists if the contract is sold.

For sure, you won’t necessarily make a profit or even recoup your initial outlay.
But it would still be turning points into money instead of Disney vacations.

 

[Sandisw]

I’m

This is the real question in my opinion...threshold vs intent & pattern. The large LLCs that rent thousands of points per year should be pretty low hanging fruit for DVC if they decide to crack down on commercial renting. What will be interesting is if/when they go after them....do they stop there. After cracking down on the large point renters I could see DVC then looking at the smaller fish that show a pattern of renting. Personally, if you have say 400 points and rent 200 out every single year I view that as commercial. That shows a continued pattern of using those points for something other than personal use. While I don't really have much skin in this game as I don't really care about renting one way or another....I think if Disney wanted to label this type of owner as commercial they could.

I don't think DVC would go that far to target such 'small fish" but think if they really wanted to crack down they could.

And while I may not personally think that action should count as “commercial”, if DVC decided to say that was the threshold that counts as a “pattern”, then I think many would be able to say it’s at least in the realm of reasonable.

That is what many of us are trying to tease out. Where is that pattern, threshold, etc. line that shifts an owner from renting for appropriate reasons and one that is not.

I am not sure what intent means because everyone who rents is doing so with that purpose. They have no use for those points that year.

 

[sethschroeder]

Nah, that room will simply be available the next day, or maybe the next, or maybe 4 days later. It's really easy: you just follow the walkers, licking the floor behind them for their droppings. Just keep that tongue to the floor 24/7 for the 6 day window in which they might walk, and you'll get your room. Easy, and really no inconvenience to you at all.

So true

Heck DVC could keep walking in if they adjusted how waitlists work to be more detailed. Example I should be able to put in a waitlist that is "IF day at (Beginning/End) of stay opens THEN rebook all connected nights available and split the stay".

Another thing that would negatively impact me but be a pro for most people is the ability to "waitlist" up to 24 hours prior to the 11 month booking window. At which point when the window opens it randomly chooses who gets the rooms.

DVC seems to want to avoid the issue though.

 

[tx911]

I’m

And while I may not personally think that action should count as “commercial”, if DVC decided to say that was the threshold that counts as a “pattern”, then I think many would be able to say it’s at least in the realm of reasonable.

That is what many of us are trying to tease out. Where is that pattern, threshold, etc. line that shifts an owner from renting for appropriate reasons and one that is not.

I am not sure what intent means because everyone who rents is doing so with that purpose. They have no use for those points that year.

How about 50% or more if your points 2 years in a row? Not necessarily triggering drastic measures, but at least a letter from DVC?

 

[AstroBlasters]

How about 50% or more if your points 2 years in a row? Not necessarily triggering drastic measures, but at least a letter from DVC?

I don’t trust their IT to get that correct. And how would it work if you have purchased/sold a contract that year? It’s just not a big enough line item in Disney’s balance sheet to justify the IT budget and potential litigation.

 

[AstroBlasters]

For sure, you won’t necessarily make a profit or even recoup your initial outlay.
But it would still be turning points into money instead of Disney vacations.

Right, but turning points into money is different than running a for profit business.

 

[JackosinDIS]

For sure, you won’t necessarily make a profit or even recoup your initial outlay.
But it would still be turning points into money instead of Disney vacations.

Yes, but as previous posters keep saying, commercial is defined as ‘making a profit’ (I don’t agree with this definition for the record).

Now you seem to be saying that you don’t need to make a profit for it to be commercial, but that turning points to money instead of a vacation is commercial?

How about turning your points into an AP?

 

[lowlight]

You want that to count as using my membership being used commercially because you personally don’t want owners, including yourself, to be allowed to rent any room,,,you seem to want it to be a system that only certain situations count for appropriate renting.

I actually never said this, and don't believe it. I'd rather have some ability to rent when needed. If I had to choose all or nothing, though, mark me down for nothing.

 

[tx911]

Yes, but as previous posters keep saying, commercial is defined as ‘making a profit’ (I don’t agree with this definition for the record).

Now you seem to be saying that you don’t need to make a profit for it to be commercial, but that turning points to money instead of a vacation is commercial?

How about turning your points into an AP?

I personally don’t think commercial necessarily requires turning a profit.
For me it comes down to using your points for vacation or turning them into cash.

I would certainly want the latter to be maintained as an option for owners, now and again, but there is a threshold beyond which you are no longer using the points as intended.

Regarding your last, it’s certainly Disney’s prerogative if they want to allow point use for APs or LL or Dining plans etc. Those are all still non- commercial uses related to vacationing.