DVC owners speculatively booking prime vacation times and renting them for profit

[mprewitt]

This post concerns the practice of some members booking "choice/prime" reservations, not with the intent of actually using them for themselves, their family, or their friends, but with the sole intent of selling them to a non-DVC member for profit. I believe that this speculative booking with the intent of renting is unfair to other DVC members.

I am not against transferring of points between DVC members. I am not against renting of excess or unusable points to non-DVC members. I don't have a problem with members renting confirmed reservations that they initially had intended on using, but now something has come up that prevents them from doing so.

I do have a problem with members booking choice reservations (choice times: Christmas/New Years; choice rooms: Grand Villa; choice locations: BCV during F&W) with the intent of never using them, but with the sole intent of selling the reservations for profit.

A reservation made for rental purposes is likely to be held for many months awaiting a non-member who is interested in the specific date / resort / room size that has been booked. I don't think anyone objects to people booking trips for actual use, nor do they object to rental transactions where a room is booked as a result of a request from the renter. It's the speculative renting that rubs people the wrong way.

I feel this practice is detrimental to other DVC members, as it hurts their chances of booking those "choice" reservations themselves.

It’s undeniable that if people stop pre-booking reservations for the sole purpose of renting months down the road, more people will be successful at booking their preferred accommodation at 11 or 7 months.

DVC and the POS prohibit commercial (i.e., for profit) renting, speculative or otherwise. Using DVC primarily to rent and make a profit (speculatively of high demand times or not) falls under that definition.

Use of Vacation Homes and recreational facilities for commercial purposes or any purposes other than the personal use described in this Declaration is expressly prohibited. "Commercial Purposes" includes a pattern of rental activity or other occupancy by an Owner that the Board, in its reasonable discretion, could conclude constitutes a commercial enterprise or practice.

[lockedoutlogic]

where'd this come from?

newspaper? mailing? another e-board? official statement?

[Maleficent's Dad]

I'd like to know where this came from as well. :confused:

I'm a bit confused. When booking a ressie, you have to give the names of all those staying for that time period. Are you then able to call MS a few weeks out and take your own name off? add a total stranger's name? I would think this would raise some serious red flags to DVC MS.

Where did you get this "speculative" information for your post?

[dlpmikki]

There is a yahoo group newsletter that mentioned this last Monday. That was the first I had ever heard of it. They mentioned a renting board that had recently changed their rules to prevent this. If it was a regular occurrence it is somewhat surprising that rules had not been changed long before this. I won't mention the board concerned here because of Intercot's terms of service.

As we do not do rentals on this board it is not terribly relevant anyway.

[mprewitt]

There is another site that has a heavily used "Rent/Trade" forum where members sold pre-booked reservations or points. There has been a lot of discussion on this board as to whether the board was doing a service or a disservice to DVC members.

Boards like this one are probably the main reason renting even exists. Without these boards, there would surely be a lot fewer owners renting points or reservations to strangers, and most of us would not even know renting existed or feel any effect from it. The boards may not have any legal obligation or responsibility to manage the DVC program, but they certainly have influenced (and continue to influence) the way members use the program. So a case could be made that the boards have some obligation to mitigate the negative effects of their influence.

The board has, in fact, implemented new policies and rules in an attempt to reduce the amount of commercial (i.e., for profit) and speculative renting.

[mprewitt]

I'm a bit confused. When booking a ressie, you have to give the names of all those staying for that time period. Are you then able to call MS a few weeks out and take your own name off? add a total stranger's name? I would think this would raise some serious red flags to DVC MS.

The practice of calling back and changing the name of the occupants to total strangers is allowed by DVC MS. I think the current threshold, to my knowledge, is when someone does this 20 times in a year, they are flagged as a commercial renter and the reservations are cancelled.

[lockedoutlogic]

The practice of calling back and changing the name of the occupants to total strangers is allowed by DVC MS. I think the current threshold, to my knowledge, is when someone does this 20 times in a year, they are flagged as a commercial renter and the reservations are cancelled.

ok...i think I've got it...

I understand your concern...but I don't think it's going to reach epidemic proportions or cause a mass disturbance.

I'm fairly certain some people have done this since DVC inception...I would imagine most being in a situation where they couldn't use the points and would have lost them if they didn't book a res at WDW with them...then rented the res to a third party.

I don't like it....but many cases are probably understandable. I'm not sure there is a trend of point sharks buying up plots and setting up e-businesses selling them...though i'm sure it's happened.

But remember, DVC is a property ownership in every legal sense. It's not a sorority with a secret handshake and a codeword. got the money? you're in. It's more like a country club..I guess :blush:
But people would have to be given some flexibility in using there points...being that they do pay real estate tax (if a pitifully small number) to own it and yearly fees.
It's like if Angolan opium dealers wanted to buy the house next to yours. Sure, you don't want them there...but as long as they are in the country legally and have the green...they have a right to buy it...until the DEA raids.

But if your concern is not being able to get your reservations...the culprit are not timeshare renters...it's simply adding to many fish to the DVC pond.
IT will progressively be harder to get some of the locations...especially BC and WL...because more people will have a crack at it. Don't think that newer members won't have friends who are older members use the 11 month window to get them in either...it happens and will more in the future. But they are trading points for points....so that is perfectly legit.

What will happen in the very near future is Saratoga, OKW, and AKV will always be available...the others will rarely be available.

Mark it down...

[DVC2004]

Believe me, Disney is totally aware of who's renting casually and who's setting up a business. It won't reach epidemic proportions. Disney is all about keeping members happy and rooms available.:thumbsup:

[mprewitt]

ok...i think I've got it...

I would imagine most being in a situation where they couldn't use the points and would have lost them if they didn't book a res at WDW with them...then rented the res to a third party.

I don't like it....but many cases are probably understandable.

What you refer to is perfectly acceptable, but is not the problem I am referring to.

I'm hoping Disney will do more to resolve the situation. Everytime I visit the "Rent a Confirmed Reservation" board, I get a bit upset at the folks who are doing what my first post discusses. The worst thing is, they simply don't care if it negatively impacts other members.

[lockedoutlogic]

What you refer to is perfectly acceptable, but is not the problem I am referring to.

I'm hoping Disney will do more to resolve the situation. Everytime I visit the "Rent a Confirmed Reservation" board, I get a bit upset at the folks who are doing what my first post discusses. The worst thing is, they simply don't care if it negatively impacts other members.

I would hope that those that have owned DVC a little longer than you or I would comment as to how much of a problem this has been....

I've only had DVC for about 9 months....you have had it less....

But My inlaws have had it for 8 years...and other close friends 10+

I don't think i've ever heard of any of them saying "blast those DVC pimps!!!"...or anything to that effect....

But then again...we take the economical approach (no high seasons, only use weekends sometimes)...the high season crowd is a completely different animal.....

...a tired, less traveling for their points, line trained kinda crowd...

[MaizeNBrew]

I've been a member for 6 years VWL and have yet to see it as a problem. The toughest times to get, I believe are the 2 big holiday weeks and then the very low point weeks. Neither of these options interest me, so perhaps it isn't a problem.

We have always know what are dates are going to be more than a year out, and always call 11 months to the day. I do believe that as there a more and more DVC properties, more and more people are going to have harder time finding things at 7 months. So my big advice to prospective buyers are is "buy where you want to stay". Perhaps some "DVC pimps" will add to this slightly but I think it is just a drop in the bucket, really. As mentioned above, just the sheer size of a property like SSR and people trying to trade out is going to have a much greater impact trying to get at the 7-month mark.

[GAN]

This is definitely an issue. But a problem? Not so sure, not yet anyway. I own at SSR and just booked BWV(3 studios) during F & W at the 7 month mark with no problem. This is a very busy time of year for BWV & BCV. I think the people being hurt are those that are waiting to make reservations. Unfortunately the system is set up to allow these "commercial" renters -maybe DVC doesn't regard these "pimps" as much of a negative as most of us.

[mprewitt]

This is definitely an issue. But a problem? Not so sure, not yet anyway.

Unfortunately the system is set up to allow these "commercial" renters -maybe DVC doesn't regard these "pimps" as much of a negative as most of us.

I haven't been personally affected by the issue, as I book at the 11-mo window and have never tried to book Christmas, New Years, a Grand Villa, or a BWV Std View yet.

I don't think DVC has any incentive to try to address the issue beyond what they currently do.

[DVC2004]

I don't think DVC has any incentive to try to address the issue beyond what they currently do.

I've never had an issue yet getting what I want as a member of over 3 years (and we go 2-3 times per year at various times and villa sizes ). You mentioned it's not affected you either. There's always going to be somebody who abuses the system in any aspect of life. I guess I don't understand why this is such an issue. I've read on the boards before someone who was upset about MNSSHP- they were concerned that some guests who did not pay for the party ticket would hang out and watch the parade. Why worry about these things? If it becomes widespread enough that it is shutting down reservations for members DVC I am sure will address and take further action.

[hubbyofadisneyholic]

This issue has been debated for years on some other sites and in the past a well known auction site (that I'm sure can't be mentioned here) was loaded with listings of available DVC ressies.
If I recall, the rules were changed last year to severely limit the number of times an individual owner could rent their points in a given year. Never having tried to rent points, I don't know if that is seriously being enforced.

I'm sure Disney could stop it if they chose.
Just as they could stop the obnoxious behavior in the parks if they chose.
But as long as the $$$ are rolling in to them they will choose to pretty much turn a blind eye.