Aggressive anti-rental email response from MS

[Nursemanit]

Considering taxes ( Federal Income/State Income/Florida ToT) - and MF I could rent all my points at $20/point and not make a profit so I am safe -

 

[Huskerpaul]

My formula test for renting DVC for a "profit".

Contract Purchase Price + Total Maintenace Fees paid to date < Total rents collected from all DVC rentals to date.

 

[Sandisw]

In my 60 years on this planet, one of the more amusing observations I have made is that when the subject of rule changes arise, Be it sports, civil or criminal law, the tax code, travel, whatever, those who are most vocally against it are typically those most in fear of being in violation of said rule changes.

In other words, the most vocal or argumentative voices on either side are usually the least objective.

I readily admits I have been pretty vocal here and do not rent my points.

I just think that many of the concerns people have revolve more around spec rentals and that because of the internet there is a lot more we can see that we didn’t before.

Look at online booking and how much more info we know about booking patterns that we did not when it was call in only.

Lots of assumptions too being made regsrding how many rentals are from the same owners or brokers vs just a lot of owners who now use confirmed reservations route vs just points route.

 

[Sandisw]

With all this talk about rentals limiting availability for members, is it just me who is (1) always able to get exactly what I want at 11 months, (2) usually able to get what I want, or something close to it, at 7-11 months, and (3) very often, via waitlist or stalking, able to get something that makes me very happy when much closer than 7 months?

Book at 11 months and always get the resort I want.

Never been shut out of booking a trip. I have engaged in some short term walking…but only for my early Dec trips.

 

[DonMacGregor]

I readily admits I have been pretty vocal here and do not rent my points.

But, with all due respect, that fact has little to do with the discussion in the thread (as it seems you are alluding to). I'm reasonably certain no one has suggested that you can't make as many reservations on your dashboard as you want to, or make as many changes as you want to those reservations, or change the guests as you see fit. You should (and can) make a hundred every year if you want to. It's what happens after that that makes a difference.

The issue is actual point utilization: how many times are those points actually used to check in on a reservation for someone other than the owner. Not simply reserved on your dashboard for someone other than you, but actually used for a reservation where someone checks in and uses those points to pay for the stay.

Internet rental sites are merely used as evidence that there are individuals or other entities that not only make multiple reservations, but then post those reservations for public rent, either on a rental site or Facebook, or wherever. EVERY reservation they make that is posted for rent is one that they anticipate that they will use, and none of them are for personal use.

 

[DonMacGregor]

Book at 11 months and always get the resort I want.

Never been shut out of booking a trip. I have engaged in some short term walking…but only for my early Dec trips.

Again, no disrespect intended, but this is the perfect example of the argument from anecdote fallacy. You can't simply rely on purely subjective examples from your personal experience, because it overlooks the fact that one (possibly isolated) example can't stand alone as definitive proof of a larger or broader premise.

I could also argue that I really love SSR standard view studios (I don't, but go with it), and I've never been shut out, even at 3 or 4 months, and I've never had to waitlist or walk a reservation. Similarly, it's like someone with 700 or 800 points telling a new owner with just 150 that they never have to borrow or buy OTU points because they "know how to better utilize their points".

 

[Sandisw]

But, with all due respect, that fact has little to do with the discussion in the thread (as it seems you are alluding to). I'm reasonably certain no one has suggested that you can't make as many reservations on your dashboard as you want to, or make as many changes as you want to those reservations, or change the guests as you see fit. You should (and can) make a hundred every year if you want to. It's what happens after that that makes a difference.

The issue is actual point utilization: how many times are those points actually used to check in on a reservation for someone other than the owner. Not simply reserved on your dashboard for someone other than you, but actually used for a reservation where someone checks in and uses those points to pay for the stay.

Internet rental sites are merely used as evidence that there are individuals or other entities that not only make multiple reservations, but then post those reservations for public rent, either on a rental site or Facebook, or wherever. EVERY reservation they make that is posted for rent is one that they anticipate that they will use, and none of them are for personal use.

I get that but I still don’t agree with people who think that limits need to be put in place that prevent people from renting using a broker, or lower the threshold, and don’t allow more than X number of booked trips each year without the owner, etc.


Yes, those sites show a lot of rentals, no question, but how many memberships with DVC exist? Certainly enough to say that even if every owner decided to offer a handful of rentals a year from their membership, we’d see a ton of rentals.

Since we have the right to rent out our points, it comes down to how many rentals a year per owner or membership should one be allowed to have before it’s evident they are using it for commercial reasons? No way any of us will agree on that.

I personally think the 20 in a rolling 12 month period is fair…because it’s 20 in the names of others, which would account for some of them being family and friends.

There are a lot of reasons people now rent and you may have it happening more than before…to use for other trips. People give that advice all the time....rent and pay cash for that cruise, etc.

But, If I did spec book and decide to rent two or three reservations a year, it doesn’t turn me Into someone using my three memberships for a commercial purpose.

So, I don’t want to see things changed because I think there is a good balance in the rules…and I do think that if DVCMC had data to support a ton of memberships were in violation they would go after them.

As I said, just seeing 500 plus confirmed reservations on a brokers site doesn’t mean those Are a violation…if there are 200 owners involved, then that keeps it well within limits.

 

[Sandisw]

Again, no disrespect intended, but this is the perfect example of the argument from anecdote fallacy. You can't simply rely on purely subjective examples from your personal experience, because it overlooks the fact that one (possibly isolated) example can't stand alone as definitive proof of a larger or broader premise.

I could also argue that I really love SSR standard view studios (I don't, but go with it), and I've never been shut out, even at 3 or 4 months, and I've never had to waitlist or walk a reservation. Similarly, it's like someone with 700 or 800 points telling a new owner with just 150 that they never have to borrow or buy OTU points because they "know how to better utilize their points".

I track things during popular times and there has never been any resort that was sold out of every room for any booking.

Whether someone gets a specific room or not is based on the whole first come first serve nature of our system.

But, not one owner has ever been shut out of booking something at their home resort for a trip they wanted, It might not be a studio, or the view they wanted, but there are always rooms to book 365 days a year. Of course, they might have to accept fewer days, waitlist, etc. but it’s the same none the less…what happens during high demand times of the year.

So, many of the complaints do seem to be around people who lost out on a high demand rooms, like BWV SV, RiV SV, AKV value, etc. IMO, not enough of those to go around and if someone wants to book and rent a popular room at a popular time, it doesn’t automatically mean it should be stopped, unless that owner is violating the commercial purpose clause of 20 or more reservations.

There is not any “fix” to the commercial purpose clause that can all of a sudden make others get those rooms

 

[DonMacGregor]

But, not one owner has ever been shut out of booking something at their home resort for a trip they wanted, It might not be a studio, or the view they wanted, but there are always rooms to book 365 days a year.

Ok, well on that note we'll just have to agree to disagree and move on.

 

[zachatak]

Is this horse not dead yet? All over 1 owner getting 1 email that may or may not be DVCs official or unofficial stance on renting.... I've read this whole thread and have read the same points stated 17 different ways but with no actual intellectual progression towards any type of resolution. I'm all for healthy debate but I'm officially done reading this one

 

[ILoveMyDVC]

Mixed feelings on this. I have rented when I had no choice but I did not buy with the intent to rent out nor would I ever reserve a prime week (taking it away from members) to line my pockets.
I'm all for a crackdown on the habitual renters.

 

[take36]

Mixed feelings on this. I have rented when I had no choice but I did not buy with the intent to rent out nor would I ever reserve a prime week (taking it away from members) to line my pockets.
I'm all for a crackdown on the habitual renters.

Same!

Given how lucrative dvc renting can be, more dvc resorts that cost a lot more to buy, and the low barrier to entry for brokers, it is only a matter of time before spec renting and broker assisted renting becomes prevalent enough to cause a problem. Disney building more DVC resorts to absorb and hide the problem via more availability is a way to temporary mitigate the problem.

 

[OKW Lover]

My formula test for renting DVC for a "profit".

Contract Purchase Price + Total Maintenace Fees paid to date < Total rents collected from all DVC rentals to date.

Please excuse this nit-picky analysis but I'm a recovering bean counter.

Your formula should spread the contract purchase price out over the number of years of the contract. So, if you are in the 10th year of a 40 year property, only 25% of the purchase price would be appropriate to include.

 

[Sandisw]

Same!

Given how lucrative dvc renting can be, more dvc resorts that cost a lot more to buy, and the low barrier to entry for brokers, it is only a matter of time before spec renting and broker assisted renting becomes prevalent enough to cause a problem. Disney building more DVC resorts to absorb and hide the problem via more availability is a way to temporary mitigate the problem.

Remeber though the rules apply to each membership and it’s owners individually and not the group as a collective group.

So, when deciding what to do, they have to look at your or my membership on its own and set rules that define a pattern of rental activity such that it doesn’t conflict with the renting we are allowed to do.

 

[Nursemanit]

Is this horse not dead yet? All over 1 owner getting 1 email that may or may not be DVCs official or unofficial stance on renting.... I've read this whole thread and have read the same points stated 17 different ways but with no actual intellectual progression towards any type of resolution. I'm all for healthy debate but I'm officially done reading this one

I disagree

 

[lawboy2001]

Is this horse not dead yet? All over 1 owner getting 1 email that may or may not be DVCs official or unofficial stance on renting.... I've read this whole thread and have read the same points stated 17 different ways but with no actual intellectual progression towards any type of resolution. I'm all for healthy debate but I'm officially done reading this one

I agree....and I'm the OP!!!! I've created a franken-thread that just won't die!! Enough already people! I've been on a 10 day vacation since I posted and come back and this is still one of the top threads??

However, I see I have a message from a supervisor from MS about my complaint so I may have an update about this soon

 

[crisi]

Please excuse this nit-picky analysis but I'm a recovering bean counter.

Your formula should spread the contract purchase price out over the number of years of the contract. So, if you are in the 10th year of a 40 year property, only 25% of the purchase price would be appropriate to include.

Arguably, since the contract is by definition for personal use (personal use including making reservations for your kid and his family), you shouldn't amortize the cost of the points over the term of the contract for the purposes of determining profit for a non commercial casual rental - the original purchase price being a "personal expense." Disney could argue - possibly unsuccessfully, but since it would require the legal system to figure out for sure if it got to that point, it would be expensive to find out - that renting for anything over the cost of dues on the points used to make the reservation constitutes "profit." Since you'd only be renting for the cost of dues, you wouldn't have taxes as an expense since you wouldn't make a profit.

But Disney is unlikely to go that far in enforcing a commercial use clause. They are far more likely to go after big renters who are easily identifiable from patterns such as booking most reservations on a different name, those who are advertising their spec rentals (which is what I think annoys the membership more than anything), people who are buying, stripping and renting, and selling, those getting around maximum point ownership by having multiple "owners" within the same address and/or owning within corporate entities or trusts, and not worry about someone who rents their points - even if they make a profit - in a casual fashion. Then again, its Disney - sometimes when they decide to address an issue, they go for overkill. And sometimes they don't address an issue at all. The Way of the Mouse is inscrutable.

 

[DonMacGregor]

Is this horse not dead yet? All over 1 owner getting 1 email that may or may not be DVCs official or unofficial stance on renting.... I've read this whole thread and have read the same points stated 17 different ways but with no actual intellectual progression towards any type of resolution. I'm all for healthy debate but I'm officially done reading this one

I disagree. I think the original discussion revolved around that single email for about a page an a half, then morphed into a broader debate regarding the current rental ecosystem. The fact that the issue is still being debated 22 pages later, suggests that that is an underlying concern for more than a few folks, and that this incident simply acted as a lightening rod for THAT discussion. This post, or some other post, doesn't really matter. If it was a moot point, we wouldn't still be here.

I think most would agree that the initial email response was an outlier, and not suggestive of any sort of proactive move on DVC's part.

 

[han22735]

I agree....and I'm the OP!!!! I've created a franken-thread that just won't die!! Enough already people! I've been on a 10 day vacation since I posted and come back and this is still one of the top threads??

However, I see I have a message from a supervisor from MS about my complaint so I may have an update about this soon

well???? lol

 

[GoingSince1990]

Arguably, since the contract is by definition for personal use

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe that nowhere in the rules is there a “definition” that a contract is “for personal use”.