Will a Rental Crackdown Reset DVC Resale Prices?

[hilltopper152]

DVC should definitely put this in their “how to use your membership to book a stay” brochure.

“To book a 7 day consecutive stay, simply waitlist every night you want after the walkers have passed your desired date, then call into member services and merge 7 reservations, and voila! Please sign next to the Mickey and date next to the palm tree. Welcome home!”

Ha true... but Disney did overvalue their new resorts that were worse resorts so cheap points at BWV that allow you to walk into Epcot will be popular. The charts are a also very slanted in scale so demand is just high. People just miss out and blame everything else The game has tough seasons for sure but most of us know if you want something you have to get it however you think you can. I rather struggle compared to handing over flexibility and adding more rules to a complicated product. I do imagine big time renters are part of the problem but also think there is personal owners with sizable contracts sitting on tons of reservations they have very little intention of actually using but they just pocket in case.

 

[Mommb]

I don't think DVC will start prohibiting or restricting changes to reservations for all members. As others have noted, this would affect people who planned to take vacations themselves but had to change (due to medical issues, due to inability to get time off work, due to choosing to vacation somewhere else, ...) and are now either giving their points to someone else or renting them out. This is explicitly permitted in the contract, and isn't the situation that DVC is trying to stop.

I also don't think DVC would crack down on serial renters who purchase points only to rent them by cancelling reservations that have already been made. People who rent points may not be able to tell the difference between "life happened" rentals and "this is my income source" rentals, and probably wouldn't recognize that "this is my income source" rentals are not permitted even if they did know about them. It would not be fair to cancel an approved reservation that renters made in good faith.

What DVC could (and should) do is identify the owners who almost never stay using their points and inform those owners that future reservations made in the name of others will not be permitted unless the owners can make a strong case that they are not using their membership as a business. They could start with owners who book more than 20 stays a year for other people, since those owners should already know that that number is more than DVC considers reasonable.

I can see people who didn't use their membership for a year or two for valid reasons (especially people with compromised immunity over the past few years), but I doubt many of those people had 20 or more rentals a year. There would need to be some way to convince DCL that there were special circumstances like this.

I don't know if cracking down on excessive non-owner reservations would reduce the issues with walking, but it wouldn't hurt, and it wouldn't affect people who rent occasionally because they can't use all their points or because they want to bring in income to pay for their dues.

 

[Sandisw]

DVC should definitely put this in their “how to use your membership to book a stay” brochure.

“To book a 7 day consecutive stay, simply waitlist every night you want after the walkers have passed your desired date, then call into member services and merge 7 reservations, and voila! Please sign next to the Mickey and date next to the palm tree. Welcome home!”

Sorry, but I’d guess the bulk of owners go in and get what they want when they want without issues, outside of the really busy times.

I just looked right now for trips starting 11 months from today and pretty much the only rooms that appear to be maybe walked…a few and far between…like less than 5.

Let’s not pretend that booking at 11 months is an issue for everyone all the time. It impacts those traveling mostly in November and December…and even then it’s not every single room at every resort.

But we are getting way off topic, myself included, so let’s get back to impact crack down on renting might have on the resale market.

 

[lowlight]

Let’s not pretend that booking at 11 months is an issue for everyone all the time. It impacts those traveling mostly in November and December…and even then it’s not every single room at a resort.

Yeah, I agree with all of that. So if walking affects me almost 100 percent of the times I want to go (March, April, November, December), am I supposed to console myself that Sandi doesn’t have a problem with her dates, or do I come and see how many others are like me and are tired of it?

I agree with much of what you say- let’s wait till they knock the big renters off and see if that helps. I also agree that anything that harms members using their contract normally is a no go. That includes fees for changes and the other penalties proposed. What we don’t agree on is 1) is walking an issue/is it wrong and 2) can it be fixed? You say no and no, I say yes and yes, there is no magic mix of words that is going to sway the other to their side. I’m a big “burn it to the ground” kinda guy, and I hope as DVC members become younger and more tech savvy, the prevalence of walking forces DVC to fix it.

 

[Nabas]

Sorry, but I’d guess the bulk of owners go in and get what they want when they want without issues, outside of the really busy times.

I just looked right now for trips starting 11 months from today and pretty much the only rooms that appear to be maybe walked…a few and far between…like less than 5.

Let’s not pretend that booking at 11 months is an issue for everyone all the time. It impacts those traveling mostly in November and December…and even then it’s not every single room at every resort.

But we are getting way off topic, myself included, so let’s get back to impact crack down on renting might have on the resale market.

More than what I have seen in the past, this year there was a real battle for Studios at a lot of DVC resorts for the first two weeks in December. Even the normally easy to book Savana View rooms at Kidani are not fully available for those two weeks.

The newer point charts might have something to do with this. When October and November were much cheaper than they are today, the demand for fall vacations was spread across 2 1/2 months. With early December still being cheap, I wonder if it’s shifted booking patterns and made early December even more in demand.

It has for us. In years past, the cheap DVC rooms and nice weather made October really appealing to us. Now that October costs so much more than it used to, we focus on early December even though we don’t like the weather as much.

 

[hilltopper152]

Yeah, I agree with all of that. So if walking affects me almost 100 percent of the times I want to go (March, April, November, December), am I supposed to console myself that Sandi doesn’t have a problem with her dates, or do I come and see how many others are like me and are tired of it?

I agree with much of what you say- let’s wait till they knock the big renters off and see if that helps. I also agree that anything that harms members using their contract normally is a no go. That includes fees for changes and the other penalties proposed. What we don’t agree on is 1) is walking an issue/is it wrong and 2) can it be fixed? You say no and no, I say yes and yes, there is no magic mix of words that is going to sway the other to their side. I’m a big “burn it to the ground” kinda guy, and I hope as DVC members become younger and more tech savvy, the prevalence of walking forces DVC to fix it.

Walking or not, you seem to travel in the busiest periods so sounds like it will be a struggle especially when competing for underweighted studios. Its something that has forced us to travel in "offseason" and we noticed our season is getting more popular too. Sounds like they need to price gouge these high demand periods mostly but hard to say that fixes anything as it mostly just screws those families forced to travel in those windows. Nothing fixes this other than maybe large companies sitting on tons of reservations for the hell of it... just partially helps it.

 

[tx911]

I'm starting to consider buying SSR, just to have that lovely welcome home feeling of being able to get exactly what I want, whenever I want, at 11 months.

 

[Genie+]

Sounds like they need to price gouge these high demand periods

There is no price gouging in a fixed system, there is only demand balancing. The average amount of points per night is already set so any increase will also cause a decrease elsewhere.

 

[Nabas]

Looking at availability, there are:

0 nights available for the next 11 months for AKV Club Studios.

0 nights available for the next 11 months for AKV Value Studios.

7 nights available for the next 11 months for BWV Standard Studios. (Only 2 nights are consecutive.)

Historically, these are by far the most difficult WDW DVC rooms to book.

These rooms are not booked solid for 11 months because of walking. They are booked because they are in extremely high demand.

As I recall, Disney is required by state law to retain 2% ownership in DVC resorts, meaning the rest of us have bought the other 98%. That’s an insanely high occupancy rate for a hotel year round.

Some of us exchange our points, but then Disney is allowed to sell those for cash. Demand remains high.

The problem here is supply and demand.

With Disney selling 98% of the supply, changing the point charts can be used to help balance demand.

But we still have the problem of commercial renters grabbing hundreds (thousands?) of the most desirable rooms and reselling them as “confirmed reservations”. I’m not talking about someone with a half-a-dozen DVC contracts renting out their excess points. And I’m not talking about DVC brokers who offer a relatively small number of confirmed reservations through DVC members with changes of plans. This appears to be happening at an industrial scale and appears to be a relatively recent phenomenon, at least at this scale.

This is hurting all of us DVC members.

 

[hilltopper152]

There is no price gouging in a fixed system, there is only demand balancing. The average amount of points per night is already set so any increase will also cause a decrease elsewhere.

yes of course its all one point base. If they want people to not travel they can highly encourage you to travel in certain periods. I think they keep studios too cheap compared to 1BR but more so the argument is they have not found the balance at each resort for holidays. BWV is bad near food and wine but sept is easy to get other places. Hard to cookie cut the whole collection of properties and also keep a realistic balance of points. This conversation is placing way too much blame on walking. In the end the dust settles and people still find rooms excluding a few ultra popular periods for the cheapest rooms.

 

[hilltopper152]

Looking at availability, there are:

0 nights available for the next 11 months for AKV Club Studios.

0 nights available for the next 11 months for AKV Value Studios.

7 nights available for the next 11 months for BWV Standard Studios. (Only 2 nights are consecutive.)

Historically, these are by far the most difficult WDW DVC rooms to book.

These rooms are not booked solid for 11 months because of walking. They are booked because they are in extremely high demand.

As I recall, Disney is required by state law to retain 2% ownership in DVC resorts, meaning the rest of us have bought the other 98%. That’s an insanely high occupancy rate for a hotel year round.

Some of us exchange our points, but then Disney is allowed to sell those for cash. Demand remains high.

The problem here is supply and demand.

With Disney selling 98% of the supply, changing the point charts can be used to help balance demand.

But we still have the problem of commercial renters grabbing hundreds (thousands?) of the most desirable rooms and reselling them as “confirmed reservations”. I’m not talking about someone with a half-a-dozen DVC contracts renting out their excess points. And I’m not talking about DVC brokers who offer a relatively small number of confirmed reservations through DVC members with changes of plans. This appears to be happening at an industrial scale and appears to be a relatively recent phenomenon, at least at this scale.

This is hurting all of us DVC members.

This is exactly my point. A direct owner at Copper Creek or RIV bought with higher charts. They see BWV standard studio and think... "wow, great value" and so does everyone else. The older park resorts are popular, cheap, and desirable. Add people sitting on fixed reservations for profit and you get unhappy members who want to log on and book the perfect vacation. Punish known parties of large room flipping and balance the points properly (as best as you can - RIV will never be BWV) and hope for the best. Not much more you can do.

 

[Sandisw]

Yeah, I agree with all of that. So if walking affects me almost 100 percent of the times I want to go (March, April, November, December), am I supposed to console myself that Sandi doesn’t have a problem with her dates, or do I come and see how many others are like me and are tired of it?

I agree with much of what you say- let’s wait till they knock the big renters off and see if that helps. I also agree that anything that harms members using their contract normally is a no go. That includes fees for changes and the other penalties proposed. What we don’t agree on is 1) is walking an issue/is it wrong and 2) can it be fixed? You say no and no, I say yes and yes, there is no magic mix of words that is going to sway the other to their side. I’m a big “burn it to the ground” kinda guy, and I hope as DVC members become younger and more tech savvy, the prevalence of walking forces DVC to fix it.

Of course it is frustring for anyone who travels at the high demand times...but it is impacting everyone traveling then, not just you or me...again, I have the same difficulty with early December bookings as everyone else...I don't always get them without going back in and using waitlisting or stalking...or flexing my dates a bit. The difference is, I don't mind having to do that because I know its a very busy DVC time...when I travel January through April, I don't run into any problems with RIV and VGF SV rooms, of all sizes...

And, you are right...I don't think its wrong...but its not that I don't think they can't stop it...I am sure they could...just think that that kind of change is a bad change for the membership....and I'd rather deal with walking because the only true way to stop it completely is to eliminate modifications of any kind to all reservations 100% of the time.

 

[Lorana]

The problem is not the walkers. The problem is the people who are not walking. They are holding onto the nights that I want, meaning I'll never be able to book them. Demand is too high for those nights.

I feel like the heart of the problem is the commerical renters.

Yes, walkers can create issues. Yes, having only 18 AKV Value Studios versus 278 other studios available at AKV (only 6% of available studios are Value) means they will be hard to get and high demand, and I think most owners understand and accept they will be hard to get.

But commerical renters coming in and snagging the value rooms and then immediately holding on to them to rent them out rather than using them for personal use is the crux of the issue. If I lose out getting a Value room because another Owner is using it; so be it. If I lose out getting a Value room because of speculative commericial renters violating the terms of DVC, that's another. That is what I'd like to see go away, and that I think is what Disney cares about.

 

[HyperspaceMountainPilot]

I feel like the heart of the problem is the commerical renters.

Yes, walkers can create issues. Yes, having only 18 AKV Value Studios versus 278 other studios available at AKV (only 6% of available studios are Value) means they will be hard to get and high demand, and I think most owners understand and accept they will be hard to get.

But commerical renters coming in and snagging the value rooms and then immediately holding on to them to rent them out rather than using them for personal use is the crux of the issue. If I lose out getting a Value room because another Owner is using it; so be it. If I lose out getting a Value room because of speculative commericial renters violating the terms of DVC, that's another. That is what I'd like to see go away, and that I think is what Disney cares about.

Yes, though I suspect they only care because Disney itself is finding it harder to fill standard rooms at high rates.

Someone earlier gave the example of how BWV standard is 9 and garden is 14… but if standard became 11, garden would become 12…I think this would (a) dramatically improve availability and satisfaction overall but (b) hurt the minority of people who bought just enough points to spend x nights in the cheapest rooms. It would presumably discourage rental swooping at some resorts’ standard rooms…but BWV’s point chart is so good that rebalancing would still make standard and garden views lucrative rentals most of the year.

 

[Nabas]

Plese stop discussing any specific DVC broker, even if it's vicariously. It's against the rules of this board and a number of posts previously were deleted for violating this rule.

Please respect the rules of the forum.

 

[sethschroeder]

I think it would be a real shame if the rental market tanked completely. For me, it's one of the brilliant flexibilities that makes DVC stand-out against a typical timeshare.

Tanked? It means as a personal owner your points would be in more demand on the one off rental you give.

 

[sethschroeder]

If DVC actually enforced it (which they should) there would be a short term drop but then it would recover. The short term drop could last a few months or a year or two.

Additionally the crack down I am not sure would stop the rentals completely what you might find is that some of the brokers switch over to high end rental only where its a minimum of 7 nights and 2BR or larger rooms or 300+ point reservations. This would allow them to still charge their premium and not have as much volume of rentals.

They could also only book at time of payment with no alterations except possible dates.

 

[sethschroeder]

Imagine if DVC to cut back on confirmed reservations and walking dates by DVC completely stops allowing the modification of names and dates on ALL RESERVATIONS!!! You would have to rebook every time you wanted a change.

Change of dates would make no sense to restrict only that of the primary name on the account.

Additionally even the primary name could possibly be granted on a very limited basis like 1 time ever few years or something to allow for extenuating circumstances.

In the end would make zero sense to have a full rebook when changing dates except when a date overlapped with the 11 month date possibly if you are trying to attack walkers. It would make sense to first curtail rentals though and seeing if that stopped the walking.

 

[Genie+]

It is curious that these seemingly commercial enterprises secure the majority of certain rooms/dates. Either this kind of contract ownership is happening on a major scale, or they have some kind of major advantages. Probably some of both.

Tanked? It means as a personal owner your points would be in more demand on the one off rental you give.

Interesting point.

 

[sethschroeder]

I think the fact that Disney changed the language in the new documents might mean they don't feel they have the tools to enforce any crackdown with the current language.

All in all I'm not fond of the mega renters, but on the other hand, why would I want to have flexibility taken out of the program?

You dont really need flexibility taken out.

You could connect accounts that are likely the same group based on name, address, email domain, business name, and other information.

Then pull all the reservation history for these grouped accounts to identify likely suspects of commercial renting.

You approach them for burden of proof they are not. If they say its for their company use then it should be easy enough to show that they are stays provided to staff or to customers at no charge. Example a marketing firm giving away free stays as part of campaigns would be fairly easy to prove since it would all be documented. You then exempt that account with a check in at times depending on certain metrics you put in place.