Are we not allowed to provide our thoughts or ask questions?
I wasn't talking about you. Someone offering information on Wyndham policies, as though DVC's will be the same. DVC and Wyndham are completely different products.
This, like other TUG Forums, is a "Discussions" forum, not an "owners" forum -- look it up.
How is that any different from a Disney Vacation Club owner booking a reservation using their DVC points?
I'm sure DVC has the stats but I strongly suspect that overall someone renting will spend much more new money than a DVC owner. The reason is that the new has worn off and thus likely less frilly spending for DVC owners plus they overall are less likely to eat out at as consistently as those new to Disney. It's not an all or none situation though, just gradations.
In Wyndham, there are twice as many sales to existing owners versus non-owners. Existing owners are unlikely to buy more points if they cannot use the points they have and see the vacations they want available for rent.
Are you talking DVC or Wyndham with that last sentence?
Probably both, and Bluegreen, too, and other points timeshares that have guest use restrictions.
When guest certificates were introduced in WorldMark, there were 30,000 more owner arrivals year-over-year. The most popular resorts and units are still just as popular, the difference is that more owners and fewer renters are occupying those times.
And, most importantly, not appear in any printout highlighting all the times an owner did NOT visit his own unit.
So what do prolific renters adding an unrelated guest say when asked this question?
I have no idea. I think renting points to another member might be the better alternative to adding a name to an existing reservation. Transferring has less consequences.
Is the question just asked online and you have to check the box or do these name changes need to be done on the phone? I am sure it is easier to just check a box than to verbally provide an answer that is untrue.
So, if I understand you correctly, if Rick or Cindy is the lead name, but Frau Farbissina (Austin Powers reference) is going to actually appear at the front desk to check in, you would have to call Disney and make Frau Farbissina the lead guest. She might already have been a named subsidiary guest, but checking in means she would have to become the lead guest.
As noted, DVC is strictly a points system, no weeks involved other than a few situations where an event week is guaranteed. IMO it doesn't matter what sales says, if it's not in writing it is irrelevant. DVC sales tends to be better than most but they can stretch the truth at times as well. I am confident this will not be an issue for one who doesn't own a boatload of points and uses DVC themselves routinely as well. There's no way they can police profit, I am confident that was an off the cuff answer or at least won't be reality. As I noted above, for all but the newest resorts, the ability to rent is contractual. One can change the lead name it just taks more effort but anyone listed can check in. DVC does require all names for the room. Rest assured this will blow over and things will settle down for all but the most egregious of renters.I've got a Disney question. I'm not an owner of Disney but have taken an interest in it because people seem to regard a Disney vacation as attaining The Holy Grail of the timeshare world. So I'm curious about it.
Apparently, Disney has at least "said" that they object to people renting out their multiple weeks "merely" to make a profit, having the suspicion that they actually have no interest in actually staying the 58 (or whatever number) weeks that they bought.
First, I have to believe that the Disney salesperson(s) knew full well that the multiple week owner was indeed buying them to rent out those weeks and may even have used that in the sales pitch. In light of their knowing that, it seems questionable to now say that those multiple weeks' owners can't rent those weeks out. Personally, I think that's pretty nasty of Disney under the circumstances.
But, ok, let's assume Disney is steadfast in refusing to allow multiple weeks' owners from renting out their weeks as of now going forward.
It seems to me, knowing even the tiniest bit about Disney reservations, that the owner can continue to be the "lead name" and add the renters as additional guests during whatever week, assuming that the total would not then exceed the total occupancy limit of that unit. Indeed, from what I understand about Disney, the non-lead-names, if they happen to arrive first, can even check in at the front desk if they wanted. And, of course, they can certainly gain entry to their unit if there's an advance check-in resulting in a cell phone getting "pinged" when the unit has been cleared by housekeeping.
So it seems to me that an owner can always, or at least most times, readily establish that that owner had indeed checked in as a guest for that week.
Might not have any incidental food charges, might not have park entry fees charged in whatever manner. But he/she can still theoretically sit in his/her unit, go to the pool, explore Orlando all day.
The question is asked online and on phone, but all you have to say is Yes, it’s personal use. Florida law allows us to rent our TS, so DVC can’t stop renting entirely. They can only forbid “commercial” renting. So all DVC can do is to define “commercial” renting. There are recent reports from sources I consider reliable that one metric they’re using is whether the rental income goes far beyond covering the cost of dues, but how they’ll determine that I have no idea. They do know who the big companies are, and I think they’re going after them first.
Disney does not allow an owner to pay for points transfers from other owners. Does not mean it doesn’t happen, just look at some of the posts on DISboards, but it is not allowed.
There is discussion by some renters of doing this, however every name takes up a slot in the room. So one less potential renter could use the room. A 1br now sleeps only 3 if the renting owner stays on the reservation. And if they are the lead I think others can still charge to the room.
I doubt this is true. You really can’t think DVC operates like other timeshare companies, because they aren’t one. They are a multinational corporation with a side hustle of selling timeshares collocated with their theme parks. The vast majority of buyers plan to use their points for stays while they visit Disney parks, not visit Florida in general. There is really no other reason to own a DVC contract, other than to use their points to rent rooms for a profit to others who want to stay in them while visiting Disney parks.
The context for posts #81 and #83 was for timeshare sales, not total sales. The topic of this thread is ostensibly the DVC crackdown on timeshare rentals.
