Point renters

[_auroraborealis_]

Sure they do still represent a cheap resale purchase, but the high dues would seemingly negate some of that.

YOU know that, and I know that, but I've definitely seen buyers who buy based on the cost of contract not total cost of ownership. Saw one elsewhere just the other day complaining about trying to book on-property for fall and how she can't ever get Boardwalk at 7 months for Food & Wine. Said she bought like 3 years ago. Not everyone does the research, and I think we've all seen some of that. (Saw someone the other day assuming they could book HHI studios mid-summer every other year on non-home resort points.)

I do think Saratoga and AKV have the larger impact, although it does seem more AKV owners actually like AKV, versus the near-universal nose-holding people seem to do with Saratoga. I actually rather like Saratoga; my issue is more that I didn't choose home resort, and my kids will NOT share a bed, making both the studio and 1BR units issues. I'm likely to sell the Saratoga contract; it's all gravy since I didn't buy it.

That seems a little aggressive. There are 110 Studios at Beach Club...133 at Bay Lake Tower...296 at Animal Kingdom Lodge. The rental market is brisk but I don't see it being anywhere close to filling 90% of those rooms on a recurring basis.

I don't think @lisaviolet was saying 90% of the occupancy was rental. She's saying most of the rental requests are studios. It may be less than 90%, but I'd guess the majority of requests are for the smallest units (with a healthy dose of AKV Value/BWV Standard/BLT Standard, because they're cheapest).

 

[tjkraz]

I may be wrong, but I interpreted @lisaviolet 's post to mean that 90% of rental requests are for studios, not that 90% of studio reservations are being held by renters.

Ah, that makes sense. Fair enough.

I'm sure Studio demand has risen over the years. Not just renters but with DVC marketing smaller and smaller point contracts, there are more people buying to stay in Studios today than 10-20 years ago.

Poly seemed to be an effort to offset the higher demand, though a lot of people derided DVC for not offering any 1b or 2b villas.

 

[Dean]

Depends on how a new resort alters overall demand. When the Grand Floridian was added, yes there were ultimately more owners in the program potentially vying for rooms at Beach Club, Boardwalk and others. However, some of the owners people who would have previously wanted to stay at BCV or BWV suddenly found themselves drawn to GF.

Did overall demand for BCV (or any other resort) increase (VGF owners trying to book there) or decrease (demand reduced as VGF is added as a new 7 month destination for all)? It's impossible for us to gauge the net impact.

The system was probably as unbalanced as it's ever been around 2010 with he massive build out at SSR followed by AKV. Additions of BLT, VGF and Poly can only have helped relieve pressure from the 2 or 3 resorts which topped many owners' preference lists.

The problem with high demand options being added is they'll make little difference in the overall 7 month availability. VGF probably only offsets the points for a villa or 2 at SSR .

I suspect resales of VB and HHI aren't helping. Because of when those resorts went to market, I don't think all the buyers were thinking "yay cheap points I will use them all on campus always!!!" because that simply wasn't a thought one could reasonably have. One might think you'd be able to book OKW or BWV occasionally with them.

But now those points are being sold in resale, and I think we've all seen people who pounce on the idea of those being cheap points, then they'll somehow book VGF, which: hah, not often.

It's hard to say what effect people who bought Poly but who don't want studios are having on the 7-month system. I suspect it's neutral, simply because their attempts to book elsewhere at 7 months leaves Poly studios for Saratoga owners and etc.

It's likely neutral because those points are already in the system. I doubt the % buying VB or HH today planning to use there and at WDW is any different than 10 yrs ago, certainly not significantly so.

The vast majority of renters want the lowest buy in and most ask for studios.

Anecdotally from my experience renting on average 1-2 rentals a year for 20 yrs, I don't think it's nearly that skewed though I'd suspect the ones I rent to are more informed than those of the rental brokers. I'd say it's mostly studios and 2 BR with an occasional 1 BR. Maybe 50/40/10% is my feel for my rental over the years. Certainly less than 90% studios but a fair number.

 

[lisaviolet]

That seems a little aggressive. There are 110 Studios at Beach Club...133 at Bay Lake Tower...296 at Animal Kingdom Lodge. The rental market is brisk but I don't see it being anywhere close to filling 90% of those rooms on a recurring basis.

I'm not that stupid. (Made me smile tjkraz! )

So sorry if my communication was off.

I meant the choice to rent studios over any other room size. That's all.

 

[lisaviolet]

Anecdotally from my experience renting on average 1-2 rentals a year for 20 yrs, I don't think it's nearly that skewed though I'd suspect the ones I rent to are more informed than those of the rental brokers. I'd say it's mostly studios and 2 BR with an occasional 1 BR. Maybe 50/40/10% is my feel for my rental over the years. Certainly less than 90% studios but a fair number.

Interesting Dean. Not going to say much more since you're a regular renter. And would know better. I rent but only when things fall through and when scanning to rent my points, it is usually studios, studios, studios wanted.

But then again maybe you are getting more affluent renters Dean.

_________________________________________________

But I would honestly guess that the percentage for studios wanted is much higher at some of the rental companies. And will only get higher in the future, with the change to five in a studio at a lot of the properties.

At WDW I mean, I am sure at the other resorts it is much more of a balanced request. Probably even more requests for larger units at places like HHI, Aulani etc.

I guess I did have more to say! As usual.

 

[lisaviolet]

I may be wrong, but I interpreted @lisaviolet 's post to mean that 90% of rental requests are for studios, not that 90% of studio reservations are being held by renters.

Didn't see this at first! Thanks Marionnette.

Thanks _auroraborealis_.

 

[crisi]

Ah, that makes sense. Fair enough.

I'm sure Studio demand has risen over the years. Not just renters but with DVC marketing smaller and smaller point contracts, there are more people buying to stay in Studios today than 10-20 years ago.

Poly seemed to be an effort to offset the higher demand, though a lot of people derided DVC for not offering any 1b or 2b villas.

Driven partly by DVD willing to sell smaller numbers of points. It used to be that with a 150 or 160 point minimum buy in, and a weeks annual vacation, you could end up with "too many" points for a studio, depending on what time of year you went. If DVD will let you buy in with 50, all you have points for is a studio.

And the only time I rented points (sample size of one) it was a two bedroom through a broker. However, I did cherry pick the rental - it was a week in a two bedroom worth of points I was looking to rent, and I wasn't interested in making three reservations for studios - I wanted them rented in a single shot.

 

[ziravan]

Wyndham gives me one free guest cert each year and then charges me $99.00 guest cert for every subsequent reservation where one of the owners isn't present at check in.

But. If DVC gets into the fee business, it'll only be a matter of time before we're being nickeled and dimed for everything. Be careful what you wish for.

 

[Dean]

Wyndham gives me one free guest cert each year and then charges me $99.00 guest cert for every subsequent reservation where one of the owners isn't present at check in.

But. If DVC gets into the fee business, it'll only be a matter of time before we're being nickeled and dimed for everything. Be careful what you wish for.

DVC dues are significantly higher so they're charging for the flexibility and the free whatever. I look at it as more pay to play than nickel and dime.

 

[Deb & Bill]

HGVC charges $79 to book a non-home resort.

 

[ziravan]

DVC already hassles renting somewhat. There's a reason why they won't speak with the reservation holder about their reservation and it's not privacy. They want to make it at least a little hassle. And they can justify it because dues pay for MS.

In the not so distant past as I understand it, the brokers were asking members to be added as associate members to accounts so that they could directly manage reservations they were brokering. In that way the members didn't have to bother with add ons, etc. DVC did away with that which was probably a mistake. At least they could monitor which points were likely bring rented by brokers that way. In any case, a change made to make renting more difficult.

The addition of the 20 reservation limit was designed to and did in fact run off a few "megarenters", to borrow a Wyndham term. Legend on the boards speak of a multi thousand point renting family where multiples family members owned the maximum number of points allowed in order to rent. No more.

So. DVC does tighten up rules when it sees fit.

I think it's only a matter of time until the brokers get cease and desist demands from Disney.

 

[Deb & Bill]

...

I think it's only a matter of time until the brokers get cease and desist demands from Disney.

Or at least the ones operating out of the US.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

I think it's only a matter of time until the brokers get cease and desist demands from Disney.

If there was any legal basis to do so I feel pretty certain they would have already.

DVC did their cease and desist - couldn't be associates on more than xx number of accounts. With the internet the way it is now it's much easier to rent directly anyway so removing the brokers might not do much other than cause a few more resales which competes more directly with DVC itself.

 

[ziravan]

If there was any legal basis to do so I feel pretty certain they would have already.

DVC did their cease and desist - couldn't be associates on more than xx number of accounts. With the internet the way it is now it's much easier to rent directly anyway so removing the brokers might not do much other than cause a few more resales which competes more directly with DVC itself.

Doesn't matter if you do the PR right. Publicize the cease/desist (They can demand without following through) with a comment that DVC is considering freezing points turned over to brokers (would only violate rules if they actually did it) and reserves the right to cancel said reservations without notice at any time.

DVC doesn't have to do anything but CONSIDER such a move to put the broker market into complete disarray.

Do we know of anybody actually caught up in the 20 reservation rule?

 

[LAX]

With the brokers serving as middle men, how would DVD even find out a broker is involved in a rental? A broker-assisted rental "looks" the same as a direct rental by the owner as far as I know. How would DVD even know which account to freeze?

LAX

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

Doesn't matter if you do the PR right. Publicize the cease/desist (They can demand without following through) with a comment that DVC is considering freezing points turned over to brokers (would only violate rules if they actually did it) and reserves the right to cancel said reservations without notice at any time.

DVC doesn't have to do anything but CONSIDER such a move to put the broker market into complete disarray.

Do we know of anybody actually caught up in the 20 reservation rule?

The points aren't turned over to anyone - the owners still retain complete control. Limiting transfers prohibits the action you are talking about.

 

[ziravan]

The points aren't turned over to anyone - the owners still retain complete control. Limiting transfers prohibits the action you are talking about.

I agree but you miss my point.

Renting reservations require a substantial degree of trust between owner and renter. A large reason for the existence of brokers is to guarantee the transaction. If the owner flakes, the renter will be made whole.

Maybe the brokers used to exist to match owners to renters, but as already mentioned, the boards can and do meet that function and could fill that niche.

No. The brokers are selling owners ease and renters trust.

But. There's another party to this transaction: Disney. If DVC were to act to destabilize the trust created by brokers, they could easily destroy the broker model.

 

[ziravan]

Now I think Wyndham has hit on something here with their Ovation buy back program that they repackage to sell.

DVC is missing the mark on serious money: THEY should buy points from owners at $15 and offer them for sell for $18/point: first to other owners in the 11 month window then just like CRO at 7. Only Disney can encroach into their own rates with reckless abandon.

If Disney offers full reciprocity on reservations IT makes with others owners points: the renter controls the reservation and can cancel just like CRO, then Disney could poach the entire market. That would drive everyone else out of the market. For just a few bucks more, the renter can get control of the reservation and when it comes to brokers, Disney is a name you can trust.

And just imagine THIS guide pitch: "Not only can you book any resort at 7 months on your points, as a (post 4/4/16) member, you can, subject to availability, have access to other members points for priority booking at 11 months at any resort - at a steep discount over CRO - we have points available from other members to book."

In fact, DVC will TRADE YOU, subject to availability, your points on an 10:7 basis for other member points. If Poly points are available and you want them at 11 months, DVC will trade you your SSR points 100 of yours for 70 of Poly (and DVC will sell those SSR points as functional CRO reservations at the 7 month window for a hefty profit).

With a little ingenuity, DVC could create an extremely profitable broker market doing things others can't do. And they could do it in a way that benefits members looking to stay elsewhere.

Pitching potential members another bite at reserving elsewhere at 11 months (on other members points at either a dollar or point trade discount) would be a genius sales tactic.

 

[ziravan]

Several years ago, major league sports threw in the towel on scalpers and now most leagues allow season ticket owners to sell their tickets on the team's website where the team takes a cut of the transaction.

The teams act as a broker; they create a market that puts most routine scalping out of business.

 

[MrInfinity]

Now I think Wyndham has hit on something here with their Ovation buy back program that they repackage to sell.

DVC is missing the mark on serious money: THEY should buy points from owners at $15 and offer them for sell for $18/point: first to other owners in the 11 month window then just like CRO at 7. Only Disney can encroach into their own rates with reckless abandon.

If Disney offers full reciprocity on reservations IT makes with others owners points: the renter controls the reservation and can cancel just like CRO, then Disney could poach the entire market. That would drive everyone else out of the market. For just a few bucks more, the renter can get control of the reservation and when it comes to brokers, Disney is a name you can trust.

And just imagine THIS guide pitch: "Not only can you book any resort at 7 months on your points, as a (post 4/4/16) member, you can, subject to availability, have access to other members points for priority booking at 11 months at any resort - at a steep discount over CRO - we have points available from other members to book."

In fact, DVC will TRADE YOU, subject to availability, your points on an 10:7 basis for other member points. If Poly points are available and you want them at 11 months, DVC will trade you your SSR points 100 of yours for 70 of Poly (and DVC will sell those SSR points as functional CRO reservations at the 7 month window for a hefty profit).

With a little ingenuity, DVC could create an extremely profitable broker market doing things others can't do. And they could do it in a way that benefits members looking to stay elsewhere.

Pitching potential members another bite at reserving elsewhere at 11 months (on other members points at either a dollar or point trade discount) would be a genius sales tactic.

Yep, if Disney wanted points to be liquid, they would do this and own the system and take the profit for themselves.