PDA

View Full Version : Value of Extended Contracts


nickspace
06-02-2009, 04:54 PM
This idea was raised on another thread but I feel it deserves a thread of its own to foster proper feedback.

If OKW extended resale contracts do not demand a much higher price than regular OKW resale contracts would it be worth while to buy an extended contract at another DVC location if Disney offers this option?

disneynutz
06-02-2009, 05:22 PM
Depends if you really think that you need the extra years.

The OKW extension was handled so poorly that it will be interesting to see what they offer for the next resort.

chalee94
06-02-2009, 05:45 PM
If OKW extended resale contracts do not demand a much higher price than regular OKW resale contracts would it be worth while to buy an extended contract at another DVC location if Disney offers this option?

you'd think it would teach most people that the present value of points 30-40 years in the future is pretty low...

if they decide to offer another extension, i hope they wait till 10-12 years from expiration.

(but for those of us who will be really old in 2042...the question is moot.)

nickspace
06-02-2009, 08:45 PM
Depends if you really think that you need the extra years.

The OKW extension was handled so poorly that it will be interesting to see what they offer for the next resort.

Why was it done poorly?

DisneyWalker44
06-02-2009, 09:15 PM
If WDW and DVC are still going strong 35 years from now, $15 to extend for 15 years will be seen as a huge bargain. In 2042 those that took the option will be laughing their butts off at those that didn't.

When trying to price the value of something 34 years from now, you're guessing about 2 factors. First, the time value of money - how much are you willing to set aside today to get a benefit far in the future. But you've also got to guess how much the item is going to be worth in 34 years. It's the double uncertainty that makes people so hesitate to pay for the extension.

If you take the extension, you are effectively betting on Disney and DVC. I'm going to turn down the extension if it's offered at $15 for my resort. But I sure hope I'm wrong and you guys are mocking me in the future.

We'll see.

Dean
06-03-2009, 06:18 AM
As I noted in the other thread, $15 was too much. $10 was about the max to get a decent amount of participation, $5-6 pp was likely a more reasonable amount. $15 a point for a value 32 years into the future is a huge amount to the member for an asset that will be on the far downside of declining value anyway. Not to mention the dues risks when that extra 15 years kicks in.

Mississippian
06-03-2009, 07:54 AM
....$5-6 pp was likely a more reasonable amount. $15 a point for a value 32 years into the future is a huge amount to the member for an asset that will be on the far downside of declining value anyway. Not to mention the dues risks when that extra 15 years kicks in.
I agree $5-6 was a reasonable amount to ask for an extension, but it was only worth $3-4.

Disney really ripped these people off, and I've never seen so many people happy to be ripped off!

BostonDisneyKid
06-03-2009, 09:29 AM
We declined based on the price as we felt it was not a good (or decent or even remotely sane) offer based on the cost/value. For what it would have cost us to add 15 years to the "end" of our contract at OKW we could have gotten an add-on of a 55-65 pt contract (not including dues) direct from disney or 65-75 pts resale.

I do not have the actual offer readily available but the original notice of the offer I have copied below as a quote...
All Old Key West owners are going to be offered the opportunity to extend the contract end date from 1/31/2042 to 1/31/2057, an additional 15 years.

The price for the extension is $25 per point. If you accept this offer prior to 2/29/2008, the cost is $15 per point with Disney Vacation Club Development covering the extra $10 per point.

If you choose to add this extension, you'll receive a "Lighthouse Memory Capsule" and a special lithograph. If you choose not to accept this offer, you will still get the lithograph but not the capsule.

In order to compensate for the cost (notary) and time required to process the paperwork, all members are getting a $30 credit of their December 2007 dues whether they take the offer or not.

Payment options are through DVC with a 10 year loan with 10.75% interest. You can also opt to finance it privately, pay it in full or pay it using a major credit card. There will be no closing costs.

This offer is per contract. If you have multiple OKW contracts you do not have to accept this offer for all of them. However, it must be applied to the full value of your points to whichever contract you choose.

This is a one time offer. You will not be allowed to extend your contract with this offer at a later date.

The price of OKW points purchased through DVC for expiration in 2042 was $92. With the passage of this extension resolution, the cost is now $96 per point with an expiration of 2057.


A lien will be placed on all current contracts in the form of a special assessment for the extension of the ground lease. The lein is satisfied by either accepting or rejecting the extension.

- Notice in bold they valued the price to be a $4 value but were charging $25 with a "purchase quick option" of only $15 !!! How they got people to sign the dotted line is beyond me. They must have sprinkled a little more than pixie dust in some of the offer envelopes unless some people really, really wanted the "Lighthouse Memory Capsule".

chalee94
06-03-2009, 10:08 AM
Why was it done poorly?

part of it was requiring owners to "opt out" rather than offering the opportunity to "opt in."

so if you owned OKW and didn't want the extension, you still had to go through the trouble of getting your refusal notarized and delivered. (to be fair, DVC did reduce fees to compensate everyone.) but if you didn't decline, DVC had the right to put a lien on your contract, cancel your reservations and so on... not a customer-friendly way to handle such a "great opportunity."

tjkraz
06-03-2009, 10:26 AM
part of it was requiring owners to "opt out" rather than offering the opportunity to "opt in."

so if you owned OKW and didn't want the extension, you still had to go through the trouble of getting your refusal notarized and delivered. (to be fair, DVC did reduce fees to compensate everyone.) but if you didn't decline, DVC had the right to put a lien on your contract, cancel your reservations and so on... not a customer-friendly way to handle such a "great opportunity."

The other approach would have been to market the extension as a separate contract. If they had gone that route, DVC would have been prohibited from offering the extension to current owners living in many states, provinces and countries due to local timeshare sales laws.

I wholeheartedly agree the price was waaaaaaay too high and that DVC should have been much better organized when it came to the extension. But on the topic of how they approached it, I have a sense DVC was in a no-win situation.

Disney_Villain
06-03-2009, 11:06 AM
The other approach would have been to market the extension as a separate contract. If they had gone that route, DVC would have been prohibited from offering the extension to current owners living in many states, provinces and countries due to local timeshare sales laws.

Hi Tim. You bet that would have happened. Living in Manitoba, Canada we would not have been able to extend from home. (As it is, we've had one heck of a time making purchases - sometimes paying for extra flights - where so many of you in the USA can just pick up your telephone and call your guide to purchase.)

We did extend our 230 point OKW contract to 2057, as we thought that 15 years more for the price DVC was intially offering was fair. That brought our OKW contract "in line" with our other contracts in terms of expiration date. Now we have contacts with expirations of 2054, 2057 and 2060.

230 points X $15 = $3450. That isn't that big a sum of money, really. We also don't have to get the full 15 years out of the extension to get good value of out this $3450 extension.

We feel that those who declined their $15/point OKW extensions (due to anything but their impending old age) really missed out on a great deal.

Chic
06-03-2009, 11:49 AM
Disney Villain-I agree with you. I think the extension offered at OKW was a great deal. Maybe I'm missing something but I'm not sure why others think the offer was a rip off. Let's do the math. It costs $3450 to extend 230 points for 15 years. You can stay about 2 weeks or more in a Studio room at Old Key West with that number of points. The current rack rate for a Studio room at Old Key West is about $300 a night for a cash reservation meaning it would cost $4200 to pay for those 2 weeks. The contract pays for itself in one year but it's good for 15 years. We all know that as the years pass that the room rates increase. Just imagine what the rack rate will be for a Studio in 2042 when the regular Old Key West contracts expire. My guess is well over $1000 a night. There are maintenance fees but you can always rent a few of your points to cover those dues if needed. I'm a Saratoga Springs owner and you can bet that if Disney offers us an extension, I'll take it in a heartbeat. I may not be alive or able to enjoy those extra 15 years but my children will still be around and going to visit Mickey Mouse. I think it would put a smile on their faces knowing that daddy purchased the extension allowing them to enjoy prepaid vacations well into their adulthood.

tjkraz
06-03-2009, 12:36 PM
Disney Villain-I agree with you. I think the extension offered at OKW was a great deal. Maybe I'm missing something but I'm not sure why others think the offer was a rip off.

The main thing you are ignoring is interest lost on the money paid for an asset you won't be able to use for 33 years.

Let's say you took that $3450 you paid to extend and had invested it. If you earned a modest annual return of 6%, by 2042 you would have over $22,000 in the bank or $96 per point. Then in 2042 you could take that money and buy a 15-year contract at OKW or AKV or some other resort if you still want to visit WDW.

The real question is whether you do better paying $15 per point now or $96 per point in 2042. I'm forced to side with the latter.

Financially I think the extension doesn't stand up to the least amount of scrutiny. Extended contracts hitting the resale market are not getting $15 more per point than the non-extended contracts.

Under the right set of circumstances it's POSSIBLE for someone to make-out better with the extension. But it would take a virtual "perfect storm" of economic conditions in order for that to happen.

If people extended for emotional reasons...that's fine...it's their money. People buy $80,000 cars every day while a $30,000 vehicle would still get the job done. But economically I think you have a lot more to gain by refusing to extend, investing the money, and looking for a cheap short-term contract come 2041.

logan115
06-03-2009, 01:17 PM
The main thing you are ignoring is interest lost on the money paid for an asset you won't be able to use for 33 years.

Let's say you took that $3450 you paid to extend and had invested it. If you earned a modest annual return of 6%, by 2042 you would have over $22,000 in the bank or $96 per point. Then in 2042 you could take that money and buy a 15-year contract at OKW or AKV or some other resort if you still want to visit WDW.

The real question is whether you do better paying $15 per point now or $96 per point in 2042. I'm forced to side with the latter.

Financially I think the extension doesn't stand up to the least amount of scrutiny. Extended contracts hitting the resale market are not getting $15 more per point than the non-extended contracts.

Under the right set of circumstances it's POSSIBLE for someone to make-out better with the extension. But it would take a virtual "perfect storm" of economic conditions in order for that to happen.

If people extended for emotional reasons...that's fine...it's their money. People buy $80,000 cars every day while a $30,000 vehicle would still get the job done. But economically I think you have a lot more to gain by refusing to extend, investing the money, and looking for a cheap short-term contract come 2041.

Ya beat me to it !! A bit more conservatively I was going to say that assuming 5% returns it would be like paying $17K in 2042.

Chris

Bob Price
06-03-2009, 02:25 PM
Ya beat me to it !! A bit more conservatively I was going to say that assuming 5% returns it would be like paying $17K in 2042.

Chris


Or you could have bought some GM stock and ....ummm..... well.....
Well you or your family could be taking 15 more years of vacations.
Maybe the extension wasn't such a bad idea.

Chic
06-03-2009, 02:35 PM
Help me out. I'm not a whiz when it comes to investment so explain how 6% interest on $3450 is $22,000. You also pay taxes on the interest every year when filing your taxes. According to my math, 6% of 3450 is $207 a year. There are 31 years between now and 2042 so $207 annual interest times 31 years is $6417 interest. Another scenario mentioned was paying $90 something dollars a point in 2042 instead. Really?? Since DVC began in early 1990 the cost per point has gone from $54 a point to $112 per point now. That means more than double the cost in 15 years. As far as the possibility of extensions being offered in 2042, I would think that Disney will begin the 50 year process all over again for the next generation of families. A young family just entering into DVC is not going to view 15 years as enough time to get their money's worth out of the program. Once again, I'm no investment expert so please clarify.

tjkraz
06-03-2009, 02:56 PM
Help me out. I'm not a whiz when it comes to investment so explain how 6% interest on $3450 is $22,000. You also pay taxes on the interest every year when filing your taxes. According to my math, 6% of 3450 is $207 a year. There are 31 years between now and 2042 so $207 annual interest times 31 years is $6417 interest.

The interest compounds meaning you earn interest on your interest.

In Year 0 you start with $3450
In Year 1 you earn $207 bringing your account balance to $3657
In Year 2 you earn $219 bringing your balance to $3876
In Year 3 you earn $232 bringing your balance to $4109

...and the numbers keep going up from there.

Most investment vehicles do not have a fixed rate of interest so you may earn 12% one year and take a small loss the next. But over 30+ years those peaks and valleys will even out. Over the last 25-years the Dow averaged an 11% annual return. That's almost double the 6% I used in this illustration.

(Note that I didn't pick that period just because it returned favorable numbers...that just happens to be the figure I was able to locate most quickly.)

And that 11% came despite things like Enron, Worldcomm, the post-9/11 market dip, the 2008 market dip, etc.

Yes you do typically have to pay interest but that comes when you pull your money out of the investment--it's not an annual charge.

Another scenario mentioned was paying $90 something dollars a point in 2042 instead. Really?? Since DVC began in early 1990 the cost per point has gone from $54 a point to $112 per point now. That means more than double the cost in 15 years.

But I wasn't talking about buying a brand new 50-year contract in 2042. In 2042 (when the initial OKW ownership would end), contracts at SSR will have 12 years left. Extended OKW contracts will have 15 years left. BLT contracts will have 18 years left.

What I was referring to is buying a SHORT TERM CONTRACT in 2041/42 with the proceeds of your investment.

Your end goal is to have OKW ownership until 2057. Here are the two approaches:

1. Pay $15 per point now to extend.
2. Invest the $15 per point. Assuming the 6% rate of return you would have approximately $96 per point in your investments (perhaps much more if you get a higher rate of return.) After taxes let's say you have $70 per point left to play with.

The question is whether--in 2042--you can buy an OKW extended contract with just 15 years remaining for $70 per point. We don't yet have an inkling of how short term contracts will be priced but I'm betting you would have no problem buying a contract with those dollars and pocketing the difference.

YMMV

Chic
06-03-2009, 03:26 PM
The accumulation of interest over the years now makes sense. At 6%, the $3450 will end up being around $20,000 after 30 years. As I mentioned in my previous post, a 230 point contract will get you about 2 weeks a year in a Studio at OKW. The current OKW Studio rack rate cost is $4200 a year without points. If rack rates did not increase over the next 30 years, multiply $4200 times 30 and you get $126,000 in cost you would be paying cash for the room if you did not own the 230 points. I'm aware that the extension is only 15 years so that's a savings of $63,000 from not paying rack rates. Keep in mind that 6% interest over the same 15 years on a $3450 investment will only leave you with a little over $8,000. If you subtract the 15 year interest of $8,000 from the $63,000 cash rack rate, you saved $55,000 by purchasing the 15 year extension. Sounds like a great deal to me.

tjkraz
06-03-2009, 03:35 PM
Certainly extending is going to look better than paying Rack Rates. The discount off of RR is why we all chose to buy DVC in the first place.

But what I'm questioning is whether you're better off paying $15 per point to extend now (or 2007, or whenever you did it) vs. holding onto the money..earning interest...and buying a 15-year contract further down the road. I'm betting it's the latter.

TSMIII
06-03-2009, 05:54 PM
Sounds like a great deal to me.

Chic - Tim's (and others) take on this, that the $15 per point was too high, has been shown to be correct as seen in the sale prices for OKW resales.

If you check out the ROFR thread http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=1960185&page=72, you'll see that on average the OKW2042 contracts are passing in the mid-to-high $60s currently while the OKW2057 contracts are passing in the low-to-mid $70s - a difference of roughly $5-$8 which is pretty much the figure many have argued, and still do, should have been the price for the extension.

Looked at another way, if you really wanted the extra years at OKW:

Say you didn't extend your contract for the $15/pt. for the 15 years - you could today, sell your OKW2042 contract for roughly $68/pt. and then purchase a resale OKW2057 contract for, what, $6 more/pt. and pay $74/pt.

A savings of $9 per point over the extension price offered from DVC.:thumbsup2

Then you could take that $9 leftover from the $15 you didn't pay and invest that! - or buy even more points!!;)

Dean
06-03-2009, 08:17 PM
The other approach would have been to market the extension as a separate contract. If they had gone that route, DVC would have been prohibited from offering the extension to current owners living in many states, provinces and countries due to local timeshare sales laws.

I wholeheartedly agree the price was waaaaaaay too high and that DVC should have been much better organized when it came to the extension. But on the topic of how they approached it, I have a sense DVC was in a no-win situation.As I also noted, it was a no win. My interpretation suggests if they extended the current DVC resorts, they automatically extended all current owners. The only ways around this that I can see is to wait until it ends then sell it again, to have a voluntary opt in and hope for the best or to do what they did or do it for fee. However, as I noted, I don't see they have the legal authority for the SA so they were truly stuck. Likely their best option would have been to actually have a vote of the membership altering the rules specifically for the extension that changed it where it was not an automatic extension if the ground lease was extended. This would have required that 60% of the membership approved it. Actually it may be more complicated than that as it likely is 60% of each unit and 60% of the units but I'd have to review the POS language to be sure. Overall the best scenario was to just extend it for free and give an opt out. That way they have everyone on board as a paying customer, avoid the predictable legal actions and challenges, satisfy the POS and the actual dollar loss is relatively small. They likely could have done so without even creating new deeds if they had chosen to.

0 points X $15 = $3450. That isn't that big a sum of money, really. We also don't have to get the full 15 years out of the extension to get good value of out this $3450 extension.Actually as a lump sum or even financed over 10 years it is a large amount of money ($60K in 30 years at 10%) for a benefit over 30 years out. In addition you are assuming the risks of fees and ownerships for a resort that will be over 50 years old at the time.

Certainly extending is going to look better than paying Rack Rates. The discount off of RR is why we all chose to buy DVC in the first place.But that's part of the rub. That's not necessarily true and when you factor in fees, it's very likely not even close to being true. There's a very good chance that it'll be more expensive to own than to rent for cash for the same or similar accommodations in 30 years. It's a gamble, plain and simple. In addition, if things work out to not be so rosy that some people walk away, the remaining members have to pay the extra in maint.

M-I-C-K-E-Y
06-03-2009, 08:52 PM
Perhaps some extended their contracts for their children (after we're all too "achy" to make the trip to WDW, there's always kids & grandkids some day).

Dean
06-03-2009, 09:12 PM
Perhaps some extended their contracts for their children (after we're all too "achy" to make the trip to WDW, there's always kids & grandkids some day).Again, that makes a number of assumptions all of which may not true. That the value will be there in 33 years, that the group in question will want to go to that resort or system, that they can afford the trips and the ownership and that they are at least as well off or better with the extension that just investing the money. The truth is that for many, none of these assumptions are likely to be true. Ultimately this is a MUCH larger gamble than is a current ownership. IMO even accepting a free extension has significant risk.

BostonDisneyKid
06-04-2009, 08:47 AM
As an OKW owner, another factor in my decison making process was that I assumed many, possibly even a majority, would opt not to extend (for many, individual reasons). So with that being a possability, I consided on January 31, 2042 when all those contracts expire and the resort then looses all those members and funding of the annual dues, then what happens on Feb 1, 2042? The resort, OKW, will still need to function and be mainatined but will only have a fraction of the funds to do so. So then what happens? Who picks up the shortfull in operating costs? Do OKW owners with 2057 contracts take on this burden alone? Do all dvc members share equally to subsidize OKW? Do they shut down a percentage of the buildings, facilities, services, staff by some sort of ratio equalled to that of the expired contract holdings to reduce the operating costs? Do they start selling contracts that begin Feb 2, 2042? At a minimum, OKW will require operations and funding through Jan 31, 2057 but who is going to pay for it?

I had started to ask MS accounting these questions and ended up speaking with many different people within the corporation, but none whom I spoke with could answer my questions with any certainty. Many had speculated as to what might occur but no difinitive answers were ever provided to my questions. Maybe I just had bad luck in who I was speaking with and I never got to the right person/people who could answer these questions... so I stopped asking as the cost factor ($15 per point when I felt the value was closer to a value of $4-$7) was reason enough for me to decline the offering.

Does anyone know what happens Feb 1, 2042 regarding the funding/costs of OKW?

tjkraz
06-04-2009, 09:53 AM
As an OKW owner, another factor in my decison making process was that I assumed many, possibly even a majority, would opt not to extend (for many, individual reasons). So with that being a possability, I consided on January 31, 2042 when all those contracts expire and the resort then looses all those members and funding of the annual dues, then what happens on Feb 1, 2042? The resort, OKW, will still need to function and be mainatined but will only have a fraction of the funds to do so. So then what happens? Who picks up the shortfull in operating costs? Do OKW owners with 2057 contracts take on this burden alone? Do all dvc members share equally to subsidize OKW? Do they shut down a percentage of the buildings, facilities, services, staff by some sort of ratio equalled to that of the expired contract holdings to reduce the operating costs? Do they start selling contracts that begin Feb 2, 2042? At a minimum, OKW will require operations and funding through Jan 31, 2057 but who is going to pay for it?


OKW should continue to operate independently. The points will continue to exist and someone will have to pay the respective dues--either members holding those points or DVD if the points reverted back to them.

Owners at other DVC resorts should not have any obligation toward funding OKW.

They COULD shut down buildings and reduce staff as you suggest. But that shouldn't impact the ownership of folks who chose to extend. They will still have to maintain buildings and services in proportion with the points owned by members beyond 2042.

DVCGeek
06-04-2009, 10:05 AM
This thread has brought out a LOT of things I never considered as being issues with an extension. I'll definitely have to think at LEAST twice if I ever get offered one; sounds more and more like it would be better for me personally to NOT extend (for the potentially massive increase in dues if nothing else from resort age related assessments for repairs and updates) and buy into a different resort at some point, resale or otherwise, assuming I'm still Disneying in 2060!!! But, if I'm alive I hope and plan to be... ;)

LIFERBABE
06-04-2009, 11:45 AM
For those currently selling extended contracts, they are losing big time. They just invested $15 per point last year and they are not recouping that on the current resale market. I know situations change, but it was throwing good money after bad.

To me, extending our OKW was not feasible because the only way to benefit was to keep the contract to enjoy those last 15 years. That meant a loss of liquidity and therefore flexibility if we were ever in a position to sell, we would lose money on the extension without realizing any benefit unlike our current points which deliver now.

DVC devalued the $15 extension from the word go with their pricing. If they cant sell a 2057 contract with a $15 spread, then why do we think we can?:confused3

Chic
06-04-2009, 01:26 PM
I'm thinking that once the original 2042 contracts expire, DVC will begin selling another round of 50 year contracts for the resort. The new contracts should be priced much lower. Why? The people who bought the original contracts have already provided the funds to cover the cost to build OKW. In other words, Disney can now sell something that doesn't cost them any revenue to build. The maintenance fees will cover upkeep for the resort but whatever DVC chooses to charge per point will be 100% profit. It's a winning situation for both parties. Even though the resort will be 50 years old, the low price tag will be an incentive for people to buy, especially since they will still have the option to stay at one of the newer DVC resorts at the 7 month booking window. I'm sure the resort will still be in excellent condition regardless of its age. Look at the Polynesian. It's almost 40 years old and still as good as new.

tjkraz
06-04-2009, 01:41 PM
I'm thinking that once the original 2042 contracts expire, DVC will begin selling another round of 50 year contracts for the resort.

The ground lease has already been extended to 2057. They would have to pass another extension to 2092 if they want to market 50-year contracts. But that second extension would again apply to everyone and create a similar set of problems to what we have now.

The new contracts should be priced much lower. Why? The people who bought the original contracts have already provided the funds to cover the cost to build OKW. In other words, Disney can now sell something that doesn't cost them any revenue to build. The maintenance fees will cover upkeep for the resort but whatever DVC chooses to charge per point will be 100% profit. It's a winning situation for both parties.

You are giving Disney waaaaaay too much credit in thinking that they will discount the product simply because it cost them less to produce. In fact this entire thread it testimony to Disney's unwillingness to do that.

Here you've got three pages of posts demonstrating how the extension was really only worth $5-8 per point....and yet Disney chose to sell it for $15. Disney didn't have to pay a dime for OKW construction to extend the ground lease, and still they chose a price point that was at least double its true economic value.

PurpleTurtle
06-04-2009, 02:12 PM
Wow. After reading this I'm even happier that I did not choose to extend. This all happened in concurrence with my dear father, the owner of our OKW points, passing away, and so I had to make all of these quick decisions on all of this stuff. Very difficult time, but I'm glad to know that I probably made the right decision for all of us.

Chic
06-04-2009, 02:25 PM
[QUOTE=tjkraz;32129880]
Here you've got three pages of posts demonstrating how the extension was really only worth $5-8 per point....and yet Disney chose to sell it for $15.

In my book, it was still a good deal. The extension allows 15 years of vacations for the price of 1 year at the cash rack rate.

LIFERBABE
06-04-2009, 03:09 PM
[QUOTE=tjkraz;32129880]
Here you've got three pages of posts demonstrating how the extension was really only worth $5-8 per point....and yet Disney chose to sell it for $15.

In my book, it was still a good deal. The extension allows 15 years of vacations for the price of 1 year at the cash rack rate.


In the words of the famous philosopher Sir Wimpy ""I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today".:rotfl:

M-I-C-K-E-Y
06-04-2009, 08:51 PM
Again, that makes a number of assumptions all of which may not true. That the value will be there in 33 years, that the group in question will want to go to that resort or system, that they can afford the trips and the ownership and that they are at least as well off or better with the extension that just investing the money. The truth is that for many, none of these assumptions are likely to be true. Ultimately this is a MUCH larger gamble than is a current ownership. IMO even accepting a free extension has significant risk.

A number of assumptions? The one opinion I stated was that some may be extending their contracts for their kids, for future use. I am absolutely certain that a large number of DVC owners look forward to future generations utilizing their points, regardless of any value analysis.

Let's not judge our fellow DVC owners by living by their hearts, rather than their heads... :rolleyes1

Dean
06-04-2009, 09:09 PM
A number of assumptions? The one opinion I stated was that some may be extending their contracts for their kids, for future use. I am absolutely certain that a large number of DVC owners look forward to future generations utilizing their points, regardless of any value analysis.

Let's not judge our fellow DVC owners by living by their hearts, rather than their heads... :rolleyes1Fair enough, some likely did it for emotional reasons rather than financial judgments. Still, they created a liability and risk for those loved ones as well as a potential benefit. There's a good chance they didn't do them any favors, it will take quite a while to know for certain.