Attack of the Lakeshore Lodge

[VGCgroupie]

The trust document allows them to move inventory in and out of a RTU plan.

But, they can’t sell more points then go with the inventory in that plan so it’s not as simple as that.

The way it works is DVD placed all of the inventory into the trust.

Then, they activate rooms into a RTU plan to sell.

For example, all 320 cabins are part of the trust. DVD added them all.

But only 63 have been activated into the CFW RTU plan and that is where the points for sale come from.

So, yes, they could decide at any time to not add all the rooms at LSL to the same RTU plan if they sell with the trust model.

Also, being in the trust doesn’t mean it has to function for use differently.

Its just the behind the scenes things that could happen that can’t when you sell deeded interests via a leasehold condo situation

Okay I think I will stick with 85% of #2 and 15% chance of #3.

They didnt create the trust just for CFW thats for sure.

 

[Sandisw]

Okay I think I will stick with 85% of #2 and 15% chance of #3.

They didnt create the trust just for CFW thats for sure.

I lean #3 right now but it’s only 60/40!

 

[Mikey15]

The trust document allows them to move inventory in and out of a RTU plan.

But, they can’t sell more points then go with the inventory in that plan so it’s not as simple as that.

The way it works is DVD placed all of the inventory into the trust.

Then, they activate rooms into a RTU plan to sell.

For example, all 320 cabins are part of the trust. DVD added them all.

But only 63 have been activated into the CFW RTU plan and that is where the points for sale come from.

So, yes, they could decide at any time to not add all the rooms at LSL to the same RTU plan if they sell with the trust model.

Also, being in the trust doesn’t mean it has to function for use differently.

Its just the behind the scenes things that could happen that can’t when you sell deeded interests via a leasehold condo situation

One thing I’ve pondered about the aspects you describe here… is it possible for DVD to market different RTU plans at the same time involving the same underlying resorts?

Say Palmetto Trust owns both LSL and all the CFW cabins. X amount of CFW cabins have been declared as CFW inventory which DVD is selling, but not all of them. Y amount of LSL keys could be sold as 11mo priority at LSL. Could they take CFW and LSL inventory not previously declared into either of those RTU plans, and offer an RTU plan at a premium, with 11mo access to both resorts? Like a third RTU that holds both CFW cabins and LSL rooms?

 

[Brian Noble]

My money is on #3. 70/30 #2 as second choice.

 

[Sandisw]

One thing I’ve pondered about the aspects you describe here… is it possible for DVD to market different RTU plans at the same time involving the same underlying resorts?

Say Palmetto Trust owns both LSL and all the CFW cabins. X amount of CFW cabins have been declared as CFW inventory which DVD is selling, but not all of them. Y amount of LSL keys could be sold as 11mo priority at LSL. Could they take CFW and LSL inventory not previously declared into either of those RTU plans, and offer an RTU plan at a premium, with 11mo access to both resorts? Like a third RTU that holds both CFW cabins and LSL rooms?

Yes, they could do that. One of the benefits I am seeing with moving to a trust model is that to gives DVD options they don’t have with the current structure.

So, if they really wanted to, they could create hybrid RTU plans over time.

 

[juliebee]

Yes, that was my initial point. They can way over-inflate the point cost of the A-frames initially, then reallocate those points later to make studios, etc. higher points in the future. This is specifically allowed by the trust language. I am NOT referring to the CFW cabins, FYI.

Would purchasing a favorite week at LSL be an extra important hedge in case they do reassign points?

 

[Tatebeck]

Remember, they don’t have to activate the inventory into the trust with the same point values. They don’t attach to units at all in that way.

They simply say we are adding X rooms for Y points.

For example, they can say we are adding 3 A frames and 10 2 bedrooms. Thst is 200 k points.

The next time they can say we are adding 2 A frames and 10 2 bedrooms and that is going to be 250K points

That RTU plan now has 450K points which can be allocated to any of those rooms in any way they choose

As more is added and activated, the total shifts and applies to total rooms.

So, nothing prevents them from changing the cost of the cabins from say 100 a night to 50 a night and shift all to the 2 bedrooms. How it was initially activated doesn’t matter like it does with a leasehold conco.

The trust has some language that says the initial point chart must be valid for 3 years but after that, it can go up.

The balance only has to be for total points against all activated inventory.

That’s why they can add new inventory at another component site down the road and then reallocate across them all.

So, it’s not like the way the leasehold condo is done.

ETA: I am not saying we will see DVD go crazy but if you look at the figures for the CFW cabins that are activated right now, the yearly cost is different for the 2nd declaration per cabin then the 1st one.

Yes, I know. And this relates to what I am saying. Once the rooms are declared/added there are still limits and the points have to shift somewhere, they are just less strict about where they are shifted to.

It just isn't reasonable to think they will have a cabin cost 1000 points a night or something and then shift the points around to make major changes elsewhere as a gotcha to members. It would be obvious, and they would shoot themselves in the foot for the entire future of DVC. And of course it could bring legal challenge if it is obviously not in the best interest of the membership but done as a cash grab.

 

[airjay75]

Darn, the boats are so amazing. Sorry you missed those. Kind of cool to seeing things from a different perspective taking the bus though.

We're doing MK tomorrow and Thursday, so hopefully we'll get another chance. The MK transportation yesterday was actually a bit of a cluster. I'll share more when I do a trip report, but we waited a while for the boats, only to come to the conclusion that they must have shut it down, went to the bus, and the time estimate was way off, and then eventually two MK busses arrived at the same time (well, one was a few minutes early, but it took so much time to offload and onload some ECVs, that a second MK bus showed up). I was a bit soured, but when we go to MK, it looked like monorail was a cluster too because they had clearly shut all boat transportation down - the lines to get on the monorail looked really bad and I saw at least one monorail train just sitting there not moving. Those are the times when BLT/VGF guests can laugh all the way back to their resort!

With it all in the rear view mirror, just have to remember that if you go to WDW enough times, you're going to have transportation fails.

 

[Cfabar1]

One of my biggest concerns with a trust model is that their flexibility becomes exposure to risk for us, most notably in the dues. One of the hotels consistently underperforming? … dump it in the trust! … stuck with half of a property from a failed contract extension (OKW ) … dump it in the trust! … if they don’t write some type of language in the contract addressing potential volatility in the dues, it’s a hard no for me. I’ll have to be content with what’s available at 7 months or rent from someone else.

As I understand it, this is what just about every other timeshare company has done with the trusts! And why the Trust isn't for me...

 

[Kailunkat]

Remember, they don’t have to activate the inventory into the trust with the same point values. They don’t attach to units at all in that way.

They simply say we are adding X rooms for Y points.

For example, they can say we are adding 3 A frames and 10 2 bedrooms. Thst is 200 k points.

The next time they can say we are adding 2 A frames and 10 2 bedrooms and that is going to be 250K points

That RTU plan now has 450K points which can be allocated to any of those rooms in any way they choose

As more is added and activated, the total shifts and applies to total rooms.

So, nothing prevents them from changing the cost of the cabins from say 100 a night to 50 a night and shift all to the 2 bedrooms. How it was initially activated doesn’t matter like it does with a leasehold conco.

The trust has some language that says the initial point chart must be valid for 3 years but after that, it can go up.

The balance only has to be for total points against all activated inventory.

That’s why they can add new inventory at another component site down the road and then reallocate across them all.

One thing I’ve pondered about the aspects you describe here… is it possible for DVD to market different RTU plans at the same time involving the same underlying resorts?

So the way I have been thinking about it is this: in the trust model - DVD has control over what inventory is added to each RTU and more ability to change point allocations over that RTU. However - when we purchase into the RTU there is a still a contract and expectation for that RTU they have to abide by correct? So they cannot take AWAY inventory or make it inaccessible to buyers, but they can ADD additional inventory which could change point charts and dues correct? I don't know historically how other companies have utilized the trust model so this is all new to me.

For those who know more and are more experienced - if someone buys into one of the RTU plans above (say a 200k point with 3 A frames and 10 2Beds) then is that RTU "sealed" for the most part? Or can they later come back in and say "oh btw we are adding 5 CFW cabins to this RTU as well" or does whatever contract you sign when you purchase prohibit that? The way I have been interpreting this is that once you purchase the RTU it kind of gets locked in stone in terms of your booking options, dues costs, and home resort similar to the current model. They can still create additional RTUs that are different from yours that mix and match different options or possibly resorts - but your RTU is always the same as what you bought. Is that incorrect?

 

[Tatebeck]

So the way I have been thinking about it is this: in the trust model - DVD has control over what inventory is added to each RTU and more ability to change point allocations over that RTU. However - when we purchase into the RTU there is a still a contract and expectation for that RTU they have to abide by correct? So they cannot take AWAY inventory or make it inaccessible to buyers, but they can ADD additional inventory which could change point charts and dues correct? I don't know historically how other companies have utilized the trust model so this is all new to me.

For those who know more and are more experienced - if someone buys into one of the RTU plans above (say a 200k point with 3 A frames and 10 2Beds) then is that RTU "sealed" for the most part? Or can they later come back in and say "oh btw we are adding 5 CFW cabins to this RTU as well" or does whatever contract you sign when you purchase prohibit that? The way I have been interpreting this is that once you purchase the RTU it kind of gets locked in stone in terms of your booking options, dues costs, and home resort similar to the current model. They can still create additional RTUs that are different from yours that mix and match different options or possibly resorts - but your RTU is always the same as what you bought. Is that incorrect?

To the first part mostly yes. Once room inventory is added to an RTU it has been declared and is/will always be available for purchasers of the RTU.

But no to the second part, the RTUs in the trust would be closer to the resort condo associations we have now I believe. The older "units" in the older resorts were kind of sealed as far as your ownership percentage, but they still have moved points across units in resorts before so they weren't that "locked" to begin with.

RTUs and Condo associations can both be added to later if DVC wishes (with some specific rules for the condo associations like time remaining >40 years, etc). They added Poly Tower to the same condo association as the OG Poly for example.

Right now CFW is in its own RTU in the trust. They could make LSL deeded like the older resorts, add LSL to the trust in it's own RTU and it wouldn't share anything with CFW, or they could add LSL to the trust AND to the same RTU as CFW and then they would share a lot.

They would share dues and booking dates, and DVC would be able to move points not just between rooms within the entire individual resorts but also from LSL to CFW or from CFW to LSL rooms if they wished. And then they could still add future resorts or rooms to the same RTU again later if they wished. The only thing sort of locked is the total number of points in the RTU (at that point in time unless/until more rooms are added to the same RTU in the future), and they can move the points between any of the room types in the RTU and dates as needed for booking.

Trust+RTU is much more flexible for DVC than anything we have had before. They could add partial resorts, resorts that expired once 2042 comes, etc. all in the same RTU if they wish.

 

[Sandisw]

So the way I have been thinking about it is this: in the trust model - DVD has control over what inventory is added to each RTU and more ability to change point allocations over that RTU. However - when we purchase into the RTU there is a still a contract and expectation for that RTU they have to abide by correct? So they cannot take AWAY inventory or make it inaccessible to buyers, but they can ADD additional inventory which could change point charts and dues correct? I don't know historically how other companies have utilized the trust model so this is all new to me.

For those who know more and are more experienced - if someone buys into one of the RTU plans above (say a 200k point with 3 A frames and 10 2Beds) then is that RTU "sealed" for the most part? Or can they later come back in and say "oh btw we are adding 5 CFW cabins to this RTU as well" or does whatever contract you sign when you purchase prohibit that? The way I have been interpreting this is that once you purchase the RTU it kind of gets locked in stone in terms of your booking options, dues costs, and home resort similar to the current model. They can still create additional RTUs that are different from yours that mix and match different options or possibly resorts - but your RTU is always the same as what you bought. Is that incorrect?

DVD remains owner of all the trust inventory that is ever added.

They don’t sell it like they did when selling it as a leasehold condo.

They simply activate it for use and then sell that use to owners.

What owners are buying is use for any inventory that is activated as part of its plan. Once added, it can actually be replaced…with something that is similar…the exact wording is part of the trust language and the RTU plan.

They can come back later and add whatever inventory they want at a new component site and that now becomes part of the “home resort”. So, yes, they could say we are now building new rooms at different place and add the ad part of the RTU plan to bought into that only had cabins to start. And, we are amending the point charts to include it all.

That is what makes this model different. But, they do not have to go that route.

They can keep every new resort its own RTU,,,and then it would function the same as always.

I think CFW and LSL is unique because both are located at Fort Wildnerness and why we speculate they could become one home resort.

ETA: If I had to speculate, my guess is that outside of LSL and CFW, any future resorts, assuming they stick with a trust model and RTU plan, those will stay their own resorts and not combine with others at different component sites.

 

[Kailunkat]

DVD remains owner of all the trust inventory that is ever added.

They don’t sell it like they did when selling it as a leasehold condo.

They simply activate it for use and then sell that use to owners.

What owners are buying is use for any inventory that is activated as part of its plan. Once added, it can actually be replaced…with something that is similar…the exact wording is part of the trust language and the RTU plan.

They can come back later and add whatever inventory they want at a new component site and that now becomes part of the “home resort”. So, yes, they could say we are now building new rooms at different place and add the ad part of the RTU plan to bought into that only had cabins to start. And, we are amending the point charts to include it all.

That is what makes this model different. But, they do not have to go that route.

They can keep every new resort its own RTU,,,and then it would function the same as always.

I think CFW and LSL is unique because both are located at Fort Wildnerness and why we speculate they could become one home resort.

ETA: If I had to speculate, my guess is that outside of LSL and CFW, any future resorts, assuming they stick with a trust model and RTU plan, those will stay their own resorts and not combine with others at different component sites.

This all makes sense. My main confusion is how dues are effected if they end up adding or replacing inventory. How are dues for RTU plans even structured? It seems to me like a bait and switch if I buy an RTU for PVB for example (low dues) and then CFW gets added to the RTU and suddenly my dues skyrocket. So there must be a mechanism for governing that I assume?

 

[gvel]

I don't know... it seems that this whole trust model requires us to "trust" Disney a little too much for my taste.

 

[mkatsy]

I don't know... it seems that this whole trust model requires us to "trust" Disney a little too much for my taste.

Right? … It’s a pretty big ask from people that won’t even answer the simplest questions.

 

[Brian Noble]

I don't know... it seems that this whole trust model requires us to "trust" Disney a little too much for my taste.

If you buy DVC, you already do. They control the whole thing--lock, stock, and barrel. Heck, individual "owners" don't even vote for the HOA Board---DVC votes on our behalf.

 

[LittleBitGoofy]

We took the fireworks cruise last week and loaded from WL. (Advertised as you have to go to Contemporary but they called the night before and asked if we wanted to board from WL. Uh yeah, we were staying at CCV, as they noticed.) They give you about an hour tour around the lakes before the show and of course we went directly to LSL first. It is *massive*.

Our boat guide put on his spotlight and we looked all over it. Feels like you could toss pebbles off your balcony into the lake. The A frames are huge too and really tall.

The roof line really gave it the feel of the Poly Tower. It was of course also very dark by this time so I didn't bother with pics and what we could see was limited of course.

One interesting thing for me was the boat captains shoe tree. I had heard of it and seen pics but first time seeing it in person. It's definitely getting removed from LSL. The tree sits right in front of the resort and close to it. No way I see it surviving.

If you've ever considered the fireworks boat and have a good sized group then I'd highly recommend it. They picked us up right there at CCV, had a great captain, roamed all over the lakes beforehand for a unique perspective, and zero crazy crowds for getting home. Worked great with one member of our party who had an e scooter and didn't want to do those nighttime crowds. And AP gets you a 10% discount!

 

[gvel]

If you buy DVC, you already do. They control the whole thing--lock, stock, and barrel. Heck, individual "owners" don't even vote for the HOA Board---DVC votes on our behalf.

Not to the same extent. I feel like the trust structure provides Disney with for more creative ways to do shady stuff we trust them not to do.

 

[Add-On-Itis]

We took the fireworks cruise last week and loaded from WL. (Advertised as you have to go to Contemporary but they called the night before and asked if we wanted to board from WL. Uh yeah, we were staying at CCV, as they noticed.) They give you about an hour tour around the lakes before the show and of course we went directly to LSL first. It is *massive*.

Our boat guide put on his spotlight and we looked all over it. Feels like you could toss pebbles off your balcony into the lake. The A frames are huge too and really tall.

The roof line really gave it the feel of the Poly Tower. It was of course also very dark by this time so I didn't bother with pics and what we could see was limited of course.

One interesting thing for me was the boat captains shoe tree. I had heard of it and seen pics but first time seeing it in person. It's definitely getting removed from LSL. The tree sits right in front of the resort and close to it. No way I see it surviving.

If you've ever considered the fireworks boat and have a good sized group then I'd highly recommend it. They picked us up right there at CCV, had a great captain, roamed all over the lakes beforehand for a unique perspective, and zero crazy crowds for getting home. Worked great with one member of our party who had an e scooter and didn't want to do those nighttime crowds. And AP gets you a 10% discount!


View attachment 1044313

Do they pipe in the music on the boat?

 

[Brian Noble]

Not to the same extent.

I suppose, but the current extent is already pretty dang far. I've said this many (many) times, but I figure I have three options when it comes to DVC.

1. Trust that DVC is generally trying to do right by its owners.
2. Assume that DVC is purely self-interested, but decide that the value proposition is still there for me as an owner.
3. Sell.

I'm somewhere between 1 and 2, leaning closer to 2.