Attack of the Lakeshore Lodge

[Genie+]

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.

When I read our current contracts there’s already plenty of things Disney could do that I would not like them to do.

I feel like everything Disney we interact with requires hoping they continue to act reasonably.

Just like park ticket fine print… on some level I have to decide how much risk to accept that it comes back to bite me:

1. Tickets Are​

• Tickets are linked to one person
• Disney may use finger scan / photo ID
• You can’t give your remaining days to someone else

---

2. No Refunds; No Resale​

• Tickets are non-refundable
• Tickets may not be sold or bartered
• Disney can void tickets found on resale sites

---

3. Expiration Rules Matter​

• Date-based tickets expire on the last valid date
• Multi-day tickets usually expire 14 days after first use
• Unused tickets expire with no value

---

4. Disney Can Change… Basically Everything​

Disney reserves the right to:

• Change hours, attractions, entertainment
• Close rides for weather, refurbishment, or capacity
• Limit or suspend parades, fireworks, shows
• Modify park rules without notice

No compensation is guaranteed.

---

5. Park Entry Is​

Even with a valid ticket:

• Entry can be denied due to capacity
• Certain ticket types require park reservations
• Special events may block access earlier than expected

---

6. Revocation Without Refund​

Disney can revoke admission if:

• Rules are violated
• Disorderly or unsafe behavior occurs
• Prohibited items are brought in
• Fraud or misuse is suspected

No refund if removed.

---

7. Photos & Likeness Clause​

By entering:

• You consent to photography & video recording
• Disney may use your image without compensation
• Applies to marketing, media, and internal use

---

8. Weather ≠ Refund​

• Rain, heat, cold, hurricanes — no refunds
• Outdoor attractions may close
• Entertainment may be canceled

---

9. Liability Limitations​

Disney is not responsible for:

• Lost or stolen items
• Personal injury except as required by law
• Acts of third parties or guests

---

10. Special Ticket Caveats​

Depending on ticket type:

• Park Hopper access starts after a set time
• After-Hours / Special Event tickets have limited entry windows
• Military / Florida Resident / Child tickets require valid ID
• Misuse can void ticket instantly

---

11. Commercial Use Is Prohibited​

• No professional photography
• No livestreaming or filming for profit
• No unauthorized tours or guiding

---

12. Arbitration & Legal Stuff​

• Most disputes must go through binding arbitration
• You waive certain rights to class-action lawsuits
• Governed by Florida or California law

 

[Kailunkat]

I can even envision how some might like a combined RTU plan....take the Epcot area....when 2042 comes, I could see some new owners who might be happy to see both BWV and BCV in the same RTU plan or, how about a BCV/YC home resort that are combined as one.

I honestly think they will end up creating "custom RTUs" and market as the ultimate "choose your own Disney Adventure" product. You'll get to pick what resorts you want in your RTU and which you don't. But who knows?

 

[Sandisw]

I honestly think they will end up creating "custom RTUs" and market as the ultimate "choose your own Disney Adventure" product. You'll get to pick what resorts you want in your RTU and which you don't. But who knows?

That can't happen....it can't go to the individual level.....because a RTU plan is tied to inventory and you only have access to that inventory.

But, having some individual and hybrid could be the way of the future....though, my initial thoughts are that unless its a situation like CFW/LSL where they are located in the same resort area.

 

[Add-On-Itis]

it stated the 30 initially declared cabins accounted for 229,820 points, which would mean that each cabin is allotted 7,660.67 points. We do not yet have an explanation for this discrepancy.

Based on my reading of the POS, the discrepency appears to be because of the way the RTU model works.....it allows for this and how over time, things can go up.

That is terrible for owners, really great for the seller DVC.

That's basically DVC inflation. Defeats the purpose of buying DVC in the first place, a hedge on your disney vacation.

 

[zavandor]

But even now, they only have 63 cabins that are in the CFW RTU and they don't have to end up adding the rest to that specific plan. Being added to the trust doesn't require all of them to be in the same RTU plan....that is another big difference that I see....

Wouldn't it be likely VB? The resort ended up being smaller than originally planned, which caused MF to be higher than protected, so they have to subsidise people who bought initially. If they declare fewer cabins, meaning fewer points splitting certain fixed expenses, not depending on the size of the resort, wouldn't they have to subsidise owners who already bought?

Anyway, while they could declare cabins in a different RTU plan in theory, I don't see why they would, what would they gain?

It's possible, instead, they'll go full trust in the future. It might actually be smart and the plan to sell SSR when it expires. Put it in the same RTU plan with BWV and BCV, sell it offering priority at all resorts and let the carnage at 11 months begin.

 

[Tatebeck]

I honestly think they will end up creating "custom RTUs" and market as the ultimate "choose your own Disney Adventure" product. You'll get to pick what resorts you want in your RTU and which you don't. But who knows?

That can't happen....it can't go to the individual level.....because a RTU plan is tied to inventory and you only have access to that inventory.

But, having some individual and hybrid could be the way of the future....though, my initial thoughts are that unless its a situation like CFW/LSL where they are located in the same resort area.

Yeah I can't see them making a bunch of different combos with the RTU plans, it just makes it even more complicated.

What I could see them doing is making 1 more mega RTU option. They could add half-ish of new/expiring resorts in separate RTU plans for those who "buy where you want to stay" to have the best 11 month chance at their favorite resorts only and then adding the rest into a franken-trust RTU with some of every new/expiring resort in it so they can have 11 month priority at that entire RTU for a new type of Sleep Around Points used before the 7 month window opens for the rest of the past direct buyers. So they can have 2 chances at various rooms-at 11 months for the RTU rooms and at 7 months at everything else

 

[DoubleBaconBLT]

Totally agree. We really won't know how DVD plans to use/abuse the trust program until more properties are added to it (presumably LSL is next to be added?), but I will guess all future resorts are going to be in the master Trust (either separately RTU or combined) and people will just have to decide if they can live with the RTU plan when buying new direct points at new resorts, as evidenced by DVD monthly point sales.

For myself, I like to think I hedged my bets with only fixed week at the trust enabled CFW and all the rest of my points (OKWe and PVB) being old school deeded interest.

I betray my ignorance, but why does a Favorite Week protect you? Is it because your FW is contractually bookable with your current points? How have previous point chart moves been handled when someone has that room in a FW? For example, if the point chart for Poly Studios in September just went up by a point, and you had that as a FW, would you just get to book it for less points? Or is that "baked in" to the 10% premium that it costs to use your FW?

 

[Tatebeck]

I betray my ignorance, but why does a Favorite Week protect you? Is it because your FW is contractually bookable with your current points? How have previous point chart moves been handled when someone has that room in a FW? For example, if the point chart for Poly Studios in September just went up by a point, and you had that as a FW, would you just get to book it for less points? Or is that "baked in" to the 10% premium that it costs to use your FW?

FW contracts always get the exact same amount of points every year just like any contract, but that exact amount of points will always be able to be used for that exact week, no matter what happens to the point chart after the fact. There are weeks that are cheaper for FW members (even with the 10% extra) than for regular members due to the way the FW calendar works and due to season reallocation.

So you know that you will always be able to get that room that week for that amount of points, even if the point charts skyrocket due to DVC and the Trust being sketchy or just season reallocation

 

[Brian Noble]

The FW is contractual. The entire allocation for that contract---and only the allocation for that contract---is used to book the week. That is true even if the nominal point requirement to book the underlying week changes.

 

[Sandisw]

Yeah I can't see them making a bunch of different combos with the RTU plans, it just makes it even more complicated.

What I could see them doing is making 1 more mega RTU option. They could add half-ish of new/expiring resorts in separate RTU plans for those who "buy where you want to stay" to have the best 11 month chance at their favorite resorts only and then adding the rest into a franken-trust RTU with some of every new/expiring resort in it so they can have 11 month priority at that entire RTU for a new type of Sleep Around Points used before the 7 month window opens for the rest of the past direct buyers. So they can have 2 chances at various rooms-at 11 months for the RTU rooms and at 7 months at everything else

They can’t add any inventory from resorts that are sold out because DVD doesn’t own those units and they are already declared into a different association.

So, they can’t move them to the trust association.

But, with new resorts? Sure, they could create hybrid RtU plans.

I tend to think they won’t unless it’s a unique situation like LSL and CFW.

 

[Tatebeck]

They can’t add any inventory from resorts that are sold out because DVD doesn’t own those units and they are already declared into a different association.

So, they can’t move them to the trust association.

But, with new resorts? Sure, they could create hybrid RtU plans.

I tend to think they won’t unless it’s a unique situation like LSL and CFW.

I didn't say anything about putting sold out resorts in it though?

I said new resorts and the expiring resorts specifically (meaning after expiration in 2042). Once they expire they revert and are not sold out anymore. Maybe you thought I meant add them now? No, I know they can't do that. I mean once they expire they could add some to an RTU if they wanted to keep VB/HH without reselling new non-park contracts or add some BW or BC in the mix at that point.

 

[gvel]

When I read our current contracts there’s already plenty of things Disney could do that I would not like them to do.

I feel like everything Disney we interact with requires hoping they continue to act reasonably.

Just like park ticket fine print… on some level I have to decide how much risk to accept that it comes back to bite me:

1. Tickets Are​

• Tickets are linked to one person
• Disney may use finger scan / photo ID
• You can’t give your remaining days to someone else

---

2. No Refunds; No Resale​

• Tickets are non-refundable
• Tickets may not be sold or bartered
• Disney can void tickets found on resale sites

---

3. Expiration Rules Matter​

• Date-based tickets expire on the last valid date
• Multi-day tickets usually expire 14 days after first use
• Unused tickets expire with no value

---

4. Disney Can Change… Basically Everything​

Disney reserves the right to:

• Change hours, attractions, entertainment
• Close rides for weather, refurbishment, or capacity
• Limit or suspend parades, fireworks, shows
• Modify park rules without notice

No compensation is guaranteed.

---

5. Park Entry Is​

Even with a valid ticket:

• Entry can be denied due to capacity
• Certain ticket types require park reservations
• Special events may block access earlier than expected

---

6. Revocation Without Refund​

Disney can revoke admission if:

• Rules are violated
• Disorderly or unsafe behavior occurs
• Prohibited items are brought in
• Fraud or misuse is suspected

No refund if removed.

---

7. Photos & Likeness Clause​

By entering:

• You consent to photography & video recording
• Disney may use your image without compensation
• Applies to marketing, media, and internal use

---

8. Weather ≠ Refund​

• Rain, heat, cold, hurricanes — no refunds
• Outdoor attractions may close
• Entertainment may be canceled

---

9. Liability Limitations​

Disney is not responsible for:

• Lost or stolen items
• Personal injury except as required by law
• Acts of third parties or guests

---

10. Special Ticket Caveats​

Depending on ticket type:

• Park Hopper access starts after a set time
• After-Hours / Special Event tickets have limited entry windows
• Military / Florida Resident / Child tickets require valid ID
• Misuse can void ticket instantly

---

11. Commercial Use Is Prohibited​

• No professional photography
• No livestreaming or filming for profit
• No unauthorized tours or guiding

---

12. Arbitration & Legal Stuff​

• Most disputes must go through binding arbitration
• You waive certain rights to class-action lawsuits
• Governed by Florida or California law

I kind of get what you mean. Sure, every transaction you complete with a major corporation, not just Disney requires a certain level of trust. But you're comparing two very different items with different scopes. Tickets are a one time use item priced at $150+- per day... DVC is a high dollar long term financial commitment. I don't know about you, but I have a much higher risk tolerance for the former.

Also, the terms of tickets are well defined and dont necessarily leave a lot of room for screwing you over in creative ways.

 

[MarkNC2Disney]

That is terrible for owners, really great for the seller DVC.

That's basically DVC inflation. Defeats the purpose of buying DVC in the first place, a hedge on your disney vacation.

So the point charts can shift upwards as more units are declared?

 

[Sandisw]

I didn't say anything about putting sold out resorts in it though?

I said new resorts and the expiring resorts specifically (meaning after expiration in 2042). Once they expire they revert and are not sold out anymore. Maybe you thought I meant add them now? No, I know they can't do that. I mean once they expire they could add some to an RTU if they wanted to keep VB/HH without reselling new non-park contracts or add some BW or BC in the mix at that point.

That was how I took the expiring resorts comments!

The 2042 situation is exactly why I think they will move to a trust model with RTU plans.

They can technically add all the 2042 resorts to the trust immediately.

I think they could even find a way to create a RTU plan and put some inventory in, as is, so they are available for trades at 7 months for those with unrestricted points and then as are renovated, they start to sell as new home resorts.

Obviously, complete speculation and out of box thinking!

 

[Sandisw]

Wouldn't it be likely VB? The resort ended up being smaller than originally planned, which caused MF to be higher than protected, so they have to subsidise people who bought initially. If they declare fewer cabins, meaning fewer points splitting certain fixed expenses, not depending on the size of the resort, wouldn't they have to subsidise owners who already bought?

Anyway, while they could declare cabins in a different RTU plan in theory, I don't see why they would, what would they gain?

It's possible, instead, they'll go full trust in the future. It might actually be smart and the plan to sell SSR when it expires. Put it in the same RTU plan with BWV and BCV, sell it offering priority at all resorts and let the carnage at 11 months begin.

No, because the trust is totally different in the way it works.

DVD isn’t selling any cabins. They own them all and a responsible for the cost of all of them.

When they activate inventory into a RTU plan, the costs for those cabins is what owners who buy into that plan are responsible

The owners pay their share of the expenses for the cabins which have been activated and DVD pays the share of expenses for the cabins that are not.

So, the dues for the cabin owners right now is based only on the 63 cabins declared and the cost to operate only those 63 cabins. They are not paying anything for non actived trust property.

I don’t see a situation where they create a separate RTU plan with just cabins either.

But, was simply pointing out that just bexause all 363 cabins are part the Palmetto Trust doesn’t mean that DVD ever has to turn them into DVC inventory because DVD isn’t selling them like they did with the previous DVC resorts.

 

[tidefan]

So the point charts can shift upwards as more units are declared?

This is the concern...

 

[MarkNC2Disney]

This is the concern...

Uhhhh… of course we’ve always placed high levels of trust in DVC’s hands, but this new (to me) wrinkle is just insane.

 

[davidhr]

Yeah, I definitely don’t care about most things discussed here. But that one is a bit too much, even for me.

One of the things that couldn’t happen was an overall point chart “inflation”. With the trust that is a possibility and I’m not too comfortable with it. Will it be a problem in the future? Unlikely. But it’s not guaranteed anymore.

 

[Add-On-Itis]

Yeah, I definitely don’t care about most things discussed here. But that one is a bit too much, even for me.

One of the things that couldn’t happen was an overall point chart “inflation”. With the trust that is a possibility and I’m not too comfortable with it. Will it be a problem in the future? Unlikely. But it’s not guaranteed anymore.

I think it's pretty likely that will happen.

Look at POLY chart this year.

 

[Brian Noble]

So, here's a question.

I just did a quick search of the CFW POS. I did not find a written statement of the "maximum reallocation" value---the point value assigned to a use-day if there were no seasonal or day-of-week variations. The language describing maximum reallocation is there, but not the specific point value.

Does anyone know if a specific maximum reallocation point value has been published anywhere in the governing documents for CFW?