Considering a mid-size resale contract - thoughts?

[Girlstar30]

This is all great advice, thank you. VGF contracts in general are just painfully priced now compared to when I bought this time last year so the lower price point/bigger contract is tempting bc I know I’ll inevitably wind up paying more across multiple smaller contracts…ugh. Decisions, decisions…

Just buy it, think of the memories, YOLO

 

[AstroBlasters]

Because you could sell off one contract and still have 100….

Good point, why have more closing costs when it's still small

 

[Girlstar30]

Because you could sell off one contract and still have 100….

Another great point

 

[AstroBlasters]

Another great point

It costs like another $300 - $400 for closing costs if you waive title insurance buying direct. So the question is can you get an extra $6-$8pp for a 50pt over a 100pt contract if you have to sell… I would argue that you can at most resorts.

It then goes to what if you want to sell SOME, but not ALL. Then, having 100 is better than 75.

 

[Girlstar30]

It costs like another $300 - $400 for closing costs if you waive title insurance buying direct. So the question is can you get an extra $6-$8pp for a 50pt over a 100pt contract if you have to sell… I would argue that you can at most resorts.

It then goes to what if you want to sell SOME, but not ALL. Then, having 100 is better than 75.

I'm going to go this route because if I ever have to sell one of my direct I'm going to lose my blue card so I'd rather be closer to getting it back than farther

 

[Moonspinner]

The only thing about breaking up direct contracts is that you need a 150 contract for blue card. Broken up will give YOU a blue card but not if you want to pass it down if the requirement is more than 150 when you pass it down.

 

[VGCgroupie]

Do you guys think it would be smarter to buy a direct 150 point split at 3 50 point contracts or 2 75 point contracts?

California property 3 50's. Florida 2 75's

 

[Girlstar30]

Browsing dvcforless.com and wondering why would someone list a resale contract that costs higher per point than buying direct??

 

[AstroBlasters]

The only thing about breaking up direct contracts is that you need a 150 contract for blue card. Broken up will give YOU a blue card but not if you want to pass it down if the requirement is more than 150 when you pass it down.

What on earth are you talking about?

 

[Ruttangel]

If you are buying a 200-250pt contract I would prioritise a decently loaded one to offset any risk of the lower selling price you will get

 

[intamin]

What on earth are you talking about?

I think they're saying if you split up the 150 points and pass it down to multiple people they won't qualify since each person who inherited it will have less than the 150 direct required.

If they're saying that even if you passed the 150 points broken into multiple contracts to the same person they wouldn't qualify.. that's obviously wrong lol.

 

[Moonspinner]

I think they're saying if you split up the 150 points and pass it down to multiple people they won't qualify since each person who inherited it will have less than the 150 direct required.

If they're saying that even if you passed the 150 points broken into multiple contracts to the same person they wouldn't qualify.. that's obviously wrong lol.

Yes, they will qualify if the requirement is still 150 and you give them a total of 150 direct. But if it is in 20 years and the requirement is 300 or whatever, the split up points won’t give them the direct benefit. It’s not a big deal for most people. Just depends on what you are planning to do with your contracts in the end.

 

[AstroBlasters]

Yes, they will qualify if the requirement is still 150 and you give them a total of 150 direct. But if it is in 20 years and the requirement is 300 or whatever, the split up points won’t give them the direct benefit. It’s not a big deal for most people. Just depends on what you are planning to do with your contracts in the end.

That is just factually not true.

 

[Moonspinner]

That is just factually not true.

I wish it was not but we bought contracts to pass on to each of our kids and bought each contract in the required amount at the time of purchase. Our guide confirmed this was how to do it.

 

[AstroBlasters]

I wish it was not but we bought contracts to pass on to each of our kids and bought each contract in the required amount at the time of purchase. Our guide confirmed this was how to do it.

I don’t think we are on the same page.

If I have one child and they inherit 3x50 point contracts that were purchased direct in 2024, then under current rules (which Disney can change whenever they want) the child would still be DVC-Y. They do not have to inherit one 150 point contract.

If have two children, then they need to each inherit 150 points, but they could each inherit 3x50 point contracts.

 

[Moonspinner]

I don’t think we are on the same page.

If I have one child and they inherit 3x50 point contracts that were purchased direct in 2024, then under current rules (which Disney can change whenever they want) the child would still be DVC-Y. They do not have to inherit one 150 point contract.

If have two children, then they need to each inherit 150 points, but they could each inherit 3x50 point contracts.

Yes, my understanding is yes, if you give the 3x50 point contracts to the kids while the direct qualifying amount is 150. The way the guide explained it to us is that the direct benefits transfer with the qualifying contract. If the direct benefits transferred with the membership, you would only be able to transfer one direct membership to one person. The contract itself has to be a qualifying contract. Members, however, can accumulate enough direct contracts to qualify for direct benefits. I would be happy to hear that our guide is incorrect. It would be helpful to hear from Disney directly on this. Or to hear if anyone has managed to transfer multiple direct contracts that previously met the direct requirements. The entire thing is too complicated. I think most people are not planning on passing the contracts down, so not an issue.

 

[AstroBlasters]

Yes, my understanding is yes, if you give the 3x50 point contracts to the kids while the direct qualifying amount is 150. The way the guide explained it to us is that the direct benefits transfer with the qualifying contract. If the direct benefits transferred with the membership, you would only be able to transfer one direct membership to one person. The contract itself has to be a qualifying contract. Members, however, can accumulate enough direct contracts to qualify for direct benefits. I would be happy to hear that our guide is incorrect. It would be helpful to hear from Disney directly on this. Or to hear if anyone has managed to transfer multiple direct contracts that previously met the direct requirements. The entire thing is too complicated. I think most people are not planning on passing the contracts down, so not an issue.

I think you are misreading what I wrote.

I wrote 3x50 to EACH kid… which means EACH inherits 3x50 contracts. So, it implies that I owned 6x50 contracts to begin with.

Each bucket of 150 points (no matter how they are split up) has enough to qualify for DVC-Y on their own.

As long as the qualifying number of points at the time of direct purchase is passed down to each beneficiary then the DVC-Y should as well under current rules.

 

[Moonspinner]

I think you are misreading what I wrote.

I wrote 3x50 to EACH kid… which means EACH inherits 3x50 contracts. So, it implies that I owned 6x50 contracts to begin with.

Each bucket of 150 points (no matter how they are split up) has enough to qualify for DVC-Y on their own.

As long as the qualifying number of points at the time of direct purchase is passed down to each beneficiary then the DVC-Y should as well under current rules.

I do understand. It seems like we have contradicting information. The problem is that those contracts are not linked together as one qualifying contract. They qualify for direct under your membership, but they do not qualify on their own the same way as a 150 point contract purchased when the requirement was 150, or as a 50 point contract purchased when the requirement was 50points. When they are handed down they are handed down as three 50 point contracts purchased when the requirement was 150. If the new requirement for direct benefits is 300, the person receiving 3x50 will need another 150 in direct contracts. I am happy to be wrong here, but this is how it was explained to us by our guide. Most people splitting 150 into 3x50 are doing so for resale anyway, so not an issue. Why else would you split a contract like that? It would be great if Disney would spell it out either way in writing. It makes me wonder if they will just say one day that benefits can’t be transferred at all.

 

[AstroBlasters]

I do understand. It seems like we have contradicting information. The problem is that those contracts are not linked together as one qualifying contract. They qualify for direct under your membership, but they do not qualify on their own the same way as a 150 point contract purchased when the requirement was 150, or as a 50 point contract purchased when the requirement was 50points. When they are handed down they are handed down as three 50 point contracts purchased when the requirement was 150. If the new requirement for direct benefits is 300, the person receiving 3x50 will need another 150 in direct contracts. I am happy to be wrong here, but this is how it was explained to us by our guide. Most people splitting 150 into 3x50 are doing so for resale anyway, so not an issue. Why else would you split a contract like that? It would be great if Disney would spell it out either way in writing. It makes me wonder if they will just say one day that benefits can’t be transferred at all.

I split mine as a hedge in case we need to sell, but many also split because they want home resort priority at different resorts.

I believe there are examples of people getting RIV and VGF when they were both in active sales and had a similar base price, but they received a breakpoint on both purchases for the ppp.

I can see people now who own direct at VGF buying at a Yacht Club DVC in the future or maybe adding on a BC/BW 2.0 in 2043 as the kids get older and they spend less time at Magic Kingdom….

 

[Sandisw]

I don’t think we are on the same page.

If I have one child and they inherit 3x50 point contracts that were purchased direct in 2024, then under current rules (which Disney can change whenever they want) the child would still be DVC-Y. They do not have to inherit one 150 point contract.

If have two children, then they need to each inherit 150 points, but they could each inherit 3x50 point contracts.

I think the point is that if you break it up, all of those contracts have to pass together.

You can’t give one to each child or they lose the benefit and would now be required to meet the new minimum.

So, if I do 3 x 50 with the plan to pass on one tk esch kid, they lose.

And, if you break to sell later a smaller amount, you risk losing benefits depending on whether you have bought more direct points.