Contracts drying up??

[AstroBlasters]

I had a look back on some of the emails I got last year for contracts. appeared to pick up after halloween

How do we think the presidential election will play on prices and so on ?

(keep politics to minimal!)

It’s a trap!

 

[🍀TwinsMom]

I don't think one party over another will affect DVC pricing, but the fed raising or lowering rates soon and any increases to the unemployment rate or a threatened government shutdown could throw a monkey wrench in things.

I'm not sure post Reflections where DVC will go to drum up business. I had heard of an Epcot possible expansion somewhere close (total rumor,) and I'm wondering if they reroute the MK train to completely surround the park, around the Villains land area, and create a second "back" entrance in the Villains land to help with the buses/monorail/hub crowd mess and build a DVC on that back end of the park for primo money, but that's 2030+range at this rate.

Really, I think/wish/fervently hope for Skyliner expansion and maybe they'd flip Grand Destino/Coronado, or at the very least get more crowd control. WDW keeps shrinking operational hours, compressing the crowds into tighter blocks of busyness at peak hours. If they're not going to invest in manpower to encourage hopping/staying late, I think it's a very poor experience to shove everyone in like cattle.

Sorry, off-topic semi rant, LOL. Back to non partisan political prognosticating while we twiddle our thumbs on news for Poly!

 

[DisneyisGr8]

We are nearly down to 1000 on the market at the moment on dvcforless.com! I keep wondering when it will dip under the threshold.

I have been wondering the same thing! Is it normal for the number of contracts to be half what they were at the beginning of the year? This is the first year I’ve really watched the numbers, so I don’t have anything to compare to.

 

[RichVIII]

If I had the time, I would love to add up all the points across the resorts and figure out how many contracts we think exist, even if the average contract size was 100 (making that up). I constantly watch the numbers but the % in active resale at one time has to be small I would guess?

 

[disneylandtour]

If I had the time, I would love to add up all the points across the resorts and figure out how many contracts we think exist, even if the average contract size was 100 (making that up). I constantly watch the numbers but the % in active resale at one time has to be small I would guess?

And of those available contracts over half are un-sellable. Either massive contracts of 500+ points (Anybody want 650 points at BoardWalk for $135pp? Anybody?) or at a wildly unrealistic price-per-point. Let's see there a resale Grand Calif at $310pp. VDH at $229pp. Poly at $225pp. And Grand Floridian at $210pp. Somaybe there's 300-400 halfway reasonable contracts up there now, along with a bunch of unsellable items.

Someone a few posts up asked when the wave of fall contracts would arrive. Typically in November, right about when owners realize that in a couple months they are on the hook for another round of Member Fees. That usually spurs owners to sell, owners who are often open to reasonable offers--so long as it means they don't need to pony up a few more K for the 2025 MFs.

 

[kgou]

I have email alerts set up on dvcforless for many different searches and it's been crickets the last couple weeks. does not seem like much is coming on the market. life is more exciting with daily notifications pinging me about contracts I might be interested in!!

 

[VGCgroupie]

I also think there are listings that are listed more than once.

 

[disneylandtour]

I also think are listings that are listed more than once.

I believe a lot of those double listings are genuine. People (maybe later in life) buy two 150 point contracts, instead of one 300 point contract, so that it's easier to pass them along to their two children, one each. Or there's always the line of 50 or 100 point add-on contracts that someone bought--a new add-on every year or so, always for the same amount, same UY. But all three or four of them are legit.

 

[TinkAgainU]

I believe a lot of those double listings are genuine. People (maybe later in life) buy two 150 point contracts, instead of one 300 point contract, so that it's easier to pass them along to their two children, one each. Or there's always the line of 50 or 100 point add-on contracts that someone bought--a new add-on every year or so, always for the same amount, same UY. But all three or four of them are legit.

I think that's true, as you said a lot of people split up what they are buying into equal smaller contracts, then sell them all at once later.

But about a month ago I got an email from one of the Brokers which said "If you are listed with another broker and the contract with them is "non-exclusive" (please read what you signed with them), you may list with us too, and encourage a competitive marketplace!" ... so she was actively soliciting dual broker listings.

 

[darkconz]

I believe a lot of those double listings are genuine. People (maybe later in life) buy two 150 point contracts, instead of one 300 point contract, so that it's easier to pass them along to their two children, one each. Or there's always the line of 50 or 100 point add-on contracts that someone bought--a new add-on every year or so, always for the same amount, same UY. But all three or four of them are legit.

I am almost in that mind set too that I would like 2 of the same contract so it will be "fair" to pass onto each of the child.

 

[VGCgroupie]

I think that's true, as you said a lot of people split up what they are buying into equal smaller contracts, then sell them all at once later.

But about a month ago I got an email from one of the Brokers which said "If you are listed with another broker and the contract with them is "non-exclusive" (please read what you signed with them), you may list with us too, and encourage a competitive marketplace!" ... so she was actively soliciting dual broker listings.

This is why I said this, I saw on FB pages that at least one broker will list things and then present offers to the main broker and offer to split commission. Some listings are far to identical that are with more than one broker.

 

[Kailunkat]

Ok - sorry to geek out like this @rferrar1, but the part of my brain that still remembers those 30 credits of statistics courses for a degree I don't even use just will not shut up!

I think it’s a 4-point system. Since only 1-stars aren’t really used, but the rest are. There are 2, 3, 4, & 5 star contracts.

Yes your right in theory. But of the 1019 listings on the site right now, here is the distribution:
8 - 5 stars
25 - 4 stars
109 - 3 stars
877 - 2 stars
0 - 1 stars

So we can all agree that the possible range is only 4 stars, but functionally it's really only 2 and 3 star ratings. Yes, things above 3 stars tend to sell faster, but if your goal is to evaluate contracts that stay on the market (versus instant sells - which IMO should actually be another stand alone flag - kind of like a 5+ rating). restricting most of the available contracts to the 2 and 3 point range doesn't actually help distinguish between them. It's like saying most of the contracts are medium-rare or medium instead of rare, medium rare, medium, medium well or well.

 

[HyperspaceMountainPilot]

Ok - sorry to geek out like this @rferrar1, but the part of my brain that still remembers those 30 credits of statistics courses for a degree I don't even use just will not shut up!

Yes your right in theory. But of the 1019 listings on the site right now, here is the distribution:
8 - 5 stars
25 - 4 stars
109 - 3 stars
877 - 2 stars
0 - 1 stars

So we can all agree that the possible range is only 4 stars, but functionally it's really only 2 and 3 star ratings. Yes, things above 3 stars tend to sell faster, but if your goal is to evaluate contracts that stay on the market (versus instant sells - which IMO should actually be another stand alone flag - kind of like a 5+ rating). restricting most of the available contracts to the 2 and 3 point range doesn't actually help distinguish between them. It's like saying most of the contracts are medium-rare or medium instead of rare, medium rare, medium, medium well or well.

I feel compelled to take the other side of this argument.

First, the goal is probably not to evaluate only contracts that linger on the market but to evaluate all contracts.

If 3* is average (and about where supply and demand meet each other) then 4* should sell fairly quickly and 5* should sell almost instantly—so that skew doesn’t suggest that 4 and 5 stars aren’t real ratings, only that they are assigned to contracts that don’t sit around very long, validating the assessment that they are quite good deals. If there aren’t any 4* or 5* contracts coming through at all, then perhaps the pricing scale needs to be recalibrated— but simply the fact that there are fewer of them doesn’t mean the system is wrong— it is what you expect from studying macroeconomics.

 

[disneylandtour]

First, the goal is probably not to evaluate only contracts that linger on the market but to evaluate all contracts.

If there's one tweak in this that I'd recommend, it's this: I'd say that the current "star" system doesn't do enough to account for either banked or stripped contracts. I believe it weighs too heavily on price per point--honestly, by a lot. I believe the way to calculate a better system would be to add $20 of value to the contract overall for each banked point that has over 11 months remaining; $15 for each banked point that has between 6 and 11 months remaining; and $10 for each point with five or six months remaining. Anything below that, I'd say, shouldn't be considered in the value. And then subtract the opposite for stripped points--subtract $20 of value for each missing point (per year) that would've had over 11 months remaining, $15 for each missing point per year between 6 and 11 months, etc.

 

[Chili327]

it weighs too heavily on price per point

I think everything and everyone does this. I am way more concerned with the dues for the next 30+ years than I am an extra couple hundred, once, right now.

 

[tom1944]

I think everything and everyone does this. I am way more concerned with the dues for the next 30+ years than I am an extra couple hundred, once, right now.

That’s my sole reason for should I or should I not buy an additional contract. I have plenty of cash to make a purchase but I also have enough points for the next 10 years/5 trips to select resorts that I want to stay at least once. I ultimately may need more points but why pay the dues until I have to.

All that said I am very tempted.

 

[ehh]

Ok - sorry to geek out like this @rferrar1, but the part of my brain that still remembers those 30 credits of statistics courses for a degree I don't even use just will not shut up!

Yes your right in theory. But of the 1019 listings on the site right now, here is the distribution:
8 - 5 stars
25 - 4 stars
109 - 3 stars
877 - 2 stars
0 - 1 stars

So we can all agree that the possible range is only 4 stars, but functionally it's really only 2 and 3 star ratings. Yes, things above 3 stars tend to sell faster, but if your goal is to evaluate contracts that stay on the market (versus instant sells - which IMO should actually be another stand alone flag - kind of like a 5+ rating). restricting most of the available contracts to the 2 and 3 point range doesn't actually help distinguish between them. It's like saying most of the contracts are medium-rare or medium instead of rare, medium rare, medium, medium well or well.

I'll +1 @HyperspaceMountainPilot and take the other side of this argument, too.

1. As both of you said, great deals move faster, so that's a factor.
2. There's no need to actually have a normal distribution here. Normal distributions are not a statistical mandate, nor even a necessary aspiration.
3. Borrowing from Disney's own surveys, I actually kind of like increased granularity on the 'good' side, where 2-out-5 is effectively the baseline result (and is how I've thought of dvcforless.com's rating system, even if they label it differently):
   • Excellent
   • Very good
   • Good
   • Just okay
   • Poor
4. These are listed prices, not negotiated prices, so the distribution is very likely weighted worse than outcome.*
   • It might even be that negotiated prices do follow a normal distribution, but we'll never know.
5. I absolutely want 1-star ratings, algorithmically throw some shade! @rferrar1

* For my recent CCV offer, I used the 3-5 stars as benchmarks to negotiate a 2-star to a better deal. Shot for a 4-star and probably ended up with a 3-star. The "What should I offer?" feature is very good for this.

 

[Chili327]

I absolutely want 1-star ratings, algorithmically throw some shade!

Yep, when i see a resort that has no business in the price range they're asking, its just seems silly & not sure if its the seller, or the broker or where that breaks down, but it is an absolute waste, & definitely would be nice to weed them out with a "2-Star & up" filter.

 

[juliebee]

I think everything and everyone does this. I am way more concerned with the dues for the next 30+ years than I am an extra couple hundred, once, right now.

Your comment got me thinking about those small contracts. For example, let's say I routinely need about 20 extra points a year. Would it be smarter to buy a small and rare 25 pt contract or just get those 20 points directly from Disney each year? The dues obligation and the higher price per point average for small contracts may suggest that going directly with Disney is the cheaper plan, but I don't know.

 

[atthebeachclub]

Your comment got me thinking about those small contracts. For example, let's say I routinely need about 20 extra points a year. Would it be smarter to buy a small and rare 25 pt contract or just get those 20 points directly from Disney each year? The dues obligation and the higher price per point average for small contracts may suggest that going directly with Disney is the cheaper plan, but I don't know.

I thought about this myself. I decided I wanted to be able to book somewhere at 11 months rather than waiting for 7 months, and I didn’t want to call in to book, so I bought the points.