And what happens, exactly, to all the new owners to whom they furiously marketed this resort? Wouldn‘t this be pulling the rug out from under them?
There is certainly a kind of beauty in this idea as DVC 1.0 owners would still get their home resort advantage (the one month from the contract) while DVC Trust owners wouldn't lose too much. They'd still be ahead of DVC 1.0 7-month-switchers from other resorts. I'm still worried that Disney might do something worse.
Well, I would argue that I'm not parsing any of the words she actually said, and at the same time, I'm not assuming they mean anything in particular or specifically. Her words have plenty of room for interpretation, including ones different from mine. I'm just not in the camp of rushing to assume anything is a done deal. I'll believe it when ANY of us actually sees something in writing from DVC, which we haven't.
Maybe, but I doubt they’re just going to blow everything up in one fell swoop. Could be a lower cost purchase option. Suddenly changing courses at VDH seems odd.
Good point, but why address the subject at all if there’s a chance her comments would be misinterpreted? I would think they teach you in executive school not to do that.
Lol, as a retired executive, I wish I learned how to answer questions on the fly better.
Ha! No, I wouldn’t rush to buy PVB resale either. But even if resale PVB points can be used on the new tower, for me the resort is an old, outdated themed motel overrun with kids, so I wouldn’t want to own there. But that’s just me!
LOL, nope, not just you. The Polynesian may be a nice place to visit for a cocktail and dinner, but I wouldn't want to live there.
Not really. The points owned by those owners would not be conveyed to the trust, and not bookable by people who owned the trust during the Home Resort period. There are fewer points "left behind" in the "original" resort than planned, but there are also fewer owners who own the "original" resort, and the points match.
Changing the booking system to add trust options could be the opportunity to make other changes.
I didn't read through the POS, but I looked at individual deeds and they really aren't any different than other timeshare systems. POS documents could include other restrictions, but one deed doesn't necessarily have any more or less restrictions or privileges than any other deeds. A land trust can own a collection of real estate. That real estate can be a whole timeshare unit a whole timeshare resort or a percentage of a timeshare unit. In the case of most systems it would be a timeshare week, but with DVC it would be whatever percentage of the unit that come from the allocated points.
A land trust is still deeded and in most cases is still considered selling real estate.
Why? It would still be the same association, just that the new deeds would mostly be owned by the trust. Deeded owners and those in the trust would have access to both the tower and the longhouses in this case. Also, deeded members would still have 11-month priority to the number of deeded points (and I assume that the trust would have access to whatever the number of trust points are).
There doesn’t seem to be an advantage for them to sell un-expirable points. It may be attractive aspect for buyers - until they see the price tag. Wouldn’t DVD need to charge a much higher $pp if no expiration?
Right, but the scenario I laid out, half-heartedly because of the heads-exploding reference, was that DVD puts all of the Poly Tower units into the Trust, thus there wouldn't be any DVC 1.0 availability. Who's to say that they couldn't, or wouldn't?
If all of Poly Tower were added to the trust, the tower would only be available to DVC 1.0 owners at the 7 month mark.
Why wouldn't there be? The "trust" is just an ownership mechanism of the points. It's independent of the association decision.
I don't think Disney would want traditional deeds that won't expire on their Disney World property. Who knows what happens in 50 years but they don't want to have one prime location blocked by people who bought their contract decades ago. I guess it depends on the conditions of a new trust whether it could handle things differently: if people don't own a specific site and DVD can switch one site for another within the model, the time limit becomes less important. The price would then, as always, depend on what people are willing to pay.
I think you are thinking of it wrong. If Poly Tower is all sold to "the trust", but still in the same association, then both deeded owners and owners of the trust would have access to both the tower and longhouses. However, there would be a point limit to both (trust could only book up to the percentage owned by the trust, deeded could book up to percentage owned by deeded).
