DVC Club Level and Home Resort Survey

[Hubalorian]

This would really change a lot and I don’t think anyone assumed anything like for the tower. Idk feels like a really big gamble to do this now that they’ve insinuated that it would be part of the existing association and never retracted their statement. This would cause a lot of upheaval and anger I would imagine, not sure DVD wants that headache.

But if this does end up being the plan, will there be a setup with BVTC to allow 7mo open availability amongst all resorts? There’s gotta be, right? Actually what does it say about this regarding CFW?

Yes, at 7months you can swap with open availability through BVTC

 

[Sandisw]

.....and some guides have said that no decision has been made and that they had no information to share. I think it's still an open question.

Not to mention I have sent three emails, and everyone of them have come back with” we cannot answer your questions and can’t confirm anything regarding the tower:”.

 

[Sandisw]

That discussion has made the rounds multiple times. The trust certainly puts a different spin on what we have "known to be true" over the last 34 years. Nevertheless, DVC has had 4 weeks to monitor online reporting and discussions following the condo meeting, and issue a correction if they felt their plans were being misrepresented. Instead DVC guides have gone on record confirming that Poly tower will be part of the same condo association. I think the odds of it being something completely different are low.

But, I am not finding anything that prevents them from making it part of PVB but immediately declare the inventory to be sold as part of a trust plan.

Current POS documents do say that there is nothing to require future declarations so still think it’s possible that they might treat this differently, now with this trust confirmed for CFW.

Nothing at the meeting said it would be sold the same way as deeded ownership interests…think we are still in for potential surprise.

 

[Sandisw]

Going to add this from the documents..Certainly seems the intent is to create future trust use plans and that it can include other component sites in which units can be transferred…

 

[AnnaKristoff2013]

Rack rate: $1602 per night

I would not compare it to rack rate.

 

[Sandisw]

Adding more food for thought…here are two clauses from the PVB POS which could potentially allow them to add Poly tower to PVB, but create a different vacation ownership plan for those units that are then sold through a trust use plan?

 

[MerlinandtheMouse]

Adding more food for thought…here are two clauses from the PVB POS which could potentially allow them to add Poly tower to PVB, but create a different vacation ownership plan for those units that are then sold through a trust use plan?

Not that I know anything about legal jargon, but this seems like it’s exactly the clause that would allow them to do what you’re saying-nice find.


Whether they choose to go down this route, I’m still a bit skeptical. It seems like it would really complicate the product and add yet another new thing buyers would have to learn and guides would have to explain, creating a petri dish of potential misunderstanding, inconvenience and complication that would dissuade new buyers. Unless they move all of PVB into the trust (if that’s even allowed), grandfather the current deeded owners and allow them to keep their deeded interest (or “upgrade” to the trust) giving deeded owners home resort access to the poly tower, but make it so going forward, new sales of the poly tower would only be sold as trust points. Legacy owner will still be able to book the longhouses and bungalows since they can separate the bookings on the website like they do Kidani and Jambo and direct owners of other resorts get 7mo access regardless. Anyway I’m sure none of this is actually allowed but it’s an interesting thought.

 

[achinforsomebacon]

I'm sure this has been discussed but if all of Poly Tower goes into the trust, does this allow restrictions to be in place while still being in the same association? So while it would technically be part of PVB, resale owners (including Poly 1?) could be restricted from accessing the new tower since the trust can make it's own rules?

Additionally, could the trust rules be set up so Poly 1 owners don't get the 11 month advantage at the tower?

 

[zavandor]

For the Poly tower, I'd think they'll declare some units to sell as deeded contracts and the rest for the Trust.
For simplicity, let's say it'll be 50-50.
This would mean that half the units in the tower will be bookable with existing PVB points and people who buy a deeded contract at the tower will be able to book the studios in the longhouses and the bungalows. For those 50% units in the tower declared as deeded, it's exactly as VGF BPK.

For the 50% of units declared in the Trust it could go two ways.
The documents found by @Sandy make me think they might consider it like a completely separate resort. Trust points will be able to book only units declared in the Trust at 11 months (not longhouses, bungalows and deeded units in the tower) and vice versa, deeded Poly owners will not be able to book the Trust units at 11 months. This would make things a bit easier to handle and understand, with no worries about the many Trust owners booking all high demand rooms in deed-Trust mixed resorts.
OR they could try to mix things at 11 months and allow any unit at the resort to be booked, up to the total number of points owned by the trust, what we've been discussing until now.
This would give Trust owners more options making the product more appealing, but it would make management of inventory a nightmare. (And open to complaints from existing owners).

 

[BeachClub2014]

But, I am not finding anything that prevents them from making it part of PVB but immediately declare the inventory to be sold as part of a trust plan.

Nothing at the meeting said it would be sold the same way as deeded ownership interests…think we are still in for potential surprise.

You, I, and others have been cautioning people that Yvonne Chang's response to the association question at the association meeting Q&A left a lot of room for interpretation. Since then, we've seen the whole trust thing pop up with a whole lot of speculation on what that may entail. We are now getting a little more clarity on the trust thing with the CFW filings.

One thing that remains clear, and I think many are glossing over, is DVD's commitment to restrictions on the use of resale points at CFW. We've seen DVD apply them to the RIV, VDH, and now CFW. I go back to the question of why on earth would DVD NOT have the same restrictions on the shiny new tower, especially if they have doubled down on restrictions with a seemingly niche product like CFW.

I think you are on to something with the idea that DVD does make the Tower part of PVB (consistent with Chang's statement) but sells it as part of a trust plan, with resale restrictions (consistent with their previous statements).

Whether they choose to go down this route, I’m still a bit skeptical. It seems like it would really complicate the product and add yet another new thing buyers would have to learn and guides would have to explain, creating a petri dish of potential misunderstanding, inconvenience and complication that would dissuade new buyers.

I understand where you are coming from, but would it be all that hard to explain in a sales pitch? In simple terms, the message would be: "If you buy Tower points directly from DVD, you have the 11-month home booking priority at the Tower and 7-month availability at every other DVC offering. That's the message they currently use.

 

[walt34]

One thing that remains clear, and I think many are glossing over, is DVD's commitment to restrictions on the use of resale points at CFW. We've seen DVD apply them to the RIV, VDH, and now CFW. I go back to the question of why on earth would DVD NOT have the same restrictions on the shiny new tower, especially if they have doubled down on restrictions with a seemingly niche product like CFW.

I've wondered how the resale restrictions and the trust would interconnect. We know from the filings that the resale restrictions are back. What we do not yet seem to know is how a multi-home-resort-trust would work because the trust seems to be limited to CFW at the moment.

So how would this work in the future? Disney will sell me trust points with the advantage of not having one home resort but several. But the moment I sell these points, they will become restricted to one home resort? Do I get a choice of which trust resort this will be? Being restricted to RIV today after resale seems somewhat limiting but being restricted to CFW seems to be much more limiting and detrimental to a further resale price (only one type of accommodation, appealing to some but less so for others)

I'm not sure if I'd ever buy trust points but buying trust points at CFW seems to be much more risky to me than buying trust points at RIV, if I understand this correctly.

 

[BeachClub2014]

So how would this work in the future? Disney will sell me trust points with the advantage of not having one home resort but several. But the moment I sell these points, they will become restricted to one home resort? Do I get a choice of which trust resort this will be? Being restricted to RIV today after resale seems somewhat limiting but being restricted to CFW seems to be much more limiting and detrimental to a further resale price (only one type of accommodation, appealing to some but less so for others)

Great question. Maybe it works something like this: A purchaser of RTU points in the Trust would have CFW as their designated home resort with 11-month/7-month booking privileges and rules as currently exist. Then, as other new Trusts are added, an owner of Trust RTU points (currently just CFW) could have 11-month (or some other priority) access to the newly added Trust options. That would allow for the resale restrictions to still apply to the underlying home resort RTU points.

Pure speculation on my part, but that seems like it would work.

 

[walt34]

Great question. Maybe it works something like this: A purchaser of RTU points in the Trust would have CFW as their designated home resort with 11-month/7-month booking privileges and rules as currently exist. Then, as other new Trusts are added, an owner of Trust RTU points (currently just CFW) could have 11-month (or some other priority) access to the newly added Trust options. That would allow for the resale restrictions to still apply to the underlying home resort RTU points.

Pure speculation on my part, but that seems like it would work.

Maybe. But in this case I think I'd prefer to buy RIV trust points or Poly tower trust points rather than CFW trust points, even if I primarily want to stay at CFW myself. Why? Because CFW appeals to a much narrower group. As long as I keep my points, I can then use my RIV trust points to book CFW at 11 months. Once I have to sell them, I would assume that RIV trust points (then locked to RIV) or Poly 2 trust points (locked to poly 2) would achieve a higher resale price than CFW trust points, because those resorts appeal to a larger group of potential buyers.

Wouldn't this mess with DVD's ability to sell CFW trust points? The main argument to sell them in the old system would be to have 11 months advantage in booking CFW. This goes away if Poly 2 trust owners can book at the same time, wouldn't it?

 

[BeachClub2014]

Maybe. But in this case I think I'd prefer to buy RIV trust points or Poly tower trust points rather than CFW trust points, even if I primarily want to stay at CFW myself. Why? Because CFW appeals to a much narrower group. As long as I keep my points, I can then use my RIV trust points to book CFW at 11 months. Once I have to sell them, I would assume that RIV trust points (then locked to RIV) or Poly 2 trust points (locked to poly 2) would achieve a higher resale price than CFW trust points, because those resorts appeal to a larger group of potential buyers.

Wouldn't this mess with DVD's ability to sell CFW trust points? The main argument to sell them in the old system would be to have 11 months advantage in booking CFW. This goes away if Poly 2 trust owners can book at the same time, wouldn't it?

I think there are a lot of unknowns about how the Trust(s) will/may work, both in the short term with CFW and in the longer term as additional Trusts (Poly Tower?) are added. It could be that the creation of the Trust is as simple as shifting from a deeded property version of DVC to a right-to-use model that has similar rules as exists today.

I think the key in all of this speculation is DVD's commitment to restrictions on resales and they will continue to use those as a driver of direct sales. If they add the upcoming Poly Tower in the same fashion, then that would allow for the resale restrictions to continue there, as well.

 

[walt34]

I think there are a lot of unknowns about how the Trust(s) will/may work, both in the short term with CFW and in the longer term as additional Trusts (Poly Tower?) are added. It could be that the creation of the Trust is as simple as shifting from a deeded property version of DVC to a right-to-use model that has similar rules as exists today.

Absolutely. I do hope that DVD will at some point in the not too distant future explain what their intentions are. Letting us interpret filings that do not match what DVD has explained publicly as of yet is probably not the best strategy to avoid uncertainty and doubt - which might hurt sales.

 

[tom1944]

Adding more food for thought…here are two clauses from the PVB POS which could potentially allow them to add Poly tower to PVB, but create a different vacation ownership plan for those units that are then sold through a trust use plan?

Once they said it was the same association I felt they had a plan like this.

 

[Sandisw]

I've wondered how the resale restrictions and the trust would interconnect. We know from the filings that the resale restrictions are back. What we do not yet seem to know is how a multi-home-resort-trust would work because the trust seems to be limited to CFW at the moment.

So how would this work in the future? Disney will sell me trust points with the advantage of not having one home resort but several. But the moment I sell these points, they will become restricted to one home resort? Do I get a choice of which trust resort this will be? Being restricted to RIV today after resale seems somewhat limiting but being restricted to CFW seems to be much more limiting and detrimental to a further resale price (only one type of accommodation, appealing to some but less so for others)

I'm not sure if I'd ever buy trust points but buying trust points at CFW seems to be much more risky to me than buying trust points at RIV, if I understand this correctly.

The current rules give those who buy into the cabins resort use plan allow them a one month guarantee as a home resort advantage.

Since the document also says that other plans can be created in the trust that are not the same, I am more inclined to think we could see a trust that adds each new resort as its own, where you get a one month advantage there, but the rest will be available after that but before those trading in via BVTC can.

However, until they decide to add any other units, it’s hard to tell how they will amend.

If one is buying at CFW, even via this trust model, with the understanding I will always have a one month advantage, not sure that is something that can be amended later on.

I need to go back, though, and read that language again to see if it gives clues.

 

[walt34]

The current rules give those who buy into the cabins resort use plan allow them a one month guarantee as a home resort advantage.

Funny, this would come back to your previous speculation, that direct owners could get 1 month head start to people who get access (to OG resorts) through the trust. The new model would then be:

11 month home resort booking at your direct home resort or trust home resort
10 months trust owners can access other trust properties (resale restrictions apply)
7 months direct owners and trust owners can access each others inventories (resale restrictions apply)

Doesn't Marriott do a 13 months vs 12 months thing?

 

[Sandisw]

Funny, this would come back to your previous speculation, that direct owners could get 1 month head start to people who get access (to OG resorts) through the trust. The new model would then be:

11 month home resort booking at your direct home resort or trust home resort
10 months trust owners can access other trust properties (resale restrictions apply)
7 months direct owners and trust owners can access each others inventories (resale restrictions apply)

Doesn't Marriott do a 13 months vs 12 months thing?

I don’t know anything about Marriott…but I did find this which I think does leave the door open for adding new units elsewhere, with their own plans…meaning resale restrictions…but allow direct purchasers potential 11 month advantage at all trust properties.

Just like it says, until there are more, one won’t know.

 

[J-Dog]

Now that we can safely assume the trust will be going ahead sooner than later, it would be another safe assumption that the Poly Tower will be added to the trust, as well (can’t see much appeal in joining the trust if it didn’t give me access to more desirable locations/resorts), right?

Not sure anyone can shed light on this at the current time anyway, but I’m very curious how they will add the current PVB longhouses into this trust since it’s very likely the same association. I’m also curious if I were to purchase into the trust, if my deeded Poly resale points can be joined with trust points to have more points at 11mos. Or will they have to be separate bookings even if both are at 11mos?

Why? Is there any known documentation that gives any dates for anything? If anything, recent declaration of more RIV units into the current legacy DVC would suggest the opposite.

Thanks. I read through the documentation and replied in another thread. But I think for the most part, the Palmetto Trust Association Inc documentation was simply created and filed to support the Cabins at FW. Nothing more. I no longer see any evidence of a multisite trust coming from Palmetto. I speculate that with the cabins being modular or manufactured homes, and being different than purpose built real estate, may have necessitated a different type of ownership plan to make it work.

I agree. Other than the "Trust" title on one document, it seems that all the other documentation that has been mentioned is just boilerplate stuff. Everything other than that is just speculation from bloggers and posters on this forum.