First Riviera ROFR

[Tumnus]

Everyone keeps saying Disney’s ROFR and restricted resort strategy is a long-term cash cow. Personally I think they are playing with fire. The number of people willing to buy DVC direct is already tiny and the ones willing to do it at today’s prices with these restrictions is even smaller. You can only trick so many people into overpaying before the word gets around.

If Riviera and other restricted resorts keep tanking in resale value that kills one of DVC’s strongest selling points “I can sell later and only take a small hit.” If people see a 50-60% percent haircut the second they walk away from the closing table they are going to think twice before buying direct.

The reality is most owners do not keep their contracts for life. The average ownership is about eight years. Life changes. People sell. If their resale options are crippled a lot will simply never buy in. And these restrictions just make the original fourteen resorts even more desirable on the resale market while the restricted ones get treated like the timeshare version of a used Kia.

Sure Disney might squeeze some short term wins by forcing people into direct sales but the long game looks shaky. Resale buyers often turn into direct buyers later kill that entry point and you dry up part of your own pipeline. And if the business model relies on an endless stream of fresh customers willing to overpay with no viable exit that’s not a strategy it’s a ticking clock.

But what do I know I am sure Disney had a bunch of people smarter than me run full financial analyses and projections.

A lot of misconceptions in this post.

"Only a small amount of people willing to buy DVC direct" - DVC sells a lot, and most is direct. The resale market is a niche market. This board is not the common person.

"Resale value is one of it's strongest selling points" - Not true at all, coming to Disney every year is the selling point. Resale value matters so some, but no one buy something expecting to sell it.

"Average ownership is about eight years" - people have posted a lot about how this is misstated and should stop being cited. The average ownership is about eight years for contracts that are sold. Most contracts are not sold. Only the ones that are sold, which is a minority of contracts, are included in the eight year stat.

 

[byurick]

A lot of misconceptions in this post.

"Only a small amount of people willing to buy DVC direct" - DVC sells a lot, and most is direct. The resale market is a niche market. This board is not the common person.

"Resale value is one of it's strongest selling points" - Not true at all, coming to Disney every year is the selling point. Resale value matters so some, but no one buy something expecting to sell it.

"Average ownership is about eight years" - people have posted a lot about how this is misstated and should stop being cited. The average ownership is about eight years for contracts that are sold. Most contracts are not sold. Only the ones that are sold, which is a minority of contracts, are included in the eight year stat.

Are you sure? That's not what the bus driver told me....

 

[Cfabar1]

I thought this was a helpful nugget in the DVCRM post….
“Unfortunately, when sellers price far below market, it can create opportunities for Disney to swoop in under ROFR.”

Personally I think RIV resale should go for around $90/pp or so currently given the restricted nature and the high point cost of rooms per night. It brings the cost roughly to $2/pt./yr. Which feels about the right price to me given the fact you’ll need more points to stay there than most other current resorts, and the fact this one has restrictions. I, in essence view RIV resale points as a different currency than the other DVC points since they aren’t a part of the O14 system. It really is a separate product in my view.

Also the unknowns of how the resort will be maintained long-term and the inability to trade out if you don’t like it after a remodel. I know others disagree, and we are all welcome to our own Magic 8 Ball prognostications….

 

[airjay75]

I wonder if Riviera faces an impact on three fronts:

• Selling for 6 years now and likely needs 12+ months to sell out. (Keep in mind deeds Disney gets back add to their inventory. DVCNews direct sales data only reflects deeds going out. Deeds coming back in prior to sold out mean it extends the sell out date.) Disney may be receiving a higher number back simply because Riviera resale prices make it harder for some who took out loans to get out. Restrictions make it easier for Disney to get points back because people may be underwater due to lower resale prices.
• Disney rarely uses ROFR while in active sales. Generally, it's only when their is an extreme bargain (see the Riviera and Aulani contracts @pkrieger2287 has mentioned in various locations).
• It's also the first restricted resale resort. Reason I mention this is because restrictions make resale purchase less valuable to many. https://www.dvcresalemarket.com/blog/dvc-resale-average-sales-prices-for-july-2025/

This puts additional pressure on those who need to sell their direct purchase contracts. Started at $188 base price in 2019. When looking at resale prices, that's one of the steepest drop off from the initial price that I recall.

Look at initial prices all the way from OKW ($51/pt) through CCV (last unrestricted $176/pt?).
Other examples only because resale prices have dropped for them. Aulani ($120? initial price) and VB ($62.75 initial price).

Curious what others think?

All excellent observations. Of course, COVID goes a long way to explaining the first two (as an aside, I yearn for the day when I never have to think of COVID's impact on our current life . . . sigh). No COVID, RIV would be sold out. And, I would think a significant reason Disney never exercises ROFR on actively selling resorts is because it is sold out before there is really that much of an active resale market - again, if RIV had sold out quicker, probably much less likely for a contract like this one to even come across the ROFR desk while in active sales.

Your post reminds me of another thing I keep thinking about. Resale contract pricing is generally determined by a number of factors. Let's say the 4 most significant are: (1) length of contract, (2) cost of dues, (3) benefits of home resort priority booking, (4) ability to use at other resorts. When you compare non-restricted resale contracts, I would argue that 1-3 affect pricing much more than 4. I would go so far to say that, outside BLT/CCV/OKW/SSR, if you're not buying a resale contract because you are hoping to use the home resort priority booking most of the time, you aren't doing the math right. And, even with BLT and CCV, you can get some significant benefits by using the home resort priority booking.

Enter RIV and the restricted resort. #4 is gone. But, how much of the value inherent in the contract is actually lost by losing #4? For sure, a significant amount, relative to the O14. Even if you're not going to use your points outside of your home resort most of the time, just the idea that you can is a big selling point to DVC. But, is it more psychological than real in terms of value lost? Right now, because RIV is the only WDW resort without #4, it keeps people away. Why bother with a RIV resale contract when you can buy one of the O14 and have fun at those resorts while it lasts. But, as more restricted resorts come online and 2042 gets closer, the fact that #4 is gone may not deflate prices as much as it does today.

And, once RIV is sold out and LSL comes online, the benefits of home resort priority booking at RIV will likely increase. That could increase the inherent value in RIV resale.

And, just to be clear, I'm not trying to argue that RIV resale is going to skyrocket (or even increase). I just think there are a lot of factors at play and we don't really know how things are going to shake out in the long-run. @Brian Noble's perspective is the right one - assume $0 salvage value, money is for spending, so enjoy it.

 

[havoc315]

It won’t be demand absent some black swan event. They keep making families with kids in Disney’s target market.

Demand eventually becomes constrained by the park capacity. They have done almost nothing to increase park capacity in decades. The new construction at Magic Kingdom will increase capacity but by how much, I doubt more than 2-3% of WDW total capacity.

There are between 35,000 to 40,000 rooms currently at WDW -- Accommodating about 100,000 guests on a daily basis.
Total WDW capacity is around 300,000, but that's only completely used at Christmas, etc.

On average -- there are 160,000 guests at WDW. That includes day visitors, locals, those that prefer an AirBNB. So there is already enough hotel and DVC capacity for about 2/3rds of the average daily guests.

I really don't know how many more rooms Disney could really add and keep filled. Disney already quietly discounts rooms on Priceline. It's not a secret that Disney has converted hotel rooms to DVC because there simply wasn't enough hotel demand.

In the end -- Disney only draws so many guests on a daily basis. And only so many of those guests have a desire to stay on property.

And there is quite a bit of room. Plus they get to start recycling resorts in about 16 years.

Yes, that is true --- But let's assume Lakeside Lodge effectively sells out in about 5 years. That gives you a window of 2032 to 2042 -- To either build yet more resorts, or just flip existing.

Then assuming they spend 2042-2050 "recycling" -- They then hit another dry patch from 2050 to 2057..

After 2057, they will have another resort to recycle every 2-3 years..

 

[Mouseforward]

I wonder if anyone has bought a 25 pointer at RIV.

I got word that I bought the first one sold.

 

[Mouseforward]

It really is a separate product in my view.

If you are a young family and want something longer than 2057 resale RIV can be a low cost option. 75 points gives you a weeks vacation every other year @ $250 a night. That is the dues cost alone in a Cabin so it is like you got a free cabin contract.

Or if you are a RIV fan and want to go from a studio to a 1br - 150 direct, 150 resale is also a good option saving you $15,000.

What I do not see is 400/500/600 point RIV contracts being sellable on the resale market. That is a lot of commitment to one resort. I can see DVC using ROFR to snap them up and split them into 50 point add ons.

RIV itself is a special product, perfectly sized studios with a great layout/design and all types of room options for large groups. Great for "Disney Adults" and the smaller size makes it less hectic. It is also a "senior friendly" resort with much less walking required vs Poly or VGF.

I think PIT has improved on RIV a with the second bath in the 1 br, but at a real steep point cost and some bad views unless you spend tons of points for PV or TPV.

 

[Brian Noble]

They have done almost nothing to increase park capacity in decades.

I disagree with this. New fantasyland, Tron, pandora, France, Pixar place, and arguably Batuu all represent additional attraction capacity. They added capacity to Soarin and Midway in the form of a third theater and track respectively. They are bulldozing a pretty big parking lot at Studios for Monsters. There have also been new restaurants and restrooms—some connected to these lands, some not. Even if you want to argue that this is just a replacement of capacity (and I don’t think it was) the new additions are still more highly utilized, which increases effective capacity.

Disney is also happy to move offsite guests onsite. Even if they don’t get a single new guest year-over-year, if they can convert some offsite guests to onsite, fine.

 

[disneylandtour]

Demand eventually becomes constrained by the park capacity. They have done almost nothing to increase park capacity in decades. The new construction at Magic Kingdom will increase capacity but by how much, I doubt more than 2-3% of WDW total capacity.

There are between 35,000 to 40,000 rooms currently at WDW -- Accommodating about 100,000 guests on a daily basis.
Total WDW capacity is around 300,000, but that's only completely used at Christmas, etc.

On average -- there are 160,000 guests at WDW. That includes day visitors, locals, those that prefer an AirBNB. So there is already enough hotel and DVC capacity for about 2/3rds of the average daily guests.

I really don't know how many more rooms Disney could really add and keep filled. Disney already quietly discounts rooms on Priceline. It's not a secret that Disney has converted hotel rooms to DVC because there simply wasn't enough hotel demand.

In the end -- Disney only draws so many guests on a daily basis. And only so many of those guests have a desire to stay on property.

I believe, in terms of Disney's outlook, the plan isn't about increasing overall capacity, but rather (1) improving repeat visitation and (2) moving off-property guests into on-property rooms. Over the past--let's say--15 years 192 (west of the I-4) has be come sketchier, with hotels having more difficulty booking rooms. Even Motel 6 left. The Ramada has been converted into office space. And so on. This is one of the markets that Disney is trying to convert over to Value resorts--while then trying to convert current Value resort customers to DVC. And more to the point, Disney would like to take a chunk away from the Airbnb market, moving those groups into DVC units with a kitchen. I'm pretty sure this is the overall plan moving forward--not so much expanding park capacity (except in MK). The new attractions are mostly an incentive for repeat business, not an overall expansion of any park (except for MK). If Disney needs more capacity for part of the year, all they need to do is expand block out a few more days on the lower end APs.

 

[Brian Noble]

I will also note that DAS restrictions plus moving from free to paid VQ is also an effective increase in capacity, because fewer people are in two places at once.

 

[Brianstl]

I think one thing that some people are overlooking is the tax benefits that Disney achieves with new construction vs. flipping contracts. It is why I am convinced the 2042 resorts will go through complete gut rehabs or more likely tear down and rebuilds when 2042 comes. Not all at once, but staggered over several years. Disney won't pass up a chance to make a few bucks flipping contracts every now and then, but it will never be part of DVC's regular business model.

 

[PolyRob]

It also occurs to me that if I add on before the end of the 3x travel bonus, I can reap a nice large pile of URs. I used some from the last purchase to rent a BMW 228 this week. Fun car, and I got it for only a few bucks over the standard rate. Alamo/National must have been overweight in sports cars this week.

And it's Welcome Home weeks....

IDK if you have a business card or are interested in them, but the Chase Ink Preferred still codes 3x travel and allows you to transfer to travel partners for a $95 annual fee if you didn't want to rush anything on the CSR before October.

 

[Brian Noble]

I don't (yet) have a business card, but having one would make sense and I don't really need to be in a hurry to buy anything for any other reason. Tail wags dog, I guess!

 

[Ruttangel]

This is why buying RIV direct scares some people. It could end up being a 50-60% loss compared to Poly which might be 25-35%.

Plus PVB dues much lower, if you’re sitting on the fence this might push you over to PVB

And the KEY message from this is also to split your contracts!!! Don’t buy over 200pts on one contract. The pool of buyers gets lower the greater the points

 

[RuntheMouse]

RIV itself is a special product, perfectly sized studios with a great layout/design and all types of room options for large groups. Great for "Disney Adults" and the smaller size makes it less hectic. It is also a "senior friendly" resort with much less walking required vs Poly or VGF.

This is exactly the thoughts DH and I have. We love RiV and our contract will outlast us but we think it’s the perfect resort for aging seniors.

 

[havoc315]

I disagree with this. New fantasyland, Tron, pandora, France, Pixar place, and arguably Batuu all represent additional attraction capacity. They added capacity to Soarin and Midway in the form of a third theater and track respectively. They are bulldozing a pretty big parking lot at Studios for Monsters. There have also been new restaurants and restrooms—some connected to these lands, some not. Even if you want to argue that this is just a replacement of capacity (and I don’t think it was) the new additions are still more highly utilized, which increases effective capacity.

A lot of recent changes actually reduced capacity. Regardless, for example, full capacity at Magic Kingdom has been 100,000 for decades. New Fantasyland did not increase that capacity. Galaxy’s Edge has a lower capacity than the attractions they replaced.

The new villains land is the first actual size expansion since the building of Animal Kingdom.

Disney is also happy to move offsite guests onsite. Even if they don’t get a single new guest year-over-year, if they can convert some offsite guests to onsite, fine.

There are only so many guests that can be converted.

There is a reason they haven’t built a regular hotel for 20 years. If they felt the demand was there, they would have.

Disney has actually been significantly reducing their regular hotel capacity.

 

[sndral]

…
There is a reason they haven’t built a regular hotel for 20 years. If they felt the demand was there, they would have.

Disney has actually been significantly reducing their regular hotel capacity.

One could argue that the addition of 545 rooms when they built the Grand Destino 15 story tower in 2019 was the equivalent of a new regular hotel.
At the same time they were building a tower at Coronado Springs they were building a 10 story 345 room DVC tower at CBR which they named Riviera & which also opened in 2019.

 

[Mouseforward]

Disney has actually been significantly reducing their regular hotel capacity.

Apparently WL has been selling out on a regular basis, I think that is one of the drivers to LSL having 500+ cash rooms. It is in location and transportation close to WL in features if the leaked plans are to believed.

It seems like WDW is selling out "value" rooms, moving guests with upgrades to Moderates, Moderates then being given upgrade offers to Deluxe.

The $800-1000 / night rooms at the big 3 MK hotels are the real issue with occupancy which to me says WDW has a pricing issue.

 

[havoc315]

One could argue that the addition of 545 rooms when they built the Grand Destino 15 story tower in 2019 was the equivalent of a new regular hotel.
At the same time they were building a tower at Coronado Springs they were building a 10 story 345 room DVC tower at CBR which they named Riviera & which also opened in 2019.

Good point about Grand Destino. Though I’m not sure whether they tore down any Coronado springs buildings.

Riviera was actually a major decrease in regular hotel capacity —- they tore down CBR rooms in order to build Riviera.

Point remains — overall, they have significantly reduced the number of regular hotel rooms over the last 20 years. They have built a tiny bit of new DVC (Poly tower), but they have mostly converted regular hotel to DVC (CBR rooms converted to Riviera; Big Pine Key, Garden wing of Contemporary converted to BLT; Wilderness Lodge rooms converted to Copper Creek)

 

[havoc315]

Apparently WL has been selling out on a regular basis, I think that is one of the drivers to LSL having 500+ cash rooms. It is in location and transportation close to WL in features if the leaked plans are to believed.

only after they cut the number of WL rooms in half. They couldn’t book the WL rooms, so they converted them to Copper Creek.

I’ll be curious to see the portion of Lakeside Lodge that is apportioned to regular hotel space. Wilderness Lodge has traditionally struggled.

It seems like WDW is selling out "value" rooms, moving guests with upgrades to Moderates, Moderates then being given upgrade offers to Deluxe.

The $800-1000 / night rooms at the big 3 MK hotels are the real issue with occupancy which to me says WDW has a pricing issue.