Ft. Wilderness Cabins becoming DVC?

[CarolynFH]

Where a Trust is prohibited from being an owner. Trusts are owners today (people have their deeds in trusts).

As a Sandi states above, there are different kinds of trusts. DVC is setting up a timeshare trust, which has completely different legal structure and rules than the kind of trust DVC owners might set up for estate planning purposes.

Then you really wouldn't "choose" anything. What is being sold then is points that can be used at any trust resort. Nothing to choose from: they work everywhere. You'd just be sold a number of points for your RTU, and would be told what resorts you can use them at and what resort just happens to be the newest (the bright, shiny thing). If every RTU owner has the same booking rights as everyone else, then home resorts become moot: every resort is your home resort and there's zero reason to attach the points to any particular resort.

That’s how the Club Wyndham Access trust works - people buy points, don’t have a home resort, can book units in any resort as long as those units are part of the Access trust. Club Wyndham Select owners do have home resorts, get a certain number of points for enrolling them in the Select program, get advance reservation priority at their home resort, and at a certain later date can book other resorts.

 

[maui22]

Could Disney be using the trust to allow them to have flexible expiration dates? Example, sell CFW in 2024 with 50 years of points. 2025 also has 50 years of points. Etc.

Here is my thinking. OKW extension went poorly. Disney right now struggles with ROFR and reselling points in as resorts near the expiration.

If the new CFW trust allows them to use ROFR, but them sell points direct with 50 (or however many years), Disney had a never ending cycle of points for resorts added to this trust.

2042 offers a good example of problems they will encounter and should make sure it doesn’t happen again. Some of OKW expires plus all of BRV, BWV, BCV, HH, and VB.

 

[walt34]

I'm reminded that the documents say a lot of things could happen, many of which have not happened yet. For example: dropping the restrictions on RIV.

I'm generally a constructionist when it comes to timeshares anyway, but I would not buy Cabin points expecting to ever use them anywhere else during the Home Resort period until and unless it was in black and white---and even then I would assume it won't last.

A lot of what is in the documents might just be fallback options: if the CFW don't sell well by themselves (just one type of room) they might combine them with Poly tower points in the trust to get them selling.

With Reflections having been cancelled, one option to balance out these cabins with a resort with more room types disappeared. The Poly tower with the trust structure might be a 'virtual' replacement for this. More 11 months options than the cabins by themselves but more points to sell than the Poly tower has by itself. If it works, expand with more resorts.

It will be interesting to see, if DVD does this from the start or waits to see how the resorts will sell standalone. At the least I'd expect the Poly tower filings to have some provisions to make this possible.

 

[Brian Noble]

With Reflections having been cancelled, one option to balance out these cabins with a resort with more room types disappeared.

For now. I don't think it is forever. Someone in TWDC is still eying that plot of land, you can bet your last mickeybar.

 

[walt34]

For now. I don't think it is forever. Someone in TWDC is still eying that plot of land, you can bet your last mickeybar.

Sure. But this would be 4+ years down the road - too late to have much influence on selling CFW. I don't think they want to be selling CFW for that long.

 

[Bo1203]

Sure. But this would be 4+ years down the road - too late to have much influence on selling CFW. I don't think they want to be selling CFW for that long.

Disney could advertise any resort in a trust even after its points have been “sold out”. They could just build cheap new rooms (or add AUL, 2042s, ROFR, Foreclosures) to add points to the trust and keep advertising the ability to book at 11months at *name your favorite resort that the trust has points of*.

 

[Sandisw]

Then you really wouldn't "choose" anything. What is being sold then is points that can be used at any trust resort. Nothing to choose from: they work everywhere. You'd just be sold a number of points for your RTU, and would be told what resorts you can use them at and what resort just happens to be the newest (the bright, shiny thing). If every RTU owner has the same booking rights as everyone else, then home resorts become moot: every resort is your home resort and there's zero reason to attach the points to any particular resort.

Yes, you would be chosing which resort plan to buy in to which would determine what your contract, based on how this initial trust has been set up…and my assessments are only based on what is there and what it could potentially mean.

Plus, as I speculated, maybe it’s not the same booking, but it is just the one month for your plan, then one for the rest, and trading via BVTC is pushed back.

We already know that they set it up that it can sell different trust use plans, but that they can’t sell more interests to a property than that match the property that was added.

 

[Sandisw]

Sorry if you've posted this before, but is this the clause you're referring to? I don't see specific references to an RTU plan, so I'm not sure what you're referring to. The Trust itself is not a vacation plan. It just administers and sells the trust interests. CFW and PVB are the vacation plans. So, I'm not sure what you mean by 'RTU plan'.

View attachment 823701

Sorry…the RTU plan was shortcut for the current one for CFW, which is called The Cabins Resort Use Plan…and that say that those who buy into this specific plan will be given a one month priority over others, but will currently be given four.

 

[walt34]

Disney could advertise any resort in a trust even after its points have been “sold out”. They could just build cheap new rooms (or add AUL, 2042s, ROFR, Foreclosures) to add points to the trust and keep advertising the ability to book at 11months at *name your favorite resort that the trust has points of*.

Yes, they could. But I'm with Brian on this that we'll know this when we see it happening. I was just offering my thinking on why they might want to start with a trust model with CFW even if they are not yet fully committed to move more resorts or inventory into this model. The single room type at CFW might prove a CFW specific problem they could solve with the trust without abandoning the existing and working DVC model.

 

[Sandisw]

Yes, they could. But I'm with Brian on this that we'll know this when we see it happening. I was just offering my thinking on why they might want to start with a trust model with CFW even if they are not yet fully committed to move more resorts or inventory into this model. The single room type at CFW might prove a CFW specific problem they could solve with the trust without abandoning the existing and working DVC model.

That is why the Poly tower situation will ar least give us insight in to where they might be going with it. If Poly tower is just added to PVB and sold like normal, then we do know they are not as far along, or committed to the trust use plan for resorts coming on board in the near future.

 

[Sykes]

IMO, we'll probably get some sense of what is coming once CFW formally goes on sale. Being able to also book PVB2 at 11 months would be a huge selling point for CFW so it's hard for me to imagine them giving up that opportunity if the plans are somewhat set in stone by that point. Similarly, if guides represent that the only way to book CFW at 11 months for the forseeable future is to buy CFW then I suspect that they'll stick with that too, for at least PVB2. It's true that they could still leave it quite ambiguous, but if they launch and CFW is functionally identical to the existing program with just a different ownership structure I'd bet dollars to donuts that trust-ownership resorts in the near future will look like that too.

 

[Sandisw]

IMO, we'll probably get some sense of what is coming once CFW formally goes on sale. Being able to also book PVB2 at 11 months would be a huge selling point for CFW so it's hard for me to imagine them giving up that opportunity if the plans are somewhat set in stone by that point. Similarly, if guides represent that the only way to book CFW at 11 months for the forseeable future is to buy CFW then I suspect that they'll stick with that too, for at least PVB2. It's true that they could still leave it quite ambiguous, but if they launch and CFW is functionally identical to the existing program with just a different ownership structure I'd bet dollars to donuts that trust-ownership resorts in the near future will look like that too.

It will be interesting to watch the timing too. I have a good feeling we will have the answers about the tower before the Cains Reosrt Use plan is offered for sale.

With the cabins, they do not need a lot of lead time to sell before opening. They started sales for BPK at VGF in March, and rooms were ready to occupancy by June. Renovations didn’t even start until February?

So, since these are cabins, and most likely being brought directly to the sites, they won’t need long between the sale start and opening date.

 

[Mikey15]

Disney could advertise any resort in a trust even after its points have been “sold out”. They could just build cheap new rooms (or add AUL, 2042s, ROFR, Foreclosures) to add points to the trust and keep advertising the ability to book at 11months at *name your favorite resort that the trust has points of*.

Based on what Sandi’s saying though they couldn’t add Aul, ROFR, or foreclosures without adding whole units (or previously undeclared ones), and that inventory would have to be moved to a new use plan in order to become part of the trust.

2042 resorts (except OKW) could be rolled in at expiry though. Or new unit additions (conversions & new builds), but CCV style rather than VGF.

 

[Roughians_satchel]

That is why the Poly tower situation will ar least give us insight in to where they might be going with it. If Poly tower is just added to PVB and sold like normal, then we do know they are not as far along, or committed to the trust use plan for resorts coming on board in the near future.

Or that they're using the trust for only one resort. When a entirely new resort comes online (say a Yacht Club) - they would create another trust, etc. It's been stated above how it gives them control working within the Florida timeshare laws - not about marketing a new product. If they were so interested in a multi-property trust, they would have started in California earlier last year.

 

[Jlo85]

Do we think the trust in any way relates to the laws or restrictions related to the sale of property that is considered a mobile home or trailer? Historically, in real estate, I believe those have different real estate law requirements and implications that may have prohibited Disney from selling them in a deeded real estate form.

I am now leaning more to this type of situation. Especially since it seems the trust may have been named for the "Palmetto Path" at Fort Wilderness.

I speculate as someone who isn't a lawyer or real estate expert, but two things I could see from quick research:

1. I think CFW could have been forced under Florida law to be classified as a "Mobile Home Park" in lieu of a Condominium like the rest of DVC. DVC could have been trying to avoid labeling it as such.
2. From what I can tell, a mobile home is only 'Real Property' under Florida law if the owner of the Mobile Home also owns the land. With the leasing situation for DVC - even though it's a sister company, I wonder if it would have been impossible to deed them as 'Real Property.'

 

[Nabas]

I think because historically DVD’s only profit stream was selling direct. That was it. These changes not only increase direct sales and profits by making direct more desirable compared to alternative, they opened ways to profit during transfer (resale). For that second part nothing existed previously.

Resale transactions that happened on legacy DVC did zip bupkis for DVD - brokers got their sweet commission and buyers got 100% of the sellers’ rights and ownership. DVD got nothing. In 2016 resale stopped allowing transfer of direct benefits. In 2019 resale restrictions on use began.

Right now there’s over $50,000,000 worth of resale contracts on the market. $4,000,000 in commissions just for a snapshot of today’s if they were sold, nevermind all of 2023 or 2024. Tens of millions commission yearly.

No longer leaving all that money on the table, restrictions open an extra path to profit. Sell back full rights on resale.

It may look risky to us owners. We worry what may happen to the DVC product and resale values. But that perspective is skewed. DVD is all about direct and for those buyers using their contract, the world is their oyster. That is enough to carry DVD and DVC.

DVD's recent strategy clearly has been to make resales less desirable. They've done this by taking away resale benefits.

This makes direct purchases more desirable and also makes it less expensive for Disney to require resale points, which they then can sell with full benefits restored.

Taking aware benefits from resales seems like a double win for Disney.

 

[Nabas]

True, but carrying a resale value has always been a HUGE selling point of DVC. If not, most people would just be buying resale Wyndham over at Bonnet Creek (which, BTW, many do).

IMO, the #1 value of a DVC resale is staying onsite at WDW. Wyndham and Bonnet Creek can never offer this.

People don't (primarily) buy DVC resale because of the value it might have if and when they sell that contract years later. IMO, they buy DVC resale for the benefits of staying onsite at WDW (e.g. bus service, early park entry, staying in the Disney Bubble, etc.).

 

[Nabas]

I’d bet most direct buyers have no clue about its resale value when they purchase…it’s just once they become owners and learn about the product, they find out that it held decent value in comparison to other timeshares.

If the majority of buyers cared about the resale value of their timeshares, most would never buy timeshares.

To me, this suggests more people buy timeshares because they think "I want to vacation here every year" than think "How much is this timeshare going to be worth when I sell it?"

 

[Nabas]

It’s why I said this discussion about PVB is really a side note as this is what makes me skeptical that DVD could ever add inventory from sold out resorts to the trust…they don’t own enough of any unit to transfer it.

Doesn't DVD already own 2% of every DVC resort?

Could they make that part of the trust?

 

[Sandisw]

Doesn't DVD already own 2% of every DVC resort?

Could they make that part of the trust?

They own 2% of the whole resort, but they do not own any unit at 100%. Since they do not, I do not believe they can add any units from sold out resorts because those units have other owners.

The documents specifically state that any property that is added to the trust has to be defined, and how do you define a fractional part of a unit. Plus, units can be made up of many rooms so which actual rooms would go with that? Units that have already been declared can’t be divided.

For example, if a unit consists of three 2 bedrooms and 3 studios, and DVDowns say 2% of that unit, what inventory would they attach a plan to to sell for use? They can’t because others own parts od those as well..