How Important Are Those Twelve Extra Years?

[Lexxiefern]

Not important at all. I will be 64 (still young ) but if I am still frequenting WDW, I will want to stay at a newer resort. All the DVC's will be old by then (like the contemporary is now)

 

[jarestel]

Not important at all to me personally, since I wouldn't be able to use it anyway. As far as passing it on to the children, that would be nice if it worked out as a result of buying the longer contract ( and me heading off to the great RnR Coaster in the sky ), but it just wasn't a contributing factor in our decision to buy. After all of the trips we will have taken on my dime before it's over, my children and grandchildren may very well be tired of WDW by then, who knows?

 

[TnRobin]

I will be 77 in 2042. My DS will be 47. Lets say he has kids at about 27ish, then my grand kids will be grown or late teens. Three generations will have a great time on my DVC. So another few years is not a biggie for us.

 

[sjdisneywedding]

i understand where alot of people are coming from, but to say ahh whatever its only a few extra years, isnt really hitting the nail on the head. Many people are looking at from the point of view of already being in dvc for years, which isnt quite accurate.

if you were buying today, not 10 years ago, not 5 years ago, not 20 from now, why not have 12 extra years.

Those 12 extra years equate to about a 25% 30% longer contract. thats fairly significant

 

[mom2rb]

The extra years are important to us. We wanted our boys to be able to take their kids to Disney World. If our boys have kids when they are 30 then SSR will last until my grandchildren are 26.

 

[sjdisneywedding]

It's a risky bet that 38 years from now you or your legacy will enjoy WDW the way they do today... too much can happen in that timeframe

IMO a much better legecy for your family would be to invest that money in a college fund, or other investment... If they still love disney by then, they can buy an "old" SSR contract for pennies on the dollar.

invest what money? the thousand bucks you might be able to save on a resale. the 12 extra years arent costing you anything extra, in fact, if you are buying direct from Disney, they are cheaper at this point w the $10 discount

 

[spiceycat]

the only other Disney nut is my family is my brother - he can't afford the annual fee - and his daughter - she certainly can't.

so I have no doubt if I died tomorrow - they would certainly sell it - they have no choice - at this time in their lives.

maybe in 20 years it will be different - who is to say.

 

[crisi]

so for everyone who is saying they dont care about the 12 years because they wont be around anymore, is it then safe to assume that the whole benefit of being able to pass these contracts on after passing is of no use to you?

No use.

Honestly, I'm divided on how long we will own. We may sell when the kids get to college or shortly after, we may use it to golf well into our retirement.

As far as passing wealth to my children, vacation homes are really far down on the list of things I want to pass onto them. We have some heirloom possessions. I hope to leave them with cash. And I hope to be able to help them out before we die with things like education and a downpayment on a home. My parents have a lovely home on a lake (not a vacation home) that they bought intending to pass down to us.....my sisters live out of state and my husband and I aren't very interested in the maintenance and expense of living on lakeshore. My parents fortunately realize that they were intending on "gifting" us with something we'd find burdensome, so there aren't hard feelings. On the same note, my parents will likely be burdened by inherieting my grandfather's Arizona home....they don't have any interest in living there, so it will involve selling it.

Finally, I have one small 150 point contract which fits our family vacation needs. I have two children. I'd have to buy another contract if legacy were important to me.

For us, best case on DVC is that about the time the length of the contract ends, we aren't interested in using it. Given family history, at the age of 76, I suspect we may own it for a year or two more than ideal.

 

[sjdisneywedding]

No use.

Honestly, I'm divided on how long we will own. We may sell when the kids get to college or shortly after, we may use it to golf well into our retirement.

.

ok then another question,

in x amount of years if you decide to sell, wouldnt those 12 extra years allow you to sell for more money?

 

[pumpkinboy]

FV= PV ( 1 + i ) ^N

You are absolutely right on this Rinkwide. And despite knowing this and being a finance wonk by profession, the extra 12 years still apealed to us! I think on my spreadsheet, the extra 12 yrs came out to less than $2 a point on a present value basis. The two APs they threw in as an incentive tipped the scales for us, but the extra 12 yrs offset the less desirable (from our perspective) location for us.

I'll be 78 when our BWVs revert to Disney, but given that I've got long-lived and fairly healthy genes (Grandma lived to 104, and with advances in medicine, I'm hoping to beat that), maybe those extra 12 will come in handy. Depending on how well WDW is kept up over time, I may still be interested in travelling there thru my 80s.

 

[dougmatt]

The only legacy you will be leaving is 12 extra years of dues payments... Are you sure your families really want to carry that burden? I'm not gonna worry about what I leave behind... While my kids enjoy the vacation, I have told them they SHOULD sell the properties (if there is any value left) unless they really plan to use them. The COST of ownership that seems to always be forgotten is mostly in the annual dues. Less so the upfront price.

That said.... If I was buying today.... I would be hard pressed not to take the extra 12 years!

But I would still have to own HH and VB since I can't get in when I want to go without 11 months..

 

[patsal]

I'll be 77 when VWL and BCV run out. I think that will be just fine.

 

[crisi]

ok then another question,

in x amount of years if you decide to sell, wouldnt those 12 extra years allow you to sell for more money?

Possibly, but it would mean years of booking at eleven months and then bothering to switch at seven. I don't LIKE SSR. (I know others do and this is not resort slamming). I like to book eleven months out at a resort I'm delighted to stay at. That is worth a lot more than the possibility of more money sometime in the future when/if we sell.

Obviously, at some point the "additional cost" of owning a different resort isn't worth it. But it isn't there in the twelve years. I bought to enjoy now and for the next decade - maybe two - and we will take it from there. Not for when I sell or when I die.

 

[Desnik]

I am 29 and DH is 32. For him the extra 12 years was very important. He sees us going to WDW forever!!LOL We also wanted our children, and grandchildren to be able to enjoy it. For DH the extra 12 years is what made him finally buy into DVC and buy at SSR. Also, he just loved the resort, so do I.

 

[sjdisneywedding]

Possibly, but it would mean years of booking at eleven months and then bothering to switch at seven. I don't LIKE SSR. (I know others do and this is not resort slamming). I like to book eleven months out at a resort I'm delighted to stay at. That is worth a lot more than the possibility of more money sometime in the future when/if we sell.

Obviously, at some point the "additional cost" of owning a different resort isn't worth it. But it isn't there in the twelve years. I bought to enjoy now and for the next decade - maybe two - and we will take it from there. Not for when I sell or when I die.

thats fine if one doesnt like SSR, thats a whole other arguement. I was commenting on those who are saying the 12 years wasnt worth it primarily because they wont be here to use it.

 

[sjdisneywedding]

The only legacy you will be leaving is 12 extra years of dues payments... Are you sure your families really want to carry that burden? I'm not gonna worry about what I leave behind... While my kids enjoy the vacation, I have told them they SHOULD sell the properties (if there is any value left) unless they really plan to use them. The COST of ownership that seems to always be forgotten is mostly in the annual dues. Less so the upfront price.

2 sides to every story

if your family will be going to WDW then its far from a burden. It will be saving them huge amounts of money in 40-50 years. MY Dues payments are next to nothing compared to what a week long vacation at WDW would be. I would get about 1 -2 nights in a deluxe for my yearly dues

 

[dougmatt]

Saving them money or forcing them to spend the money? The real answer is in your first 8 words "if your family will be going to WDW". How do you know now, what someone else will want to do then? Is that worth making a decision on?

To each their own.... Like I said, I would probably have a hard time with the choice, if I was making it now... If I liked SSR it would be a no brainer! But since I am not a real fan (yet) it would make the choice harder as I REALLY like VWL and BWV (the 2 on prop's I own).

 

[crisi]

sjdisneywedding

I don't think not liking it is a whole different argument, I think there are many variables to the same argument. 12 years is one variable. Resale value on variable. Appeal of the resort one. The OP asked "how important is it." If other variables were different (I was fifteen years younger - or even my kids were fifteen years older because then I would be in more of a position to judge a "legacy", I liked the resort, I was buying with the resale value in ten years is mind) those 12 years might be very important.

As to your second point, my parents also though living on a lake was "far from a burden" and had long conversations about how they would fairly determine who got the home we were all supposed to want.....three children, none of us want to live there. It is a beautiful home. And living on a lake is great....just not great enough to justify the maintenence. Its possible my children will see DVC as the same. If they don't, they can purchase DVC Mark III or IV when they can afford it.

I'm going to sound like Pa here, but I don't think Disney has much more than 50 years worth of life left in it as a resort. 50 years is a LONG time in cultural history. Its a long time in corporate history, economic history, social history. I really enjoy our Disney experiences, but the parks seem dirtier, there are more crowds, fewer truly magical moments, and it is less charming to me than it was 20 years ago when I first went. The risk is pretty low that 10 years from now Disney will no longer be an attractive vacation destination for us - but the farther you look out, the higher the risk becomes. Of course, there is also the possibility that the parks 50 years from now are incredible meccas and my children will curse me for denying them this.

BTW, I should go back to your first point...the ability to will DVC to my children IS important. If my husband and I die before the term of the lease, I want the value of that asset to be put towards their trusts or the value of the estate. It would be a shame if I died tomorrow and my kids "lost" $12,000 worth of assets because ownership reverted to DVC at that point. But that's a shorter term consideration that what happens 38 years from now.

 

[sjdisneywedding]

sjdisneywedding

I don't think not liking it is a whole different argument, I think there are many variables to the same argument. 12 years is one variable. Resale value on variable. Appeal of the resort one. The OP asked "how important is it." If other variables were different (I was fifteen years younger - or even my kids were fifteen years older because then I would be in more of a position to judge a "legacy", I liked the resort, I was buying with the resale value in ten years is mind) those 12 years might be very important.

like I said thats fine, i understand all the other arguements BUT that wasnt my point in this particular case. its a whole other arguement with respect to those giving not being here as the main and only reason for not wanting the 12 years. I understand the OP, but after everyone chimes in that they dont want 12 years because they wont be here well then thats where i wanted to know about passing the years on and selling for future gains etc etc

Believe me I know theres a million different variables to as why each of us has dvc

As to your second point, my parents also though living on a lake was "far from a burden" and had long conversations about how they would fairly determine who got the home we were all supposed to want.....three children, none of us want to live there. It is a beautiful home. And living on a lake is great....just not great enough to justify the maintenence. Its possible my children will see DVC as the same. If they don't, they can purchase DVC Mark III or IV when they can afford it.

As i said, IF they are going to go, THEN you will be savings them a lot of money. i didnt say when they go. I guess some feel that their children can buy their own dvc when/if they can afford it, however for me I would much rather pass the dvc down and save my children money if they so desire to have a dvc. If not they can sell they contract with the extra 12 years and get soemthing out of it.

 

[rinkwide]

...I don't think Disney has much more than 50 years worth of life left in it as a resort...I really enjoy our Disney experiences, but...there are more crowds.

Sort of reminds me of...

...nobody goes to that place anymore, it's too crowded...