Just heard that Disney bought back all contracts under $70.

[todsue99]

Just so all you guys know. If the seller is willing to wait they do not have to except Disney's offer. I have a friend who has been trying to buy from The Time Share Store and they are on their third try. They started at $63 dollars a point (I think) and then $68 which was turned down yesterday and now they are up to $72. As long as the seller is willing to wait they can renagotiate it. Way wouldn't the seller wait, they are $2700 ahead. It is a 300 point contract. Just thought it might clear things up.

 

[CarolA]

Well the seller is taking a chance that I will come back with a higher bid. If 68 was my bid on contact with no current points I probably would not come back with more money. SO... the seller tells Disney no, I say no and the seller has NO money. Sometimes you should take the money and run!

 

[todsue99]

In my friends case they contacted the seller and told them they were going to offer more.

 

[Poorman]

I rest my case.

 

[CGregoryJr]

With all due respect, it appears that many folks have failed to get their facts straight regarding these "instances" where there was ostensibly a bidding war between a third party purchaser and Disney. The stipulations in a ROFR are clear and unambiguous. They permit the individual possessing the right to stand in the place of a purchaser where there has been a bona fide offer and acceptance. When the seller executes the sales contract, they have entered into a binding agreement with the purchaser and Disney (by virtue of Disney's ROFR). Such rights are designed to preclude a "bidding war" for obvious reasons. While I am not asserting that I possess any personal insight regarding cases that have been discussed herein, I can only suggest that there is a very strong likelihood that the actual fact pattern differs from the set of circumstances depicted in the various postings. Most importantly, I am interested in making sure the users of the forum are obtaining the best possible advice. I know that's why I log on this site several times a week. To get the views of those who are really in the know regarding this product.

 

[Dean]

Originally posted by CGregoryJr
With all due respect, it appears that many folks have failed to get their facts straight regarding these "instances" where there was ostensibly a bidding war between a third party purchaser and Disney. The stipulations in a ROFR are clear and unambiguous. They permit the individual possessing the right to stand in the place of a purchaser where there has been a bona fide offer and acceptance. When the seller executes the sales contract, they have entered into a binding agreement with the purchaser and Disney (by virtue of Disney's ROFR). Such rights are designed to preclude a "bidding war" for obvious reasons. While I am not asserting that I possess any personal insight regarding cases that have been discussed herein, I can only suggest that there is a very strong likelihood that the actual fact pattern differs from the set of circumstances depicted in the various postings. Most importantly, I am interested in making sure the users of the forum are obtaining the best possible advice. I know that's why I log on this site several times a week. To get the views of those who are really in the know regarding this product.

I know for certain that it was common for DVC to offer for the parties to resubmit a couple of years ago. I also know that there have been some changes in how this works in the last couple of years. DVC no longer makes that offer but that doesn't mean that the buyer and seller couldn't contact DVC and ask to resubmit. DVC could say no but they don't have to. I also know that one of the resale agents said the first contact they usually got when it had been denied was a check from DVC suggesting they no longer went out of their way to allow the parties to resubmit.

 

[todsue99]

I don't know any legal things, but just from what our friends are doing. They are submitting it for the third time. I do not know if they asked DVC if they could or not. I did not mean to offend anyone. I just know they are doing it.

 

[DebbieB]

DVC may allow counteroffers as a courtesy, but I don't believe there's anything in the purchase agreement that requires them to.

I'm looking at mine dated 1/5/99:

Before PURCHASER (exact puncuation) may resell PURCHASER's Ownership Interest to a third party, PURCHASER is required to offer it to DVD upon the same terms and conditions, including financing, as is offered by or to the third party. Accordingly, PURCHASER must notify DVD in writing no less than thirty (30) days in advance of the proposed closing date of PURCHASER's intent to sell and must include a copy of the proposed transaction reducing to writing in all respects. Upon receipt of such written notice, DVD shall determine prior to the closing date whether it wishes to exercise its right of first refusal. If DVD elects to exercise its right of first refusal, DVD shall notify the PURCHASER in writing of such election, and the purchase of DVD shall be closed on or before the proposed closing date.
If DVD fails to notify PURCHASER of its election to exercise its right of first refusal prior to the proposed closing date, PURCHASER may proceed to close the transaction with the third party upon the original terms and conditions offered by or to the third party. DVD's right of first refusal is a covenant that runs with the land and shall always be a requirement binding on any sucessor in title to PURCHASER.

 

[CGregoryJr]

Imagine that. An unconditional, unilateral and unambiguous ROFR. I guess the Mouse's general counsel has his/her act together after all. Who could have possibly envisioned such a result?

 

[Dean]

Originally posted by CGregoryJr
Imagine that. An unconditional, unilateral and unambiguous ROFR. I guess the Mouse's general counsel has his/her act together after all. Who could have possibly envisioned such a result?

No one disputes the contractual arrangement, only it's implementation. In the past it has not been DVC's intent to buy back properties only to prop up the resale price to avoid major competion to new sales. Either way discribed will do that. I know for certain that they previously allowed one to resubmit. I also know they do not routinely offer this option now but may entertain it if requested. I also know that in many cases they have not given any options to resubmit and just bought it back, especially the last 2 years or so.

 

[msdis]

I think this is shortlived. There are a lot of people on waitlists for buybacks. Some of those as in a recent post, may no longer want those points as they have bought elsewhere or have changed their minds. Once those lists are cleaned up, Disney will have "dead" inventory until potential buyers are made aware most likely by agents calling people who already own at those resorts. If people keep chasing the price, Disney will stop. It will no longer be in their best interest. Also, right after 9/11 the resale board tripled and you couldn't get people to buy. Not to be negative, but that opportunity is just around the corner with all the negative talk going on. I say to those who can wait it out, those prices will come back down again for a while, it's just like any other market.