Mutually cancelable DVC resale purchase contract

[Dean]

Good thing our forefathers didn't feel that way. It's OK to have an open mind and to consider other points of view as valid especially when double standards are involved. Just because Disney has written into their contract that they have ROFR doesnt mean it's in the best interest of the DVC owners. The point shuffle was "rationalized" as being in the best interest of DVC to maximze bookings. Well, I rationalize that an owner selling DVC in a free marketplace is also in the best interest of DVC. When Disney exercises ROFR that is not going to maximize bookings. They've just eliminated a potentail owner.

I'm a happy owner and am thinking of adding on, not selling. I just shake my head when i see so many opinions expressed that are not open to change or the consideration of alternative methodology to bring about equality in the marketplace. I don't know that equality should ever be construed as illegal or unethical.

It doesn't matter if it's in the members best interest, it's part of the agreement up front that you and all members agreed to upon becoming a member. The difference between that and our founders is that they didn't have choices in this regard, it is NOT an analogous situation. My understanding is that ROFR has been challenged and has held up previously but I don't have any direct documentation. Maybe someone on TUG would know if you wanted to pursue further.

Yes. ROFR increases the cost of timeshares above what they would be if there were no ROFR.

Maybe, maybe not. It likely doesn't affect retail cost which is really all DVC cares about as it relates to what it costs a member to buy in. There are times when ROFR has affects the floor and times it has not. What it does do is prevent a fire sale and that can be neg or pos for a given member. It may protect the prices if you want to sell but it may make it more difficult to sell if you need to quickly.

 

[marynvince]

It doesn't matter if it's in the members best interest, it's part of the agreement up front that you and all members agreed to upon becoming a member. The difference between that and our founders is that they didn't have choices in this regard, it is NOT an analogous situation. My understanding is that ROFR has been challenged and has held up previously but I don't have any direct documentation. Maybe someone on TUG would know if you wanted to pursue further.

those that don't embrace the possibility that there may be a better way that suits the collective as well as the individual prospective buyer are closed minded.
I understand that we all agreed to ROFR as part of our agreement. I'm saying that maybe it's not the best policy. That perhaps there's a better way. Whether that way is adopted by Disney or developed by a member, like a mutually cancellable contract, or some other methodology, as long as it is in the best interest of DVC, I am for it.

 

[Dean]

those that don't embrace the possibility that there may be a better way that suits the collective as well as the individual prospective buyer are closed minded.
I understand that we all agreed to ROFR as part of our agreement. I'm saying that maybe it's not the best policy. That perhaps there's a better way. Whether that way is adopted by Disney or developed by a member, like a mutually cancellable contract, or some other methodology, as long as it is in the best interest of DVC, I am for it.

I've considered all options I'm aware of and decided the current system is the best. There may be a better way to accomplish the developer goal but I'm not aware of any that I consider better. Remember this isn't a goal to make it better for everyone, this is a system specifically designed to protect the developer, not to be "fair". It just so happens that there can be benefits to owners as well. Many have ROFR, not all use it or do so as aggressively as DVC. I've mentioned Westgate previously, I don't feel what they do (or did, not sure whre they are right now) is appropriate.

One thing some resort systems do is to have very high transfer fees, as much as 10% of the purchase price or equal to 5 years of maint fee. As I read FL law on timeshares, I don't think they could legally do it that way at DVC. Another is to limit the options of resale buyers in any one of a number of ways including reservation options for some over others, extra fees to some over others, etc. If you look at the timeshare world, DVC is as mild as it gets in these areas in general.

 

[crisi]

Its not a matter of being closed minded. Its a contract. The contract was signed years ago. The only way to change the terms of the contract is if Disney and EACH INDIVIDUAL DVC OWNER agreed to change the terms of the contract.

You cannot agree to change the terms of my contract with Disney. I have to agree to that.

I'm trying to see any reason why a change in terms of the contract that would cost Disney millions to implement would be worth it from their perspective.

 

[marynvince]

Its not a matter of being closed minded. Its a contract. The contract was signed years ago. The only way to change the terms of the contract is if Disney and EACH INDIVIDUAL DVC OWNER agreed to change the terms of the contract.

You cannot agree to change the terms of my contract with Disney. I have to agree to that.

I'm trying to see any reason why a change in terms of the contract that would cost Disney millions to implement would be worth it from their perspective.

Please quote the passages you are attempting to address. Your global approach is nonsensical. No one has suggested that YOUR contract with disney be changed. No one has suggested that Disney spend millions to implement anything.

 

[crisi]

Please quote the passages you are attempting to address. Your global approach is nonsensical. No one has suggested that YOUR contract with disney be changed. No one has suggested that Disney spend millions to implement anything.

I would have thought that was very clear. The agreements we sign are pretty global and boilerplate - they have been pretty much the same agreement since the first OKW contracts were sold, in which the terms under which ROFR and resales are spelled out.

I understand that we all agreed to ROFR as part of our agreement. I'm saying that maybe it's not the best policy