OKW Contract Extension Quitclaim Deed

[Sammie]

One does have to wonder how they decided what the extension date would be or why they decided to offer it now some 32 years before the orginial expiration date.

Also will be very interesting to see if the extension is offered to other resorts that expire in 2042, if not, then why not.

Actually I am not sure why they did not offer extensions to all resorts that expire in 2042 at the same time they offered OKW, I just think there are alot of unknowns in this and they are the only ones with the answers and they are not very forthcoming.

 

[tjkraz]

One does have to wonder how they decided what the extension date would be or why they decided to offer it now some 32 years before the orginial expiration date.

My recollection was that it was largely due to diminishing points inventory while other resorts were still under construction.

The extension was first offered in late 2007. At that time, SSR was nearly sold out (they stopped active sales in July '08 until Treehouses were announced months later), AKV Jambo was nearly sold out, AKV Kidani was 18 months away from opening and BLT was still just a rumor.

Extending OKW by 15 years gave them the ability to market 50-year OKW contracts as a third option, extend the sales life of SSR and Jambo, and help bridge the gap to Kidani and BLT.

 

[Dean]

One does have to wonder how they decided what the extension date would be or why they decided to offer it now some 32 years before the orginial expiration date.

Also will be very interesting to see if the extension is offered to other resorts that expire in 2042, if not, then why not.

Actually I am not sure why they did not offer extensions to all resorts that expire in 2042 at the same time they offered OKW, I just think there are alot of unknowns in this and they are the only ones with the answers and they are not very forthcoming.

There are lots of variables and we can only guess about some of the issues. OKW was the first and I suspect it was a test to a degree. If so, I think they dug themselves into a hole and it really is not the best test. The obstacles they faced including needing enough participation from those eligible to extend, what the price would be and then how to do it. IMO, they made a mistake initially by tying the expiration date to the ground lease. Had they simply listed a date for expiration it would have made the process much easier and eliminated the need for all the gyrations and possibly eliminated the need for new deeds for anyone. I don't think they could have waited until too late to sell though they could have waited for a few years. I also don't think they'll be a large market late in the course for 15 years assuming they have a proportionate price given their track record. There is risk having different expiration dates due to the management costs, much like trying to shrink government. I think they have two ways to go. Cut their losses on OKW and forget about extensions or try to find a way to get most people to extend. $15 a point this far out isn't going to do it I don't believe though for the smaller more in demand resorts they may get a little better numbers. IMO, $10 was the absolute max to make it workable and likely even better at $5-8 a point to get most people to participate. They likely should have given a "finance" option where you paid maybe $1 a point more for a few years to make it relatively painless. It should be interesting over the next few years.

 

[kingfish]

According to my knowledge of Real Estate Contracts in Florida there are many requirements. First, a meeting of the minds, since the ammendment came after my contract (which states January 2041)..I have no say in what happens after that. Second, good and valuable consideration, which falls back to the first item...meeting of the minds. We were offered a lithograph, not $25. My Attorney, on a quick off the record phone call said I could argue...1. I don't own an interest after January 31, 2041 thus I cannot represent I do by signing a deed. He suggested I sign a letter, but a Deed, to be recorded in the Public Record showing I'm conveying an interest in something I do not own. 2. Disney wants to bully us in to paying today for something that won't happen for 30 years. WOW. Do you think they paid $25/point upfront for the extension? I think I'll wait until 2040 to send them a check...but the big deal is the fact I am signing a Deed representing I own something I don't. I don't want to be difficult, I just dont think it's right of me to represent an ownership, I do not have.

 

[Dean]

According to my knowledge of Real Estate Contracts in Florida there are many requirements. First, a meeting of the minds, since the ammendment came after my contract (which states January 2041)..I have no say in what happens after that. Second, good and valuable consideration, which falls back to the first item...meeting of the minds. We were offered a lithograph, not $25. My Attorney, on a quick off the record phone call said I could argue...1. I don't own an interest after January 31, 2041 thus I cannot represent I do by signing a deed. He suggested I sign a letter, but a Deed, to be recorded in the Public Record showing I'm conveying an interest in something I do not own. 2. Disney wants to bully us in to paying today for something that won't happen for 30 years. WOW. Do you think they paid $25/point upfront for the extension? I think I'll wait until 2040 to send them a check...but the big deal is the fact I am signing a Deed representing I own something I don't. I don't want to be difficult, I just dont think it's right of me to represent an ownership, I do not have.

The date in question is Jan, 2042. Technically as I read the POS, the ending date on the contract is the expiration of the ground lease, not necessarily the date itself. That is the reason that they need those declining to sign over a deed rather than just an ackowledgement. In a sense they did strong arm the issue with the threat of a special assessment, which as I read the POS, they do not have the authority to enforce. I do realize their predicament given the setup of the system in trying to come up with an extension plan, esp if they were going to charge for it.

 

[ddave]

$

Good point.......Regarding the fee I will refund the $ 25.00.

Regarding extending the weirdness.......II don't agreee........

Personally I believe DVC has done something wrong whether it was intentional or not....Not sure.....However, I do believe that DVC has tried to use several tactics that are not appreciated by myself nor do I find very professional. Including trying to get people to pay thousands of dollars to make up for their mistake or error, to imply their is a law stating I had to sign a quitclaim deed but not being able to produce said law and a threat of not being able to use the product for which I have already paid Disney in advance. I personally don't like to be threatened in these manners. Maybe my extending the weirdness will gain something for my family or better other OKW members who have been taken advantage of.

It was very clear what they were doing. They communicated it thoroughly and gave you plenty of time to decide what you want to do. Including until today! You had an option and could have exercised it either way. Instead you turn in into something "wierd". The only "wierdness" is what you are doing.

I'm not a fan of some of the things disney does (ie: valet parking), but you had every opportunityto respond. They gave you the $25 to offset your "trouble", which wasn't a big deal to do, until you made a big deal. You chose to put yourself in the spotlight. Everyone else is looking at you going . If that's your mission, you've succeeded.

I believe you should sell your DVC and be done with the Disney hastles. O you can't. You'd have to sign the paper.