Pre Jan 2019 resale contract in original 14 - can Disney change the rules or are we protected perhaps by the deed?

[Galun]

I haven’t really through about this before, but we have been adding.

We have a bunch of points we bought pre Jan 2019, and recently added a bunch of points. I know with current rules, the points we bought before Jan 2019 can be used at the original 14 and all future resorts, and the points we recently added could only be used at the original 14. The restriction is placed on the resale date after Jan 2019.

Does anyone know if pre Jan 2019 contracts are protected from change if the purchaser hold till expiration? In other words, is the restriction placed on the new deed? Then I have my old deeds and Disney can’t change the rules. I will feel better if that’s the case.

Thanks!

 

[sethschroeder]

There is plenty Disney can do but in reality they would never touch those contracts as it opens them more up to legal action likely. If you buy something and its outlined you can't do X its much different than being told later you can't do X and its not written in the contract other than something vague on how they have the option to change things.

I mean I know people have talked about around here the ability to have different resorts trade at different premiums for non-home resort stays.

Disney has already tried doing things that people feel explicitly is against the terms of the agreement as well. Although the lock-off premium was rolled back possibly to avoid a legal battle (doesn't mean Disney agrees they can't do it).

I also think there is a vague "in best interest of owners" language which they could spin a million ways to make any change seem "good".

 

[_auroraborealis_]

The key thing they could change is the "all future resorts" part. The trading into O14 is based on how each condo association became part of Buena Vista Trading, the parent trading organization. To change that would require basically dissolving BVT and having everyone start over.

They could take the ability of old resorts to trade into new resorts moving forward away easily. Fundamentally, DRR is the first association in BVT2, and any future resort could join with specific trading rules. That said, it would be a big issue that could be challenged if BVT allowed a BVT2 property to trade into BVT, but not the reverse as a blanket rule. It works okay for the post-2019 resales not to be allowed to trade to BVT2, but if they rescinded the rights of BVT1 held prior to 2019 or by original owners to trade to BVT2, while allowing BVT2 to prance in? They'd likely lose a legal challenge on that one.

 

[Galun]

The key thing they could change is the "all future resorts" part. The trading into O14 is based on how each condo association became part of Buena Vista Trading, the parent trading organization. To change that would require basically dissolving BVT and having everyone start over.

They could take the ability of old resorts to trade into new resorts moving forward away easily. Fundamentally, DRR is the first association in BVT2, and any future resort could join with specific trading rules. That said, it would be a big issue that could be challenged if BVT allowed a BVT2 property to trade into BVT, but not the reverse as a blanket rule. It works okay for the post-2019 resales not to be allowed to trade to BVT2, but if they rescinded the rights of BVT1 held prior to 2019 or by original owners to trade to BVT2, while allowing BVT2 to prance in? They'd likely lose a legal challenge on that one.

Good insight, thanks. Good to know the original 14 are kinda one under BVT and they would have to undo that to make major changes. Makes me feel pretty confident on being able to continue to book among the original 14 going forward. That’s where the prime locations are anyways. Even the new DLH DVC tower is in a much inferior position than VGC, and will probably sell for a higher price per point.

 

[CastAStone]

Even the new DLH DVC tower is in a much inferior position than VGC, and will probably sell for a higher price per point.

I’ve seen some wild pricing predictions on DLH villas, but I don’t think I’ve seen anyone predict that it’ll cost more than VGC’s $280. That got to that price to (try to) balance very limited supply with demand; with DLHV they will have a lot more supply (of, as you note, a clearly inferior product) and need to adjust pricing accordingly.

Also Disney has always protected existing resale owners; since they’ve already lost that sale, there’s not really a compelling reason for them to rescind those protections. Scaring away new resale owners is the goal.

 

[Royal Consort]

(of, as you note, a clearly inferior product) and need to adjust pricing accordingly.

I dont know.. the Disneyland Hotel has a lot of love and history associated with it. There are certainly those who favour this resort over GC. We will always stay there given the choice.

 

[Galun]

I’ve seen some wild pricing predictions on DLH villas, but I don’t think I’ve seen anyone predict that it’ll cost more than VGC’s $280. That got to that price to (try to) balance very limited supply with demand; with DLHV they will have a lot more supply (of, as you note, a clearly inferior product) and need to adjust pricing accordingly.

Also Disney has always protected existing resale owners; since they’ve already lost that sale, there’s not really a compelling reason for them to rescind those protections. Scaring away new resale owners is the goal.

if the economy has recovered, I think the price will be higher than vgc. It’s another 2 years of inflation, and when was the last time new dvc was priced lower than old, even with inferior location?

 

[_auroraborealis_]

I’ve seen some wild pricing predictions on DLH villas, but I don’t think I’ve seen anyone predict that it’ll cost more than VGC’s $280. That got to that price to (try to) balance very limited supply with demand; with DLHV they will have a lot more supply (of, as you note, a clearly inferior product) and need to adjust pricing accordingly.

Also Disney has always protected existing resale owners; since they’ve already lost that sale, there’s not really a compelling reason for them to rescind those protections. Scaring away new resale owners is the goal.

I think the points charts + buy in will combine to be quite nuts.

 

[zavandor]

I’ve seen some wild pricing predictions on DLH villas, but I don’t think I’ve seen anyone predict that it’ll cost more than VGC’s $280. That got to that price to (try to) balance very limited supply with demand; with DLHV they will have a lot more supply (of, as you note, a clearly inferior product) and need to adjust pricing accordingly.

The $280pp price is really bonkers. It really means: "we don't have any points but if we can put our hands on some and you absolutely want them you're going to pay a fortune".
We would need to compare it with the $188 that RIV is currently selling at. If it were to go on sale now, I think they could easily ask $210pp with a point chart higher than VGF.
The resort has mostly studios and some pods. They're going to market to families for a stay in a studio for 3-4 nights annually. Even with a high point chart and high buy in, "the price per month over 10 years will be a reasonable amount to own a piece of the original Disneyland Hotel"*

* I bet the slae pitch will be along those lines.

 

[CastAStone]

The $280pp price is really bonkers. It really means: "we don't have any points but if we can put our hands on some and you absolutely want them you're going to pay a fortune".
We would need to compare it with the $188 that RIV is currently selling at. If it were to go on sale now, I think they could easily ask $210pp with a point chart higher than VGF.
The resort has mostly studios and some pods. They're going to market to families for a stay in a studio for 3-4 nights annually. Even with a high point chart and high buy in, "the price per month over 10 years will be a reasonable amount to own a piece of the original Disneyland Hotel"*

* I bet the slae pitch will be along those lines.

We’re way off topic here (my fault), so I’ll Point you to my thoughts on likely pricing and points and why over in another thread and we can continue conversing in that thread.

I’ll go $230
Pods 90/week low season
Studios 115/week low season
1BR - 230/week low season
2BR - 330/week low season

This is roughly break even with cash prices for Disneyland tower if you factor in time value of money. Even if you straight line the $230 into $4.60 a year, the pay back is like 16 years. I don’t see how they can price it higher than this.

 

[limace]

if the economy has recovered, I think the price will be higher than vgc. It’s another 2 years of inflation, and when was the last time new dvc was priced lower than old, even with inferior location?

Well, isn’t that true now? RIV is lower than many of the open resorts.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.**********.com/how-much-does-dvc-cost-2020-price-list/amp/

 

[CastAStone]

Well, isn’t that true now? RIV is lower than many of the open resorts.

Yes. The newest resort is always priced below most of the sold out resorts because it's needed to ensure people prefer to buy the one that they have millions of points of inventory for.

 

[sethschroeder]

Well, isn’t that true now? RIV is lower than many of the open resorts.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.**********.com/how-much-does-dvc-cost-2020-price-list/amp/

RIV also is the 11th resort on property, is not walkable to any park, has high point charts, has highest MFs, is surrounded by a moderate resort, is the first to have resale restrictions, is in a location where resale restrictions matter (people less likely to buy DL to go to WDW every year), and is a very subdued "Disney" theme.

Also VGC is $260 which is the most expensive of all resorts out there. If RIV was priced at $220 (w/ CCV) it would be selling much worse right now because of all the options around WDW but with DL there will be zero other options for people and even resale on VGC will likely be more expensive with ever increasing prices.