ROFR Discussion Thread

[Brian Noble]

they did what was right for their business and the optics that I would have GLADLY spread on these and other boards...oh you bet I let them know that!

This is where you and I part ways. I would not blame either Fidelity nor the Title company for not doing a thing that the contract doesn't say they have to do. The fault is 100% the sellers for refusing to hold to the terms of the contract they signed. Why should the broker have to pay for the seller's dishonesty?

Like I said: I know this is an unpopular take, because most people here (including me!) are in the buyer's frame of reference. None of us would be happy about losing the value of those points. But, being unhappy about something does not mean that a non-responsible party suddenly becomes responsible.

 

[AstroBlasters]

Alright…. sending a smallish loaded VGF to ROFR where the seller agreed to split the CAF fee…. it’s probably ROFR bait… but we’ll see….

 

[IsDVCForMe?]

Alright…. sending a smallish loaded VGF to ROFR where the seller agreed to split the CAF fee…. it’s probably ROFR bait… but we’ll see….

Split the CAF? That’s a fair way to do it. I like that!

 

[AstroBlasters]

Split the CAF? That’s a fair way to do it. I like that!

I had one seller come back and say they would split the CAF and closing costs only if I split the commission and estoppel.

I did the math and actually didn’t have a problem with it because it was still less than paying all of closing and CAF… but it ended up not working out as the seller kept changing their mind on what they would accept.

That’s not a contract I need to be involved in…. I can’t imagine getting paperwork back would go smoothly.

 

[VGCgroupie]

I had one seller come back and say they would split the CAF and closing costs only if I split the commission and estoppel.

I did the math and actually didn’t have a problem with it because it was still less than paying all of closing and CAF… but it ended up not working out as the seller kept changing their mind on what they would accept.

That’s not a contract I need to be involved in…. I can’t imagine getting paperwork back would go smoothly.

The commission part is is crazy.

I agree. If they are wishy washy in the beginning best to not even go down that road.

 

[PolyRob]

Alright…. sending a smallish loaded VGF to ROFR where the seller agreed to split the CAF fee…. it’s probably ROFR bait… but we’ll see….

 

[disneylandtour]

And again: These transactions almost always go exactly as advertised. In the few situtations they do not, the seller generally makes good on the missing points, because usually they are missing due to some honest mistake.

With the ROFR timeline now shortened up, I sorta think that I wouldn't be the worst idea in the world for escrow to hold back the cost of one year's worth of points (i.e. 150 points x $20 - 3,000) from the seller's payout until the buyer can confirm that all points, as advertised, showed up.

 

[gvel]

This is going to be a very unpopular take around here, but: Fidelity was not responsible for paying you for those missing points. It was a nice gesture that they did, but it was the seller's responsibility. Had they not paid you, I would not hold it against them.

True... but a broker's reputation is worth more than a few grand. It was a smart/calculated business decision on their part.

 

[TheDailyMoo]

This is where you and I part ways. I would not blame either Fidelity nor the Title company for not doing a thing that the contract doesn't say they have to do. The fault is 100% the sellers for refusing to hold to the terms of the contract they signed. Why should the broker have to pay for the seller's dishonesty?

Yes we'll agree to disagree because I for one expect to get what I paid for through a broker...not some random Craigslist listing. I, and I think many others, would do what it took to get what they paid for especially when we're talking thousands of dollars. Since it doesn't happen too often the brokers should be more than willing to do what it takes to make it right otherwise their whole business structure begins to crumble once enough people start to realize there are zero protections. They take in hefty fees on these transactions and if buyers could get stiffed left and right with nary any recourse then why even have a broker, just have a wild west style private "for sale by owner" message board like many time share rentals do at your own risk.

 

[AstroBlasters]

Per, ROFR.

I think of WDW resorts in tiers (depending on where the market price is):

1) Love them or hate them:
A) Riveria
B) Cabins

2) Sleep Around:
A) SSR
B) OKW/OKW-E

3) Sleep Around Plus:
A) Bay Lake Tower
B) Copper Creek
C) Animal Kingdom

4) The 2042s
A) Bolder Ridge
B) Beach Club
C) Boardwalk

5) Premium Resorts
A) Poly
B) Grand Flo

 

[haletiki]

I also think any SSR ROFR activity will be short lived personally. This isn’t OKW where they want all the 2042s to try and make them extended. Any ROFR activity is just to replenish their SSR stock and once they do that, I don’t think we’ll see much more SSR ROFR activity.

Moving the discussion here where it belongs.

I think what you're saying makes a ton of sense and hopefully even if this one we are waiting for gets eaten then we can just keep staying the course and find another that won't for whatever reason.

I knew going into it that it might be a longer process. Especially at the price point we want to hit being ROFR bait.

 

[AstroBlasters]

Moving the discussion here where it belongs.

I think what you're saying makes a ton of sense and hopefully even if this one we are waiting for gets eaten then we can just keep staying the course and find another that won't for whatever reason.

I knew going into it that it might be a longer process. Especially at the price point we want to hit being ROFR bait.

Just remember, they can’t take them all….

 

[VGCgroupie]

Per, ROFR.

I think of WDW resorts in tiers (depending on where the market price is):

1) Love them or hate them:
A) Riveria
B) Cabins

2) Sleep Around:
A) SSR
B) OKW/OKW-E

3) Sleep Around Plus:
A) Bay Lake Tower
B) Copper Creek
C) Animal Kingdom

4) The 2042s
A) Bolder Ridge
B) Beach Club
C) Boardwalk

5) Premium Resorts
A) Poly
B) Grand Flo

Sounds right to me.

 

[atthebeachclub]

I don’t have proof, but have my suspicions that the $500 CAF is affecting resale prices.

 

[IsDVCForMe?]

I bet if it does, it will be right now. The longer it’s there, the less noticeable it will be. Forgot to add that it will be the smaller contracts that have resale price decreases.

 

[Cfabar1]

I don’t have proof, but have my suspicions that the $500 CAF is affecting resale prices.

I think its putting friction in the transactions... more psychologically than on an actual dollar basis...

 

[AstroBlasters]

I think its putting friction in the transactions... more psychologically than on an actual dollar basis...

$1200ish in total closing costs adds up….

 

[IsDVCForMe?]

I think its putting friction in the transactions... more psychologically than on an actual dollar basis...

Ya, could see that. But as a newer DVC member, I think newer DVC buyers will just add that to their costs and not think twice about paying it.

 

[IsDVCForMe?]

$1200ish in total closing costs adds up….

It does but you’ve been around for a while. If I’m buying points now as a newer DVC buyer and knowing I’ll be spending way more than $500 on Disney resorts, as well as everything else Disney related, that isn’t a large cost to me.

 

[AstroBlasters]

It does but you’ve been around for a while. If I’m buying points now as a newer DVC buyer and knowing I’ll be spending way more than $500 on Disney resorts, as well as everything else Disney related, that isn’t a large cost to me.

It doesn’t on a ppp basis on a larger contract, but it can add significant cost on small contracts. I walked away from a number of contracts because the all-in ppp was too high to make sense to me.