ROFR Discussion Thread

[airjay75]

They have “unborrowed” points for me before in a special circumstance.

I see no reason why they wouldn’t/couldn’t for themselves.

Yeah, that's probably the answer.

 

[Brian Noble]

As long as they don't unbalance the system, I don't see why they couldn't. For example, if there is roughly the same amount of borrowing and banking, they probably could not systematically unborrow. There is probably a lot of flexibility given breakage.

 

[airjay75]

airjay75---$85-$20155-200-SSR-Oct-0/25, 400/26, 200/27- sent 4/17

Just posting here in case anyone wants to discuss. I went shopping for VB and ended up with SSR. I think this makes more sense as VB SAP. I have also gotten myself into more borrowing with my contracts (and anticipate some more borrowing in 2027) so this should help ameliorate that.

That said, I have heard elsewhere about some recent SSR ROFR activity, so I suppose this could have some elevated ROFR risk. I guess I'll find out!

 

[IsDVCForMe?]

airjay75---$85-$20155-200-SSR-Oct-0/25, 400/26, 200/27- sent 4/17

Just posting here in case anyone wants to discuss. I went shopping for VB and ended up with SSR. I think this makes more sense as VB SAP. I have also gotten myself into more borrowing with my contracts (and anticipate some more borrowing in 2027) so this should help ameliorate that.

That said, I have heard elsewhere about some recent SSR ROFR activity, so I suppose this could have some elevated ROFR risk. I guess I'll find out!

Love the extra 200 points from 2025. Hope you get it!

 

[airjay75]

Love the extra 200 points from 2025. Hope you get it!

Thanks. Yeah, the fully loaded aspect of this one made it quite attractive. That is also why I was wondering earlier about whether Disney can unbank/unborrow points when they ROFR. Assuming that can and/or they want more points and/or it's at the right unit, I suppose that could make this one attractive.

My understanding is that there were 7 SSR contracts ROFR'd in early April, presumably to help replenish points in the rather successful SSR flash sale they've had. But they were also all small contracts (under 100 points). And, we had several SSR contracts pass just yesterday. So, I think it's still a pretty small risk here.

 

[PolyRob]

Thanks. Yeah, the fully loaded aspect of this one made it quite attractive. That is also why I was wondering earlier about whether Disney can unbank/unborrow points when they ROFR. Assuming that can and/or they want more points and/or it's at the right unit, I suppose that could make this one attractive.

My understanding is that there were 7 SSR contracts ROFR'd in early April, presumably to help replenish points in the rather successful SSR flash sale they've had. But they were also all small contracts (under 100 points). And, we had several SSR contracts pass just yesterday. So, I think it's still a pretty small risk here.

I think it's a good price, but not too aggressive that there is no chance it passes.

Not a huge issue if anything happens since there is plenty of SSR out there to buy! It's not like a BLT in Oct that you need to finish out some annual reservations.

 

[Sandisw]

ROFR discussion question. If Disney exercises ROFR on a contract that has banked or borrowed points, can Disney unbank or unborrow those points? We know they can change the UY (although they could not or did not always do that in the past). Not sure if we know the answer to this question.

I'm just thinking about how this plays into ROFR decisions because when Disney sells direct points, by law, current UY points have to be given to the purchaser. So, I wonder if contracts with no current UY points or with points that have been banked into a future year are inherently less attractive in ROFR if they are points Disney plans to re-sell as direct rather quickly.

I realize we may not know the answer to this question.

The contract gets dissolved and the points go back into the unit not attached to anything.

So, they no longer are banked or borrowed points. They just can’t put into the unit more points than what was there.