ROFR Thread Jan to March 2023 *PLEASE SEE FIRST POST FOR INSTRUCTIONS & FORMATTING TOOL*

[HIRyeDVC]

This is going to be an interesting one to watch over time... I've seen posted that the average owner only keeps their DVC 8-10 years. So for argument's sake, let's pretend that Riviera only gets to 50% resale owned 10 years from now (not a full turnover of the resort or anything too crazy). Whatever would "normally" open up at a resort at 7 months would be dramatically reduced at a resort with that restriction like Riviera. 50% of the owners can't stay anywhere else, so they won't drop any rooms at 7 months. And then the pool of everyone who can book there include anyone who has bought direct anywhere ever, plus everyone with grandfathered resale (i have a ton of resale that can book there). So from my vantage point, that restriction breaks the model and makes a booking nightmare across the board - owners will have to book right at 11 months and rooms will get walked like crazy - because resale buyers will make sure they get a booking and non-resale buyers have to compete with them. The home window will be crazy, and not much will even open at 7 months. To me, that's more of a deterrent to buying direct. Why pay an extra $100 per point to be facing that? When I can save thousands and just rent my points out and rent RIV points from one of those resale buyers if/when I want to stay there? It feels like it's going to be like trying to grab VGC at 7 months. And at some point it becomes mostly resale... I wonder if there are stats somewhere about how much of a resort like OWK or BWV is still all original owners 20something years later... Riv isn't all that old and already there are folks who want/need to sell just a few years in. They take a HUGE hit doing so but want out badly enough I guess and the % resale is growing.... it isn't even sold out.

Your future is very possible but the scenario is way too far away for people to care about or drive purchasing habits. This is why I’ve always believed in the mantra of buying where you want to stay. If everyone did that, then this scenario is almost a non-issue. At least it isn’t for me.

 

[Chili327]

It depends on if you value Riviera and other future resorts which a lot of people do - I would hate not having the option to use anything in the future that is new. I am still placing a wager that you will be excluded from VDH and I think Poly 2 as well.

You think Poly2 will be separate?
I think it’ll go same as VGF, same stuff hopefully.

 

[DisneyTakeAllMyMoney]

Your future is very possible but the scenario is way too far away for people to care about or drive purchasing habits. This is why I’ve always believed in the mantra of buying where you want to stay. If everyone did that, then this scenario is almost a non-issue. At least it isn’t for me.

Totally agree - most people aren't the overly analytical type like me LOL. That's why I think it will be interesting to watch over time - all those people who pay a crazy premium for a place like AKV today to buy direct to be able to book there - will they regret not buying resale when they can't book there anyway...? It will be interesting. But if they end up only being able to stay at AKV (or maybe SSR or OKW) eventually, that's a hefty premium to pay for a potential that may become nonexistent.

I fully support buy where you want to stay (LOL- obviously). Thankfully I have no desire to stay there

 

[naman1221]

You think Poly2 will be separate?
I think it’ll go same as VGF, same stuff hopefully.

I honestly don't know - I think it will be to prevent studio dilution. But also because I think Disney is in the business of making money - I think VGF was different simply because it was an existing building being repurposed.

I think you have a hard time recouping the cost of a brand new tower without making some incentive to buy it direct.

 

[naman1221]

This is going to be an interesting one to watch over time... I've seen posted that the average owner only keeps their DVC 8-10 years. So for argument's sake, let's pretend that Riviera only gets to 50% resale owned 10 years from now (not a full turnover of the resort or anything too crazy). Whatever would "normally" open up at a resort at 7 months would be dramatically reduced at a resort with that restriction like Riviera. 50% of the owners can't stay anywhere else, so they won't drop any rooms at 7 months. And then the pool of everyone who can book there include anyone who has bought direct anywhere ever, plus everyone with grandfathered resale (i have a ton of resale that can book there). So from my vantage point, that restriction breaks the model and makes a booking nightmare across the board - owners will have to book right at 11 months and rooms will get walked like crazy - because resale buyers will make sure they get a booking and non-resale buyers have to compete with them. The home window will be crazy, and not much will even open at 7 months. To me, that's more of a deterrent to buying direct. Why pay an extra $100 per point to be facing that? When I can save thousands and just rent my points out and rent RIV points from one of those resale buyers if/when I want to stay there? It feels like it's going to be like trying to grab VGC at 7 months. And at some point it becomes mostly resale... I wonder if there are stats somewhere about how much of a resort like OWK or BWV is still all original owners 20something years later... Riv isn't all that old and already there are folks who want/need to sell just a few years in. They take a HUGE hit doing so but want out badly enough I guess and the % resale is growing.... it isn't even sold out.

I have seen that 7-8 year number quoted and I think that is biased data based on the fact that it is a resale site that is reporting it.

If that is true, what that number really means is: Of the people who are interesting in selling, they keep it on average 7-8 years. We have no idea if that is 10% of the DVC population or 70%.

Personally, the benefits are not the reason to buy direct. But the disparity is only going to get worse from here on out..not better for all the new things they introduce to compare vs resale. I have one direct contract and one resale contract so I see the value of both - but there is no way I would have bought only resale because the ability to have as much variety as possible was very important to me.

 

[HIRyeDVC]

Totally agree - most people aren't the overly analytical type like me LOL. That's why I think it will be interesting to watch over time - all those people who pay a crazy premium for a place like AKV today to buy direct to be able to book there - will they regret not buying resale when they can't book there anyway...? It will be interesting. But if they end up only being able to stay at AKV (or maybe SSR or OKW) eventually, that's a hefty premium to pay for a potential that may become nonexistent.

I fully support buy where you want to stay (LOL- obviously). Thankfully I have no desire to stay there

The first real litmus test will probably be after 2042, when a handful of resorts expire. Especially the two most popular in crescent lake. After that, 11 month booking advantage will become much more important. But as I’ve said, it’s still 19 years away and people are still more interested in buying the cheapest points possible like SSR to use on the network. Can’t say that I blame them at all.

 

[Sandisw]

This is going to be an interesting one to watch over time... I've seen posted that the average owner only keeps their DVC 8-10 years. So for argument's sake, let's pretend that Riviera only gets to 50% resale owned 10 years from now (not a full turnover of the resort or anything too crazy). Whatever would "normally" open up at a resort at 7 months would be dramatically reduced at a resort with that restriction like Riviera. 50% of the owners can't stay anywhere else, so they won't drop any rooms at 7 months. And then the pool of everyone who can book there include anyone who has bought direct anywhere ever, plus everyone with grandfathered resale (i have a ton of resale that can book there). So from my vantage point, that restriction breaks the model and makes a booking nightmare across the board - owners will have to book right at 11 months and rooms will get walked like crazy - because resale buyers will make sure they get a booking and non-resale buyers have to compete with them. The home window will be crazy, and not much will even open at 7 months. To me, that's more of a deterrent to buying direct. Why pay an extra $100 per point to be facing that? When I can save thousands and just rent my points out and rent RIV points from one of those resale buyers if/when I want to stay there? It feels like it's going to be like trying to grab VGC at 7 months. And at some point it becomes mostly resale... I wonder if there are stats somewhere about how much of a resort like OWK or BWV is still all original owners 20something years later... Riv isn't all that old and already there are folks who want/need to sell just a few years in. They take a HUGE hit doing so but want out badly enough I guess and the % resale is growing.... it isn't even sold out.

I think that 8 - 10 year statement is misinterpreted. What I have read is that out of those who actually sell DVC, those owners have owned around 10 years, but it is only looking at the pool of owners who sell.

The number I have seen is that maybe 1% of contracts sell every year and that the owners who make up that 1% are within that 8 - 10 year mark...but its not considering that 99% of the owners are not selling, many who have owned for a very long time.

Right now, SV rooms at RIV are going fast and there is very few resale points out there. And, it will take 20 years or so to have any level of resale points in the system...its never going to be mostly resale.

I agree that owners will need to book at 11 months but we do now if we want SV rooms. I also agree that trading in to RIV could prove to be more difficult for those who don't own there, but there will still be a lot of resorts to choose from for those wanting out with direct points and over time, there will always be places for those with direct points to trade...

And, every resort has resale contracts show up for sale this soon after opening...I got BLT resale 2 years after it started serlling....so what we have seen with RIV contracts is not unusual in terms of # for sale, 4 years in from when it started sales.

So, for those that want to stay at RIV and other places, direct points can make sense...with RIV being the only one out, the whole rent my points to rent RIV points may work when its one...but what about when its more than one resort a resale buyer is locked out of? It's not going to be as simple as it sounds...because chances are, those who are buying RIV resale points are doing so to use them there...we certainly did...

 

[teamsamant]

.

 

[DisneyTakeAllMyMoney]

The first real litmus test will probably be after 2042, when a handful of resorts expire. Especially the two most popular in crescent lake. After that, 11 month booking advantage will become much more important. But as I’ve said, it’s still 19 years away and people are still more interested in buying the cheapest points possible like SSR to use on the network. Can’t say that I blame them at all.

The funny thing is that it reminds me of the Timon and Pumbaa movie they use to play in the land - the environmental fable as they called it. The pre-riviera system relied on flow... someone who owned CCV might book their home at 11 months, but at 7 they'd decide they want a savannah view at AKV, so they would swap... and someone who owned at BLT would want that CCV room... and when BLT opened up someone who owned SSR would grab it, etc. But now, someone who buys RIV resale can't swap to the savannah view at AKV... and thus the domino chain never happens to an increasing degree. It reminds me of that movie because when you put a log jam in a free flowing system, it starts blocking things up... slowly at first, but the bigger the wall gets, the more clogged it gets. And definitely in 2042 when 6 of the "original 14" expire at the same time it will surely clog up. I mean that was Disney's whole message - you can't start stacking logs in the middle of a river and expect it will have no impact- Timon said so LOL You start down that route and eventually nothing is moving and you just have each resort in its own little pool

 

[E2ME2]

The funny thing is that it reminds me of the Timon and Pumbaa movie they use to play in the land - the environmental fable as they called it. The pre-riviera system relied on flow... someone who owned CCV might book their home at 11 months, but at 7 they'd decide they want a savannah view at AKV, so they would swap... and someone who owned at BLT would want that CCV room... and when BLT opened up someone who owned SSR would grab it, etc. But now, someone who buys RIV resale can't swap to the savannah view at AKV... and thus the domino chain never happens to an increasing degree. It reminds me of that movie because when you put a log jam in a free flowing system, it starts blocking things up... slowly at first, but the bigger the wall gets, the more clogged it gets. And definitely in 2042 when 6 of the "original 14" expire at the same time it will surely clog up. I mean that was Disney's whole message - you can't start stacking logs in the middle of a river and expect it will have no impact- Timon said so LOL You start down that route and eventually nothing is moving and you just have each resort in its own little pool

Interesting take - and I have a close eye on this, as we love the 2042 resorts and are about to close on a BWV add-on, because 11Mo priority is still a key factor there (&BCV, where we also own a small add-on). We are both between 4-15 months from turning 65. We find we spend most of our Park-Time in EPCOT. When not in the parks, we love hanging out at the AKVs & DS. I have always been an uber-planner, planning 5 years at a time for most things. Now that I''m approaching 65, I have tried to shorten that planning horizon to about 3 years at a time. We will be constantly be reassessing which home resorts to sell/buy/hold as we get closer and closer to 2042, and to being octogenarians!
My current ROM plan is to maybe buy a few more BCV points, while prices are low and ROFR sleeps; hold my SSR points until 2034-2039, hoping to sell at that time at a price that recoups most of the SSR original investment; then consider an exit strategy for our AKV contracts. This all assumes we are still able-bodied and cogent in 2034-2039. Oops- I've done it again, and over-planned. Too many possibilities, variables, and risks to plan over that span of time, so back to my 1-3 year plan. Let's find some BCV at a bargain!!

 

[HIRyeDVC]

I honestly don't know - I think it will be to prevent studio dilution. But also because I think Disney is in the business of making money - I think VGF was different simply because it was an existing building being repurposed.

I think you have a hard time recouping the cost of a brand new tower without making some incentive to buy it direct.

No one knows. And this issue has been debated ad nauseam. we don’t even know for sure what VDH will be, and that thing is about to go on sale any day now. If VDH will be restricted, I can’t see how Poly won’t be. To leave Riviera all alone on an island as the only restricted DVC resort just seems cruel and pointless.

 

[elenex]

No one knows. And this issue has been debated ad nauseam. we don’t even know for sure what VDH will be, and that thing is about to go on sale any day now. If VDH will be restricted, I can’t see how Poly won’t be. To leave Riviera all alone on an island as the only restricted DVC resort just seems cruel and pointless.

The thing about the poly tower that makes it's situation unique, though, is that the existing PVB lacks 1br, 2br, and GVs. PVB owners are many and would be highly irritated if they can't use their existing points in the new room categories. Disney would recoup costs with the near decade that's being cut off the contracts by grouping in the same association, and would also be able to rebalance the bungalows and distribute some of those points over the 1br and 2br so they're aren't empty half the time. I think there are opportunities to take advantage of poly being 1 association, so my expectation is that it will be part of the existing association and not subject to restrictions.

VDH, on the other hand, will definitely have them.

 

[HIRyeDVC]

The thing about the poly tower that makes it's situation unique, though, is that the existing PVB lacks 1br, 2br, and GVs. PVB owners are many and would be highly irritated if they can't use their existing points in the new room categories. Disney would recoup costs with the near decade that's being cut off the contracts by grouping in the same association, and would also be able to rebalance the bungalows and distribute some of those points over the 1br and 2br so they're aren't empty half the time. I think there are opportunities to take advantage of poly being 1 association, so my expectation is that it will be part of the existing association and not subject to restrictions.

VDH, on the other hand, will definitely have them.

In Disney’s eyes, Poly direct owners CAN book at the new Poly tower at 7 months. They don’t care about resale because they’ve sold all their Poly points already. Disney would make the most money by selling it as new with the maximum 50 year contract. But like I said. No one knows and everything is speculation.

 

[suzking7]

suzking7---$92-$12534-120-SSR-Aug-0/21, 0/22, 240/23, 120/24- sent 3/20, passed 3/27

So excited!!!

 

[tom1944]

suzking7---$92-$12534-120-SSR-Aug-0/21, 0/22, 240/23, 120/24- sent 3/20, passed 3/27

So excited!!!

That would be a perfect second contract for me.
I am torn about buying another SSR contract or having my second contract be a different resort. Either AKV, BRV or BLT.

 

[hglenn]

The thing about the poly tower that makes it's situation unique, though, is that the existing PVB lacks 1br, 2br, and GVs. PVB owners are many and would be highly irritated if they can't use their existing points in the new room categories.

They shouldn't be irritated....that's what they bought... I hope nobody is buying Poly with the expectation there would eventually be 1 and 2 BR units available.

 

[DisneyTakeAllMyMoney]

In Disney’s eyes, Poly direct owners CAN book at the new Poly tower at 7 months. They don’t care about resale because they’ve sold all their Poly points already. Disney would make the most money by selling it as new with the maximum 50 year contract. But like I said. No one knows and everything is speculation.

Disney actually makes more money by selling it at new pricing and giving owners only 42 years like they did with VGF2. They can flip it and sell it again faster - $217/42 is more $ for them than $217/50 and people are eating VGF2 up. Timing will be similar on poly - 42ish years left there too when it becomes available. Speculation is our entertainment as we sit here waiting for news on VDH

 

[Lucky Wall-E]

The thing about the poly tower that makes it's situation unique, though, is that the existing PVB lacks 1br, 2br, and GVs. PVB owners are many and would be highly irritated if they can't use their existing points in the new room categories. Disney would recoup costs with the near decade that's being cut off the contracts by grouping in the same association, and would also be able to rebalance the bungalows and distribute some of those points over the 1br and 2br so they're aren't empty half the time. I think there are opportunities to take advantage of poly being 1 association, so my expectation is that it will be part of the existing association and not subject to restrictions.

VDH, on the other hand, will definitely have them.

My thinking is in line with yours here.
Another thought I had is Disney will have another opportunity to sell a brand new resort with fewer than 50 years. People were surprised how many bought GFV direct with only 40 years remaining.
If Disney can sell direct with fewer years and are successful they may adopt a 40 year contract on newer resorts they build instead of 50.
Disney is hinting that contracts for VDH may expire in 2062 in the promo video which makes buying direct only 38 years.
The Poly tower would offer 42 years if they build it into the existing association.
Not a loss for Disney, but could be considered a loss for buyers.

 

[Chili327]

Disney actually makes more money by selling it at new pricing and giving owners only 42 years like they did with VGF2. They can flip it and sell it again faster - $217/42 is more $ for them than $217/50 and people are eating VGF2 up. Timing will be similar on poly - 42ish years left there too when it becomes available. Speculation is our entertainment as we sit here waiting for news on VDH

I agree, and i think they may actually sell VDH with only 40 years on it (or whatever, less than 50), just so the points can be cheaper to buy, but they still make as much if not more money.
*edit*
Yes agreed @Lucky Wall-E

 

[Lucky Wall-E]

Disney actually makes more money by selling it at new pricing and giving owners only 42 years like they did with VGF2. They can flip it and sell it again faster - $217/42 is more $ for them than $217/50 and people are eating VGF2 up. Timing will be similar on poly - 42ish years left there too when it becomes available. Speculation is our entertainment as we sit here waiting for news on VDH

Looks like I said just about what you said. The numbers say it all in the end!