ROFR Thread July to Sept 2019 *PLEASE SEE FIRST POST FOR INSTRUCTIONS & FORMATTING TOOL*

[emchen]

Think of it this way. They are already marking it up huge when they sell to a direct buyer. So they are paying today’s prices for the points which they don’t have to pay mf on and then can turn around and sell them a year or 2 from now at even higher prices. There is no cost to Disney to carry these points sine the mf have already been paid by the seller. Also stripped contracts usually sell for cheaper than o e with points available immediately

I've noticed this pattern myself from the ROFR threads. Stripped contracts are *a lot* more likely to be taken than comparable contracts that have had ROFR waived.

I've heard from people that Disney can and does reload points to these contracts and sell them immediately. Makes financial sense: get paid double the maintenance fee for the stripped use year, plus direct sale markup, equals maximum gain for them. On the backend, a million ways to juggle points through accounting department...its a beautiful thing.

 

[Doberge]

I guess so I like this one better, so hopefully it will pass!! Thanks!!

I misread the UYs before and totally overlooked that you'd get +220 current use year points and next year's points 8 months sooner. That's a nice one!

 

[pangyal]

Updated!

I wasn't able to add a couple of you, since the formatting was off and the totals were incorrect. Sorry .

 

[hlhlaw07]

Updated!

I wasn't able to add a couple of you, since the formatting was off and the totals were incorrect. Sorry .

I have to say, and I understand that this will not likely be a popular view point, but I don’t find it all that helpful to have such stringent rules for posting for the string. So much that I don’t even really look at the beginning of the thread and just look at the posts as they come (which I would add is super unhelpful when I get a notice for a new posting, but it is just someone telling them to click the link in the first post) I can tell what they are trying to convey whether they meet the formatting requirements. I would also add that a properly formatted string doesn’t actually convey accurate information. The price per point does not generally correlate to what people are actually paying per point and gives a false sense of people paying less than they are actually paying. Again, not trying to offend, just trying to point out that maybe the stringent formatting guidelines aren’t as useful as they are made out to be. I personally only look at the posts as they are posted and then have to do the mental math myself to see what people are actually paying per point because the string does not actually convey that without additional math. Also the string generator will not even generate a string in some circumstances, for instance, like when a seller gives a credit for future MFs. If you put the price/point the contract was listed at and then actually put the total price you are paying, there will be an error because the math doesn’t work out and it won’t give you a string.

This thread is immensely helpful, but sometimes way too hard to just post simple information that people can digest on their own. I wonder if we wouldn’t get more information if people weren’t required to meet an exact format that doesn’t necessarily give simple information that doesn’t require more analysis. And I know there is a string generator to do the work for you, but on a lot of computers/networks it doesn’t work.

Again, not trying to offend or make those mad who run this thread. I have been closely following these threads for years and have used them to buy numerous resale contracts in the past two years. But I haven’t used them in the way they purport to be useful. Just my 2 cents...

 

[emchen]

Add-on-itis:

emchen---$184.3-$30888-160-VGC-Jun-0/18, 110/19, 160/20- sent 7/30

emchen---$95-$20805-200-SSR-Jun-0/18, 200/19, 200/20-International Seller- sent 7/31

 

[pangyal]

I have to say, and I understand that this will not likely be a popular view point, but I don’t find it all that helpful to have such stringent rules for posting for the string. So much that I don’t even really look at the beginning of the thread and just look at the posts as they come (which I would add is super unhelpful when I get a notice for a new posting, but it is just someone telling them to click the link in the first post) I can tell what they are trying to convey whether they meet the formatting requirements. I would also add that a properly formatted string doesn’t actually convey accurate information. The price per point does not generally correlate to what people are actually paying per point and gives a false sense of people paying less than they are actually paying. Again, not trying to offend, just trying to point out that maybe the stringent formatting guidelines aren’t as useful as they are made out to be. I personally only look at the posts as they are posted and then have to do the mental math myself to see what people are actually paying per point because the string does not actually convey that without additional math. Also the string generator will not even generate a string in some circumstances, for instance, like when a seller gives a credit for future MFs. If you put the price/point the contract was listed at and then actually put the total price you are paying, there will be an error because the math doesn’t work out and it won’t give you a string.

This thread is immensely helpful, but sometimes way too hard to just post simple information that people can digest on their own. I wonder if we wouldn’t get more information if people weren’t required to meet an exact format that doesn’t necessarily give simple information that doesn’t require more analysis. And I know there is a string generator to do the work for you, but on a lot of computers/networks it doesn’t work.

Again, not trying to offend or make those mad who run this thread. I have been closely following these threads for years and have used them to buy numerous resale contracts in the past two years. But I haven’t used them in the way they purport to be useful. Just my 2 cents...

I respect and appreciate your viewpoint, I honestly do . Thank you kindly for the feedback and the food for thought. At this point in time, I plan to continue requesting that people use the formatting that I have set up over the years of running this thread by utilizing the ROFR string generator tool so that the information is clear, concise, uniform, and easily viewed and interpreted.

I will say that I have seen another ROFR thread with people posting everything willy-nilly and it made my head hurt trying to interpret the data that was being posted.

As well, all you need to do to figure out the “true” price per point, dollar for dollar, is to divide the total by the number of points on the contract. If the total is missing the MFs due at closing, or the broker’s admin fees, that number will be skewed and will not represent a valid data point.

If you all are having issues generating accurate strings, please let me know. I have a guy I can talk to about that (paging @ScubaCat )!

 

[Matty B13]

I will say that I have seen another ROFR thread with people posting everything willy-nilly and it made my head hurt trying to interpret the data that was being posted.

Yes, that one is a complete mess and very hard to figure anything out.

 

[Randywatson79]

I greatly appreciate the work and info in this thread. It was invaluable for my first resale purchase.

 

[thelionqueen]

I have to say, and I understand that this will not likely be a popular view point, but I don’t find it all that helpful to have such stringent rules for posting for the string. So much that I don’t even really look at the beginning of the thread and just look at the posts as they come (which I would add is super unhelpful when I get a notice for a new posting, but it is just someone telling them to click the link in the first post) I can tell what they are trying to convey whether they meet the formatting requirements. I would also add that a properly formatted string doesn’t actually convey accurate information. The price per point does not generally correlate to what people are actually paying per point and gives a false sense of people paying less than they are actually paying. Again, not trying to offend, just trying to point out that maybe the stringent formatting guidelines aren’t as useful as they are made out to be. I personally only look at the posts as they are posted and then have to do the mental math myself to see what people are actually paying per point because the string does not actually convey that without additional math. Also the string generator will not even generate a string in some circumstances, for instance, like when a seller gives a credit for future MFs. If you put the price/point the contract was listed at and then actually put the total price you are paying, there will be an error because the math doesn’t work out and it won’t give you a string.

This thread is immensely helpful, but sometimes way too hard to just post simple information that people can digest on their own. I wonder if we wouldn’t get more information if people weren’t required to meet an exact format that doesn’t necessarily give simple information that doesn’t require more analysis. And I know there is a string generator to do the work for you, but on a lot of computers/networks it doesn’t work.

Again, not trying to offend or make those mad who run this thread. I have been closely following these threads for years and have used them to buy numerous resale contracts in the past two years. But I haven’t used them in the way they purport to be useful. Just my 2 cents...

There is so much attention and work required to supply this incredible source of information. Although it might be user friendly to just post what you think is needed, it's definitely not easy for those who disseminate all this and more information. I found the link quite easy actually... way easier than trying to do it myself. I appreciate their effort and am happy to do anything I can to contribute.

 

[Iestyn5150]

I greatly appreciate the work and info in this thread. It was invaluable for my first resale purchase.

I completely agree. Using this thread I went from a total novice to very well informed in the space of just a few weeks. I’m struggling to understand why that simple form is causing such issues. It’s half a dozen entires and your done!

 

[emchen]

I’ve been able to see patterns from this thread that has helped me enormously as well. Thank you OP!

 

[SwirlTheCitrus]

SwirlTheCitrus---$105-$16385-150-BRV@WL-Dec-0/17, 0/18, 0/19, 150/20- sent 8/1

 

[BrerRemus]

I agree would have been still trying to get through ROFR without this thread. Thanks so much for all tour hard work I appreciate it.

 

[mrsap]

This board is extremely helpful, keep up the good work

 

[Jecca]

Jecca---$152-$25940-160-BLT-Aug-0/18, 139/19, 160/20, 160/21- sent 7/18

Update that we passed on 8/2!!

Jecca---$152-$25940-160-BLT-Aug-0/18, 139/19, 160/20, 160/21- sent 7/18, passed 8/2

 

[kannons610]

Great thread. I really like the standardized format. My wife and I are thinking about purchasing at SSR. We have three kids and I was hoping someone could give me some information regarding studio room occupancy there. I know Disney states that studio occupancy at SSR is 4 but do they allow five people or would they not let us stay in a studio with two adults and three kids? I know that back in the day we could just put a kid on the floor without Disney knowing but now everyone is linked to the room because of the magic bands so its tougher. Thanks in advance for your help.

 

[pangyal]

Great thread. I really like the standardized format. My wife and I are thinking about purchasing at SSR. We have three kids and I was hoping someone could give me some information regarding studio room occupancy there. I know Disney states that studio occupancy at SSR is 4 but do they allow five people or would they not let us stay in a studio with two adults and three kids? I know that back in the day we could just put a kid on the floor without Disney knowing but now everyone is linked to the room because of the magic bands so its tougher. Thanks in advance for your help.

Unfortunately, the fire codes preclude them from allowing more than the stated occupancy for each room. That being said, if you are able to purchase enough points to book one-bedrooms, I would bet that your sanity would stretch along with your points . Five people in a studio is a bit daunting if that is all you are ever planning for. With the one-bedroom, you get the laundry and the full kitchen, plus almost double the breathing room. Just my two cents .

 

[kannons610]

Thanks for that information. I would prefer a one bedroom but it costs so many more points. It would be much easier to stay for longer than a week in a studio.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

Great thread. I really like the standardized format. My wife and I are thinking about purchasing at SSR. We have three kids and I was hoping someone could give me some information regarding studio room occupancy there. I know Disney states that studio occupancy at SSR is 4 but do they allow five people or would they not let us stay in a studio with two adults and three kids? I know that back in the day we could just put a kid on the floor without Disney knowing but now everyone is linked to the room because of the magic bands so its tougher. Thanks in advance for your help.

Places that allow 5 in a studio are : BRV, BWV, BCV, PVB and VGF. The 5th bed is a pull down single Murphy bed. For cost effectiveness it would be better to buy one of these and book studios as long as you can book at 11 months.

 

[motherof5]

Just654---$103-$10300-100-SSR-AUG-0/18, 100/19, 100/20-Sent 7/17-passed 8/2

First DVC Contract

Congratulations