Would you pay a premium when buying direct for ability to sell as unrestricted?

[Bearval]

Would you be willing to pay a premium when buying direct to have the ability to sell that contact in the future as unrestricted? if so what would be the percentage of the direct cost you would be willing to pay? Also this would only apply to the contract the one time you sold it and not transfer to the resale buyer.

 

[Stargazer65]

Yes 10%

To clarify, I'm talking about Riviera and the like that follow suit only.

 

[Cfabar1]

not exclusively for that. I like knowing that I can sell, but I don't intend to sell.

also, I hope disney never does this.

 

[Sandisw]

Nope! I bought to use and enjoy. If we ever have to sell, anything we get selling is a bonus.

Plus, talk about complicated...this resale at RIV/VDH is restricted and this resale at RIV/VDH is not? What would unrestricted mean in terms of resorts it can be used?

RIV and VDH entered BVTC with DVC resort agreements that say that their resale points can't be used at other resorts in exchange for blocking other resorts resale points from being valid there. Only direct points can trade both ways.

While DVD gave themselves the right to remove the restrictions, I think it would need to be all or nothing.

Not to mention, DVD would never do this and the reason is simple...they can influence the market but can't control it. No way are they going to allow people to pay money for something that could open them up for liability.

 

[Robbie Cottam]

Unless the rule of unintended consequences bites Disney squarely in the ears, I think we have to except the fact that restriction are a thing.

To many people made money in the mouses sand box,

So he changed the rules…

People will either except, restrictions …. Or buy direct….

paying a premium at purchase, although sounding good on paper creates a level of complexity no body wants

it also opens resale buyer up to being scammed ….

 

[Stargazer65]

Did some more calculations...I revise my answer to 8.7%. For a Riviera premium that is.

 

[Bearval]

Unless the rule of unintended consequences bites Disney squarely in the ears, I think we have to except the fact that restriction are a thing.

To many people made money in the mouses sand box,

So he changed the rules…

People will either except, restrictions …. Or buy direct….

paying a premium at purchase, although sounding good on paper creates a level of complexity no body wants

it also opens resale buyer up to being scammed ….

I believe the restrictions are here to stay. They needed/wanted to create a demand for direct over resale and they finally achieved that. I do see them going forward only ROFRing the restricted points once those resorts sell out since they can get them on the "cheap" and resell them again as direct without restrictions.

 

[DanCali]

I believe the restrictions are here to stay. They needed/wanted to create a demand for direct over resale and they finally achieved that. I do see them going forward only ROFRing the restricted points once those resorts sell out since they can get them on the "cheap" and resell them again as direct without restrictions.

This is the model most timeshare companies have. It also primarily relies on selling to uninformed buyers - i.e, those unfamiliar with resale options. RIV is already selling at a discount to resorts like PVB and VGF despite the longer contract life (although RIV does have higher dues, so that also matters). If it gets to a point where RIV, Poly2 and other restricted resorts will be going for sub-$100 resale, there will be very little incentive for informed buyers to buy those resorts direct.

 

[Sandisw]

This is the model most timeshare companies have. It also primarily relies on selling to uninformed buyers - i.e, those unfamiliar with resale options. RIV is already selling at a discount to resorts like PVB and VGF despite the longer contract life (although RIV does have higher dues, so that also matters). If it gets to a point where RIV, Poly2 and other restricted resorts will be going for sub-$100 resale, there will be very little incentive for informed buyers to buy those resorts direct.

It will be interesting to see when/if that happens. Many of us, myself included, believe that would be its price right out of the gate, and yet, it is still averaging, based on what I have seen in the $130s. Few outliers of course.

But, while it certainly is lower than VGF, it is higher than several others that can trade (SSR, etc.) and PVB seems to be settling into the same price point right now. Even CCV and BLT all seem to be settling in to the current RIV value....

By the time we may see it, those resorts will more likely be sold out so DVD won't care since they will be selling the new resort!

However, once its the norm and not the exception, will the resale value settle in for all resorts to be similar? I am not convinced we will see them go sub-100 for a very long time... in part because its very possible that RIV owners will hold longer and use/rent so not to sell at that price.

That is us...the last contract we would every sell is RIV if the value of those points dips...not that we care because we bought without care of resale value...but, if I am downsizing things, RIV is the one we hold the longest.

 

[Epcot Forever Forever]

A premium? Absolutely not. Direct pricing is outrageous enough already.

It would never, ever, ever happen though so it’s academic as a question.

 

[Robbie Cottam]

This is the model most timeshare companies have. It also primarily relies on selling to uninformed buyers - i.e, those unfamiliar with resale options. RIV is already selling at a discount to resorts like PVB and VGF despite the longer contract life (although RIV does have higher dues, so that also matters). If it gets to a point where RIV, Poly2 and other restricted resorts will be going for sub-$100 resale, there will be very little incentive for informed buyers to buy those resorts direct.

I think you have that backwards, Informed buyers WILL buy RIV and The new Disney Land hotel direct because they don't want to be restricted.

I have two "blue card" memberships I don't need another one but I most likely WILL NOT buy resale point because, I like to keep my options open.

I have 6 separate contract in total,

I have known about resale since shortly after buying my first.
I have never even consider buying resale.

I would not consider myself uninformed or an uninformed buyer.

Direct and resale are really two different products, now.

 

[Her Dotness]

Nope! I bought to use and enjoy. If we ever have to sell, anything we get selling is a bonus.

Precisely.

I'm beginning to feel like a rubber stamp as many times as I agree with Sandisw.

 

[GoingSince1990]

This is the model most timeshare companies have. It also primarily relies on selling to uninformed buyers - i.e, those unfamiliar with resale options. RIV is already selling at a discount to resorts like PVB and VGF despite the longer contract life (although RIV does have higher dues, so that also matters). If it gets to a point where RIV, Poly2 and other restricted resorts will be going for sub-$100 resale, there will be very little incentive for informed buyers to buy those resorts direct.

At which point Disney has every reason to ROFR every resale contract, as they can resell direct, without restrictions, at a much higher price. Which in turn could cause the private resale markets for those resorts to disappear; why would any private buyer bother to make an offer when ROFR was almost guaranteed? And this would leave those owners wishing to exit at the mercy of Disney, in the same way as “traditional” timeshare owners are at the mercy of the developer when they want to exit.

 

[Epcot Forever Forever]

I think you have that backwards, Informed buyers WILL buy RIV and The new Disney Land hotel direct because they don't want to be restricted.

I have two "blue card" memberships I don't need another one but I most likely WILL NOT buy resale point because, I like to keep my options open.

I have 6 separate contract in total,

I have know about resale since short after buying my first.
I have never even consider buying resale.

I would not consider myself uninformed or an uninformed buyer.

Direct and resale are really two different products, now.

I think an informed buyer can make either choice; depending on the facts of their situation, their travel desires, and their available cash, both can make sense. But 99% of uninformed buyers aren’t aware of the resale market and will buy direct.

 

[Bearval]

At which point Disney has every reason to ROFR every resale contract, as they can resell direct, without restrictions, at a much higher price. Which in turn could cause the private resale markets for those resorts to disappear; why would any private buyer bother to make an offer when ROFR was almost guaranteed? And this would leave those owners wishing to exit at the mercy of Disney, in the same way as “traditional” timeshare owners are at the mercy of the developer when they want to exit.

I don’t believe they will ever go back to aggressively ROFRing the legacy contracts again since they are only restricted from the newest resorts. For me it no longer matters. I have all the points I need now and will be taking a dirt nap long before the contracts expire. I have one small direct contract that is not restricted and can bank and borrow to get a week at the new resorts if I have a need to.

 

[Epcot Forever Forever]

At which point Disney has every reason to ROFR every resale contract, as they can resell direct, without restrictions, at a much higher price. Which in turn could cause the private resale markets for those resorts to disappear; why would any private buyer bother to make an offer when ROFR was almost guaranteed? And this would leave those owners wishing to exit at the mercy of Disney, in the same way as “traditional” timeshare owners are at the mercy of the developer when they want to exit.

If Disney ROFR’d every contract, the price of contracts would increase rapidly (see Saratoga Springs, 2021-22), and it would quickly become unprofitable for Disney to ROFR contracts. They’d also wind up with way, way, way more points than they could sell at full price, and have to run enormous discounts that would drop prices to where supply and demand were in equilibrium in order to not hemorrhage profits - and that point they’d have to reach would be very, very close to the previous resale prices (see Animal Kingdom, early 2023), as we know because they’d reached a natural equilibrium there on the resale market

In other words, if Disney did that, they’d lose absolute boatloads of money.

 

[DanCali]

I think you have that backwards, Informed buyers WILL buy RIV and The new Disney Land hotel direct because they don't want to be restricted.

So if, for argument’s sake, RIV was selling for $70 resale, you’d still buy for $220 direct knowing you lose (on paper) 70% of your equity 10 days after you sign? Is there any resale price that would make you rethink direct?

No thanks for me… I know it will be worth $0 in 48 years, but I don’t want it to depreciate 70% in 10 days…

 

[Robbie Cottam]

I think an informed buyer can make either choice; depending on the facts of their situation, their travel desires, and their available cash, both can make sense. But 99% of uninformed buyers aren’t aware of the resale market and will buy direct.

If you want a new car do you go shopping at a used car dealer?

Informed or uninformed Disney has been and will continue to change the product so that Disney wins.
If you want the shinny new time share with all the option you will go to Disney.

If you want the used and unwanted time share you will goto the used market....

If Disney stays the coarse, it would appear their intent it to control not the used market, but the used product.
If you are content with only staying at one resort for perpetuity, then you buy used. If you want to be able to use DVC as designed you don't...

Although I have done less than ZERO research, and this statement falls in the "wild *** guess"realm, I can see people who buy resale at restricted resorts inventing and or using the existing "trade boards". I can see that becoming a thing, for those that bought resale and then realized it gets old staying in the same resort every trip....

 

[Bearval]

If you want a new car do you go shopping at a used car dealer?

Informed or uninformed Disney has been and will continue to change the product so that Disney wins.
If you want the shinny new time share with all the option you will go to Disney.

If you want the used and unwanted time share you will goto the used market....

If Disney stays the coarse, it would appear their intent it to control not the used market, but the used product.
If you are content with only staying at one resort for perpetuity, then you buy used. If you want to be able to use DVC as designed you don't...

Although I have done less than ZERO research, and this statement falls in the "wild *** guess"realm, I can see people who buy resale at restricted resorts inventing and or using the existing "trade boards". I can see that becoming a thing, for those that bought resale and then realized it gets old staying in the same resort every trip....

The people who buy resale with the intention of staying at studios or two bedrooms is going to hate it if they have to make changes to their reservation after the 7 month mark. The availability of the rooms they want will be slim to none and they won’t have the option of switching resorts.

 

[Robbie Cottam]

The people who buy resale with the intention of staying at studios or two bedrooms is going to hate it if they have to make changes to their reservation after the 7 month mark. The availability of the rooms they want will be slim to none and they won’t have the option of switching resorts.

yep, so like I said Disney's wins

And I bet you'll find lots of trades happening