February direct sales but also debate about trusts

[T00dles]

Some good points @Sandisw. I can see management potentially pointing to low cabin sales and high dues, and saying "Look, we have to mix maintenance costs together if we want to sell some of these properties."

 

[Sandisw]

The flip side is that they could have kept things lower incentive wise to gauge actual interest and since it doesn’t appear strong at this point, decide this really is a niche product and not tie it to something that is seen as a better choice and add other “moderate” level projects down the line that cluster together.

 

[mkatsy]

The flip side is that they could have kept things lower incentive wise to gauge actual interest and since it doesn’t appear strong at this point, decide this really is a niche product and not tie it to something that is seen as a better choice and add other “moderate” level projects down the line that cluster together.

Where did that trust paperwork first show up? Was it the comptroller? I would guess that the very first step would be to add the tower to the trust if that is the route they are going. Applying for the timeshare license would be second. On the timeshare license application you have to declare the type of ownership (trust, leasehold, fee simple).

 

[maui22]

Has any resort started out

Where did that trust paperwork first show up? Was it the comptroller? I would guess that the very first step would be to add the tower to the trust if that is the route they are going. Applying for the timeshare license would be second. On the timeshare license application you have to declare the type of ownership (trust, leasehold, fee simple).

Sometimes, Disney slips up and puts the information in the multi-site POS. I believe this is why some are trying to get their hands on this document from a CFW buyer.

If Disney doesn't slip up with the POS and/or multi-site POS, wouldn't the first step be receive timeshare approval?

Wouldn't they keep everything internal to Disney until it is approved by the state where the property is located. Example, once Florida approved CFW, they would then be able to start approval process for other states to make sure it's legal in those states.

During this time, there is no reason to disclose the trust plan because that may have to change if it's rejected by some state. Does Disney want to be banned from even discussing Poly tower with anyone located in California? (This is what happened with PVB. IIRC, it was 2-3 months after sales started before anyone located in California could discuss it. Best Polynesian spokesperson lived in California and he had to fly to WDW to be able to buy.).

I believe the first documents on the county will show up are the declaration.

I believe the documents people used to decipher some room information showed up on the Southern Florida Water Management District government web site. If I understood the posts back then, Disney had to file documents for plumbing work, so it appeared there. That included partial blue prints.

 

[mkatsy]

The application for timeshare license offers a privacy option, im not sure of the exact wording. A company can request to have all of the documents held by the DBPR in confidence while they work through the licensure process. This may (or may not) be what’s happening now. If this option was requested, we wouldn’t see anything until they have met the DBPR criteria and the license is issued.

 

[maui22]

The application for timeshare license offers a privacy option, im not sure of the exact wording. A company can request to have all of the documents held by the DBPR in confidence while they work through the licensure process. This may (or may not) be what’s happening now. If this option was requested, we wouldn’t see anything until they have met the DBPR criteria and the license is issued.

Interesting.

Edit: in the past we have only seen the license after it has been approved. Can Disney still have the license private once the license is approved in Florida?

That may explain why CFW (the trust as we know it today) was the shortest time from timeshare license approval to resort opening.

The things I'm watch for on DBPR are:

• Any new association to appear under the Disney license.
• PVB license to have a component site added. This would be an addition to Poly. Component site was added for BPK addition to VGF. However, I believe Riviera, VDH, and CFW also have component sites listed (which may be related to the restrictions).
• CFW license could in theory have another component added (if somehow they want CFW + Poly tower under the same association).
• The managing entity for the restricted resorts currently have 3 associations (Riviera, VDH, and CFW). If they add a 4th, I believe that would mean Poly tower is not part of PVB.

 

[mkatsy]

Interesting.

Edit: in the past we have only seen the license after it has been approved. Can Disney still have the license private once the license is approved in Florida?

That may explain why CFW (the trust as we know it today) was the shortest time from timeshare license approval to resort opening.

The things I'm watch for on DBPR are:

• Any new association to appear under the Disney license.
• PVB license to have a component site added. This would be an addition to Poly. Component site was added for BPK addition to VGF. However, I believe Riviera, VDH, and CFW also have component sites listed (which may be related to the restrictions).
• CFW license could in theory have another component added (if somehow they want CFW + Poly tower under the same association).
• The managing entity for the restricted resorts currently have 3 associations (Riviera, VDH, and CFW). If they add a 4th, I believe that would mean Poly tower is not part of PVB.

The license is always public record. Florida Timeshare law allows for an affidavit of confidentiality to protect proprietary information to be submitted with the application. No guarantees are made that it will be granted, but they will consider honoring it.

 

[Sandisw]

Where did that trust paperwork first show up? Was it the comptroller? I would guess that the very first step would be to add the tower to the trust if that is the route they are going. Applying for the timeshare license would be second. On the timeshare license application you have to declare the type of ownership (trust, leasehold, fee simple).

The first paperwork we saw with details that CFW would be sold via a RTU plan under a trust association was end of December when they were filled.

We learned about resale restrictions for VDH when they filed and updated the multi site POS and an owner buying a different resort direct last winter had that document and it was discovered there

So, I anticpate we will see declaration documents about 2 to 4 months ahead of sales?

But, the timeshare license was filed for CFW in October…so that did show up first.

 

[mkatsy]

Disney and the Governor kissed and made up today, that's a win for everyone. Now file that Poly paperwork!

 

[hockeydad21]

I agree, but not in the way you think.

From the point of view of a day-to-day DVC owner, the cabins are being sold like any other DVC resort. You buy points homed at resort X, you get 11 months booking there, and 7 months everywhere else. The fact that the legal structure is different has nothing to do with anything.

I expect Poly to be the same thing, and it will not have 11 month cross-booking privileges with the cabins. It doesn't matter whether it is sold beneficial interests in a trust or as a fractional deeded leasehold, my bet is that the usage model is not changing.

I'll also give slightly longer odds on Something Like Reflections eventually being built and being part of the same association as the cabins.

I feel like this “trust” topic has spiraled so far out of control with theories, it’s sorta getting crazy, so I might as well throw my hat into the ring of crazy theories….

There are 2 things we know for certain about DVC’s fort wilderness site:

1. The cabins are temporary structures that required a trust to convert them to DVC. A 50 year deed cannot happen on a piece of property that will eventually be replaced with an entirely new cabin in the next 20-30 years. Make no mistake, this is the only reason why the CFW was the first (and so far only) property put into the trust despite VDH opening just last year. They need to be able to replace these cabins, and they can only do that if it’s not deeded. End of story.
2. Disney wants to build another DVC property at fort wilderness (reflections or something like it), which is why the reflections permit was extended not too long ago. Assuming this does happen at some point within the next 9 years, then I foresee DVD adding this property to the CFW trust. The 11 month booking priorities for CFW and Reflections would end there. It would also be nice because then it gives the CFW access to some much improved and needed amenities at a new tower (reflections) even if it takes a golf cart to get there. That’s the entire trust, and it only was created because the cabins are temporary structures.

The Poly tower will be tied to the PVB association, and all future DVC resorts outside of fort wilderness continue to be deeded properties. The trust lives and dies at fort wilderness. I genuinely think that’s it for the trust, but who knows. It'll take years (potentially 10+) before we truly know Disney's intentions.

If they were to go the Sandisw route and start adding all new resorts to the trust, then it’ll over complicate the system in my opinion. You’d have your blue card members who can book anywhere, resale restricted members to the original 14, resale restricted to Riv and newer associations stuck with just their home property, and then this trust nonsense which could become its own undesirable monster to confuse people even more with their own set of weird resale restrictions. People like DVC because it’s somewhat simple and it allows them to create core family memories. If you over complicate it with even more restrictions while also increasing the price significantly, then you’re going to lose many potential buyers in the future. I think we're already seeing that have an impact on Riv and VDH as neither are selling that well despite being fantastic resorts. I personally don’t think Disney wants to be in the same conversation as Marriott and Wyndham timeshares, but they're getting closer and closer to it with more restricted hotels. It wouldn’t be worth it in my opinion because no one looks at those in a good light.

 

[Jimmy Geppetto]

I feel like this “trust” topic has spiraled so far out of control with theories, it’s sorta getting crazy, so I might as well throw my hat into the ring….

There are 2 things we know for certain about DVC’s fort wilderness site:

1. The cabins are temporary structures that required a trust to convert them to DVC. A 50 year deed cannot happen on a piece of property that will eventually be replaced with an entirely new cabin in the next 20-30 years. Make no mistake, this is the only reason why the CFW was the first (and so far only) property put into the trust despite VDH opening just last year. They need to be able to replace these cabins, and they can only do that if it’s not deeded. End of story.
2. Disney wants to build another DVC property at fort wilderness (reflections or something like it), which is why the reflections permit was extended not too long ago. Assuming this does happen at some point within the next 9 years, then I foresee DVD adding this property to the CFW trust. The 11 month booking priorities for CFW and Reflections would end there. It would also be nice because then it gives the CFW access to some much improved and needed amenities at a new tower (reflections) even if it takes a golf cart to get there. That’s the entire trust, and it only was created because the cabins are temporary structures.

That’s it. Poly tower will be tied to the PVB association, and all future DVC resorts outside of fort wilderness continue to be deeded properties. The trust lives and dies at fort wilderness.

If they were to go the Sandisw route and start adding all new resorts to the trust, then it’ll over complicate the system. You’d have your blue card members who can book anywhere, resale restricted members to the original 14, resale restricted to Riv and newer associations stuck with just their home property, and then this trust nonsense which could become its own undesirable monster to confuse people even more. People like DVC because it’s somewhat simple and it allows them to create core family memories. If you over complicate it, then you’re going to lose so many potential buyers in the future. I personally don’t think Disney wants to be in the same conversation as Marriott and Wyndham timeshares. It wouldn’t be worth it in my opinion because no one looks at those in a good light.

And to avoid all of the “complication” all you have to do is buy directly from DVC.

Seems to be less of a conspiracy and more of a valid (and profitable) business plan to me.

 

[maui22]

And to avoid all of the “complication” all you have to do is buy directly from DVC.

Seems to be less of a conspiracy and more of a valid (and profitable) business plan to me.

Poly tower will sell no matter the decision.

If Poly tower is trust with 50+ years...

• Shouldn't Disney charge more than PVB's $250/pt?
• If tower trust is same price as PVB, they lock in 10 years of 0% return for building the tower.
• If they ever give Poly tower incentives making it less than PVB, Disney earns negative returns for 10 more years of their Poly tower investment.

 

[Cabius]

I feel like this “trust” topic has spiraled so far out of control with theories, it’s sorta getting crazy, so I might as well throw my hat into the ring of crazy theories….

There are 2 things we know for certain about DVC’s fort wilderness site:

1. The cabins are temporary structures that required a trust to convert them to DVC. A 50 year deed cannot happen on a piece of property that will eventually be replaced with an entirely new cabin in the next 20-30 years. Make no mistake, this is the only reason why the CFW was the first (and so far only) property put into the trust despite VDH opening just last year. They need to be able to replace these cabins, and they can only do that if it’s not deeded. End of story.
2. Disney wants to build another DVC property at fort wilderness (reflections or something like it), which is why the reflections permit was extended not too long ago. Assuming this does happen at some point within the next 9 years, then I foresee DVD adding this property to the CFW trust. The 11 month booking priorities for CFW and Reflections would end there. It would also be nice because then it gives the CFW access to some much improved and needed amenities at a new tower (reflections) even if it takes a golf cart to get there. That’s the entire trust, and it only was created because the cabins are temporary structures.

The Poly tower will be tied to the PVB association, and all future DVC resorts outside of fort wilderness continue to be deeded properties. The trust lives and dies at fort wilderness. I genuinely think that’s it for the trust, but who knows. It'll take years (potentially 10+) before we truly know Disney's intentions.

If they were to go the Sandisw route and start adding all new resorts to the trust, then it’ll over complicate the system in my opinion. You’d have your blue card members who can book anywhere, resale restricted members to the original 14, resale restricted to Riv and newer associations stuck with just their home property, and then this trust nonsense which could become its own undesirable monster to confuse people even more with their own set of weird resale restrictions. People like DVC because it’s somewhat simple and it allows them to create core family memories. If you over complicate it with even more restrictions while also increasing the price significantly, then you’re going to lose many potential buyers in the future. I think we're already seeing that have an impact on Riv and VDH as neither are selling that well despite being fantastic resorts. I personally don’t think Disney wants to be in the same conversation as Marriott and Wyndham timeshares, but they're getting closer and closer to it with more restricted hotels. It wouldn’t be worth it in my opinion because no one looks at those in a good light.

Presumably we'll know for sure soon (as it pertains to PVB) and over the next few years (as it pertains to the system as a whole), but all of this rings true to me. I know some folks won't believe it until it's written in blood -- it'll always be the next resort, or the one after that -- but the simplest explanation here is that they couldn't sell a deeded interest in temporary structures, and drafted the documents to give themselves maximum flexibility in the future.

 

[TheDailyMoo]

I feel like this “trust” topic has spiraled so far out of control with theories, it’s sorta getting crazy, so I might as well throw my hat into the ring of crazy theories….

There are 2 things we know for certain about DVC’s fort wilderness site:

1. The cabins are temporary structures that required a trust to convert them to DVC. A 50 year deed cannot happen on a piece of property that will eventually be replaced with an entirely new cabin in the next 20-30 years. Make no mistake, this is the only reason why the CFW was the first (and so far only) property put into the trust despite VDH opening just last year. They need to be able to replace these cabins, and they can only do that if it’s not deeded. End of story.
2. Disney wants to build another DVC property at fort wilderness (reflections or something like it), which is why the reflections permit was extended not too long ago. Assuming this does happen at some point within the next 9 years, then I foresee DVD adding this property to the CFW trust. The 11 month booking priorities for CFW and Reflections would end there. It would also be nice because then it gives the CFW access to some much improved and needed amenities at a new tower (reflections) even if it takes a golf cart to get there. That’s the entire trust, and it only was created because the cabins are temporary structures.

The Poly tower will be tied to the PVB association, and all future DVC resorts outside of fort wilderness continue to be deeded properties. The trust lives and dies at fort wilderness. I genuinely think that’s it for the trust, but who knows. It'll take years (potentially 10+) before we truly know Disney's intentions.

If they were to go the Sandisw route and start adding all new resorts to the trust, then it’ll over complicate the system in my opinion. You’d have your blue card members who can book anywhere, resale restricted members to the original 14, resale restricted to Riv and newer associations stuck with just their home property, and then this trust nonsense which could become its own undesirable monster to confuse people even more with their own set of weird resale restrictions. People like DVC because it’s somewhat simple and it allows them to create core family memories. If you over complicate it with even more restrictions while also increasing the price significantly, then you’re going to lose many potential buyers in the future. I think we're already seeing that have an impact on Riv and VDH as neither are selling that well despite being fantastic resorts. I personally don’t think Disney wants to be in the same conversation as Marriott and Wyndham timeshares, but they're getting closer and closer to it with more restricted hotels. It wouldn’t be worth it in my opinion because no one looks at those in a good light.

 

[Sandisw]

I feel like this “trust” topic has spiraled so far out of control with theories, it’s sorta getting crazy, so I might as well throw my hat into the ring of crazy theories….

There are 2 things we know for certain about DVC’s fort wilderness site:

1. The cabins are temporary structures that required a trust to convert them to DVC. A 50 year deed cannot happen on a piece of property that will eventually be replaced with an entirely new cabin in the next 20-30 years. Make no mistake, this is the only reason why the CFW was the first (and so far only) property put into the trust despite VDH opening just last year. They need to be able to replace these cabins, and they can only do that if it’s not deeded. End of story.
2. Disney wants to build another DVC property at fort wilderness (reflections or something like it), which is why the reflections permit was extended not too long ago. Assuming this does happen at some point within the next 9 years, then I foresee DVD adding this property to the CFW trust. The 11 month booking priorities for CFW and Reflections would end there. It would also be nice because then it gives the CFW access to some much improved and needed amenities at a new tower (reflections) even if it takes a golf cart to get there. That’s the entire trust, and it only was created because the cabins are temporary structures.

The Poly tower will be tied to the PVB association, and all future DVC resorts outside of fort wilderness continue to be deeded properties. The trust lives and dies at fort wilderness. I genuinely think that’s it for the trust, but who knows. It'll take years (potentially 10+) before we truly know Disney's intentions.

If they were to go the Sandisw route and start adding all new resorts to the trust, then it’ll over complicate the system in my opinion. You’d have your blue card members who can book anywhere, resale restricted members to the original 14, resale restricted to Riv and newer associations stuck with just their home property, and then this trust nonsense which could become its own undesirable monster to confuse people even more with their own set of weird resale restrictions. People like DVC because it’s somewhat simple and it allows them to create core family memories. If you over complicate it with even more restrictions while also increasing the price significantly, then you’re going to lose many potential buyers in the future. I think we're already seeing that have an impact on Riv and VDH as neither are selling that well despite being fantastic resorts. I personally don’t think Disney wants to be in the same conversation as Marriott and Wyndham timeshares, but they're getting closer and closer to it with more restricted hotels. It wouldn’t be worth it in my opinion because no one looks at those in a good light.

The cabins did not need a trust to sell them. They do not have wheels, and will be built right on site....they are considered real property. (See updated multi site POS)

While aspects will be prefabricated offsite, those will be brought in and then put together right there. And, from all the information I have gotten, this trust is not going to be a one and done with the cabins.

Will it incorporate Poly tower? Not sure but it doesn’t hafe anything to do with blue csrd. That is simply what entitles you to membership extras like discounts.

Points carry the rules and while those of us around for a long time know all the differences, new buyers don't. They come in with the product that is for sale and if it means that they are selling all new the same way, under a trust model, the other resort agreements and ways of the past are really not going to be a big deal.

But, it is why I believe we havent seen them try to add anything from the current active resorts and why I don't see them selling Poly tower two ways.

I guess we will see what happens in the next 5 years!

 

[Paul Stupin]

I feel like this “trust” topic has spiraled so far out of control with theories, it’s sorta getting crazy, so I might as well throw my hat into the ring of crazy theories….

There are 2 things we know for certain about DVC’s fort wilderness site:

1. The cabins are temporary structures that required a trust to convert them to DVC. A 50 year deed cannot happen on a piece of property that will eventually be replaced with an entirely new cabin in the next 20-30 years. Make no mistake, this is the only reason why the CFW was the first (and so far only) property put into the trust despite VDH opening just last year. They need to be able to replace these cabins, and they can only do that if it’s not deeded. End of story.
2. Disney wants to build another DVC property at fort wilderness (reflections or something like it), which is why the reflections permit was extended not too long ago. Assuming this does happen at some point within the next 9 years, then I foresee DVD adding this property to the CFW trust. The 11 month booking priorities for CFW and Reflections would end there. It would also be nice because then it gives the CFW access to some much improved and needed amenities at a new tower (reflections) even if it takes a golf cart to get there. That’s the entire trust, and it only was created because the cabins are temporary structures.

The Poly tower will be tied to the PVB association, and all future DVC resorts outside of fort wilderness continue to be deeded properties. The trust lives and dies at fort wilderness. I genuinely think that’s it for the trust, but who knows. It'll take years (potentially 10+) before we truly know Disney's intentions.

If they were to go the Sandisw route and start adding all new resorts to the trust, then it’ll over complicate the system in my opinion. You’d have your blue card members who can book anywhere, resale restricted members to the original 14, resale restricted to Riv and newer associations stuck with just their home property, and then this trust nonsense which could become its own undesirable monster to confuse people even more with their own set of weird resale restrictions. People like DVC because it’s somewhat simple and it allows them to create core family memories. If you over complicate it with even more restrictions while also increasing the price significantly, then you’re going to lose many potential buyers in the future. I think we're already seeing that have an impact on Riv and VDH as neither are selling that well despite being fantastic resorts. I personally don’t think Disney wants to be in the same conversation as Marriott and Wyndham timeshares, but they're getting closer and closer to it with more restricted hotels. It wouldn’t be worth it in my opinion because no one looks at those in a good light.

Presumably we'll know for sure soon (as it pertains to PVB) and over the next few years (as it pertains to the system as a whole), but all of this rings true to me. I know some folks won't believe it until it's written in blood -- it'll always be the next resort, or the one after that -- but the simplest explanation here is that they couldn't sell a deeded interest in temporary structures, and drafted the documents to give themselves maximum flexibility in the future.

I’m inclined to agree with you guys. I don’t understand why DVC would need to add the additional booking privileges that might be enabled by a trust to sell a tower like Poly2, that will sell anyway for no doubt a high price. And I think few will want to pay even more for the ability to book at a lesser resort in which they’re probably not interested. And if they’re forced to, sales could take a hit.

Maybe there are obscure legal reasons that benefit Disney by moving the same system currently in place away from deeded properties. Or maybe it’s just the transitory nature of the FW cabins for that resort only. Or maybe they’re playing the long game and it involves some 2042 related strategy.

I look at DVC as, basically the gold standard, and am both uninterested and a bit mistrustful of the sales strategies used by other time share companies. If Disney attempts to either copy or adopt them, in my opinion they’ll undermine their own product, and be doing so at their own risk.

 

[walt34]

The cabins did not need a trust to sell them. They do not have wheels, and will be built right on site....they are considered real property. (See updated multi site POS)

While aspects will be prefabricated offsite, those will be brought in and then put together right there. And, from all the information I have gotten, this trust is not going to be a one and done with the cabins.

Exactly. Even if the trust was needed for a cabins specific reason, they gave themselves more options in the trust structure and the concerning documents than they would have needed to continue with DVC as it is today. Whether they did this with a specific plan for the near future (Poly tower), with a plan to move on later (2042 resorts) or just as a contingency (if we are redrawing all of these documents, let's keep all options open for the future) we don't know. Maybe the final Poly Tower contracts will give some clarity - maybe not.

 

[hockeydad21]

The cabins did not need a trust to sell them. They do not have wheels, and will be built right on site....they are considered real property. (See updated multi site POS)

While aspects will be prefabricated offsite, those will be brought in and then put together right there. And, from all the information I have gotten, this trust is not going to be a one and done with the cabins.

Will it incorporate Poly tower? Not sure but it doesn’t hafe anything to do with blue csrd. That is simply what entitles you to membership extras like discounts.

Points carry the rules and while those of us around for a long time know all the differences, new buyers don't. They come in with the product that is for sale and if it means that they are selling all new the same way, under a trust model, the other resort agreements and ways of the past are really not going to be a big deal.

But, it is why I believe we havent seen them try to add anything from the current active resorts and why I don't see them selling Poly tower two ways.

I guess we will see what happens in the next 5 years!

The cabins don't need to have wheels to be a temporary structure! The current cabins are the 2nd version of cabins at fort wilderness, the new DVC cabins will be the 3rd version. It is likely there will be a 4th version within the next 20-30 years prior to the CFW contract's end date. Disney literally removes the old cabins roughly every 20 years when they're done with them, and then sells them! Disney would not legally be able to sell them in 20+ years if DVC chose to use a deed at CFW!

It doesn't need to be an RV or have wheels to be a "temporary structure"

 

[walt34]

I’m inclined to agree with you guys. I don’t understand why DVC would need to add the additional booking privileges that might be enabled by a trust to sell a tower like Poly2, that will sell anyway for no doubt a high price. And I think few will want to pay even more for the ability to book at a lesser resort in which they’re probably not interested. And if they’re forced to, sales could take a hit.

I don't expect them to do this but here is a reason: they know that the Poly will sell well, whatever they do. And maybe CFW currently doesn't sell as well as they'd like. The tower has a limited number of points (which are dictated by the number of rooms and the points per night for these rooms). There is a limit to how far they can push the points per night before it becomes a problem (if the tower studios are much more expensive than the old Poly studios, the old studios will become much harder to book as people will buy the tower and want to stay at the cheapest studios). So there is a limit to how many points overall the tower can be worth to DVD.

If they find a way to enhance CFW points with some booking privileges at the tower (10 months?), they can sell CFW points to people who are mainly interested in the tower. This results in many more points DVD can sell to people who want access to the tower.

Now, because of what they have said so far, I don't expect them to actually do it this time. But there are benefits for DVD to go for a multi-site structure.

 

[Sandisw]

The cabins don't need to have wheels to be a temporary structure! The current cabins are the 2nd version of cabins at fort wilderness, the new DVC cabins will be the 3rd version. It is likely there will be a 4th version within the next 20-30 years prior to the CFW contract's end date. Disney literally removes the old cabins roughly every 20 years when they're done with them, and then sells them! Disney would not legally be able to sell them in 20+ years if DVC chose to use a deed at CFW!

It doesn't need to be an RV or have wheels to be a "temporary structure"

Not what I was told so we can agree to disagree. They are real property and thus could have been sold outside of a trust.

Now, the ideas that they try to make this trust a product that enhances home resort advantage to more than one resort is just that…an idea

But, there is no reason to assume that selling all future properties at RTU vs leasehold deeds is out of the realm of possibility.