WOW DVC Prices !!!

[tom1944]

Possibly for sure, but legally, the POS states it is now a 2057 contract, which is why owners need to sign the quit claim deed so those go back to Disney.

Now, I think there will be plenty that might want to just give it back to DVD at that time, but I still think it is going to be messy for DVD to handle it and any owner who wants to still use it and pay fees might be seen as a benefit for DVD then stopping those owners from use...which means they have to cover the shortfall of all lthose contracts because IIRC, there was a lawsuit in which they agreed that owners who are extended to 2057 can not be forced to pay additional MFs to account for those contracts that were given back to Disney.

Can Disney turn all the rooms no longer owned under a 2042 expiration into cash rooms and cover the MF they would need?

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

Neither party can modify the contract unilaterally.

DVC did though and that's the main point.

 

[Bearval]

I can promise you someone is already ready to fight this in 2042. People had lawyer letters and had lawyers involved when this was done. If I were a non-signer, I would be confident someone is doing something.

And if not, I guess it expires.

When they extended the ground lease to 2057, they DID change the POS. The contract was extended for all owners.

That is why what DVD sells ends in 2057 because that is when the resort now expires. And, DVD has the right to change the POS and they did....that is why this will be a mess and why they did what they did in terms of quit claim deeds.

It won’t be as big a mess as people think. DVD will wait until 2042 rolls around to do anything. By then the number of owners of the 2042 contracts will be smaller. DVD will then not access the 2042 contracts MFs for the coming year then wait and see if lawsuits are filed. If they are served with a class action lawsuit, DVD will file an injunction to deny a class action suit and chose to litigate each owner individually. This their right. Merck did this with Vioxx. The individual owners would have to hire their own lawyer. This will be expensive for the owners with no guarantee they will win. DVD has nothing to lose but everything to gain by raking this path.

 

[Nabas]

Someone is always willing to fight. Letters from lawyers are cheap. Litigating is expensive.

Disney controls the use of the points. After that it would be up to the 2042 owner to pay an attorney to actually do more then send a letter.

Your post has me thinking, in 2041 does Disney simply again offer the same extension at an inflation adjusted price?

Even with a group of DVC owners involved, simply paying the extension would seem less expensive than fighting (and potentially losing) this in court.

 

[Bearval]

Can Disney turn all the rooms no longer owned under a 2042 expiration into cash rooms and cover the MF they would need?

They would belong to DVD they can do what they want at that point in time.

 

[RoseGold]

Your post has me thinking, in 2041 does Disney simply again offer the same extension at an inflation adjusted price?

Even with a group of DVC owners involved, simply paying the extension would seem to less expensive than fighting (and potentially losing) this in court.

This seems like a pretty elegant solution for Disney, and maybe a very cheap one for everyone. If there aren't many of these owners left, this might be the way. Even if it has to be at $25.

 

[tom1944]

I figure most owners would be mid 70's or older

 

[E2ME2]

I think it means free in that they will take an extra 15 years at no cost.

Disney will foreclose if they do not pay MF.

If the contract ends in 2042 I believe Disney will deny them the ability to use the points. Just because someone else has a contract out to 2057 does not mean you do.

Oh - interesting. And DVD only applied that to OKW, not any of the other 2042 resorts???
Lots to speculate on…..

 

[RoseGold]

I figure most owners would be mid 70's or older

It would also be resale though, like anyone who bought until late 2007, direct or resale. Maybe even later than that. There are stories on these boards from 2008 resale where paperwork was unclear.

 

[Sandisw]

Can Disney turn all the rooms no longer owned under a 2042 expiration into cash rooms and cover the MF they would need?

Anything they own can be rented for cash, yes. Anything owned by someone else who didn’t pay or do a quit claim deed? I don’t think They can unless they decide ot a yeah and put owners on it to file a suit against them.

My gut is that they will simply let owners keep using beyond 2042 as long as they agree to pay the fees.

 

[tom1944]

Anything they own can be rented for cash, yes. Anything owned by someone else who didn’t pay or do a quit claim deed? I don’t think They can unless they decide ot a yeah and put owners on it to file a suit against them.

My gut is that they will simply let owners keep using beyond 2042 as long as they agree to pay the fees.

I wonder how many that will be?

You are not saying an owner of OKW 2042 and leaves their contract to a child will allow the child to continue us until 2057 are you?

Or if someone wants to add a relative to their contract now that person can continue until 2057?

If it is only people who owned at the time of the extension and the number is small I can see maybe. I can also see them taking a hard look at those points being rented out and enforcing the commercial use clause as much as they can.

Did the person and persons that came up with the expiration plan lose their job for creating this problem?

 

[Sandisw]

I wonder how many that will be?

You are not saying an owner of OKW 2042 and leaves their contract to a child will allow the child to continue us until 2057 are you?

Or if someone wants to add a relative to their contract now that person can continue until 2057?

If it is only people who owned at the time of the extension and the number is small I can see maybe. I can also see them taking a hard look at those points being rented out and enforcing the commercial use clause as much as they can.

Did the person and persons that came up with the expiration plan lose their job for creating this problem?

I think that in these cases, they would require the owner to sign the quit claim to change ownership, including for gratuitous transfers.

That is required for all owners who sell a 2042 contract and are original owners. That document must be signed in order for the new buyer to have clear title.

That is how, over the years, more contracts have become officially ending in 2042.

 

[RoseGold]

You are not saying an owner of OKW 2042 and leaves their contract to a child will allow the child to continue us until 2057 are you?

Or if someone wants to add a relative to their contract now that person can continue until 2057?

Gratuitous transfer has a process, which I believe requires the quitclaim, like resale. Without Disney would just ROFR it.

Inheritance through probate is a different thing. I don't see how it would even be possible to require a quitclaim.

And even then people were buying with trusts or LLCs, which never die.

 

[lovethesun12]

A question connected with DVC prices....

I've been really regretting two different use years and considering selling my contract for a while.

Since I'll be a buyer and a seller I'm not sure what to do...is it best to sell now so I can buy a contract with my use year for cheaper? Or wait it out until I can get a better price for my contract and try to find a deal?

What would you do?

 

[RoseGold]

Since I'll be a buyer and a seller I'm not sure what to do...is it best to sell now so I can buy a contract with my use year for cheaper? Or wait it out until I can get a better price for my contract and try to find a deal?

What would you do?

If you're upgrading to pricier points, say SSR -> VGF, I'd sell and buy now. The hit SSR took isn't as much as the VGF took, so you come out ahead. If you're doing the reverse, I'd wait. If they're about equal, I'd just do it now.

 

[Brian Noble]

If Disney rejects the use of those points people have to sue to enforce their interpretation the contract. That gets more expensive for individual's than it does for Disney.

I'm not even sure the owner would prevail.

Disney's argument would almost certainly be something along the following lines: "The original agreement was for the owner's use up to and expiring in 2042. Both parties willingly agreed to that expiration date at the effective price. We offered additional years, an offer which this owner did not accept. The fact that the ground lease was the mechanism of extension does not change the fact that the original agreement explicitly articulated the expiration of the owner's use in 2042. We believe the other party is not entitled to more, and ask the court to so order."

IANAL, but I can see that having a chance--and maybe a good one.

The idea that Disney is just going to ignore these owners out of the desire to avoid a messy fight does not seem consistent with how the company generally behaves. But, as Jeff Lebowski would say:

 

[RoseGold]

If Disney rejects the use of those points people have to sue to enforce their interpretation the contract. That gets more expensive for individual's than it does for Disney.


I am not sure a lawyer can see much of a contingency arrangement so I would expect they would want a payment to represent you.

People have sued for a lot less, like the ADA lawsuit for DAS. "In fact, A.E.P. testified that during their first visit, the family went on at least 42 rides over three half-days at the parks"

And don't forget the timeshare regulations and oversight is in play here too, also known as the Florida government.

 

[HIRyeDVC]

A question connected with DVC prices....

I've been really regretting two different use years and considering selling my contract for a while.

Since I'll be a buyer and a seller I'm not sure what to do...is it best to sell now so I can buy a contract with my use year for cheaper? Or wait it out until I can get a better price for my contract and try to find a deal?

What would you do?

Are you asking if we can see the future for the DVC resale market? I don't think anyone can presume to know what the market will do next. I mean, no one anticipated what would happen coming out of the pandemic. And no one predicted what's happening now. But in your case, I think it depends on what you're selling to buy what resort? Either way, you can't expect to buy low and sell high at the same time. It's a huge buyer's market so if you're ok with selling for low to buy low, then go for it.

 

[E2ME2]

Are you asking if we can see the future for the DVC resale market? I don't think anyone can presume to know what the market will do next. I mean, no one anticipated what would happen coming out of the pandemic. And no one predicted what's happening now. But in your case, I think it depends on what you're selling to buy what resort? Either way, you can't expect to buy low and sell high at the same time. It's a huge buyer's market so if you're ok with selling for low to buy low, then go for it.

Agreed -
I pulled my SSR listing, waiting to see if this market rebounds.

 

[HIRyeDVC]

Agreed -
I pulled my SSR listing, waiting to see if this market rebounds.

I think it's going to get worse before it gets any better, as a seller that is. Unless Disney flexes some ROFR power, which I don't think they will anytime soon, the floor could look a lot lower IMO. If you can afford to hold on for the long haul, I'd keep it and just enjoy the points.