First RIV resale contract sold for?

[anomamatt]

This is why I think Riviera should trade below $100. Using this method I could get Saratoga, Poly, and BLT for less than $10 per point and CCV and AKV for about the same price per point. But with the non-Riviera resort I get to also exchange into other resorts. So I think Riviera should be trading at a discount per point to these other resorts not at a premium.

Your comparison is a little bit of apples to oranges. Because with RVA, 2019 MF = 2020 MF. The other resorts will go up another ~7% for 2020 (still catching up to $15/hr wages).

However, even with a 7% increase in MFs, Saratoga is indeed still under $10.31 per point (it's ~$9.80/point -- assuming you find a loaded contract for $103/point which isn't easy). But the value of Saratoga vs restricted-Riviera would be a personal preference. I'd rather have Riviera, but I also do not like SSR and wouldn't want to stay there. And I subscribe to "buy where you are willing to stay".

 

[kboo]

While there is the option of walking to HS, I doubt many people do it.

I think that the demand is high because people want to walk to Food and Wine Festival.

Granted, I am only a data point of 1, but speaking for the stroller set, it's really hard to beat walking or a reliable* mode of transportation that doesn't require folding a stroller and managing/carrying the small kid that goes in the stroller. We made offers on BWV and BCV contracts a few years ago, but they never worked out because I didn't think they were worth the asking price given the time left on the contracts (BWV ~$95-100pp; BCV ~$110) Instead, at the time, we bought BLT so we could walk to MK. When we stay in the BW area (BWV, BCV or Swan) we *always* walk to HS and EP. In fact, when we've stayed outside of the EP/HS area, we've given HS a pass completely. Even though we are in the twilight of the stroller years, the ability to roll a stroller or scooter (grandparents) onto the gondolas, or walk to MK, is worth many $$ per point. And for those reasons, if I want a trip to include EP/HS, I will stay at the Swan in a regular hotel room over a resort that has buses to those parks.

We did MNSSHP with a double stroller while staying at the Swan. Both kids fell asleep around 9:30 pm, and we had to wake up the older kid and make her walk on the the bus and to our room. I carried the little one, and DH lugged a folded double stroller on the bus.

I am thrilled with the news of the VGF walkway - we own at BLT, RIV and VGF for a reason.


*monorail not included

I do not think that in the second go around October and November will be in the lowest point category.

There is also a lot of evidence to suggest that the days of the 10 point room are over. The minimum point requirement for a studio (excluding Tower studios- which are not real rooms) in the last four resorts built is 15, 15, 16, and 17. I would expect the new BWV and BCV to follow this pattern. It's a double inflation that a lot of our discussions on these boards have hinted at. 50% more points required at 50% higher price. It's a double whammy.

I totally agree. That alone would be reason not to offer an extension to current owners. They may offer an current owner discount/incentive to buy into the BWV/BCV 2.0, similar to the developer credits and early buy in period when offering new resorts to current DVC owners, but that's it. They won't need to do major renovations. Even if they reconfigured the bathrooms (such wasted space!) it would not cost that much more.

How will they compensate members that are unable to use their points.

Easy. They won't. There are many posters on FB, current DVC owners, who don't necessarily use or rent out their points. They don't get any compensation. The points just expire.

 

[Hjs33]

Your comparison is a little bit of apples to oranges. Because with RVA, 2019 MF = 2020 MF. The other resorts will go up another ~7% for 2020 (still catching up to $15/hr wages).

However, even with a 7% increase in MFs, Saratoga is indeed still under $10.31 per point (it's ~$9.80/point -- assuming you find a loaded contract for $103/point which isn't easy). But the value of Saratoga vs restricted-Riviera would be a personal preference. I'd rather have Riviera, but I also do not like SSR and wouldn't want to stay there. And I subscribe to "buy where you are willing to stay".

Yes, “buy where you are willing to stay” is good advise. But with Riviera it’s “buy where you can ONLY stay” is the more appropriate term and that to me makes it a far more inferior contract even compared to SSR.

 

[Matty B13]

Just saw a RIV listing from a broker (not to be listed here) with 175 Point, Dec UY contract for $144/point.

 

[TexasChick123]

They don’t have to invest large amounts of capital to renovate BWV or BCV to re-sell them in 2042. Many of you say the walking distance to EP alone is enough to buy. If I was DVD, I’d barely do anything in the way of renovations but increase the price and points charts significantly, and they’ll still sell like hot cakes. Just put some new bedding in the units, and call it a day.

 

[Katie L]

Just saw a RIV listing from a broker (not to be listed here) with 175 Point, Dec UY contract for $144/point.

I saw it too. Might offer $100 on it...

 

[anomamatt]

I saw it too. Might offer $100 on it...

Same agents that brokered the $100 contract previously. Maybe I'll offer $101. ;-)

So far, all of my (two) $100 offers have only led to "no thanks". But their starting at $144 gives me some hope.

 

[kboo]

I saw it too. Might offer $100 on it...

DO IT!!!!

Same agents that brokered the $100 contract previously. Maybe I'll offer $101. ;-)

So far, all of my (two) $100 offers have only led to "no thanks". But their starting at $144 gives me some hope.

Do you know if it's a flip? Wasn't the $100 contract the same # of points and UY?

 

[Matty B13]

They don’t have to invest large amounts of capital to renovate BWV or BCV to re-sell them in 2042. Many of you say the walking distance to EP alone is enough to buy. If I was DVD, I’d barely do anything in the way of renovations but increase the price and points charts significantly, and they’ll still sell like hot cakes. Just put some new bedding in the units, and call it a day.

Don't give DVC any ideas!!!!!!

I can see them doing this in a heart beat.

 

[anomamatt]

Do you know if it's a flip? Wasn't the $100 contract the same # of points and UY?

Yes. Good point! I doubt the same number of points and the same UY is a coincidence. And we know that broker is a flipper...

Talk about shady... they buy the contract themselves and then turn it around a couple weeks later asking for 40% above what they paid.

 

[crvetter]

Yes. Good point! I doubt the same number of points and the same UY is a coincidence. And we know that broker is a flipper...

Talk about shady... they buy the contract themselves and then turn it around a couple weeks later asking for 40% above what they paid.

Unless they did what DVC Resale Market did which was an Instant Buy Back Offer. Though I personally think that entire sale stank of conflicts of interest. At least DVC Resale Market the seller doesn't even list if they go that route.

 

[TexasChick123]

Same agents that brokered the $100 contract previously. Maybe I'll offer $101. ;-)

So far, all of my (two) $100 offers have only led to "no thanks". But their starting at $144 gives me some hope.

Yes. Good point! I doubt the same number of points and the same UY is a coincidence. And we know that broker is a flipper...

Talk about shady... they buy the contract themselves and then turn it around a couple weeks later asking for 40% above what they paid.

Unless they did what DVC Resale Market did which was an Instant Buy Back Offer. Though I personally think that entire sale stank of conflicts of interest. At least DVC Resale Market the seller doesn't even list if they go that route.

I definitely think that is what’s happening here. It’s something I’m filing away in the event I ever go to buy or sell again to steer clear of them.

 

[hlhlaw07]

I definitely think that is what’s happening here. It’s something I’m filing away in the event I ever go to buy or sell again to steer clear of them.

I agree! The fact they estimated to the previous owner the contract was valued at around $130 (the price I believe it was listed at) and now they are listing it substantially higher when absolutely nothing has changed in between the 2 transactions. There is one data point to determine the market value and that is their own $100 purchase on the exact same contract, so if anything they should be listing at or lower than the previous listing price. But somehow now, when they are listing the contract, it’s worth more? If I was the previous owner of that contract I would seriously be considering filing a complaint with the licensing authority for that broker. This reeks of a breach of fiduciary duty.

 

[Bing Showei]

Unless they did what DVC Resale Market did which was an Instant Buy Back Offer. Though I personally think that entire sale stank of conflicts of interest. At least DVC Resale Market the seller doesn't even list if they go that route.

It’s something I’m filing away in the event I ever go to buy or sell again to steer clear of them.

Blasting this sale on social made zero sense. Did they generate some short term traffic? Maybe. Did they sow seeds of distrust and tarnish their new business venture. Absolutely. They come off as unabashedly self serving.

 

[GGGT]

......................... but speaking for the stroller set, it's really hard to beat walking or a reliable* mode of transportation that doesn't require folding a stroller and managing/carrying the small kid that goes in the stroller. ...............we bought BLT so we could walk to MK. When we stay in the BW area (BWV, BCV or Swan) we *always* walk to HS and EP. ........................

Exactly. Noting beats the opportunity to walk to a park imo.

 

[Hjs33]

How d

I agree! The fact they estimated to the previous owner the contract was valued at around $130 (the price I believe it was listed at) and now they are listing it substantially higher when absolutely nothing has changed in between the 2 transactions. There is one data point to determine the market value and that is their own $100 purchase on the exact same contract, so if anything they should be listing at or lower than the previous listing price. But somehow now, when they are listing the contract, it’s worth more? If I was the previous owner of that contract I would seriously be considering filing a complaint with the licensing authority for that broker. This reeks of a breach of fiduciary duty.
[/QUO

I agree! The fact they estimated to the previous owner the contract was valued at around $130 (the price I believe it was listed at) and now they are listing it substantially higher when absolutely nothing has changed in between the 2 transactions. There is one data point to determine the market value and that is their own $100 purchase on the exact same contract, so if anything they should be listing at or lower than the previous listing price. But somehow now, when they are listing the contract, it’s worth more? If I was the previous owner of that contract I would seriously be considering filing a complaint with the licensing authority for that broker. This reeks of a breach of fiduciary duty.

How do you know it’s the exact same contract?

Isn’t it possible these are two different contracts with the same points and use year? Most likely the last seller did not finance and needed to sell. The new listings probably did finance and are trying to break even on the loan.

 

[hlhlaw07]

How d


How do you know it’s the exact same contract?

Isn’t it possible these are two different contracts with the same points and use year? Most likely the last seller did not finance and needed to sell. The new listings probably did finance and are trying to break even on the loan.

Yep, anything is possible. Would be a very large coincidence. Since they have shown themselves to be “shady” with the first transaction, I’m not quick to give them the benefit of a coincidence for this one.

 

[Sandisw]

FWIW, I offered $100 on the 125 point contract when it was first listed. And my offer was declined.

Full disclosure that I own at Riviera (one of 5 resorts I own at), but I bought a fixed week (first week of December) to hedge against potential resale problems. That said, I would buy Riviera for $100 all day. Here is why:

Let's look at the math of staying at Riviera and let's say you are interested in a long weekend: April 2-5, 2020.

- This is 60 points in a Tower Studio.

- The cash rate for a Tower Studio is $1,995. No one pays rack rates, so let's assume you get an amazing 35% off. That ends up at $1,297.

- The DVC rental rate would be $1,020 from DVC Rental Store ($17/point).

At $100/point, you are at $2/year in upfront cost. Add $8.31 for dues. So $10.31 per point... your cost for that room in Year 1 is $618.60. (Yes, the dues will go up yearly, but so will the rack rate for the room).

You are 50% of the best potential cash rate you'll find and 40% off the current rental rate (and rental rates are currently way too low, IMO).

Even if you bought the contract to rent the points out, at $100, you will do quite well.

Of course, my big assumption is that people will want to stay at Riviera. I think that will be the case, but the resort isn't open. If the skyliner is a flop, Riviera could be in trouble. But if people do want to stay there, $100/point will be the bottom. I think $125-140 (in today's $) will be the ultimate settling price for resale.

Sounds like staying at RIV is a resort that you want to stay. I agree with you that buying resale and choosing a home resort is different for everyone and while I would never pay for RIV with it's limitations for my use, I might consider it (as I stated) if my children every decided it was a must for them. But, I also own enough points to stay elsewhere.

Curious, would this be your first contract? Or do you own points already? I think the ultimate value of RIV on resale market will not be known for a few years, until people have owned for a while, there are more resale contracts sold, and the effect on ability to book when that is your only option is known.

Keep us posted if you end up getting one for the price you want to pay!!! Good luck!!!

 

[Hjs33]

Yep, anything is possible. Would be a very large coincidence. Since they have shown themselves to be “shady” with the first transaction, I’m not quick to give them the benefit of a coincidence for this one.

How were they shady with the first transaction? Do you know something or are you just guessing something isn’t right?

 

[Bing Showei]

How were they shady with the first transaction? Do you know something or are you just guessing something isn’t right?

Let’s give the broker the benefit of the doubt and assume they were different contracts.

As a broker, there is the fiduciary responsibility to complete a sale on terms that first serves the interest of the owners and buyers. This does not necessitate a broker getting top dollar for the seller or best price for the buyer, but it does suggest that there should be some measure of fair market value.

The question becomes this: did this broker see $100 as fair market value? I see two possibilities.

One, they did believe that $100 was was what the market would bear, that this was fair market value, and that this was the best offer their client could get. Or two, they intentionally paid the seller a sub-market level price to serve first their own interest in making money on the sale beyond their commission.

The reasons I fall squarely into the latter-reasoning are that:

1- the contract spent next to no time on the market at the initial asking price - how could it have possibly had time to suss out the market?
2- the buyer is a known Disney timeshare flipper who now owns the new firm that “sold” this contract - clear conflict of interest
3- the buyer and broker have a long history of working very closely together at her previous brokerage firm where she moved large volumes of his flipped/stripped contracts
4- anonomatt mentioned making an offer for the exact amount it sold for but was rejected only to have the contract sell, to the owner of the firm, for the same price
5- the owner/buyer and broker are both old hands in this business and very familiar with the Disney timeshare product, the likelihood they misjudged a product’s value by 44% seems unlikely
6- once believing that a 125 point contract that an owner paid $184/point plus closing costs for was worth only $100/point, the same broker now suddenly sees the value of the exact same size contract valued at 44% more

All of this is circumstantial, I recognize that. But the decision by the brokerage firm to broadcast this sale to the public for all the free publicity it generated... and let’s be honest, this sale put this unknown firm on the map... has only shined a spotlight on it. And under scrutiny, the understandable conclusion people will draw is that this deal was “stank” to quote auroraborealis.