Let's speculate about Polynesian some more!

[KimMcGowan]

I have purposely not responded in over 6 months because I never thought there was a question as to the new tower being same association. At the DVC meeting in Dec 0f 2022 there was a slide show with labels clearly indicating the tower part of the same association. Than this past December we have a Disney executive stating most likely same association. Yet we have those on this board that came up with some amusing theories that this was just errors or attempts to miss direct. I am more of an Occam's razor kind of guy, so when we are being told that the tower is in the same association it makes no sense to me to believe otherwise. By the way I have a bet with myself that there will be someone who will reply to this post stating how wrong I am....nothing surprises me anymore.

Just as I stated, there was a slide show in 2022 and it labeled the new Tower as part of the Poly DVC. At the time, those who were convinced the Tower would be a separate association were quick to state it was just a minor person who probably miss labeled the slides. By the way, I won the bet. I owe myself one Diet Coke, which is the max I will bet anyone on anything.

One of the things I love about this board is that everyone is generally kind. I kinda think we went off the rails a little in our responses to these quotes. I personally agree with them 100% and have made multiple posts about the slide in question. Let’s try to remember that we are all here because we love Disney.

 

[Massachusetts]

Just to clarify, Disney doesn't pay dues per se. They only chip in if the amount collected from regular non-Disney owners isn't enough to pay the bills during that calendar year. Because of that, I honestly don't know whether the amount of dues that would have been paid by a new owner enters into their ROFR decision making or not.

How can this be? Disney must have an accounting transaction for their proportional interest in dues in unsold DVC inventory, the ROFR inventory and foreclosed inventory.

 

[Sandisw]

How can this be? Disney must have an accounting transaction for their proportional interest in dues in unsold DVC inventory, the ROFR inventory and foreclosed inventory.

The way it is set up is that DVD is allowed, under FL law, to provide a developer guarantee. This guarantee provides owners with the assurance that whatever estimated number is calculated in December for the following year will be all the owner pays.

My RIV dues are $8.85/pt. If the expenses for 2024 were to exceed that, then any shortfall DVD will pay. They won't ask me for more. In exchange, DVD doesn't pay dues for the points they own.

That doesn't mean they pay nothing at the end of the year....if there is a shortfall, then that is what they pay. And, if you look at the operating budget, and the guarantee, our guarantee is usually a little less (so they go in knowing about what they should pay).

But, as I said, since they do this every year, with every resort, I have to imagine that the actual cost to them for the unsold points they own that have been declared, is less than what they would pay if they choose not to offer it.

 

[mkatsy]

One of the things I love about this board is that everyone is generally kind. I kinda think we went off the rails a little in our responses to these quotes. I personally agree with them 100% and have made multiple posts about the slide in question. Let’s try to remember that we are all here because we love Disney.

the antagonistic taunting tone of the message was the issue, not the content. Speak to others the way you would like to be spoken to ......... or brace for impact.

 

[CanadianDVC2024]

Just to clarify, Disney doesn't pay dues per se. They only chip in if the amount collected from regular non-Disney owners isn't enough to pay the bills during that calendar year. Because of that, I honestly don't know whether the amount of dues that would have been paid by a new owner enters into their ROFR decision making or not.

Due to it being a February use year, the seller had already paid the 2024 dues with 2024 points untouched and loaded and had to be compensated for them back. So Disney was essentially paying for those dues. Which, I think actually increased the price per point for them to around $133-135?

 

[CarolynFH]

Due to it being a February use year, the seller had already paid the 2024 dues with 2024 points untouched and loaded and had to be compensated for them back. So Disney was essentially paying for those dues. Which, I think actually increased the price per point for them to around $133-135?

Okay, if part of the purchase price included reimbursement for 2024 dues, yes, you're right, in that case Disney did pay the 2024 dues when they exercised ROFR on that contract. And so I'm sure they considered the total cost when choosing whether to exercise ROFR or not, and apparently $133-135 pp was acceptable to them.

To clarify for those who are new to DVC, that contract having a February UY had nothing to do with the seller having already paid 2024 dues. Dues are assessed and paid on a calendar year basis, so a seller with a December UY would also have had to pay 2024 dues prior to sale, whether the December 2024 points had been used or not. Whether the buyer reimbursed the seller for 2024 dues would have been a matter of negotiation, as always.

 

[SL6827]

Have no dog in this fight, but I hope Disney does keep the new tower as how they lead most to believe it will be at that meeting, the same. Hoping they keep their word, which makes them look respectable.

 

[LoveToDisney]

If they keep it the same, the 11 month window won’t mean much for the new Poly Tower owners considering a flood gate will open up from the first poly DVC owners to swamp whatever points will gradually be declared. You can definitely kiss availability goodbye for 7 month window for a few years until most points have been declared.
I understand why they would put both Poly and Tower together since the first Poly was incomplete without 1 and 2 bedrooms but the process will be messy…..

 

[EYL]

If I'm thinking this correctly, I think the beginning of PVB ROFR is a sign that it *will* be the same association. If DVD must own 2% of the total points in a resort, the more PVB points they ROFR back, means that they can sell more Tower points when it's added to the association. I mean, if PVB has 4,000,000 points, it means DVD must own at least 80,000 points now. If they plan to add another 4,000,000 points from the Tower, all DVD needs to do is ROFR 80,000 points from PVB for cheap and they can sell all Tower points. This may also mean that they expect the demand to be high for the Tower.

 

[HyperspaceMountainPilot]

This may also mean that they expect the demand to be high for the Tower.

Perhaps they noticed this thread is over 80 pages.

 

[mkatsy]

Perhaps they noticed this thread is over 80 pages.

I spy with my little - Fireworks view from the top of a tower … don’t get cocky Disney!

 

[HyperspaceMountainPilot]

I spy with my little - Fireworks view from the top of a tower … don’t get cocky Disney!

What is this a rendering of?

 

[Chili327]

What is this a rendering of?

I believe that is Epic Universe?

 

[mkatsy]

What is this a rendering of?

Helios at Epic Universe

 

[HyperspaceMountainPilot]

Helios at Epic Universe

Reminds me of the Miracosta.

 

[maui22]

If I'm thinking this correctly, I think the beginning of PVB ROFR is a sign that it *will* be the same association. If DVD must own 2% of the total points in a resort, the more PVB points they ROFR back, means that they can sell more Tower points when it's added to the association. I mean, if PVB has 4,000,000 points, it means DVD must own at least 800,000 points now. If they plan to add another 4,000,000 points from the Tower, all DVD needs to do is ROFR 800,000 points from PVB for cheap and they can sell all Tower points. This may also mean that they expect the demand to be high for the Tower.

I think you mean they need to own 80,000 not 800,000 for each portion.

 

[achinforsomebacon]

The way it is set up is that DVD is allowed, under FL law, to provide a developer guarantee. This guarantee provides owners with the assurance that whatever estimated number is calculated in December for the following year will be all the owner pays.

My RIV dues are $8.85/pt. If the expenses for 2024 were to exceed that, then any shortfall DVD will pay. They won't ask me for more. In exchange, DVD doesn't pay dues for the points they own.

That doesn't mean they pay nothing at the end of the year....if there is a shortfall, then that is what they pay. And, if you look at the operating budget, and the guarantee, our guarantee is usually a little less (so they go in knowing about what they should pay).

But, as I said, since they do this every year, with every resort, I have to imagine that the actual cost to them for the unsold points they own that have been declared, is less than what they would pay if they choose not to offer it.

Does this mean the dues per point is based on taking the total estimated cost for the year and dividing by the points not owned by DVD vs dividing by the total points for the entire resort?

 

[HyperspaceMountainPilot]

Does this mean the dues per point is based on taking the total estimated cost for the year and dividing by the points not owned by DVD vs dividing by the total points for the entire resort?

I was wondering that as well. If they sell 500,000 OKW points, will dues go down?

 

[AwfulWaffle]

will dues go down?

Disney is consistent about one thing, nothing even goes down. They may dangle a carrot from time to time but you can bet Disney will win in the end

 

[EYL]

I think you mean they need to own 80,000 not 800,000 for each portion.

YES! You're absolutely right! Thanks for the catch. Edited.