OKW Extension Papers & Lockout Mentioned

[Sandisw]

I don't see any way to adjust UY of the points and I don't think it's matter anyway as that'd still be more points than villas in the 2042 category the last 2 years.

I've long predicted they'll limit banking the last 2 possibly 3 years and borrowing the last year possibly 2. They could also give an out to those wanting to not pay dues and give up a that last year of points. They could prorate the number of points based on UY compared to the end date with a comensurate decrease in dues or they could just have a free for all with the unlucky and poor planners simply losing out. The latter is likely begging for legal action so I see it as being the least likely of all variables.

Since the ownership is actually tied to the land lease and they extended the land lease, I do feel one could make a valid argument they still owned without paying up. But DVC could certainly throw their weight around and make it not worth fighting with them. Likely they'd compromise with those owners. DVC has a history of making certain offers contingent on non disclosure but I think we'd hear about this type of deal if it happened much at all.

They can.

DVD changed the rules and have the power to change a UY now, so I don’t see why they can’t do it for that last year if they strategically stop banking an borrowing.

That means the number of points for that last year of ownership would indeed match the inventory, wouldn’t it?

And, with the option to trade out still, there would not be more than a 1:1 match, any different then there is now when people bank or borrow.

I do agree that those original owners who want to still use will end up getting to do so, at least in part, because DVd might have a vested interest in just making some level of concession with them.

 

[WDWFERN]

And just when I had convinced myself two 150 point contracts was the way to go to take advantage of having relatively inexpensive direct SAP that we would be fine using at OKW, or if things were available at 7 months taking advantage of those opportunities. But not sure taking on what sounds like could be a mess in time at OKW is worth that couple thousand dollar buy in savings.

So back to leaning toward RIV add on after all. Ugh the pendulum just keeps on going back and forth…

 

[Cfabar1]

And just when I had convinced myself two 150 point contracts was the way to go to take advantage of having relatively inexpensive direct SAP that we would be fine using at OKW, or if things were available at 7 months taking advantage of those opportunities. But not sure taking on what sounds like could be a mess in time at OKW is worth that couple thousand dollar buy in savings.

So back to leaning toward RIV add on after all. Ugh the pendulum just keeps on going back and forth…

That is the life of a DVC owner.... A week ago I would have said "I will never buy AKV", now I am considering needing another 100-150 points there...

 

[Sandisw]

And just when I had convinced myself two 150 point contracts was the way to go to take advantage of having relatively inexpensive direct SAP that we would be fine using at OKW, or if things were available at 7 months taking advantage of those opportunities. But not sure taking on what sounds like could be a mess in time at OKW is worth that couple thousand dollar buy in savings.

So back to leaning toward RIV add on after all. Ugh the pendulum just keeps on going back and forth…

If you are buying a 2057 contract then I would assume you won’t be impacted.

We did consider the OKW, but then I realized home resort is too important to me and we are back to RIV…and even that is off for now.

 

[Dean]

Thank you. I read that earlier and had forgotten. It seems to me that some of the useful life items already exceed my years of availability. Am I reading it wrong? Three items have a useful life that exceeds 18 years. I see there is a range but I am assuming that is to capture the various components that are collapsed into these line items.

Insurances are tending to require roof replacements at 10-15 years in many cases for homes, not sure how this is working in the resort world. Normally timeshares cycle villa refurbishment with softgoods (furniture, carpet, drapes) every 5-7 years and a full refurbishment every 10-14 years. The better ones tend to be on the shorter end and the questionable ones on the later part of that timeframe. Historically DVC hasn't shown quite the routine planning and scheduling opting more for an add needed schedule though they've seemed to do better lately. To my knowledge they have never released any scheduling plans other than things actually about to be performed.

 

[Dean]

DVD changed the rules and have the power to change a UY now, so I don’t see why they can’t do it for that last year if they strategically stop banking an borrowing.

That means the number of points for that last year of ownership would indeed match the inventory, wouldn’t it?

And, with the option to trade out still, there would not be more than a 1:1 match, any different then there is now when people bank or borrow.

I do agree that those original owners who want to still use will end up getting to do so, at least in part, because DVd might have a vested interest in just making some level of concession with them.

I don't see that they have that ability for existing contracts still owned by individuals for the legacy resorts but it wouldn't matter. You have to eliminate some of the total points from the equation or extend the usage of the resort to allow the potential for the points to be used. And you have to account for or credit dues proportionally. If you were going to do so by changing the UY, you'd have to do so several years in advance AND you'd need the owners on board with the proportional loss of points at the time.

 

[Sandisw]

I don't see that they have that ability for existing contracts still owned by individuals for the legacy resorts but it wouldn't matter. You have to eliminate some of the total points from the equation or extend the usage of the resort to allow the potential for the points to be used. And you have to account for or credit dues proportionally. If you were going to do so by changing the UY, you'd have to do so several years in advance AND you'd need the owners on board with the proportional loss of points at the time.

Dues are calendar year, so not sure what that has to do with it. All owners will pay the same dues regardless for 2041 and January of 2042 regardless of UY.

If banking and borrowing is stopped a few years ahead of time and all owners get their 2041 points for use Feb 1st to January 31st, then all owners are getting a full year to use their last set of points.

As it stands now, if you have a Dec UY, and nothing changes, you get two months and that is it. You are not entitled to any exception unless DVD decides to grant it. To me, it’s easier to simply let all points become Feb UY points for use. And I don’t see any legal reason DVD can’t do that and why any owner would want to prevent it.

It’s also way I think they will make the home resort period much longer the last few years to give owners of the 2042 resort a chance to book since by then, there will be resorts that can trade in, that blocks resale owners from using.

My guess would be we see a home resort of 7 months and trades at 4.

 

[Dean]

Dues are calendar year, so not sure what that has to do with it. All owners will pay the same dues regardless for 2041 and January of 2042 regardless of UY.

If banking and borrowing is stopped a few years ahead of time and all owners get their 2041 points for use Feb 1st to January 31st, then all owners are getting a full year to use their last set of points.

As it stands now, if you have a Dec UY, and nothing changes, you get two months and that is it. You are not entitled to any exception unless DVD decides to grant it. To me, it’s easier to simply let all points become Feb UY points for use. And I don’t see any legal reason DVD can’t do that and why any owner would want to prevent it.

It’s also way I think they will make the home resort period much longer the last few years to give owners of the 2042 resort a chance to book since by then, there will be resorts that can trade in, that blocks resale owners from using.

My guess would be we see a home resort of 7 months and trades at 4.

Dues are Calendar year based on the number of points so it'd still require an adjustment. I do believe there are a number of ways they could pull it off but my experience suggests that there will some people affected more than others and there will be drama. There is also precedence and contactual ability to have a lottery. I hope I'm around to enjoy the fun and drama.

 

[Sandisw]

Dues are Calendar year based on the number of points so it'd still require an adjustment. I do believe there are a number of ways they could pull it off but my experience suggests that there will some people affected more than others and there will be drama. There is also precedence and contactual ability to have a lottery. I hope I'm around to enjoy the fun and drama.

It will be interesting that is for sure.

 

[NY Pirate Princess]

Insurances are tending to require roof replacements at 10-15 years in many cases for homes, not sure how this is working in the resort world. Normally timeshares cycle villa refurbishment with softgoods (furniture, carpet, drapes) every 5-7 years and a full refurbishment every 10-14 years. The better ones tend to be on the shorter end and the questionable ones on the later part of that timeframe. Historically DVC hasn't shown quite the routine planning and scheduling opting more for an add needed schedule though they've seemed to do better lately. To my knowledge they have never released any scheduling plans other than things actually about to be performed.

Understood. But there is a "useful life remaining" category too which exceeds my okw useful life! At some point, soon if not already, budget items will be included in dues for items I won't have use of. Other contracts will go to 2057 and have the benefit of repairs and replacements I helped pay for.

I can't decide if this indicates Disney is waiting for lawsuit before they adjust dues, intend to offer all non-original 2042 owners a contract extension at a particular cost, or I am not understanding the limited I formation provided by DVD.

I know owners got a small credit for COVID related closures. Will this be the same thing? I will get $12.52 credit for my last year's dues? (Totally random useless number cited.)

 

[WDWFERN]

So is the thinking that the dues for the 2057 contracts will have a significant jump at some point? They are already relatively high, but will the remaining members with 2057 contracts have to ultimately make up the difference as the members with 2042 fall off?

 

[WDWFERN]

If you are buying a 2057 contract then I would assume you won’t be impacted.

We did consider the OKW, but then I realized home resort is too important to me and we are back to RIV…and even that is off for now

Thanks for the insight, It was tough to pass up OKW, as we do need to add on now for an upcoming large family trip at RIV, so I can’t wait for the next round of incentives without worrying I’ll lose the ability to book what we want while the room we need is available even inside 7 months. But I also wonder if long term the home resort priority could come into play even more, especially with unknowns about potential trust model.

Adding to that some uncertainty about what will happen with dues, I think I’m back to RIV. Which good news for everyone else waiting for better incentives next round. If I add on now, I’m sure it definitely increases the likelihood of an awesome promotion next round.

 

[Shoktherapy]

 

[Dean]

So is the thinking that the dues for the 2057 contracts will have a significant jump at some point? They are already relatively high, but will the remaining members with 2057 contracts have to ultimately make up the difference as the members with 2042 fall off?

Likely not. All contracts will still be owned by someone whether it's DVC or otherwise. It's not like those contracts stop existing. This discussion will come around again for 2057 but the round coming up for 2042 should give some insights into what to expect. But there are things that could happen to availability and locations related to post 2042, esp if DVC owns a large enough % to close down a portion or to use them for other things like College housing like they used to some other nearby areas. Historically DVC has been fairly reasonable and appropriate when there were larger variables so I tend to think even how they approach this will be at least reasonable. History also tells me that there are those that will disagree, vehemently, including on DIS.

 

[Cfabar1]

Understood. But there is a "useful life remaining" category too which exceeds my okw useful life! At some point, soon if not already, budget items will be included in dues for items I won't have use of. Other contracts will go to 2057 and have the benefit of repairs and replacements I helped pay for.

I can't decide if this indicates Disney is waiting for lawsuit before they adjust dues, intend to offer all non-original 2042 owners a contract extension at a particular cost, or I am not understanding the limited I formation provided by DVD.

I know owners got a small credit for COVID related closures. Will this be the same thing? I will get $12.52 credit for my last year's dues? (Totally random useless number cited.)

The bigger mess will be owners who knowingly purchased a 2042 resale contract after the extension. They specifically chose to buy a product that would expire in 2042, and Disney (through ROFR) allowed them to purchase it. So, in my view, Disney has an obligation to not charge those owners (as well as those who bought before Disney changed the terms as well) for "useful life" expenses that they will never have access to. I am actually surprised that Disney couldn't have made a condition of any resale purchase be that the points were some how converted/reeducated/whatever phrase into a 2057 agreement/extension.

The whole thing is a mess... but the executive team that created it is likely long gone, and certainly will by 2042, so what do they care...

By the way, there's a reason why they didn't do this at other resorts at the same time as OKW let alone since... My suspicion is that even back then they recognized that the other resorts had much more intrinsic value than OKW would.

 

[Sandisw]

The bigger mess will be owners who knowingly purchased a 2042 resale contract after the extension. They specifically chose to buy a product that would expire in 2042, and Disney (through ROFR) allowed them to purchase it. So, in my view, Disney has an obligation to not charge those owners (as well as those who bought before Disney changed the terms as well) for "useful life" expenses that they will never have access to. I am actually surprised that Disney couldn't have made a condition of any resale purchase be that the points were some how converted/reeducated/whatever phrase into a 2057 agreement/extension.

The whole thing is a mess... but the executive team that created it is likely long gone, and certainly will by 2042, so what do they care...

By the way, there's a reason why they didn't do this at other resorts at the same time as OKW let alone since... My suspicion is that even back then they recognized that the other resorts had much more intrinsic value than OKW would.

Anyone who buys a 2042 contract now is buying one in which the original owner signed a quit claim deed back to Disney already.

So, those owners aren’t even part of the situation.

It’s the owners who did not sign and did not pay. By default, when DVD unilaterally agreed to extend the ground lease to 2057, they unilaterally obligated all owners to expenses to 2057.

Those that signed a quit claim did, or who wanted to do so now, are automatically done.

You can’t buy a 2042 contract resale without the seller, or a previous seller, having given up their right already to the extension.

Basically, an original owner of a 2042 contract can not sell it without signing the quit claim deed.

 

[Cfabar1]

Anyone who buys a 2042 contract now is buying one in which the original owner signed a quit claim deed back to Disney already.

So, those owners aren’t even part of the situation.

It’s the owners who did not sign and did not pay. By default, when DVD unilaterally agreed to extend the ground lease to 2057, they unilaterally obligated all owners to expenses to 2057.

Those that signed a quit claim did, or who wanted to do so now, are automatically done.

You can’t buy a 2042 contract resale without the seller, or a previous seller, having given up their right already to the extension.

Basically, an original owner of a 2042 contract can not sell it without signing the quit claim deed.

yes, but I could imagine owners with a 2042 expiration balking at paying into capital reserves for something they contractually won't be able to use. Is that spelled out in any documentation?

 

[Sandisw]

yes, but I could imagine owners with a 2042 expiration balking at paying into capital reserves for something they contractually won't be able to use. Is that spelled out in any documentation?

See, I don’t see those owners any different than anyone who owns and then sells. Yoy are paying for future expenses even when you may no longer own.

The 2042 OKW contracts being bought now are bought with the stipulation that you give it back to DVD in 2042, even though the contract goes to 2057.

Now, I am sure people might complain and it’s very possible it will be handled with different dues amount. And maybe these will be treated the same way.

But, at least IMO, those owners are completely different than someone who hasn’t signed away their rights.

 

[CastAStone]

I imagine nobody will want to be DVC President beginning in 2038 or so... That five year timeline from 2038-2043 is going to be a terrible job for someone to navigate!

Are you kidding? Crisis is my favorite kind of job to take. It’s never boring. You’re usually given a lot of leeway. And you can actually do things that are useful instead of being another damn cog.

Sign me up for that all day.

 

[CastAStone]

Insurances are tending to require roof replacements at 10-15 years in many cases for homes, not sure how this is working in the resort world.

Commercial is different. They weren’t dealing with the rampant fraud like residential. The biggest recent roofing change for Florida commercial real estate is that roofs are typically being covered on a depreciated basis rather than on a replacement basis. So they’ll cover a 20 year old roof with an expected 30 year life, but they’ll only pay out 1/3rd of the replacement cost.

You can still find replacement cost insurance in commercial in Florida, but the price difference is significant.

I have no idea what Disney is using.