Disney really is the best

[mj2vacation]

Not to beat a dead horse, but why do people keep talking about "buying" DVC?
They are paying an upfront rental fee to DVC to be allowed to pay their MF's for twenty to forty years, no...? Then they, or their heirs, must pay another upfront rental fee, maybe, at Disney's discretion.
But there is zero ownership involved.

We can split hairs all day, but in reality, there is a deed involved. You can search them all day long on the orange co website.

I think we all get it, it doesn't work for you. You are entitled to your opinion.

95% of the world thinks timeshare is a scam, yet here we are talking about how great it is. So clearly different opinions are not a bad thing.

 

[rickandcindy23]

My Disney OKW expires 2042. That is the soonest date for expiration for any DVC resort. I will be pretty old by then, and our daughter will be my age. I think we will be okay with the expiration date of OKW.

 

[silentg]

We have an annual Season Pass, which we can go M-F to all 4 parks with blackout days. The good thing Disney did this year for Annual pass holders was a 20% discount on food and merchandise. This was good for us since we didn't need to buy a Tables in Wonderland card. We went to Hollywood Studios yesterday to see the Great Movie Ride, for the last time and we had dinner at the Brown Derby. We get Florida Resident prices on our annual pass since we live in Florida. People ask us why we have a timeshare at OL when we live in the area. I think it's like a membership to a club.we are able to use the facilities at OL for day trips and golf. IMHO OL is one of the best timeshares in Florida.
Silentg

 

[dagger1]

We can split hairs all day, but in reality, there is a deed involved. You can search them all day long on the orange co website.

I think we all get it, it doesn't work for you. You are entitled to your opinion.

95% of the world thinks timeshare is a scam, yet here we are talking about how great it is. So clearly different opinions are not a bad thing.

Don't mean to split hairs and varied opinions are what make the world interesting. I get that renting DVC works for you (until it doesn't when it expires). But my question was about the use of the words "buying" and "ownership", and how something that disappears after a period of time can be considered "best" (per the OP.) A deed that expires is a recorded rental agreement, no?

 

[silentg]

A timeshare RTU is a good option. We have two timeshare weeks that have expiration dates. As in our case, when these weeks expire we will be elderly and will be glad not to have them anymore. We had our first timeshare expire and we didn't renew. We enjoyed the time we had it and don't feel bad about it. There are so many different kinds of timeshares. Just as there are many places to visit.
Silentg

 

[vacationhopeful]

You can record many items .. liens against a property; a contract for services against a property; covenants & restrictions on a property you sold.

Mostly the residual value of a timeshare is very close to ZERO. Age of the resort, condition of the facilities, phase of life for the owners, style of the vacation offered ... like nudist colonies have lost ANY POSSIBLE appeal to me since I have seen more OLD PEOPLE bodies full of flab and scars.

 

[mj2vacation]

A deed that expires is a recorded rental agreement, no?

Nope. Still a deed.

 

[Braindead]

. like nudist colonies have lost ANY POSSIBLE appeal to me since I have seen more OLD PEOPLE bodies full of flab and scars.

I didn't know you had to go to a nudist colony to see that. Practically any resort any pool. Especially your snowbird weeks

 

[vacationhopeful]

I didn't know you had to go to a nudist colony to see that. Practically any resort any pool. Especially your snowbird weeks

Touche .... but as a former lifeguard for 2 summers in my youth ... pool attire is not something I judge or really notice.... unless it involves 'cracks' ... frontal or rear view formats.

PS I almost got fired from my first lifeguard job .. I was cleaning the pool in a skimpy 2 piece suit a hour before opening. The BofD's wife stopped by to leave some snacks bar goodies AND objected to my Florida college bikini. Reminder her ... pool was NOT opened and this was NOT my guard bathing suit.

 

[Jason245]

Don't mean to split hairs and varied opinions are what make the world interesting. I get that renting DVC works for you (until it doesn't when it expires). But my question was about the use of the words "buying" and "ownership", and how something that disappears after a period of time can be considered "best" (per the OP.) A deed that expires is a recorded rental agreement, no?

All timeshares are a simple financial arraignment. To be honest having an end date is probably more appealing to some..because at least you know when obligations end and what period to amortize over..

And given that these are interval ownerships. . Everything is a very weak ownership. Per say.

At end of day.. (not counting time value of money)

Take your buy in price divide by years you plan on using and add that to annual mf. That is your cash rental price for that year.

If you can get that same price without a commitment.. great don't buy. .if you cant..and fully intend to use.. then buy (and the savings is your roi)..



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

 

[Dean]

Corporate DVC is very smart at marketing .... and will look HARD at making an offer to extend an original OWNER or direct family member's DVC expiring ownership by RESELLING the points back to them. If the original family brought at $35 per point and the offer to extend is $XXX per point (where DVC has spent almost no DOLLARS on marketing or commissions send a new certificate and update the computer records) verse selling those points for say, $XXX per point ... DVC would do fine. And I am not saying that the exact terms of ownership would NOT be absolutely the same as the original certificate. DVC might require a additional full price purchase ALSO ... so a 123 point contract might have to be upgraded to a 231 point contract. And/or DVC might alter (increase the number of) points required to book resorts & unit sizes.

I do NOT see DVC saying "Farewell, Good bye" to these very long term DVC families who owned their points for 15 or 20 or 25 plus years .... esp if prices drop on the resale market as the expiration dates approach the "Drop Dead" date.

Disney is NOT going to tear down all the DVC resorts ... could seriously remodel or alter the theme of resorts which could be due to outdated theme park, outdated design (handicap or maintenance issues), structural issues of a building, etc. The Animal Kingdom Park is a big land hog and very expensive to operate ... and part of the DVC resort theme... could be either expanded or just totally terminated. Or the Contemporary Resort (the oldest hotel?) with the monorail running thru it ... on that expensive real estate next to the Magic Kingdom.

The Orlando park opened in 1971 .... designed in the 1960s. I was living 35 miles from NORTH of the parks for over a year when Disney dropped the rope. Things CHANGED drastically in Central Florida after October, 1971 ... not so much in 1971 or the following couple of years ... but the area drastically was altered within 5 years...new interstates, local roads, airports, schools, towns built. Orlando Airport is NOT MCO (was McCoy Air Force Base in 1971)... Orlando Airport today services mostly private planes. The larger airport for that area in 1970 was Daytona Beach International Airport ... still there with a commercial flight or two daily ... but TODAY most flights are due to Emory Riddle University which sits with direct access to the runways... a school which has expanded from its 1971 days...when I dated a Vietnam vet going to school there.

Almost 46 years for WDW Magic Kingdom Park ... less for the oldest DVC resort incantation... I am sure changes will happen ... if I really, really knew the future for the DVC resorts .. I could make a fortune. Meanwhile, I will just keep using my 90 DVC/AKV points.

You give them more credit than I do but we'll see. Certainly the OKW extension was a bust measured by participation.

Nope. Still a deed.

Technically a deed but more of a trust in function.

 

[ljmiii]

Not to beat a dead horse, but why do people keep talking about "buying" DVC?...But there is zero ownership involved.

No timeshare purchase is 'ownership' in the sense you seem to mean. DVC owners have a known end date but all timeshare 'owners' are subject to the whims of the company that actually owns and/or manages the property.

MVCI is certainly not the worst of the timeshare bunch. But we saw with the introduction of MVCI's DP program - and more importantly how MVCI chose to implement it - that Marriott had no problem overriding what the governing docs said about their customer's 'ownership', then changing the docs to meet their needs, then persuading the Florida legislature to change their timeshare laws to retroactively make everything they did nice and legal.

So yes, some properties are governed by docs that state the timeshares are RTUs with rights reverting to the original owner/developer, some are RTUs with rights distributed to the buyers, and some have no end date. But the 'ownership' of all of them differ only in degree not in kind.

 

[dagger1]

... So yes, some properties are governed by docs that state the timeshares are RTUs with rights reverting to the original owner/developer, some are RTUs with rights distributed to the buyers, and some have no end date. But the 'ownership' of all of them differ only in degree not in kind.

Thanks for the clarification. I guess if I (and my family) like my Timeshare System/Developer enough to want to pass it down through inheritance, I will avoid RTU's. I appreciate the info.

 

[ajl189]

How were you able to sell at a profit when you purchased at cast discount? That's a violation of contract terms.

We owned 1000 points with Disney at one point. We made money on every contract when we sold.

Our Grand Californian contracts sold for nearly double what we paid for them, not factoring any use of them and the developer points that we received when we purchased.

Granted we received a cast discount on that purchase, but anyone who purchased Grand Cal, Beach Club, Grand Floridian are sitting pretty in regard to what they paid vs sale price.

DVC is a fairly liquid product. Very easy to sell. All 9 contacts that we sold were full price offers and we had contracts within 48 hours for all.

Marriott is our other favorite and even with us buying early on with an associate discount, we would lose money if we sold.

Is DVC the best for everyone in every situation ? Hell no. But for the niche of a niche that it fits for, it's hard to beat.

 

[mj2vacation]

How were you able to sell at a profit when you purchased at cast discount? That's a violation of contract terms.

It's not a violation of terms. I just sent an email to legal when I still worked there. They just try to prevent flipping.

We purchased ours for personal use, but after a few years decided to invest the money into a business. Can't complain. We used the heck out of ot!

Still have 200 points.

 

[blondietink]

Our first timeshare purchase was 12 years ago at DVC and it was great when our kids were little and we went to WDW at least once a year. We haven't been back to WDW in over 3 years and until they finish Star Wars land, we probably won't be back. Instead we have been using our DVC at Aulani in Hawaii. Yes, DVC has held it's value and the resorts are very nice, but the choices are limited to mostly Florida/Orlando.

We also own Vistana/Starwood. and find the resorts are just as nice, some better than DVC and the system is much more flexible and has more variety to pick from .... Mexico, Bahamas, Hawaii, California, Arizona, etc. Now with the Vistana merge into the ILG group, it's even better and with Starwood merging into Marriott, more choices on the hotel side. Both systems have their positives and negatives, but we are happy with our choices.

 

[Lisa P]

No timeshare purchase is 'ownership' in the sense you seem to mean. DVC owners have a known end date but all timeshare 'owners' are subject to the whims of the company that actually owns and/or manages the property.

When people own a condo (full ownership), they are "subject to the whims" of the HOA. Timeshare owners of a fixed-week of a condo in an HOA-managed resort, "subject to the whims" of the HOA in the same way. Deeded timeshares are "owned" since they include a deed to real estate, however broadly divided. One cannot dispute that these are "owners" in the traditional sense of ownership of real estate.

Vacation Clubs (like DVC) have always used language as a marketing ploy: DVC distanced themselves from Right-To-Use "timeshare" by describing DVC as a "vacation club" and a "piece of the magic", to assign a different social acceptability to their RTU timeshare. In the 1990s, some considered it deceptive for it's time, and all considered it very effective marketing. The DVC product offers RTU rights to a leasehold agreement, not to a deed, and so it is not "ownership" in real estate. This has always been a point of contention for some. Whatever DVC calls itself, it is a RTU timeshare and subject to timeshare laws, so its purchases must be recorded with the county. That does not make it "ownership" in the real estate sense.

In recent years, DVC chose to distinguished rights to the leasehold-only vs. rights within the Club. Again, they used language as a marketing ploy. This time, they used the terms "owners" vs. "members" in order to assign a "members-only" exclusivity to developer purchasers. Again, their selection of words ("owner" when there is no real estate ownership) is a point of contention as it appears deceptive.

After all, with DVC (or any RTU vacation club) there are no deed owners, no real estate owners outside of the developer, only lessees. Mostly very happy lessees but lessees, nonetheless.

 

[dagger1]

When people own a condo (full ownership), they are "subject to the whims" of the HOA. Timeshare owners of a fixed-week of a condo in an HOA-managed resort, "subject to the whims" of the HOA in the same way. Deeded timeshares are "owned" since they include a deed to real estate, however broadly divided. One cannot dispute that these are "owners" in the traditional sense of ownership of real estate.

Vacation Clubs (like DVC) have always used language as a marketing ploy: DVC distanced themselves from Right-To-Use "timeshare" by describing DVC as a "vacation club" and a "piece of the magic", to assign a different social acceptability to their RTU timeshare. In the 1990s, some considered it deceptive for it's time, and all considered it very effective marketing. The DVC product offers RTU rights to a leasehold agreement, not to a deed, and so it is not "ownership" in real estate. This has always been a point of contention for some. Whatever DVC calls itself, it is a RTU timeshare and subject to timeshare laws, so its purchases must be recorded with the county. That does not make it "ownership" in the real estate sense.

In recent years, DVC chose to distinguished rights to the leasehold-only vs. rights within the Club. Again, they used language as a marketing ploy. This time, they used the terms "owners" vs. "members" in order to assign a "members-only" exclusivity to developer purchasers. Again, their selection of words ("owner" when there is no real estate ownership) is a point of contention as it appears deceptive.

After all, with DVC (or any RTU vacation club) there are no deed owners, no real estate owners outside of the developer, only lessees. Mostly very happy lessees but lessees, nonetheless.

Thank you! Very informative!

 

[chalee94]

After all, with DVC (or any RTU vacation club) there are no deed owners, no real estate owners outside of the developer, only lessees. Mostly very happy lessees but lessees, nonetheless.

Well, "lessees" who actually do own an asset that in many cases they can sell for more than they paid for it. I don't have a traditional real estate deed but I do have something that is still worth thousands of dollars that I can convey to another "owner." For most of us simpletons, that is what "ownership" means.

While some are eager to pass a decrepit old building on to their heirs (with the increasing likelihood of major repairs and renovation), having an end date seems like a workable tradeoff for other people who want to limit some of the risk.

It's only a "marketing ploy" because so many of the deeded real estate timeshares have such a bad reputation for owners who want to get out and find it's a lot more difficult than they expected. Generally, you find out within the first hour of research about DVC that it's more like a lease arrangement with a specified end date, so it's amusing that you consider it to be misleading.

I have one DVC contract that should expire around the time that I do, which works fine for me - and if I decide to sell it, it would be under contract by the end of that day. I also have one deeded timeshare that might be challenging to unload if I decide to get rid of it (but fortunately, it only cost a dollar - and it cost that because I bought a liability more than an asset, deeded or not). But I understand what I bought in each case and each one has worked great so far for its intended purpose.

 

[dagger1]

Well, "lessees" who actually do own an asset that in many cases they can sell for more than they paid for it. I don't have a traditional real estate deed but I do have something that is still worth thousands of dollars that I can convey to another "owner." For most of us simpletons, that is what "ownership" means.

While some are eager to pass a decrepit old building on to their heirs (with the increasing likelihood of major repairs and renovation), having an end date seems like a workable tradeoff for other people who want to limit some of the risk.

It's only a "marketing ploy" because so many of the deeded real estate timeshares have such a bad reputation for owners who want to get out and find it's a lot more difficult than they expected. Generally, you find out within the first hour of research about DVC that it's more like a lease arrangement with a specified end date, so it's amusing that you consider it to be misleading.

I have one DVC contract that should expire around the time that I do, which works fine for me - and if I decide to sell it, it would be under contract by the end of that day. I also have one deeded timeshare that might be challenging to unload if I decide to get rid of it (but fortunately, it only cost a dollar - and it cost that because I bought a liability more than an asset, deeded or not). But I understand what I bought in each case and each one has worked great so far for its intended purpose.

All timeshares "expire" at the owner's death, heirs do not have to accept them. I plan on leaving, specified in my will, any timeshares my children don't want (possibly one or all Wyndham CWA contracts) to the Timeshare Developer/Manager/HOA. However TS's that my children do want, such as Hyatt fixed ski/floating summer weeks and Marriott Ko'Olina I can and will leave to them. Per selling a "Vacation Club" near it's expiration date, it's hard to understand why anybody would buy it.

 

[Dean]

All timeshares "expire" at the owner's death, heirs do not have to accept them. I plan on leaving, specified in my will, any timeshares my children don't want (possibly one or all Wyndham CWA contracts) to the Timeshare Developer/Manager/HOA. However TS's that my children do want, such as Hyatt fixed ski/floating summer weeks and Marriott Ko'Olina I can and will leave to them. Per selling a "Vacation Club" near it's expiration date, it's hard to understand why anybody would buy it.

That is an ineffective method of risk control in this situation since they don't have to accept it and most wouldn't unless it had real value anyway. The estate wouldn't be able to close until this issue were truly settled.

 

[dagger1]

That is an ineffective method of risk control in this situation since they don't have to accept it and most wouldn't unless it had real value anyway. The estate wouldn't be able to close until this issue were truly settled.

Thanks for the tip. But am I correct that heirs do not have to accept TS's either if in the estate at death?

 

[Dean]

Thanks for the tip. But am I correct that heirs do not have to accept TS's either if in the estate at death?

I'm not a lawyer but that's my understanding. Just the estate cannot be settled and proceeds dispersed until this is taken care of. What I've been told is the courts can remove it and often will after 1-1.5 yrs if petitioned to do so. There are ways to get this done if it has not value and has been non performing (fees not being paid). I don't think they're normally going after assets but they could. This is something to discuss with your executor and leave clear directions on.

 

[chalee94]

Per selling a "Vacation Club" near it's expiration date, it's hard to understand why anybody would buy it.

As some of the more knowledgeable TUG members like to say, "the value of a timeshare is in its use."

If you want to be onsite at WDW, there's only one game in town and they won't sell you the land underneath, regardless (unless you pony up several million to buy in at the Golden Oak development.) DVC is a niche product that has an appeal to those with a bit of a Disney obsession. Even if it doesn't fit the constraints for your definition of "real estate", it does have a financial value as an asset that has endured - making words like "buy" and "owner" completely appropriate. It will eventually hit a value of zero, which should not come as a surprise to anyone who is semi-conscious.

(But sure - it's kinda like how it's hard to understand why a poster who claims to have no interest in beating a dead horse keeps doing so in a forum for a timeshare system that they claim to have no interest in - "mild obsession" would again seem to be the most accurate answer...)

 

[mj2vacation]

Golden Oak was deannexed from RCID before development