RoFR back??

[Robbie Cottam]

Scratch what I was saying....the warranty deed does have the symbols for the contract that I had taken via ROFR. But, DVD has bought contracts back from owners without it being ROFR, or foreclosure.

I have also read over the years that if mistakes are made, and a new deed needs to be done, it can show up in a way it looks like a sale back to DVD.

What symbol is this and where is it located

 

[Robbie Cottam]

I’d much rather have the McRib be back than RoFR.

You can buy those at Walmart

 

[Epcot Forever Forever]

So short of there being some other program that none of us have heard of where Disney proactively tries to directly buy contracts nearing distress, but AREN'T considered transfers in-lieu of foreclosure, I don't know what else they would be but ROFR.

I'm always eager to learn more! So if anyone has insight that I'm missing, I'm all ears!

I assume some version of this:

https://dvcnews.com/resorts/old-key...c-offering-to-buy-back-old-key-west-contracts

 

[Galactic Reversal]

Hey friends - as the author of the post referenced on page 9 that I'm not allowed to quote because the anti-spam filter doesn't seem to like me, I'll add in with what I learned manually reviewing hundreds of contracts on the Orange County site. (Could a Mod ping me and help get that fixed so I can quote post 175 and 176?)

First things first: I do think that a more accurate description of the dataset is "Contracts where Disney was the Grantee, but it wasn't a foreclosure, and it wasn't a transfer in-lieu of foreclosure." and not necessarily that 100% of them are ROFR. There are definitely a couple in there that aren't ROFR, and are instead likely a buyer with buyer's remorse where Disney stepped in. (Looking at you, Doc 20230419978 at VGF and you Doc 20230005622 at RIV). But I do believe that most of them are ROFR until someone can give a better explanation for what's going on with them.

Foreclosures have a really distinct format. They are multi pages. There are newspaper filings of notice posted. Etc. Example of what a foreclosure looks like: Doc 20230380053

"Surrendered" Contracts when the owner gives it up in lieu of foreclosure also have a very distinct look to them. They are filed as "Warranty Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure". They look like this: Doc 20230381144

I didn't include any of those ("foreclosure" or "warranty deed transfer in lieu of foreclosure") in my dataset. All of the ones that I DID include look more like this: Doc 20230009656. This format looks just like a direct purchase agreement, but in reverse (where Disney is the grantee instead of the grantor). On most of them it even has the little palm tree and Mickey icons where input is needed just like everyone would recognize from when they bought direct.

So short of there being some other program that none of us have heard of where Disney proactively tries to directly buy contracts nearing distress, but AREN'T considered transfers in-lieu of foreclosure, I don't know what else they would be but ROFR.

I'm always eager to learn more! So if anyone has insight that I'm missing, I'm all ears!

Note: I tried to include direct links to the contracts referenced above, but the anti-spam filters prevented the reply :-( If you do a google search for orange county florida official records search you should be able to find the county website and search for the doc numbers I called out above.

Thanks for sharing these insights. It seemed like you put in an awful lot of work so I was a bit baffled at the thought that none of them were actually ROFR. The lack of the largest brokers corroborating any of them seems unlikely too. I’m not sure what to think, I haven’t spent much time looking at the comptroller data.

 

[Sandisw]

What symbol is this and where is it located

HAHA...I deleted the comment which would make the "scratch that" make more sense. I had posted that the documents I signed last year via ROFR did not have the palm trees and mickey heads that was mentioned as a way to tell the warranty deed was an ROFR.

But, I then looked up the actual deed on the OCC website, and for that document, it is there. The comment was that the contracts that are on the site being discussed have deeds that appear to be ROFR because they don't look the same as foreclosure....but I think that anytime someone sells back to DVD or they have to re-do a deed, it will look like that.

I have also read that when a deed has to be redone...mistake in name, etc...it might look like an ROFR might look....

 

[DonMacGregor]

Could you expand on this? It sounds very interesting. Why would they need to sell points from a certain unit and aren't units in the tens of thousands? Would a few points make that big of a difference? Thanks.

If you call up DVC and ask to buy a contract at a sold-out resort, they can only sell you those points they have in inventory, typically acquired through ROFR, foreclosure, surrender, etc..

The problem is, the points come back in as they went out: in the tiny chunks that make up individual contracts. Depending on when those contracts were originally sold, the points could be from any of the units the resort is divided up into, or many of them.

For DVC to sell you that contract you want, let’s say it’s 300 points at BCV, all 300 of those points need to be from the same unit number. If DVC doesn’t have 300 points allocated to the same unit number, they can’t sell you the 300 points.

DVC can change the use year of points, but they cannot change the unit those points are allocated to. To get you the 300 points you want to buy, DVC has to find them. One suggested use of ROFR, is for DVC to take back points from a specific unit number, in order to be able to sell larger contracts at sold-out resorts (which always carry a HUGE markup when buying direct).

 

[Sandisw]

I think this is the only thing that makes sense...on the surface anyway.

Could you expand on this? It sounds very interesting. Why would they need to sell points from a certain unit and aren't units in the tens of thousands? Would a few points make that big of a difference? Thanks.

You are given a deeded interest in a unit and units can be all different sizes. For example, a unit might be one GV, or it might consist of three 2 bedrooms and a studio, etc.

To sell you a contract, you have to be deeded into one unit and if there are not enough points left in that unit, they can't sell it to you. For example, if Unit 1 has only 10 points left, then they can't sell those because they are not enough to make a contract...

But, if Unit 1 shows up resale with 300 points, and they take it, they now have 310 points in one unit that can be sold.

 

[Cfabar1]

A couple thoughts with the new data:

- Wonder if they are trying to push people to buy direct by strategically deploying VGF ROFR to prevent resale from saving that much money over direct.
- Wondering if they are trying to build up some availability to be able to sell fixed weeks
- Interesting they would buy back AKV... maybe they are worried about the floor getting too low on that property.

Amazing they (at the moment) have given up on the buying back OKW. I'd have thought they'd be very interested in having that buyback basically never end given the 2042/2057 debacle.

 

[intamin]

For DVC to sell you that contract you want, let’s say it’s 300 points at BCV, all 300 of those points need to be from the same unit number. If DVC doesn’t have 300 points allocated to the same unit number, they can’t sell you the 300 points.

DVC can change the use year of points, but they cannot change the unit those points are allocated to. To get you the 300 points you want to buy, DVC has to find them. One suggested use of ROFR, is for DVC to take back points from a specific unit number, in order to be able to sell larger contracts at sold-out resorts (which always carry a HUGE markup when buying direct).

Interesting, I guess I never fully understood the importance of the unit but it makes sense that all of the points must come from a single unit. So if you wanted to buy 300 points, it's possibly they may not have enough in one unit, but you may be able to buy 2 150s from different units. Good to know.

 

[TheDailyMoo]

If you call up DVC and ask to buy a contract at a sold-out resort, they can only sell you those points they have in inventory, typically acquired through ROFR, foreclosure, surrender, etc..

The problem is, the points come back in as they went out: in the tiny chunks that make up individual contracts. Depending on when those contracts were originally sold, the points could be from any of the units the resort is divided up into, or many of them.

For DVC to sell you that contract you want, let’s say it’s 300 points at BCV, all 300 of those points need to be from the same unit number. If DVC doesn’t have 300 points allocated to the same unit number, they can’t sell you the 300 points.

DVC can change the use year of points, but they cannot change the unit those points are allocated to. To get you the 300 points you want to buy, DVC has to find them. One suggested use of ROFR, is for DVC to take back points from a specific unit number, in order to be able to sell larger contracts at sold-out resorts (which always carry a HUGE markup when buying direct).

You are given a deeded interest in a unit and units can be all different sizes. For example, a unit might be one GV, or it might consist of three 2 bedrooms and a studio, etc.

To sell you a contract, you have to be deeded into one unit and if there are not enough points left in that unit, they can't sell it to you. For example, if Unit 1 has only 10 points left, then they can't sell those because they are not enough to make a contract...

But, if Unit 1 shows up resale with 300 points, and they take it, they now have 310 points in one unit that can be sold.

Understood. Thanks for the explanation! However let's assume these ROFRs are for the purpose of units. The two AKV were larger point totals I believe close to 500 points or thereabouts combined. You're saying that DVC doesn't have that many points on hand from one unit considering how much they've ROFR'd over the years and that AKV is not in active sales?

 

[DonMacGregor]

Understood. Thanks for the explanation! However let's assume these ROFRs are for the purpose of units. The two AKV were larger point totals I believe close to 500 points or thereabouts combined. You're saying that DVC doesn't have that many points on hand from one unit considering how much they've ROFR'd over the years and that AKV is not in active sales?

No, I’m not saying that at all. I just explained how all points in a contract need to be from the same deeded unit. I also said that is one theory as to why DVC ROFR’s at all. There are a million other possibilities we have no insight into.

 

[TheDailyMoo]

No, I’m not saying that at all. I just explained how all points in a contract need to be from the same deeded unit. I also said that is one theory as to why DVC ROFR’s at all. There are a million other possibilities we have no insight into.

Of course! Was just wondering out loud if that's a possibility. Appreciate the explanation again!

 

[Sandisw]

Understood. Thanks for the explanation! However let's assume these ROFRs are for the purpose of units. The two AKV were larger point totals I believe close to 500 points or thereabouts combined. You're saying that DVC doesn't have that many points on hand from one unit considering how much they've ROFR'd over the years and that AKV is not in active sales?

We have no idea but the unit a contract is deeded to us one off the many reasons we have heard for ROFR when a contract gets taken at a higher price and something else gets through that’s less expensive.

I’m stumped about VGF but then again, maybe it is for the purpose of nudging people back to direct.

 

[PolyRob]

Of course! Was just wondering out loud if that's a possibility. Appreciate the explanation again!

@Sandisw also confirmed (I believe in this thread yesterday) that she contacted her guide and she could purchase AKV right now since there is no wait list and points are readily available.

 

[TheDailyMoo]

I’m stumped about VGF but then again, maybe it is for the purpose of nudging people back to direct.

Although it may not be the actual reason however on the surface no other explanation makes as much sense.

 

[DanCali]

@Sandisw also confirmed (I believe in this thread yesterday) that she contacted her guide and she could purchase AKV right now since there is no wait list and points are readily available.

AKV availability for direct should not be a problem. They had a highly attractive promo as recently as May - I believe it was $143 after MB with the 200-point threshold. They sold over 25K AKV points that month (compared with 2965 in July), but I doubt they sold out. The dues there are higher, so maybe they get more inventory via foreclosures than from other resorts.

 

[intamin]

AKV availability for direct should not be a problem. They had a highly attractive promo as recently as May - I believe it was $143 after MB with the 200-point threshold. They sold over 25K AKV points that month (compared with 2965 in July), but I doubt they sold out. The dues there are higher, so maybe they get more inventory via foreclosures than from other resorts.

I'm surprised they didn't sell more points given how cheap it was to be honest.

 

[WxKristin]

Random Question -- as DVD/DVC acquires these points they can use them for cash rooms (at least somewhere in the 30-60 day range or elsewhere), right? I'm assuming the DVD owned points don't go unaccounted for/unused annually.

 

[Epcot Forever Forever]

Random Question -- as DVD/DVC acquires these points they can use them for cash rooms (at least somewhere in the 30-60 day range or elsewhere), right? I'm assuming the DVD owned points don't go unaccounted for/unused annually.

Yes. Disney can use them for cash rooms so long as the points exist for the use year the dates are in. If they’ve been spent, Disney has to wait until the new UY like anyone else.

For points Disney outright owns, they do not have to wait for the 30-60 day window, that’s for points other owners own that are clearly going to go unused. For those points, disney can rent use them to rent rooms to whoever, and the share the proceeds with the booked resort’s DVC budget.

 

[maui22]

In addition to DVD needing all the points needing to come from the same unit, doesn’t DVD need to have points for the UY sold available?

For example, if they sell someone a Sept UY VGF, they need 2022 Sept UY points, 2023, UY points, and 2024 points for that sale.

Do these need to be from the actual contracts for the unit?