|
|
Post by nickys on Jan 3, 2024 13:53:37 GMT -5
Briefly, yes. There are some who are refuting what Hope quoted earlier. The alternative idea seems to be there is a over-reaching Trust, and within it there would be sub-trusts, one for each resort. Each sub-trust could include a whole resort or undeclared complete units at an existing resort. This would allow a distinction between buying direct points or buying resale. If you bought direct you would have home priority at all sub-trusts, whereas resale buyers only have it at the specific sub-trust you purchased. And only direct buyers would be able to switch into legacy resorts. This also fits with the language used over resale restrictions at the Cabins, and also where they say that any future developments at FW may be part of the Cabin “association” or a new one. The sub-trust idea is how they could take some of the undeclared units at existing resorts and have them included in the Trust set up. So there would be a Riviera sub-trust,an Aulani sub-trust etc. By only using undeclared complete units at these resorts they can amend the POS without affecting existing owners at those resorts. Thanks for saving me some clicks! I am curious to know who is actually right in the end. Again I'm no expert and I know there are a lot of expert wannabes out there so it's hard to know who's right and who is not. Truthfully what you were explaining with direct versus resale makes it so complicated I would want nothing to do with it. Might make me think about how I'm going to deal with adding on a few more for the tower. I really think this whole idea is stupid to try and add on to existing resorts though. It's complicated enough for me having three separate home resorts, I don't want to worry about having to really keep spreadsheets just to keep track of what I can do  I hope the lawyer is right really. Mostly out of my lack of desire to keep track of how things are supposed to work. I have quite a lot of faith in Drusba, but I’m fairly sure he isn’t the only lawyer involved. And at least one refuting his interpretation is very experienced in all things DVC and has a pretty encyclopaedic know of it’s workings. This from my impressions from afar, and I’ll be the first to admit my eyes glaze over often when this kind of discussion happens. I’ll be interested to see what happens in a few months time too. What I don’t see happening is Poly2 being entirely within this new set-up. But if sales aren’t what they hope for then 🙅♀️ |
|
|
|
Post by nickys on Jan 3, 2024 13:55:25 GMT -5
Can you please explain the refutes against what the lawyer had said then? I don't understand how it seems like old associations could not be added but new ones could and since Polynesian is not new, they cannot. Again when dealing with a company that was run by a crook, and until that crook is 100% removed from everything, I will not be reading that forum unless I am accidentally directed there. It seems like you were just giving two completely different reports of what's going on there and I'm confused. I thought the crook died or is there another person in the DVC sphere like the one who burned Kim? Fairly confident she’s talking about PW and the DIS. There’s been no confirmation yet afaik that he is 100% divested from all areas of the organisation. |
|
|
|
Post by helenabear on Jan 3, 2024 13:55:50 GMT -5
Can you please explain the refutes against what the lawyer had said then? I don't understand how it seems like old associations could not be added but new ones could and since Polynesian is not new, they cannot. Again when dealing with a company that was run by a crook, and until that crook is 100% removed from everything, I will not be reading that forum unless I am accidentally directed there. It seems like you were just giving two completely different reports of what's going on there and I'm confused. I thought the crook died or is there another person in the DVC sphere like the one who burned Kim? Uh no this is the DIS crook Pete Werner. Sexual assault and racking up about $900k in unauthorized debt on a company Amex. Allegations of other types of abuse and cameras in bathrooms at his house to record things. Until I hear he is completely divested of the company, I try not to click much. Knowing how the DIS posters are, I'd rather not read pages upon pages of drivel giving money to him with clicks. I know he had screwed over some of my friends in the early 2000s as well so I had been avoiding there more and more until 2010 or so. This just reaffirmed my desire not to help his bankroll. |
|
|
|
Post by helenabear on Jan 3, 2024 13:57:53 GMT -5
I thought the crook died or is there another person in the DVC sphere like the one who burned Kim? Fairly confident she’s talking about PW and the DIS. There’s been no confirmation yet afaik that he is 100% divested from all areas of the organisation. Yes this is who, but I have zero issues naming by name here. No name is considered taboo here. I follow tattle and hope to hear he's 100% divested as soon as it really can be done (I realize it takes time). A line in the sand I drew that I'm being stubborn on. |
|
|
|
Post by JaxFLBear on Jan 3, 2024 14:01:31 GMT -5
Can you please explain the refutes against what the lawyer had said then? I don't understand how it seems like old associations could not be added but new ones could and since Polynesian is not new, they cannot. Again when dealing with a company that was run by a crook, and until that crook is 100% removed from everything, I will not be reading that forum unless I am accidentally directed there. It seems like you were just giving two completely different reports of what's going on there and I'm confused. I thought the crook died or is there another person in the DVC sphere like the one who burned Kim? I believe you are thinking of DVC Mike who passed away. AFAIK, he isn't the crook being referred to, but he did burn a lot of bridges when he started his own website which is/was blocked by may other Disney fan boards. |
|
|
|
Post by nickys on Jan 3, 2024 14:05:44 GMT -5
Fairly confident she’s talking about PW and the DIS. There’s been no confirmation yet afaik that he is 100% divested from all areas of the organisation. Yes this is who, but I have zero issues naming by name here. No name is considered taboo here. I follow tattle and hope to hear he's 100% divested as soon as it really can be done (I realize it takes time). A line in the sand I drew that I'm being stubborn on. I just prefer not to name him at all frankly. I already thought he was a repulsive individual after becoming privy to his behaviour towards a former moderator over there, with appalling comments towards him verbally and in emails. I just hope that was the sum of it, after the allegations came to light. |
|
|
|
Post by helenabear on Jan 3, 2024 14:17:40 GMT -5
Yes this is who, but I have zero issues naming by name here. No name is considered taboo here. I follow tattle and hope to hear he's 100% divested as soon as it really can be done (I realize it takes time). A line in the sand I drew that I'm being stubborn on. I just prefer not to name him at all frankly. I already thought he was a repulsive individual after becoming privy to his behaviour towards a former moderator over there, with appalling comments towards him verbally and in emails. I just hope that was the sum of it, after the allegations came to light. I feel you and I totally understand! I used to not mention his name either after the way he treated not only moderators, but people who had given him money. We stuck around because we liked each other I think more than anything for a number of years. Most of us stopped buying into whatever he sold with his travel agency at least. I found out the way that he treated the travel agent I used for our honeymoon years after the fact was horrific. Nothing I have ever heard about that man has been good outside of maybe something his mom would say. I say his name now so that people know what he has done and hopefully will stay away from him and not create any more victims. I have watched the two sexual assault victims put videos out and it's incomprehensible the damage he is done. I am hopeful that the divesting happens soon though I'm not sure I could regularly post there again? I have a usable account there that I posted shortly after the allegations just tell those who are running it how horrible many of us have been treated, but I am still wary that things won't change enough there. A shame too because it is pretty big. Though really I found the attitude there to be pretty negative over the years, but given how the moderators were treated and treating other people I can't say I'm totally surprised at how some of the posters are just total jerks there and get away with it. Anyway thank you for understanding why I don't give clicks there as much as I can yet. I know this was a tangent but I'm not really trying to be snotty about the website as much as I am trying to make sure that this type of person doesn't even get two cents from me with a click. I do accidentally click sometimes as I search, but I am trying to avoid. Though at some point I'm going to just hope that they are divested completely from the company and I won't have to worry about it |
|
|
|
Post by nickys on Jan 3, 2024 16:01:10 GMT -5
Tagging helenabearThis is a pretty good explanation of why the alternative sub-trust model can work for undeclared units in an existing association. Quote: The POS for PVB that I reviewed…and I am guessing it is the same for all others…states new declarations or phases can be added to the same condo association under a different vacation plan. This is what I think allows them to sell them differently. That means current deeded owners have access to book the number of rooms declared for them, and trust owners get the inventory out there. Because the POs says we can stay in any room at the resort, even ones not yet declared, and vice versa, it doesn’t matter which rooms are declared to which. What happens is that at 7 months, when all owners with eligible points can be booked via BVTC, whatever rooms from each bucket are still open, get released for all…it happens behind the scenes. That is why I think it can work without issue at those that still have units not declared. For those sold out, this won’t work because you have to declared something as trust property and you can’t really do that when all DVD would own is a fractional ownership of one. Right now, DVD is not required to declare any more of the rooms. We are only guaranteed when we buy to have access to the initial declaration. Once declared, we have acces, but if they choose to never sell the other 25% of the resort…I think that is what is left…trust or no trust…they can. End Quote |
|
|
|
Post by BWV Dreamin on Jan 3, 2024 16:17:54 GMT -5
Nice find Nicky. And this is why the talk is that the new Poly2 tower could be transferred into the Trust ownership in its entirety, as all of this declaration would be “ complete” units, not fractional. Current Poly owners could still book.
|
|
|
|
Post by helenabear on Jan 3, 2024 16:33:21 GMT -5
Tagging helenabearThis is a pretty good explanation of why the alternative sub-trust model can work for undeclared units in an existing association. Quote: The POS for PVB that I reviewed…and I am guessing it is the same for all others… states new declarations or phases can be added to the same condo association under a different vacation plan. This is what I think allows them to sell them differently. That means current deeded owners have access to book the number of rooms declared for them, and trust owners get the inventory out there. Because the POs says we can stay in any room at the resort, even ones not yet declared, and vice versa, it doesn’t matter which rooms are declared to which. What happens is that at 7 months, when all owners with eligible points can be booked via BVTC, whatever rooms from each bucket are still open, get released for all…it happens behind the scenes. That is why I think it can work without issue at those that still have units not declared. For those sold out, this won’t work because you have to declared something as trust property and you can’t really do that when all DVD would own is a fractional ownership of one. Right now, DVD is not required to declare any more of the rooms. We are only guaranteed when we buy to have access to the initial declaration. Once declared, we have acces, but if they choose to never sell the other 25% of the resort…I think that is what is left…trust or no trust…they can. End Quote I will have to pull mine out and check on this. POS can be amended and added to but I am not sure the very last part of that being stated on it about the vacation plan. It's been since 2015 since I read though. And yes, I read the whole dang book I do know that the way things are written get to be kind of fuzzy anyway because legal speak and different meanings of what certain words mean really throw some things off. I am not sure how this would really affect owners anyway in the traditional sense. We will not be pushed out because of partial ownership of trusts. I will just be sure not to buy a trust if that comes to it before PVB comes out. Or I'll just buy some resale and be done with it. Disney is not learning that they tick people off when they make it complicated. Nice find Nicky. And this is why the talk is that the new Poly2 tower could be transferred into the Trust ownership in its entirety, as all of this declaration would be “ complete” units, not fractional. Current Poly owners could still book. Yeah sorry but this is laughable to me that anyone thinks this is how it will go down. Meaning that they would put the entire point system into a trust? They are going to get a lot of add-ons from this from people like me who own and want more points to be able to stay in bigger rooms. To have our options limited in a direct sale? I don't buy it. Disney is doing some dumb things, but I don't think they would put the entire Point amount into a trust. Best done would be a percentage of an existing resort. |
|
|
|
Post by BWV Dreamin on Jan 3, 2024 17:27:26 GMT -5
The problem with transferring current deeded points into the trust ( say resale points) is that they are deeded as fractional units, not whole units. Starting with new builds, they can have the entire points system entered into the trust because before sales, they are complete units. And that was has to be when units are transferred into the Trust. Hoping I am conveying this right.
Whether we like it or not, it is coming. And DVD is figuring out ways to enter more resorts into the Trust. We are witnessing the end of Disney Vacation Club as we know it.
|
|
|
|
Post by helenabear on Jan 3, 2024 18:17:53 GMT -5
Each resort has multiple units. I own a bit of Bora Bora, Tokelau and I think Moorea.
You can select portions of each resort by unit. I'd have to look up exactly which rooms at each. While PVB is a new building it's not new in other ways. Keep that in mind while reading there.
Reminds me of why I don't like reading there much anyway. They were not only wrong about PVB but they refused to admit the words that were said. Now they're jumping on this trust bandwagon for whatever reason. People there are not in the know as a whole. Even those who claimed relationships with higher ups grossly exaggerated that. I'd be shocked if they were correct about PVB honestly. I'd be wary of their certainty. Didn't age well with the same vs different association talk.
I'll own it if I'm wrong about PVB but making it all trust? Color me highly skeptical.
I do see this for the trailers.... And I could see how they might want to sweeten something up but I have zero interest in a trust. I can see percentages of units like they do with the fixed weeks but that's it.
Keep in mind I am following elsewhere where I find smart peoples. Just not onr specific website.
|
|
|
|
Post by nickys on Jan 4, 2024 4:53:38 GMT -5
helenabear , I don’t see anyone suggesting the whole of the Poly tower being sold as a trust. Even the person I quoted isn’t saying that will happen. What is being suggested is that this is a way for DVC to add undeclared units at Aulani in particular into a trust. The same could therefore happen to any resort where sales stagnate. I have no idea who “they” that you keep referring to (wrt to the Poly) are. But as far as I can see, this isn’t a battle between 2 opposing viewpoints about what happens to DVC, the Poly etc. No one seems to be saying “ this is what is going to happen”. It’s just that some people think this is the solution to the Aulani “problem” and that’s why DVC are going this route. I think it all stems from trying to fathom out what the motives are for this Trust.
|
|
|
|
Post by helenabear on Jan 4, 2024 7:13:21 GMT -5
helenabear , I don’t see anyone suggesting the whole of the Poly tower being sold as a trust. Even the person I quoted isn’t saying that will happen. What is being suggested is that this is a way for DVC to add undeclared units at Aulani in particular into a trust. The same could therefore happen to any resort where sales stagnate. I have no idea who “they” that you keep referring to (wrt to the Poly) are. But as far as I can see, this isn’t a battle between 2 opposing viewpoints about what happens to DVC, the Poly etc. No one seems to be saying “ this is what is going to happen”. It’s just that some people think this is the solution to the Aulani “problem” and that’s why DVC are going this route. I think it all stems from trying to fathom out what the motives are for this Trust. Did you see what I quoted? Not your post, of course. However it was stated all in a trust. So that had nothing to do with you or what you said. I bolded exactly what I was referring to "Poly2 tower could be transferred into the Trust ownership in its entirety," The "they" are those that the others are claiming the above on the DIS. I did see a lot from the PVB association talk and actual quotes from posters there. On one thread they actually jumped from being angry about the announcement for PVB and then went into the whole trust thing just to have something else to try and argue about. I saw just a few pages and it was weird. One thing I will 100% disagree with you on is that there are often two opposing sides who just want to fight simply to fight. It happens on multiple places that I see. Some people really enjoy it. It happens on my Facebook group and it happens on a number of forums. I am trying to reduce negativity in my life so I'm not actively seeking out certain places any longer but they exist. I know didn't specifically quote someone in my last post, but it was in direct response to the post above. I'm not here to say that something with the trust couldn't happen, but the idea that the entirety of Polynesian Tower will go into Trust really just makes me wonder how they got to that conclusion |
|
|
|
Post by sawickipedia on Jan 4, 2024 15:42:08 GMT -5
I thought the crook died or is there another person in the DVC sphere like the one who burned Kim? Uh no this is the DIS crook Pete Werner. Sexual assault and racking up about $900k in unauthorized debt on a company Amex. Allegations of other types of abuse and cameras in bathrooms at his house to record things. Until I hear he is completely divested of the company, I try not to click much. Knowing how the DIS posters are, I'd rather not read pages upon pages of drivel giving money to him with clicks. I know he had screwed over some of my friends in the early 2000s as well so I had been avoiding there more and more until 2010 or so. This just reaffirmed my desire not to help his bankroll. Yeah I was thinking of DVCMike - I had no idea about PW - good to know. I hate to support bad actors and will happily avoid.
|
|
