|
|
Post by Adelard of Bath on Apr 14, 2023 10:25:35 GMT -5
(although many expect that the legislature will change that law to allow DeSantis to run) ... but it is possible that is another law that will be changed. The whole thing just makes me sick. Along with the idea of the hand-selected committee of the RCID replacement. The whole thing seems wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by njgoofy on Apr 14, 2023 14:51:34 GMT -5
Actually, unless they list themselves as a B Corp nope, they are to build shareholder wealth. Do do anything else puts them out of compliance. Rigby, a happy workforce is part of returning shareholder wealth. They cannot generate that return without good employees. The problem with taking a political stance is a workforce almost always mimics the views of the general public, which in the case last year that caused Reedy Creek means they chose a segment of their workforce over another segment. Good leaders and BOD's should never do that. Disney's did. And now that issue is ongoing. Actually many (hundreds) companies equate diversity and inclusion very overtly with happier employees AND shareholder value. Companies are proud of their scores on the Corporate Equality Index; Companies use these statistics based upon good people practices to recruit, retain employees AND to sell products. See www.hrc.org/resources/corporate-equality-index#report-highlightsWe can agree and disgree, on many issues, but basic human fairness should not be politicized in the first place. Just my 2 cents. PEACE! NJ Goofy |
|
|
|
Post by Wonderdog on Apr 14, 2023 15:09:44 GMT -5
What we are missing in this discussion is that this whole war was / is great for DeSantis because when this started he needed a soap box to get on to take his "brand" national and Disney gave him exactly that. There are few organizations out there that will guarantee the national exposure that a fight with Disney will. Just think how much air time he has received, how many mentions of his name even becoming a target of SNL that would not have happened without Disney. Even the articles that say Disney got the best of him are a plus because it gives him a whole new round of national chest pounding that would not have happened without it. I think the presidential aspirations do play into how protracted this fight becomes. Under current Florida law, DeSantis will have to resign as governor if he runs for President (although many expect that the legislature will change that law to allow DeSantis to run). The current feeling is that DeSantis will not be the Republican nominee for President in 2024, but he is young and may try again in 2028. Technically, DeSantis will have hit his term limits as governor in 2027, but it is possible that is another law that will be changed. On the other side, it is hard to see that Disney is leaving Florida anytime soon and will likely throw considerable resources to get back the autonomy it enjoyed since the 1960’s. In the meantime, however, I think that further development will be slowed because that it is an entirely rational thing to do when the future is incredibly uncertain. It is pretty clear that right now all of DeSantis' actions, politically, are pandering to a certain segment of the electorate in order to win the nomination of his party for President. |
|
|
|
Post by broganmc on Apr 14, 2023 16:05:19 GMT -5
(although many expect that the legislature will change that law to allow DeSantis to run) ... but it is possible that is another law that will be changed. The whole thing just makes me sick. Along with the idea of the hand-selected committee of the RCID replacement. The whole thing seems wrong. And yet it didn't bother you when Disney was the one hand picking the committee of RCID? Interesting
You do realize the entire reason why our timeshares are only 50 year leases instead of outright ownership like every other timeshare in the industry is so that Reedy Creek has no residents and Disney remains the only entity living there? They have been working this monopoly for decades and ensuring they were a law into themselves.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wiltony on Apr 14, 2023 16:40:45 GMT -5
The whole thing seems wrong. That's because it is. The whole thing just makes me sick. Along with the idea of the hand-selected committee of the RCID replacement. The whole thing seems wrong. And yet it didn't bother you when Disney was the one hand picking the committee of RCID? Interesting
You do realize the entire reason why our timeshares are only 50 year leases instead of outright ownership like every other timeshare in the industry is so that Reedy Creek has no residents and Disney remains the only entity living there? They have been working this monopoly for decades and ensuring they were a law into themselves.
Man, they are SO evil. 
Look, Disney is far from innocent, but just because a company does something in its own self interest doesn't mean it might not also be beneficial to its customers, too. In fact, I would assert that when a company does that, it's likely to be more successful in the long run. Disney's long-term success indicates to me that indeed, most of its decisions have been beneficial for both itself, as well as its customers.
I am really happy they did this. Having my descendants on the hook to get out of a timeshare ownership and/or be on the hook for thousands of maintenance fees against their will is a terrible prospect. Sounds like the 50-year expiration mechanism was a good move for both D.V.D. as well as owners.
|
|
|
|
Post by SuzanneSLO on Apr 14, 2023 16:41:08 GMT -5
The whole thing just makes me sick. Along with the idea of the hand-selected committee of the RCID replacement. The whole thing seems wrong. And yet it didn't bother you when Disney was the one hand picking the committee of RCID? Interesting
You do realize the entire reason why our timeshares are only 50 year leases instead of outright ownership like every other timeshare in the industry is so that Reedy Creek has no residents and Disney remains the only entity living there? They have been working this monopoly for decades and ensuring they were a law into themselves.
I have never been to WDW at a time when the board for Reedy Creek was not chosen by Disney since that was set up before Disney broke ground in the 1960s. I was aware of this arrangement when I bought my DVC (which by the way is not the only leased TS in the industry, nor would an ownership deed have made me a Florida resident). If I wanted to visit Daytona Speedway or live in The Villages, I understand that they have a different governing arrangement than other parts of the state. Maybe those arrangement would be sufficient to keep me from visiting/living there, or maybe not. Maybe there are enough people who feel that the State of Florida appointed Board will do a better job then the Disney appointed Board and we will see a huge spike in DVC resale prices because everyone wants a piece of that. |
|
|
|
Post by bubster on Apr 14, 2023 17:30:24 GMT -5
For 50 years the Disney appointed Reedy Creek board did whatever was in the best interest of Disney. The DeSantis appointed Reedy Creek board will, I feel, do what is in the best interest of DeSantis. DeSantis is on the war-path against Disney for his own political interests. I would rather trust Disney at this point.
|
|
|
|
Post by SuzanneSLO on Apr 14, 2023 17:32:21 GMT -5
There is some thought that this may end only when the DeSantis donors’ start to realize that they are backing the side that says government knows better how to run a business.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldhalfelf on Apr 15, 2023 15:07:36 GMT -5
Of possible interest to readers of this thread: www.orlandosentinel.com/politics/os-ne-reedy-creek-ag-no-public-record-20230414-4g2ndy5gnnf4xfq2r5xd3dhsaa-story.html . In the comments that follow, I do not opine on the merits of the two sides' global positions, but rather confine myself to the issue of plausible public record requests. In the (non-Florida) state in which I reside, effective uses of FOIA "rarely" ( cough, cough) ask for items "...discussing an intention or goal of circumventing, avoiding, frustrating, mitigating or otherwise attempting to avoid the effects of anticipated actions...." by other parts of the government. Instead, typical requests would simply ask for all non-exempt past communications dealing with the then still-pending agreement involving the target agency. Even so, the problem would be that any draft working documents (e.g., made to inform the decision-making agency of policy options, etc.) are in fact exempt by statute. Someone familiar with Florida's public records law may be able to shed light on any relevant differences. The earlier-quoted passage seems political, and the pejorative gerunds ("circumventing", etc.) are more like click-bait than a public records request.  |
|
|
|
Post by cpnkirk on Apr 15, 2023 17:20:41 GMT -5
The whole thing just makes me sick. Along with the idea of the hand-selected committee of the RCID replacement. The whole thing seems wrong. And yet it didn't bother you when Disney was the one hand picking the committee of RCID? Interesting
You do realize the entire reason why our timeshares are only 50 year leases instead of outright ownership like every other timeshare in the industry is so that Reedy Creek has no residents and Disney remains the only entity living there? They have been working this monopoly for decades and ensuring they were a law into themselves.
I didn't know this was the reason, but I do know that I wouldn't have bought DVC if there were no expiration date and no resale market. I know people who tell me about their timeshare that was inherited, but the yearly fees cost more than just renting the same property. Hopefully we'll never get to that point with DVC! |
|
|
|
Post by bubster on Apr 15, 2023 18:05:12 GMT -5
And yet it didn't bother you when Disney was the one hand picking the committee of RCID? Interesting
You do realize the entire reason why our timeshares are only 50 year leases instead of outright ownership like every other timeshare in the industry is so that Reedy Creek has no residents and Disney remains the only entity living there? They have been working this monopoly for decades and ensuring they were a law into themselves.
I didn't know this was the reason, but I do know that I wouldn't have bought DVC if there were no expiration date and no resale market. I know people who tell me about their timeshare that was inherited, but the yearly fees cost more than just renting the same property. Hopefully we'll never get to that point with DVC! The lawyer that did our trusts was shocked that we did not want to be rid of our timeshare. He had never heard of DVC and didn’t understand why our kids would want it. |
|
|
|
Post by helenabear on Apr 16, 2023 8:29:47 GMT -5
And yet it didn't bother you when Disney was the one hand picking the committee of RCID? Interesting
You do realize the entire reason why our timeshares are only 50 year leases instead of outright ownership like every other timeshare in the industry is so that Reedy Creek has no residents and Disney remains the only entity living there? They have been working this monopoly for decades and ensuring they were a law into themselves.
I didn't know this was the reason, but I do know that I wouldn't have bought DVC if there were no expiration date and no resale market. I know people who tell me about their timeshare that was inherited, but the yearly fees cost more than just renting the same property. Hopefully we'll never get to that point with DVC! Not sure that is as there are residents of RCID. Also Right to Use timeshares are not entirely uncommon. Westin, Wyndham and Marriot even have some. |
|
|
|
Post by broganmc on Apr 17, 2023 10:09:56 GMT -5
Of possible interest to readers of this thread: www.orlandosentinel.com/politics/os-ne-reedy-creek-ag-no-public-record-20230414-4g2ndy5gnnf4xfq2r5xd3dhsaa-story.html . In the comments that follow, I do not opine on the merits of the two sides' global positions, but rather confine myself to the issue of plausible public record requests. In the (non-Florida) state in which I reside, effective uses of FOIA "rarely" ( cough, cough) ask for items "...discussing an intention or goal of circumventing, avoiding, frustrating, mitigating or otherwise attempting to avoid the effects of anticipated actions...." by other parts of the government. Instead, typical requests would simply ask for all non-exempt past communications dealing with the then still-pending agreement involving the target agency. Even so, the problem would be that any draft working documents (e.g., made to inform the decision-making agency of policy options, etc.) are in fact exempt by statute. Someone familiar with Florida's public records law may be able to shed light on any relevant differences. The earlier-quoted passage seems political, and the pejorative gerunds ("circumventing", etc.) are more like click-bait than a public records request. Yeah I heard about that. Honestly I think the only reason why people are supporting Disney in this on this thread is because they have a bias towards Disney. Insert any other company and I think the same people would be crying foul. Clearly Disney is trying to pull a fast one over the state. On the one hand they claim everything was open in public and on the other hand they say they had no records to back that up? Yeah pull the other one. |
|
|
|
Post by broganmc on Apr 17, 2023 10:20:48 GMT -5
The whole thing seems wrong. That's because it is. And yet it didn't bother you when Disney was the one hand picking the committee of RCID? Interesting
You do realize the entire reason why our timeshares are only 50 year leases instead of outright ownership like every other timeshare in the industry is so that Reedy Creek has no residents and Disney remains the only entity living there? They have been working this monopoly for decades and ensuring they were a law into themselves.
Man, they are SO evil.
Look, Disney is far from innocent, but just because a company does something in its own self interest doesn't mean it might not also be beneficial to its customers, too. In fact, I would assert that when a company does that, it's likely to be more successful in the long run. Disney's long-term success indicates to me that indeed, most of its decisions have been beneficial for both itself, as well as its customers.
I am really happy they did this. Having my descendants on the hook to get out of a timeshare ownership and/or be on the hook for thousands of maintenance fees against their will is a terrible prospect. Sounds like the 50-year expiration mechanism was a good move for both D.V.D. as well as owners.
A lot of people answered my post. I'm only picking yours at random. So don't feel singled out please. Ask the assertion that Disney does things that benefit the customer and the company, I will point out to you how much they've raised ticket prices over the last 3 years. Far more than the cost of living. And then you have the shutdown of annual pass sales for DVC owners. Not to mention the elimination of the DVC discount for annual passes. And then you have the inflated pricing of Genie+ during crowd at times like Easter. Not to mention the whole institution of the Genie+ program eliminating the free 3 FP program before it. None of these things were done to benefit the customer. But they have made Disney a lot more profitable. Let's face it. Disney makes decisions to benefit itself. Period. It's not about improving customer satisfaction. They've been trading on that reputation for the last 10 years while systematically eroding all of those things that please the customer. That's the very thing we've all been complaining about for years. And yet people have no qualms about Disney solely controlling its own Reedy Creek district. I find that interesting. Now as for everybody liking the 50 year lease, ask all the 2042 Resort owners in 10 years. That's when the market will bottom out on resales and Disney is only going to let the contract expire so they can refurb and resell it as brand new. Quite a good scam since they don't have to build it again but they will sell it as if it was a brand new build. Come on you know they're going to do it. I think the bottom line here is me pointing out Disney is just as guilty as being self-serving and uncaring of the public as people here are accusing Florida State legislature being. The only difference is Florida State legislature was elected by the people of Florida. So really what people are mad at are the people of Florida. I think people are choosing the Disney side here solely out of a bias for Disney. Understandable since we are all DVC owners. We love Disney. And it's hard to step back and take an objective view. |
|
|
|
Post by broganmc on Apr 17, 2023 10:22:57 GMT -5
I didn't know this was the reason, but I do know that I wouldn't have bought DVC if there were no expiration date and no resale market. I know people who tell me about their timeshare that was inherited, but the yearly fees cost more than just renting the same property. Hopefully we'll never get to that point with DVC! Not sure that is as there are residents of RCID. Also Right to Use timeshares are not entirely uncommon. Westin, Wyndham and Marriot even have some. Which Marriott ones? I asked because I'm also a Marriott Vacation club owner. All of them are owned in perpetuity. And the maintenance fees are a lot less than Disney. So was the buy-in price. But resale and rental market is nothing. That is truly a vacation plan portfolio. |
|
