Does Timesharing have A Future?

[tennisWalt Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close tennisWalt]

I see several problems with timesharing in the future.

1) Both RCI and II seem to be renting and not exchanging the better Resorts.

For example: I did a RCI search for both exchanges and rentals with timeshare weeks that in the past were able to trade into Resorts like these in Hawaii.

I have Exchanged into both KBC and The Point at Poipu.

I now see no Exchanges and all Rentals


The Point at Poipu (#3682


Unit Type Max Occup

(Privacy) Kitchen Check-In Date Check-Out Date Price

2 BR 6 (6) Full 07-Sep-2010 14-Sep-2010 USD 1,088.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 09-Sep-2010 16-Sep-2010 USD 1,088.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 10-Sep-2010 17-Sep-2010 USD 1,088.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 11-Sep-2010 18-Sep-2010 USD 1,088.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 12-Sep-2010 19-Sep-2010 USD 1,088.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 13-Sep-2010 20-Sep-2010 USD 1,088.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 14-Sep-2010 21-Sep-2010 USD 1,088.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 19-Sep-2010 26-Sep-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 20-Sep-2010 27-Sep-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 21-Sep-2010 28-Sep-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 24-Sep-2010 01-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 25-Sep-2010 02-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 26-Sep-2010 03-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 27-Sep-2010 04-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 28-Sep-2010 05-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 30-Sep-2010 07-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 03-Oct-2010 10-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 04-Oct-2010 11-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 07-Oct-2010 14-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 11-Oct-2010 18-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 14-Oct-2010 21-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 15-Oct-2010 22-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 18-Oct-2010 25-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 21-Oct-2010 28-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 22-Oct-2010 29-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 25-Oct-2010 01-Nov-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 28-Oct-2010 04-Nov-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 29-Oct-2010 05-Nov-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 01-Nov-2010 08-Nov-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 02-Nov-2010 09-Nov-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 24-Aug-2010 31-Aug-2010 USD 1,349.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 26-Aug-2010 02-Sep-2010 USD 1,349.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 30-Aug-2010 06-Sep-2010 USD 1,349.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 31-Aug-2010 07-Sep-2010 USD 1,349.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 02-Sep-2010 09-Sep-2010 USD 1,349.99

Ka'anapali Beach Club (#4985)

Unit Type Max Occup

(Privacy) Kitchen Check-In Date Check-Out Date Price

1 BR 4 (4) Partial 22-Sep-2010 29-Sep-2010 USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 24-Sep-2010 01-Oct-2010 USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 29-Sep-2010 06-Oct-2010 USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 01-Oct-2010 08-Oct-2010 USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 02-Oct-2010 09-Oct-2010 USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 04-Oct-2010 11-Oct-2010 USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 06-Oct-2010 13-Oct-2010 USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 09-Oct-2010 16-Oct-2010 USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 14-Sep-2010 21-Sep-2010 USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 17-Oct-2010 24-Oct-2010 USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 22-Oct-2010 29-Oct-2010 USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 23-Oct-2010 30-Oct-2010 USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 25-Oct-2010 01-Nov-2010 USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 27-Oct-2010 03-Nov-2010 USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 29-Oct-2010 05-Nov-2010 USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 30-Oct-2010 06-Nov-2010 USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 31-Oct-2010 07-Nov-2010 USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 01-Nov-2010 08-Nov-2010 USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 02-Nov-2010 09-Nov-2010 USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 04-Nov-2010 11-Nov-2010 USD 1,124.99

2) Maintenance Fees are increasing to the point were Timesharing doesn't seem to make any sense any more. For example look at Hawaii and New York City Resort's Maintenance Fees. $2000 to $3000 Maintenance fees are reducing the number of people willing to buy into Timesharing. And in some case rentals are less than the MF.

3) The cost of buying at the Resorts VS what they are selling for on Ebay.Weeks or Points may be selling for $20,000 to $30,000 at these Resorts, yet they are not able to sell on Ebay for even $1000 in some cases.

4) Another unknown factor in sales is the ever increasing cost of Airline tickets and Car rentals for places like Hawaii and Europe.

What Direction do you see the the Timeshare Industry going?

Walt

[BWolf Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close BWolf]

Walt: My view is timesharing will go back to the future. About the only stability I see is in fixed week, fixed unit, owner-controlled timeshare resorts where the owners tend to visit yearly. The few in this category that I know about seem to have stability and active resales programs.

I'm not sure where the Marriott's, All-inclusives, Points, and various other "voodoo" (note: I'm using this term facetiously) timeshare systems might be headed.

I do know there are ardent supporters of these other systems on this board so I'm interested in their views.

[timeos2 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close timeos2]

If they knew no one would be likely to buy except in the rarest cases

It is about as tough as it can get. To be honest it has never made any sense to buy at developer prices due to the instant depreciation. Yet the well honed presentations managed to create sales out of nothing and to some degree continue to do so. Usually to folks that later regret the ill-informed decision and then look to dump it at a tremendous personal expense.

Meanwhile the resale market is flooded with unwanted units and people / companies falling over each other to offer theirs for less - often PAYING someone to take it! Hardly the makings of a robust, sustainable marketplace.

Finally we have the resorts themselves which do not sell weeks but have to pay to operate and maintain the physical plant. Those who actually use the resort or trade it end up shouldering the costs which may quickly exceed what simply renting from the glut of owners/inventory could obtain for less than owning.

Unless you are a user of a resort/system you really like and see a value in the original cost/ongoing fees timeshare is very much a losing proposition. I would hazard a guess that informed owners are 80% + happy as tey bought right, know how to use/trade it and had realistic expectations from the start. I'd also guess that well over 50% of ALL owners feel taken/trapped by timeshare and would never buy in knowing what they do now.

Makes for unbelievable values for those informed enough to take advantage and a money pit for the majority of the world. Overall it just doesn't look very good for the future.

[Spence Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Spence]

I see several problems with timesharing in the future.

1) Both RCI and II seem to be renting and not exchanging the better Resorts.

For example: I did a RCI search for both exchanges and rentals with timeshare weeks that in the past were able to trade into Resorts like these in Hawaii.

RCI more than II, I think, as RCI points really gave them the license to 'monetize' deposits of their choice to pay for those Disney and Airline tickets.

2) Maintenance Fees are increasing to the point were Timesharing doesn't seem to make any sense any more. For example look at Hawaii and New York City Resort's Maintenance Fees. $2000 to $3000 Maintenance fees are reducing the number of people willing to buy into Timesharing. And in some case rentals are less than the MF.

MFs are increasing especially at resorts where the developer is the manager as developers have found that they make money here as well as on the sales side.

3) The cost of buying at the Resorts VS what they are selling for on Ebay.Weeks or Points may be selling for $20,000 to $30,000 at these Resorts, yet they are not able to sell on Ebay for even $1000 in some cases.

There are some gems on eBay but most are smaller points packages or off/shoulder season that aren't worth anything anyway.

4) Another unknown factor in sales is the ever increasing cost of Airline tickets and Car rentals for places like Hawaii and Europe.

I think that airline tickets are still a bargain and have not gone up near as much as the cost of living, my opinion, not based on any statistical data.

What Direction do you see the the Timeshare Industry going?

More points, it's the only way to move that off/shoulder season inventory and gives the developer and/or exchange company license to kill.

[chriskre Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close chriskre]

Personally I love my weeks at the beach in my choice of season for my own personal use. Don't think weeks is worth owning for trading. Never bought my weeks with that in mind anyway. The few times that I've traded my weeks have been disappointing except for maybe 2 weeks. I did like the PFD for one of my weeks as I've thought it good value for the last minute stuff.

As for the points systems. I'm loading up on several of the mini-systems because I see plenty of inventory in those systems that I never see on RCI and honestly I don't have the time to be constantly hunting the sightings boards for full weeks anyway. I like the shorter vacations of 4 or 5 days as I'm not yet retired and can't afford to always go away for a week. I think most working Americans have this issue, hence the popularity of points.

I hope that some entrepreneurial person will see the void that RCI is leaving behind and give RCI/II a run for their money. Not sure why it hasn't really happened yet. I imagine developers are held down by the need to use RCI as a selling point and obviously they sign some type of exclusive which hurts the little guy down the road. This should be illegal if it's going on.

[Jya-Ning Silver Contributor Find all posts View Profile Close Jya-Ning]

Assume someone still developing the resorts. Than based on what we see in this crisis, those things will be the experience for the developers

1. maintainance can be gold egg. So more and more devloper will try to work around the local government rules to control the resort. It also good in control the resort "standard" as well as their name.
2. selling is strong, as long as they don't carry the note or the cost of building.
3. as long as they can figure a way to control the inventory, the renting process can be done in a smart way and generating good revenue. so more and more central control.

Jya-Ning

[BocaBum99 Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close BocaBum99]

Absolutely YES. Timesharing will be flourishing for the long term foreseeable future. It will not be the same as it always has been done. But, it will continue. The reason for it is quite simple. It's the single best value out there for family vacations either as a rental or ownership or exchange.

Sure, there are a ton of bad business models out there. But, as long as there are units out there available and owned by people, then timesharing will continue.

The only way it goes away is if masses of timeshare owners bail and leave the resorts with extremely high delinquency rates and tons of resorts just go belly up. I mean greater than 25-33% delinquency rates. When that happens, then dramatic action will be taken by Homeowner's associations. They will create rental programs and reduce maintenance fee growth. Or, they will vote to turn themselves into whole condos. Either way, it means units will be occupied by someone and as long as that is happening, timesharing will continue.

Developers will also continue as long as they can use their current model of selling for 2-4 times the actual market value of timeshares. Not sure how long it will continue, but it's been going for 40 plus years and it's down from it's all time high, but it still continues.

[timeos2 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close timeos2]

Buy to use has always been a winnng choice. Will continue to be

Personally I love my weeks at the beach in my choice of season for my own personal use. Don't think weeks is worth owning for trading. Never bought my weeks with that in mind anyway. The few times that I've traded my weeks have been disappointing except for maybe 2 weeks. I did like the PFD for one of my weeks as I've thought it good value for the last minute stuff.

We are in basic agreement. If people buy to use - points or weeks - then the value is there and informed owners can make the case for it. What has never made sense and never will is owning timeshare to profit (short term at best) or owning strictly to trade as the rules change while ownership, once accepted, if basically forever.

I fully agree with Boca as well. Timesharing is NOT going away. Far too many exist, far too many make money on the process and far too many know there is an underlying value in there if you can dig it out. But the "good old days", if they ever really existed, are long gone. It is a tough place to deal with now and I sure wouldn't want to be a developer trying to sell full cost anything today.

[bnoble Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close bnoble]

I did a RCI search for both exchanges and rentals with timeshare weeks that in the past were able to trade into Resorts like these in Hawaii.

Part of your problem is almost certainly the trade power revision RCI implemented last year. In that revision, RCI (a) made trade power much more fine-grained than it had been the year or two before, and (b) significantly tightened the degree to which deposits could "trade up" in terms of trade power.

A good-but-not-quite-great deposit (let's call it Deposit A) sees Poipu units also available for exchange:

The Point at Poipu (#3682)

1613 Pe'e Road
Koloa, HI 96756
USA
808/742-1888
International Vacation Ownership Timeshares for Sale | DRI
Units that meet your criteria Total Units Available: 51
Unit Type Max Occup
(Privacy) Kitchen Check-In Date Check-Out Date Price
2 BR 6 (6) Full 03-Sep-2010 10-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 05-Sep-2010 12-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 06-Sep-2010 13-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 07-Sep-2010 14-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,088.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 09-Sep-2010 16-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,088.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 10-Sep-2010 17-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,088.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 11-Sep-2010 18-Sep-2010 USD 1,088.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 12-Sep-2010 19-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,088.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 13-Sep-2010 20-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,088.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 14-Sep-2010 21-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,088.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 16-Sep-2010 23-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 17-Sep-2010 24-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 19-Sep-2010 26-Sep-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 20-Sep-2010 27-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 21-Sep-2010 28-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 23-Sep-2010 30-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 24-Sep-2010 01-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 25-Sep-2010 02-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 26-Sep-2010 03-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 27-Sep-2010 04-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 28-Sep-2010 05-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 30-Sep-2010 07-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 01-Oct-2010 08-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 03-Oct-2010 10-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 04-Oct-2010 11-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 05-Oct-2010 12-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 07-Oct-2010 14-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 11-Oct-2010 18-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 14-Oct-2010 21-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 15-Oct-2010 22-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 17-Oct-2010 24-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 18-Oct-2010 25-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 19-Oct-2010 26-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 21-Oct-2010 28-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 22-Oct-2010 29-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 24-Oct-2010 31-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 25-Oct-2010 01-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 26-Oct-2010 02-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 28-Oct-2010 04-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 29-Oct-2010 05-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 31-Oct-2010 07-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 01-Nov-2010 08-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 02-Nov-2010 09-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 04-Nov-2010 11-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 24-Aug-2010 31-Aug-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,349.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 26-Aug-2010 02-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,349.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 29-Aug-2010 05-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 30-Aug-2010 06-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,349.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 31-Aug-2010 07-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,349.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 02-Sep-2010 09-Sep-2010 USD 1,349.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 07-Aug-2010 14-Aug-2010 Exchange Fee Only

Another deposit (let's say Deposit B), about two small steps down from Deposit A, doesn't see these for exchange, only for rental.

Neither Deposit A nor Deposit B see any exchanges at Ka'anpali. However, a tiger (Deposit C) that has seen every reported sighting so far, does:

Ka'anapali Beach Club (#4985)

104 Ka'anapali Shores Place
Lahaina, HI 96761
USA
808/661-2000
International Vacation Ownership Timeshares for Sale | DRI

Units that meet your criteria Total Units Available: 23
Unit Type Max Occup
(Privacy) Kitchen Check-In Date Check-Out Date Price
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 22-Sep-2010 29-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 24-Sep-2010 01-Oct-2010 USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 29-Sep-2010 06-Oct-2010 USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 01-Oct-2010 08-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 02-Oct-2010 09-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 04-Oct-2010 11-Oct-2010 USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 06-Oct-2010 13-Oct-2010 USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 09-Oct-2010 16-Oct-2010 USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 14-Sep-2010 21-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 15-Oct-2010 22-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee Only
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 16-Oct-2010 23-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee Only
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 17-Oct-2010 24-Oct-2010 USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 22-Oct-2010 29-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 23-Oct-2010 30-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 25-Oct-2010 01-Nov-2010 USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 27-Oct-2010 03-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 29-Oct-2010 05-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 30-Oct-2010 06-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 31-Oct-2010 07-Nov-2010 USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 01-Nov-2010 08-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 02-Nov-2010 09-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 03-Nov-2010 10-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee Only
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 04-Nov-2010 11-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,124.99

I won't disclose the deposits, but I will tell you that prior to 5/30/09, all three of these traded identically---they all saw every sighting reported in the spacebank, and all three were tigers.

However, it is perfectly reasonable to rank them C > A > B. From my perspective, C is more desirable than A. B is less desirable than either. All are very nice weeks, that many people would enjoy, but *more* people want C than A (or B), and *fewer* people are probably wiling to deposit C than A (or B). While these new valuations are not advantageous to me, the rankings that RCI is implicitly providing with them are not irrational. (And, I own A and B, but C is in someone else's account, so this is not "owner's pride" speaking.) Perhaps most tellingly, if I were to rent them on the open market, I'd likely have to pay a good chunk more for C than A (and a little bit more for A than B).

You can view this change one of two ways. It can be the death knell for timesharing as we know it. It can also be seen as a way to level the playing field for those owners of premium time that aren't quite as diligent about getting up at 4AM to scour the new deposits each morning, or don't plan ahead quite so far as the average TS4Mer might in placing an ongoing search, and so on. By effectively reserving these premium exchanges for other owners depositing premium time, you increase the chances that those owners can find a like-for-like exchange---and if those owners are satisfied with the value they get back, they are more likely to deposit again. True, the owners of not-quite-premium time aren't getting back the very best trades, but they still have access to very good trades, those more on par with what they are depositing.

I'm not very happy about this change personally, but I can see why RCI might have implemented it, and I can begrudgingly admit that it is a bit more fair. In fact, it *might* even be *good* for timesharing generally by giving owners of the best time better access to comparable exchanges, though I will admit that it is clearly bad for timesharing as TS4Mers know it.

What's more, the rumored move towards a credit-based system re-opens access to those premium exchanges to those who aren't depositing premium weeks, but it will cost them a little bit more in return---so my two not-quite-premium weeks might get one premium exchange, but only leave enough credits left for a "good" one. That's not as good as getting two premium weeks back, and some might prefer two not-quite-premium weeks instead of one premium and one good. But, if this credit scheme comes to pass, at least we'll have that choice.

Absolutely YES. Timesharing will be flourishing for the long term foreseeable future. It will not be the same as it always has been done. But, it will continue. The reason for it is quite simple. It's the single best value out there for family vacations either as a rental or ownership or exchange.

I agree with this. It is true that fees have gone up. But, so have hotel rates. I'm going to the Mouse House this summer with my kids. If I don't want to share a single hotel room with them (and I don't), the cheapest I can get by on property is renting two Value rooms---and even with the current promotions (that are generous compared to pre-crash days), that's going to run me $1660. Instead, I'm staying in a 2BR at VWL---a much better location, a much nicer and better equipped room. An owner there would pay about $1830 in MFs for that room. That's fairly high in terms of fees, but it's only a couple hundred bucks more than the two 260 sq. ft. cinder block boxes that I'd be renting instead. Even when you throw in the costs of purchasing the contract amortized over the ownership, it's not a horrible price. And, to be fair, it's the #2 rated resort in all of the TUG ratings database---only Aviara gets better scores---so for some, it is money well spent. If you want to compare more directly, two Studios at VWL would cost an owner only $1320---less money for better rooms in a better location/resort.

One thing that *is* clear to me is that, over time, the ability to get insane leverage by trading very inexpensive weeks for very expensive ones---as measured by market rental value---will get harder and harder. Such leverage situations generally only arise through inefficiencies in marketplaces, and timesharing started out as the very definition of an inefficient marketplace. But, as various changes are implemented---point/credit based exchange rather than week-for-week, more exposure of trade values, etc.---the market becomes more efficient, and leverage decreases. Paradoxically, sites like TS4M and TUG are hastening the demise of this leverage, because information also makes the market more efficient.

So, if by "timesharing as we know it" you mean "getting a dollar for a dime", then yes---I think timesharing as we know it is (slowly) coming to an end, at least where usage and exchange are concerned. In terms of developer pricing vs. resales, if the developers continue to rely on Fear Uncertainty and Doubt to sell retail vs resale, market inefficiencies will continue to exist on the acquisition side.

[bnoble Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close bnoble]

I think there is a real concern regarding highly seasonal resorts with fixed-fee-per-week MF structures. The rental value of offseason time is typically well below the weekly fee, while the peak season time value is well above it. In the long term, that's not a sustainable model, because the offseason owners will eventually just balk and abandon their weeks---either willingly, or through death. Those weeks are effectively unsalable, leaving the remaining owners holding the bag. Such resorts might end up having to cash out as whole condos, unless the peak season is large enough to still keep fees comparable to or below market rental rates.

[Carolinian Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Carolinian]

I think there is a real concern regarding highly seasonal resorts with fixed-fee-per-week MF structures. The rental value of offseason time is typically well below the weekly fee, while the peak season time value is well above it. In the long term, that's not a sustainable model, because the offseason owners will eventually just balk and abandon their weeks---either willingly, or through death. Those weeks are effectively unsalable, leaving the remaining owners holding the bag. Such resorts might end up having to cash out as whole condos, unless the peak season is large enough to still keep fees comparable to or below market rental rates.

Virtually all resorts are seasonal, such as hurricane season in the Caribbean and Florida. Big city timeshares are some of the few I can think of where demand equals or exceeds supply all year long. But even there, they are seasonal too, but only in the degree to which demand exceeds supply for different times of the year.

The old RCI model was designed to protect the golden goose, the timeshare resorts, by using last minute inventory to give value to the off season weeks through the 45 day window, but the new RCI is abandoning that. Protecting the ownership / exchange model protected RCI's income stream.

Resorts need to realize that RCI is no longer their partner, but now often their competitor, and look to develop own-to-use resale markets on one hand, and migrate their owners who exchange to other exchange companies on the other. Some resorts in Europe are already well down the path on this. Resorts need to adapt to the Brave New World of RCI if they are going to survive.

[Carolinian Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Carolinian]

The Weeks system has always, and very sensibly, traded within a range. That makes excellent sense as their is no way to accurately and fairly split hairs to come up with an exact number system that correctly assigns exact values. So trading within a range is always preferable to an exact number system. What appears to have happened is that RCI has arbitrarily narrowed their ranges at least on the upside. The benefit they receive from this is very clear. When fewer members qualify for trades that leaves more weeks that RCI can classify as ''excess'' and rent to outsiders to put money in their own pocket. This is the massive conflict of interest created by RCI renting out weeks to the general public. And it is the very thing that threatens the future of timesharing.

Part of your problem is almost certainly the trade power revision RCI implemented last year. In that revision, RCI (a) made trade power much more fine-grained than it had been the year or two before, and (b) significantly tightened the degree to which deposits could "trade up" in terms of trade power.

A good-but-not-quite-great deposit (let's call it Deposit A) sees Poipu units also available for exchange:

The Point at Poipu (#3682)

1613 Pe'e Road
Koloa, HI 96756
USA
808/742-1888
International Vacation Ownership Timeshares for Sale | DRI
Units that meet your criteria Total Units Available: 51
Unit Type Max Occup
(Privacy) Kitchen Check-In Date Check-Out Date Price
2 BR 6 (6) Full 03-Sep-2010 10-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 05-Sep-2010 12-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 06-Sep-2010 13-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 07-Sep-2010 14-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,088.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 09-Sep-2010 16-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,088.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 10-Sep-2010 17-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,088.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 11-Sep-2010 18-Sep-2010 USD 1,088.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 12-Sep-2010 19-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,088.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 13-Sep-2010 20-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,088.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 14-Sep-2010 21-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,088.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 16-Sep-2010 23-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 17-Sep-2010 24-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 19-Sep-2010 26-Sep-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 20-Sep-2010 27-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 21-Sep-2010 28-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 23-Sep-2010 30-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 24-Sep-2010 01-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 25-Sep-2010 02-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 26-Sep-2010 03-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 27-Sep-2010 04-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 28-Sep-2010 05-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 30-Sep-2010 07-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 01-Oct-2010 08-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 03-Oct-2010 10-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 04-Oct-2010 11-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 05-Oct-2010 12-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 07-Oct-2010 14-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 11-Oct-2010 18-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 14-Oct-2010 21-Oct-2010 USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 15-Oct-2010 22-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 17-Oct-2010 24-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 18-Oct-2010 25-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 19-Oct-2010 26-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 21-Oct-2010 28-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 22-Oct-2010 29-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 24-Oct-2010 31-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 25-Oct-2010 01-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 26-Oct-2010 02-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 28-Oct-2010 04-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 29-Oct-2010 05-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 31-Oct-2010 07-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 01-Nov-2010 08-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 02-Nov-2010 09-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,232.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 04-Nov-2010 11-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 24-Aug-2010 31-Aug-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,349.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 26-Aug-2010 02-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,349.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 29-Aug-2010 05-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee Only
2 BR 6 (6) Full 30-Aug-2010 06-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,349.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 31-Aug-2010 07-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,349.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 02-Sep-2010 09-Sep-2010 USD 1,349.99
2 BR 6 (6) Full 07-Aug-2010 14-Aug-2010 Exchange Fee Only

Another deposit (let's say Deposit B), about two small steps down from Deposit A, doesn't see these for exchange, only for rental.

Neither Deposit A nor Deposit B see any exchanges at Ka'anpali. However, a tiger (Deposit C) that has seen every reported sighting so far, does:

Ka'anapali Beach Club (#4985)

104 Ka'anapali Shores Place
Lahaina, HI 96761
USA
808/661-2000
International Vacation Ownership Timeshares for Sale | DRI

Units that meet your criteria Total Units Available: 23
Unit Type Max Occup
(Privacy) Kitchen Check-In Date Check-Out Date Price
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 22-Sep-2010 29-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 24-Sep-2010 01-Oct-2010 USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 29-Sep-2010 06-Oct-2010 USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 01-Oct-2010 08-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 02-Oct-2010 09-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 04-Oct-2010 11-Oct-2010 USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 06-Oct-2010 13-Oct-2010 USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 09-Oct-2010 16-Oct-2010 USD 1,097.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 14-Sep-2010 21-Sep-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 15-Oct-2010 22-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee Only
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 16-Oct-2010 23-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee Only
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 17-Oct-2010 24-Oct-2010 USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 22-Oct-2010 29-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 23-Oct-2010 30-Oct-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 25-Oct-2010 01-Nov-2010 USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 27-Oct-2010 03-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 29-Oct-2010 05-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 30-Oct-2010 06-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 31-Oct-2010 07-Nov-2010 USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 01-Nov-2010 08-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 02-Nov-2010 09-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,124.99
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 03-Nov-2010 10-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee Only
1 BR 4 (4) Partial 04-Nov-2010 11-Nov-2010 Exchange Fee -OR- USD 1,124.99

I won't disclose the deposits, but I will tell you that prior to 5/30/09, all three of these traded identically---they all saw every sighting reported in the spacebank, and all three were tigers.

However, it is perfectly reasonable to rank them C > A > B. From my perspective, C is more desirable than A. B is less desirable than either. All are very nice weeks, that many people would enjoy, but *more* people want C than A (or B), and *fewer* people are probably wiling to deposit C than A (or B). While these new valuations are not advantageous to me, the rankings that RCI is implicitly providing with them are not irrational. (And, I own A and B, but C is in someone else's account, so this is not "owner's pride" speaking.) Perhaps most tellingly, if I were to rent them on the open market, I'd likely have to pay a good chunk more for C than A (and a little bit more for A than B).

You can view this change one of two ways. It can be the death knell for timesharing as we know it. It can also be seen as a way to level the playing field for those owners of premium time that aren't quite as diligent about getting up at 4AM to scour the new deposits each morning, or don't plan ahead quite so far as the average TS4Mer might in placing an ongoing search, and so on. By effectively reserving these premium exchanges for other owners depositing premium time, you increase the chances that those owners can find a like-for-like exchange---and if those owners are satisfied with the value they get back, they are more likely to deposit again. True, the owners of not-quite-premium time aren't getting back the very best trades, but they still have access to very good trades, those more on par with what they are depositing.

I'm not very happy about this change personally, but I can see why RCI might have implemented it, and I can begrudgingly admit that it is a bit more fair. In fact, it *might* even be *good* for timesharing generally by giving owners of the best time better access to comparable exchanges, though I will admit that it is clearly bad for timesharing as TS4Mers know it.

What's more, the rumored move towards a credit-based system re-opens access to those premium exchanges to those who aren't depositing premium weeks, but it will cost them a little bit more in return---so my two not-quite-premium weeks might get one premium exchange, but only leave enough credits left for a "good" one. That's not as good as getting two premium weeks back, and some might prefer two not-quite-premium weeks instead of one premium and one good. But, if this credit scheme comes to pass, at least we'll have that choice.


I agree with this. It is true that fees have gone up. But, so have hotel rates. I'm going to the Mouse House this summer with my kids. If I don't want to share a single hotel room with them (and I don't), the cheapest I can get by on property is renting two Value rooms---and even with the current promotions (that are generous compared to pre-crash days), that's going to run me $1660. Instead, I'm staying in a 2BR at VWL---a much better location, a much nicer and better equipped room. An owner there would pay about $1830 in MFs for that room. That's fairly high in terms of fees, but it's only a couple hundred bucks more than the two 260 sq. ft. cinder block boxes that I'd be renting instead. Even when you throw in the costs of purchasing the contract amortized over the ownership, it's not a horrible price. And, to be fair, it's the #2 rated resort in all of the TUG ratings database---only Aviara gets better scores---so for some, it is money well spent. If you want to compare more directly, two Studios at VWL would cost an owner only $1320---less money for better rooms in a better location/resort.

One thing that *is* clear to me is that, over time, the ability to get insane leverage by trading very inexpensive weeks for very expensive ones---as measured by market rental value---will get harder and harder. Such leverage situations generally only arise through inefficiencies in marketplaces, and timesharing started out as the very definition of an inefficient marketplace. But, as various changes are implemented---point/credit based exchange rather than week-for-week, more exposure of trade values, etc.---the market becomes more efficient, and leverage decreases. Paradoxically, sites like TS4M and TUG are hastening the demise of this leverage, because information also makes the market more efficient.

So, if by "timesharing as we know it" you mean "getting a dollar for a dime", then yes---I think timesharing as we know it is (slowly) coming to an end, at least where usage and exchange are concerned. In terms of developer pricing vs. resales, if the developers continue to rely on Fear Uncertainty and Doubt to sell retail vs resale, market inefficiencies will continue to exist on the acquisition side.

[bnoble Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close bnoble]

Virtually all resorts are seasonal, such as hurricane season in the Caribbean and Florida.

Sure. But in those locations, the "bad season" is a lot shorter than the desirable one(s). It's very different in, say, the upper midwest, where half the year (or more) is mud, and even the winter has very little draw outside the region.

[timeos2 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close timeos2]

The old RCI model was designed to protect the golden goose, the timeshare resorts, by using last minute inventory to give value to the off season weeks through the 45 day window, but the new RCI is abandoning that. Protecting the ownership / exchange model protected RCI's income stream.

The problem being the one way street of that process. Sure the highly seasonal weeks get "value" by taking far more desirable time in less seasonal areas, but that still leaves RCI (or whoever) stuck with those true mud weeks and no one willing to take them at any price. Not ANY price. The owners of the less seasonal areas that now lost inventory to those mud week owners have nothing to claim out as it is supposed to be a one in - one out game. It just moves the problem it doesn't actually add value to anything. You scoff at RCI Points for trying to do the same by taking low value weeks and combining them to actually create enough value to rightfully claim a more useful period yet applaud it when you think it somehow benefits weeks.

THE WEEKS SYSTEM NEVER WORKED. It just took awhile before the shortcomings became too obvious to cover up.

[BocaBum99 Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close BocaBum99]

The Weeks system has always, and very sensibly, traded within a range. That makes excellent sense as their is no way to accurately and fairly split hairs to come up with an exact number system that correctly assigns exact values. So trading within a range is always preferable to an exact number system. What appears to have happened is that RCI has arbitrarily narrowed their ranges at least on the upside. The benefit they receive from this is very clear. When fewer members qualify for trades that leaves more weeks that RCI can classify as ''excess'' and rent to outsiders to put money in their own pocket. This is the massive conflict of interest created by RCI renting out weeks to the general public. And it is the very thing that threatens the future of timesharing.

This is incorrect. Weeks based trading has always been completely disconnected with supply and demand. That is why dramatic trade ups were possible and so easy to get. Those of us on the timeshare boards could easily figure out the disconnects and exploit them. It is getting harder and harder to exploit because the exchange market is getting more efficient. The perfectly efficient market is the one where you can exchange for exactly what your unit is worth. It is happening with rentals.

Part of the reason why trading power ranges are so much tighter now is that RCI has been renting units and now better understands the real supply and demand. They are now adjusting TP formula accordingly.

The biggest transition of exchange companies is more toward a rental model. I have been saying for years that rentals is the best proxy for supply and demand. When RCI starts granting value to an owner at time of deposit, the transformation to a true supply - demand model will be complete.

This is one of the biggest changes and it is definitely for the better.