Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Deed-Backs

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Yes.. It is fear that keeps this from being widely accepted.

    It will be a bit long (as many of my rants are) but consider this:

    In the timeshare industry, sales and marketing personnel are the individuals who have risen through the ranks into senior management positions.

    For timeshare sales people- it's always been more about the presentation of the sizzle than about the steak. In other words, the quality of the product has nothing to do with its success- in their mind it all comes down to packaging! For the most part, the industry has not been built on the idea of providing a high quality product- but rather on the use of marketing gimmicks and high pressure sales techniques to ensnare buyers.

    Timeshare salespeople are not service providers. They are hunters who attempt to track and overcome their prey. I've always thought it was interesting how the backroom of many a front line sales office reminded me of a hunting lodge. The sales people all sit back and swap stories about how they bagged their latest prey! It's normally a very competitive and aggressive environment.

    Initial sales training for timeshares almost always consists of more time learning the psychology of sales, and studying techniques to manipulate their prospects rather than on developing product knowledge. How many presentations have you been on where you understood how the timeshare system worked better than your salesperson?

    Juxtapose that image with another sales environment such as a restaurant where the employee training has always been focused on service . The servers are always taught basic sales techniques to upsell and build the check, but in well run establishments the emphasis is always on service rather than just sales tactics.

    One business is based on creating initial sales. The other is based on building customer loyalty and developing a long term relationship of repeat business.

    Over the past two years as the supply of new prospects has diminished, timeshare developers are trying to reinvent themselves into the second model. The ARDA reports prove that an increasing ratio of developer sales have become upgrades and sales to their current owner base, rather than new sales.

    The problem is that most of the people who are still in charge of timeshares don't have a service mentality.. Many are wolves trying to hide their true nature in sheepskins, but if you could look inside you'd still see the same front line sales guy who does not believe in the value of the product and thinks that trickery is the only way it can be sold. Most unfortunately don't seem to have any respect for the product or for the consumers who actually buy it!

    Because deep inside many of these same individuals believe that timeshare has little to no value, most are convinced that if the individual owners had an effective opportunity to get out- there would be a flood of abandonments....

    It's a shame.. For most resort brands- these people are so entrenched in upper management that any significant change is impossible. It's the culture of timeshare itself that needs to evolve, and I have doubts that this will ever be able to happen until the vast majority of these wolves are pushed out..
    my travel website: Vacation-Times.org.

    "A vacation is what you take when you can no longer take what you’ve been taking."
    ~Earl Wilson

    Comment


    • #17
      I cannot think of anything that would do more to restore confidence in the timeshare market than a policy by resorts to take back deeds. It would be in effect be saying that we, who still believe in advantages of timeshare, can make this market work. If people could be confident that they would not be saddled by MF's forever, they would be free to start buying again. Market liquidity would be restored.

      Yes there would be some short term pain, as many frustrated owners would dump their units fast. But they could be marketed again exactly because of the deed back policy. New customers would be willing to buy them if they knew that, worst case, they could always give them back.

      And if they cannot be successfully marketed even though they are free, that is really valuable information and maybe the resort should consider liquidating. Often the resorts are built on valuable real estate, so this would often be a win win. Much better to sell the assets early and divide the proceeds than to wait for a death spiral and default.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Will View Post
        I cannot think of anything that would do more to restore confidence in the timeshare market than a policy by resorts to take back deeds. It would be in effect be saying that we, who still believe in advantages of timeshare, can make this market work. If people could be confident that they would not be saddled by MF's forever, they would be free to start buying again. Market liquidity would be restored.

        Yes there would be some short term pain, as many frustrated owners would dump their units fast. But they could be marketed again exactly because of the deed back policy. New customers would be willing to buy them if they knew that, worst case, they could always give them back.

        And if they cannot be successfully marketed even though they are free, that is really valuable information and maybe the resort should consider liquidating. Often the resorts are built on valuable real estate, so this would often be a win win. Much better to sell the assets early and divide the proceeds than to wait for a death spiral and default.

        Wow!

        Truth, or close to it.

        Thanks for the candor.
        RCI Member Since 24-Aug-1989/150-plus Exchanges***THE TIMESHARE GRIM REAPER~~~Exchanging/Searching/SW Florida/MO/AR/IA/Consumer Advocacy/Estate Planning/Sports/Boating/Fishing/Golf/Lake-living/Retirement****Sometimes ya just gotta be a dick

        Comment


        • #19
          OK, back to this.

          What do you think would happen if every association announced to all owners that they would take back all weeks anyone wanted to give back?

          No money, just take them back.
          RCI Member Since 24-Aug-1989/150-plus Exchanges***THE TIMESHARE GRIM REAPER~~~Exchanging/Searching/SW Florida/MO/AR/IA/Consumer Advocacy/Estate Planning/Sports/Boating/Fishing/Golf/Lake-living/Retirement****Sometimes ya just gotta be a dick

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by JLB
            OK, back to this.

            What do you think would happen if every association announced to all owners that they would take back all weeks anyone wanted to give back?

            No money, just take them back.
            You'd kiss the timeshare model good bye except for the Developer controlled operations. They alone could afford to eat the weeks by absorbing them into their snare & then market it at greatly inflated prices along with guaranteed profits in management.

            Not a pretty picture if you actually like having real choices in timeshares.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by timeos2 View Post
              You'd kiss the timeshare model good bye except for the Developer controlled operations. They alone could afford to eat the weeks by absorbing them into their snare & then market it at greatly inflated prices along with guaranteed profits in management.

              Not a pretty picture if you actually like having real choices in timeshares.
              So, you are saying that many owners retain their timeshares, and pay fees, because of the threat of consequences if they did not, and that the industry would crumble if owners had the ability to leave when they pleased?

              In your opinion
              RCI Member Since 24-Aug-1989/150-plus Exchanges***THE TIMESHARE GRIM REAPER~~~Exchanging/Searching/SW Florida/MO/AR/IA/Consumer Advocacy/Estate Planning/Sports/Boating/Fishing/Golf/Lake-living/Retirement****Sometimes ya just gotta be a dick

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by JLB View Post
                So, you are saying that many owners retain their timeshares, and pay fees, because of the threat of consequences if they did not, and that the industry would crumble if owners had the ability to leave when they pleased?

                In your opinion
                No, I'm saying that giving an open ended and absolute way for owners to simply walk away from what they bought & agreed to pay would leave those who wanted to use/enjoy the timeshare(s) with fees so high that they too would get out until the resort either fell into the developers hand OR was forced to close.

                It is not the Associations role to "take back" ownerships - they are legally charged with operation of the resort & collection of all funds needed to accomplish that. They are overstepping their rights if they take it on themselves to commit some owners to pay what others legally owe.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Different words, but I am taking that as the same meaning, with a little chastising concerning responsibility, that, IYO, many owners would walk away.

                  Would I be correct that, IYO, associations would not do that because it is their obligation to hold it together, not to cause it to fall apart?

                  RCI Member Since 24-Aug-1989/150-plus Exchanges***THE TIMESHARE GRIM REAPER~~~Exchanging/Searching/SW Florida/MO/AR/IA/Consumer Advocacy/Estate Planning/Sports/Boating/Fishing/Golf/Lake-living/Retirement****Sometimes ya just gotta be a dick

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by JLB
                    Different words, but I am taking that as the same meaning, with a little chastising concerning responsibiulity, that, IYO, many owners would walk away.

                    Would I be correct that, IYO, associations would not do that because it is their obligation to hold it together, not to cause it to fall apart?

                    Exactly. They have no right to unilaterally commit owners to fees unless they have followed the full process of collection & foreclosure. They also are charged with properly running & financing the Association. To allow fees to rise because some owners see an easy way to dump onto others what they voluntarily bought & agreed to terms for isn't meeting their fiscal duties as a Board. In fact it could easily earn them a lawsuit both as Directors/Board members and possibly personal liability as well. Any Board that considers that as a policy had better understand the full implications and how they may be exposed if it leads to a financial collapse.

                    If it is a policy that some feel is viable then they had best get the laws changed. As it stands it is not even a legally defensible course of action no matter what the intent. Associations are not empowered under the law to voluntarily commit their owners to the fees of other owners. Check it out.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by timeos2
                      Exactly.
                      Exactly . . . some owners would walk away if they could, but associations are legally bound to force them to continue to pay fees they don't want to, for something they no longer use.

                      Is that about it?

                      Gee, the standard answer for dealing with RCI . . . just stop . . . seems like a breath of fresh air.

                      RCI Member Since 24-Aug-1989/150-plus Exchanges***THE TIMESHARE GRIM REAPER~~~Exchanging/Searching/SW Florida/MO/AR/IA/Consumer Advocacy/Estate Planning/Sports/Boating/Fishing/Golf/Lake-living/Retirement****Sometimes ya just gotta be a dick

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by JLB View Post
                        Exactly . . . some owners would walk away if they could, but associations are legally bound to force them to continue to pay fees they don't want to, for something they no longer use.

                        Is that about it?

                        Gee, the standard answer for dealing with RCI . . . just stop . . . seems like a breath of fresh air.

                        But Jim they can't "just walk away" as that isn't what they agreed to when they bought! That isn't a choice. It is sell, give away or pay. That's the law for condos/timeshare and heaven forbid all real estate! Try abandoning (walk away) from a lot in a bad section of town you don't want anymore and see if the city/town/county doesn't try to collect & eventually foreclose. All the while your credit takes a hit. That's what real estate is and, probably for worse in many cases, timeshares were established as real estate despite the fact that it's a stretch to make it fit. The law says they are so unless you bought an RTU type there is no end until it is transferred out of your name or the Association legally disbands it. #1 is the far more likely out. Walking away isn't.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Sounds like fun.

                          I'll take three.



                          Funny though, that our resorts keep sending us notices of how the cost of collection and litigation is driving our fees up.

                          Damned if you do. Damned if you don't.
                          RCI Member Since 24-Aug-1989/150-plus Exchanges***THE TIMESHARE GRIM REAPER~~~Exchanging/Searching/SW Florida/MO/AR/IA/Consumer Advocacy/Estate Planning/Sports/Boating/Fishing/Golf/Lake-living/Retirement****Sometimes ya just gotta be a dick

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Timeos2, your argument assumes that the abandonment of timeshare responsibility is not already happening, and will not continue to. People are already starting to stop paying MF's. Simply put, they are just too overburdened. Other owners are picking up the tab, until they can no longer. It will not end well this way. Basically, we can do this the easy way or the hard way. No one is in a better position to make economic use of unwanted timeshares than HOA's. True, it is beyond what they bargained for, but HOA's, if they want timeshare to continue, must learn to accept new roles. They can rent them, and work to market them. I know it is hard, but how on earth could individual owners do this as effectively as HOA's which already have an office onsite? Moreover, I believe that if there were a take back policy, people would start buying again. The reason people don't buy is that they don't want to be trapped forever. Once this ridiculous obstacle is removed, people will buy. Nothing is more durable than the the desire to take vacations.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Will
                              Timeos2, your argument assumes that the abandonment of timeshare responsibility is not already happening, and will not continue to. People are already starting to stop paying MF's. Simply put, they are just too overburdened. Other owners are picking up the tab, until they can no longer. It will not end well this way. Basically, we can do this the easy way or the hard way. No one is in a better position to make economic use of unwanted timeshares than HOA's. True, it is beyond what they bargained for, but HOA's, if they want timeshare to continue, must learn to accept new roles. They can rent them, and work to market them. I know it is hard, but how on earth could individual owners do this as effectively as HOA's which already have an office onsite? Moreover, I believe that if there were a take back policy, people would start buying again. The reason people don't buy is that they don't want to be trapped forever. Once this ridiculous obstacle is removed, people will buy. Nothing is more durable than the the desire to take vacations.
                              The flaw is that although people may in fact stop paying the fees that does not mean they have been able to walk away unscathed. What they face is collections, fees, interest and eventual foreclosure - all on their credit file. Now some may not care - most do. So yes, indirectly the other paying owners pick up the cost - although it shouldn't be too much as a percentage if the resort properly rents the unpaid time for the maximum they can get - and then can set up a process that handles the foreclosures and resale of the time at little or no cost to the Association. Done correctly the owner does indeed suffer for failing to pay while the Association is more or less "held harmless". And within a year or so the owner no longer owns the timeshare - has both poor collections and a foreclosure on their credit history - and the timeshare has a new, paying owner.

                              That's the way it's supposed to work and Associations meeting the proper fiduciary standards will have a similar plan in place. Those that don't - and it tends to be the "big names" that aren't afraid to simply bill their owners for shortfalls rather than do the duty they are charged with - are fleecing their owners in more ways than one. Those are the troublesome places to own IMO.

                              So assuming that people can/are just walking away is a misconception and far less of an issue than some may think. It can be an overwhelming problem if allowed to fester and those managements/Boards should be changed ASAP by the owners they are supposed to represent.

                              Thee is no legal precedent that allows an Association to simply accept any time back on demand. In fact if they do it can get them into trouble whereas following the laws for collection and proper foreclosure guarantees they are doing their appointed duty for the owners.

                              It is really very simple and spelled out in each and every timeshare document. It's up to both sides to follow those rules/laws exactly not shortcut one facet or another on either side. Anything less and one or both will suffer.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Will
                                Timeos2, your argument assumes that the abandonment of timeshare responsibility is not already happening, and will not continue to. People are already starting to stop paying MF's. Simply put, they are just too overburdened. Other owners are picking up the tab, until they can no longer. It will not end well this way. Basically, we can do this the easy way or the hard way. No one is in a better position to make economic use of unwanted timeshares than HOA's. True, it is beyond what they bargained for, but HOA's, if they want timeshare to continue, must learn to accept new roles. They can rent them, and work to market them. I know it is hard, but how on earth could individual owners do this as effectively as HOA's which already have an office onsite? Moreover, I believe that if there were a take back policy, people would start buying again. The reason people don't buy is that they don't want to be trapped forever. Once this ridiculous obstacle is removed, people will buy. Nothing is more durable than the the desire to take vacations.
                                Elegant and accurate
                                RCI Member Since 24-Aug-1989/150-plus Exchanges***THE TIMESHARE GRIM REAPER~~~Exchanging/Searching/SW Florida/MO/AR/IA/Consumer Advocacy/Estate Planning/Sports/Boating/Fishing/Golf/Lake-living/Retirement****Sometimes ya just gotta be a dick

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X