The One Really Big Issue . . .

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

I think we can agree that the reasons we pick a TS over a hotel are many...

If we could look at this a little differently, in that you are a fractional owner of a resort, it would be much better.

To achieve this, the industry needs a new game plan. Something like a hybrid between RCI and Orbitz, where they take in unused days/weeks and market the heck out of them, not for resale or trade but to people looking for a hotel. The TS would need to staff a Director of Sales and a small sales team focused on this "Hoteling" busienss. They could also include unsold weeks in the inventory, with the fractional owners taking a small percentage as profit or offset to MF.

As a consumer. Why pay $159 for a tired Hampton inn with 220 sq ft for a family when you could get a 480sq ft "Condo" for the same or less. Charge a $10-20 per night "Resort Fee" to cover cleaning with a max of $80 per stay to cover the added expenses.

What it comes down to, is TS need to see "Hoteling" as an ogoing revenue stream, rather than just focusing on sales. If they have 25% vacancy from owners and could sell 50% of that at an ADR of $120; based on 500 rooms (or ~182,000 room nights) that comes to $2.7M.

I don't know where you stay but I have never stayed in a 220 sq. ft hotel room and we spend 50-60 nights a year in hotels. The standard rooms at the hotel where we stay the most are 550 sq. ft.. We normally stay in a suite at that hotel and they are 1250 sq. ft. In fact the smallest hotel room where we have stayed in the last few years is 350 sq. ft. at the Paris in Las Vegas. We have stayed in 3 timeshares and also the Michelangelo Hotel in New York City. The room we had at the Michelangelo was much larger and a lot nicer than any of the 3 timeshares we have stayed at in NYC. We of course have also stayed in large luxury 2BR timeshare units at several resorts like the Grand Mayans but none of them were as big as our 2 BR suite at the Homewood Suites in Phoenix.

The point is that in comparing timeshares with hotels you are making generalizations that just aren't true. The Homewood Suites that I referred to has a full kitchen and very large bedrooms.

Actually we prefer staying in hotels except for a very few timeshares that have all the hotel services and amenities like room service, daily housekeeping, etc.

[JLB Please excuse me, I'm a Dick. Not a moron just a Dick Find all posts View Profile Close JLB]

http://www.timeshareforums.com/forum...k-request.html

[JLB Please excuse me, I'm a Dick. Not a moron just a Dick Find all posts View Profile Close JLB]

I don't know where you stay but I have never stayed in a 220 sq. ft hotel room and we spend 50-60 nights a year in hotels. The standard rooms at the hotel where we stay the most are 550 sq. ft.. We normally stay in a suite at that hotel and they are 1250 sq. ft. In fact the smallest hotel room where we have stayed in the last few years is 350 sq. ft. at the Paris in Las Vegas. We have stayed in 3 timeshares and also the Michelangelo Hotel in New York City. The room we had at the Michelangelo was much larger and a lot nicer than any of the 3 timeshares we have stayed at in NYC. We of course have also stayed in large luxury 2BR timeshare units at several resorts like the Grand Mayans but none of them were as big as our 2 BR suite at the Homewood Suites in Phoenix.

The point is that in comparing timeshares with hotels you are making generalizations that just aren't true. The Homewood Suites that I referred to has a full kitchen and very large bedrooms.

Actually we prefer staying in hotels except for a very few timeshares that have all the hotel services and amenities like room service, daily housekeeping, etc.

Since you can stay in a timeshare as a non-owner, typically for an annual fee or less, the whole tired old hotel v. timeshare subject is moot.

I also agree that one can stay in a very nice hotel/motel room for $50 or less, because of how competitive and available the industry is.

I would make a comment about paying $200 for a hotel room, but since my "What is Wrong With These People?" thread of ten years ago, I know the answers is "nothing". Some pay $200; some pay $50.

Our last night in a Hampton, New Year's Eve a year ago, was $29.

Disney Main Gate - Celebration area hotel
$35.00 per room, per night

Disney Main Gate - Celebration area condo
$37.00 per room, per night

Westgate Lakes Resort & Spa Universal Studio...
Orlando, US
Check in: 03/19/12
Check out: 03/20/12
Total
(including tax recovery charges and service fees)
(Nightly price breakdown may include rounding) $97.23

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

It seems far too many, especially when they get all excited about resales & vales or so called deedbacks (which often aren't as the resort Association never before owned them nor does it want them now) lump the two together.

Yep. Even in the points systems, they're different entities, although more tightly connected. I've never had a problem with the guys running the resorts; different story when it comes to the developers. I wouldn't say I disagree with everything the developers do (I actually think they're expanding in some pretty logical directions, for the majority of owners), I definitely have some serious disagreements with them, which is not true of the guys actually managing the resorts.

I think most would agree, as do I that JLB is VERY correct in that this is probably THE major issue that needs resolution in this industry. Selling inflatedly high products is not uncommon (how much does a car REALLY cost). You pay for marketing, advertising, and salespeople salaries. If I no longer want my car, I can EASILY sell it, there is a very large market. Even if it is back to the dealer who originally sold it at a financial loss.

I see three differences between a TS and a car. One, most people know that a new car loses considerable value for the consumer the minute you drive off the parking lot; OTOH, very few people know that there is a secondary market for Timeshares. With cars, people who'd be perfectly satisfied with a second-hand vehicle take that option, and scorn the guys who buy new. Those are the often the ones most annoyed that they paid full price for a TS. I do believe this will change over time as people get more informed.

Second, a car is something that many people "have" to buy whether they want one or not. Few U.S. cities have a great public transportation system. So cars are in that sense a necessity. Timeshares, OTOH, are a luxury; a want, not a need. Generally, luxuries lose value much more rapidly, and much more completely, than necessities.

The third difference I see is that cars are something you use everyday; a TS something you use once a year or less. If someone builds 2000 cars, they sell them to 2000 people. When those 2000 people go to sell their cars, they're competing with, at most, 1999 people. But if someone builds 2000 TS units, they sell them to 10,000 owners (assuming two weeks are kept back for maintenance). So even if TSs were a necessity, there'd still be 50 times the competition for someone trying to sell one.

None of this to endorse current TS prices, and I definitely don't endorse TS sales practices. But even if most potential buyers knew about resale TSs, I think the cost of TS resales would still be a much smaller percentage of the original price than the cost of a second-hand car is to what it was new. And because a TS carries ongoing costs most luxury items don't, I suspect resale price will never be anywhere near developer costs, because there will always be people who want out.

Although TSs don't depreciate in the same sense as cars, most points systems have already set up a two-tier situation where people who buy for the developer get something that people who buy resale don't. Which makes people who buy from the developer feel they got more for their money and creates a difference between what the developer offers and what you can get "second hand," but (some people believe) lowers the value of resales. I don't believe it makes a difference in resale value, myself, or at least not much of one and not right now -- might make a difference if there were more people buying resale first time out, and if the perks of buying from the developer were more exciting.

The point is that in comparing timeshares with hotels you are making generalizations that just aren't true.

This chart has budget (Super 8) at 236 sq. ft., mid-price at 312, upscale at 378, and deluxe at 450 (those are measurements total, bedroom and bath).
http://yourfirstvisit.net/wp-content...-Standards.jpg

That fits my measurements of the budget, mid-price and upscale places we've stayed in since I saw the chart. OTOH, most of the 2 BR condos we've stayed in were 1100-1300 sq. ft., a considerable gain over 2 rooms for us, especially if you value the full kitchen and dining areas. And we can generally get the 2 BR for less than 2 hotel rooms. I do disagree with Mongoose that TSs can compete with hotels head to head; add in daily housekeeping fees and Timeshares won't be such a deal. But for people like us, who don't care about daily housekeeping, staying in a TS we usually get a bigger place for less money, and we always get considerably more comfort.

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

Comparing buying a used car vs new to timeshares from the developer or resale is not a valid comparison. A lot of people like ourselves always buy new cars because we like a new car. There is no such thing as a new timeshare as somebody else has used it unless you happen to be the rare person that used it first and even then that is only once.

The other thing is that timeshares are indeed not a necessity whereas a car and a house are.

I would never get a timeshare today even if it was free. There are so many vacation options available that don't lock you into paying annual M/F for something that is very difficult to get rid of. I don't see it getting any better for the foreseeable future.

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

Yep. Even in the points systems, they're different entities, although more tightly connected. I've never had a problem with the guys running the resorts; different story when it comes to the developers. I wouldn't say I disagree with everything the developers do (I actually think they're expanding in some pretty logical directions, for the majority of owners), I definitely have some serious disagreements with them, which is not true of the guys actually managing the resorts.



I see three differences between a TS and a car. One, most people know that a new car loses considerable value for the consumer the minute you drive off the parking lot; OTOH, very few people know that there is a secondary market for Timeshares. With cars, people who'd be perfectly satisfied with a second-hand vehicle take that option, and scorn the guys who buy new. Those are the often the ones most annoyed that they paid full price for a TS. I do believe this will change over time as people get more informed.

Second, a car is something that many people "have" to buy whether they want one or not. Few U.S. cities have a great public transportation system. So cars are in that sense a necessity. Timeshares, OTOH, are a luxury; a want, not a need. Generally, luxuries lose value much more rapidly, and much more completely, than necessities.

The third difference I see is that cars are something you use everyday; a TS something you use once a year or less. If someone builds 2000 cars, they sell them to 2000 people. When those 2000 people go to sell their cars, they're competing with, at most, 1999 people. But if someone builds 2000 TS units, they sell them to 10,000 owners (assuming two weeks are kept back for maintenance). So even if TSs were a necessity, there'd still be 50 times the competition for someone trying to sell one.

None of this to endorse current TS prices, and I definitely don't endorse TS sales practices. But even if most potential buyers knew about resale TSs, I think the cost of TS resales would still be a much smaller percentage of the original price than the cost of a second-hand car is to what it was new. And because a TS carries ongoing costs most luxury items don't, I suspect resale price will never be anywhere near developer costs, because there will always be people who want out.

Although TSs don't depreciate in the same sense as cars, most points systems have already set up a two-tier situation where people who buy for the developer get something that people who buy resale don't. Which makes people who buy from the developer feel they got more for their money and creates a difference between what the developer offers and what you can get "second hand," but (some people believe) lowers the value of resales. I don't believe it makes a difference in resale value, myself, or at least not much of one and not right now -- might make a difference if there were more people buying resale first time out, and if the perks of buying from the developer were more exciting.



This chart has budget (Super 8) at 236 sq. ft., mid-price at 312, upscale at 378, and deluxe at 450 (those are measurements total, bedroom and bath).
http://yourfirstvisit.net/wp-content...-Standards.jpg

That fits my measurements of the budget, mid-price and upscale places we've stayed in since I saw the chart. OTOH, most of the 2 BR condos we've stayed in were 1100-1300 sq. ft., a considerable gain over 2 rooms for us, especially if you value the full kitchen and dining areas. And we can generally get the 2 BR for less than 2 hotel rooms. I do disagree with Mongoose that TSs can compete with hotels head to head; add in daily housekeeping fees and Timeshares won't be such a deal. But for people like us, who don't care about daily housekeeping, staying in a TS we usually get a bigger place for less money, and we always get considerably more comfort.

Using Super 8 as an example is as bad as the old timeshare vs Motel 6 argument. Not everybody stays in budget hotels. We sure don't. There are many deals on good hotels/suites resorts that are cost competitive with owning a timeshare. If you must have a timeshare, you can rent one without being an owner. Our Homewood Suites ( Hilton Property ) stay in Phoenix was during prime time. As I said we had a 2BR 2BA suite with full kitchen that was much larger than most timeshares. It was very nice and cost just $139 /nt which included a hot breakfast every morning and evening meal Mo-Thu.

The other suites we stay in are much nicer and luxurious than almost all timeshares with a lot more amenities and definitely better furniture.

Having said that, there are times when timeshares can be better for some people. My point is that so many people make these generalizations based on comparing timeshares with bottom end hotels/motels.

[Will Junior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Will]

It seems to me that if we really think timeshares are such a bad deal we should be advocating the conversion of the resorts to other uses through dissolution of the timeshare covenants. Simply selling timeshare units to new owners will not resolve the problem. The new people one sells to will soon realize what a bad deal they have, and they will want to sell too. The sale may change who is stuck, but not the fact that someone is stuck, and the underlying problem will be perpetuated.

There really are only two solutions. Find a way to restore value to timeshares, and provide a reason for wanting to own them rather than wanting to sell them, or dissolve the legal framework and sell the real estate. Since the real estate is often valuable, especially when oriented around the ocean, this second option can be a win win for everyone.

The current arrangement, that of enforcing the status quo with threats and punitive legal action, is the worst possible idea. This will eventually make most owners unwilling participants, and ensure that timeshares be worth less than zero indefinitely.

I think that the best alternative is for resorts to take deeds back in a orderly managed fashion, and invest the time and effort that is necessary to begin creating a viable market. This is absolutely possible, but it would take commitment and initiative. But if we are not going to do this, then lets start dissolving the timeshare covenants, which will at least reduce the supply, and eventually balance supply and demand. The current policy, which is based on the premise that we can ensure the future of timesharing by force, is misguided in the extreme, and has pretty much already destroyed the market.

If history is any guide, there will be number of people responding to this post who will say that it is impossible to dissolve the timeshare legal framework because the needed super majorities can never be obtained. This is not true. Dissolving timeshares is difficult but not impossible. It would also take commitment and initiative. Really, there is no solution to the current mess that does not require initiative and commitment. But at least we would have a plan. Right now we have no plan. Forcing people to pay indefinitely for something they no longer want with threats of legal penalties is not a viable plan.

[Will Junior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Will]

The current plan is this: You say timeshares are so bad that no one will buy them because no sensible person could want one? Well, the solution to this problem is to use legal penalties in a way that will make owning them even less attractive. And if you don't like it, your option is to sell.

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

First you say this:

Using Super 8 as an example is as bad as the old timeshare vs Motel 6 argument. Not everybody stays in budget hotels. We sure don't.

Then you say that:

The other suites we stay in are much nicer and luxurious than almost all timeshares with a lot more amenities and definitely better furniture.

Maybe people keep comparing Timeshares to Motel 6 or Super 8 because the quality is the same. The TSs I've stayed in are nice enough and clean, but even the recently upgraded ones with granite counters do not compare to the nicest hotels I've stayed in.

There are many deals on good hotels/suites resorts that are cost competitive with owning a timeshare. If you must have a timeshare, you can rent one without being an owner.

I've had no luck with that route in trying to find a place that will sleep seven or eight; most cut it off at six. I've got five kids, so six doesn't work for me. Even before we owned we often stayed in TSs, and I get the best deals with those as an owner.

[JLB Please excuse me, I'm a Dick. Not a moron just a Dick Find all posts View Profile Close JLB]

Have the Timeshare Resorts forgoten about the resale market - Timeshare Companies Discussion Forum

What should we do with our timeshare? | Money | guardian.co.uk

Vacation Internationale ownerships are now worthless - Timeshare Users Group Online Community Forums

Was 2007 the bottom of the resale market? - Timeshare Users Group Online Community Forums

[JLB Please excuse me, I'm a Dick. Not a moron just a Dick Find all posts View Profile Close JLB]

Dave Ramsey - "You can't get rid of a timeshare" - Timeshare Rescue - YouTube

http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/13/pf/s...ymag/index.htm

http://community.lawyers.com/forums/p/89938/426798.aspx

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/tavissmiley/...hat-timeshare/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...021804378.html

[bravesfan Member Find all posts View Profile Close bravesfan]

i think the more negative posts that are made about timeshare the more negativity floats up on google searches. You might be making the resale problem worse by constantly harping on it! Have you asked your resorts to take back your weeks?

Seems to me if you owned decent weeks that there would be an inherant demand for them even if it was simply giving them away free! I am new to the game and don't do the extensive research that you do. If I am being silly let me know!

[JLB Please excuse me, I'm a Dick. Not a moron just a Dick Find all posts View Profile Close JLB]

Remember that "resorts" and "developers" are NOT the same enmity. Unless the Developer has hung around & is still in control - ie Orange Lake or Wastegate as bad examples - the "resort" is the Association which likely sold no one anything. It exists solely to operate & maintain the property.

It seems far too many, especially when they get all excited about resales & vales or so called deedbacks (which often aren't as the resort Association never before owned them nor does it want them now) lump the two together.

I'm right with anyone that feels that a OL or Wastegate shoud be made - even forced - to take weeks back virtually on demand as they are indeed the culprits who sold what they know is a $1 unit for tens of thousands and will do it again when they get it back.

Not so for the true Associations owned & operated by the individual owners. They never sold, have no outlet or process to sell and cannot (by law) and should not - by edict or law change - ever be forced to. The documents for most wold not allow it without super vote approval by owners. It cannot be willy nilly forced on them when they never signed up for that. Your Association should be sure that you as the majority are protected from that. There is a way that the Association can be forced to take them - and the owners accept it - but if the process isn't followed it is an illegal assessment you should not agree to IMO.

It is not by accident that the industry is organized with developers v. HOAs and Exchange Companies v. Affiliates, so that all can deny culpability for just about everything. In 20-plus years I can't remember once that any group said, "That was us. Sorry!"

That is why I say there being no exit strategy is a failing of the industry, not the resort, or something like that.

But, then, I have already posted that the HOA has the Power and Duty to do just about anything they deem necessary that is in the best interest of all the owners. Just because the docs do not say they can own weeks (take them back), does not mean they can't, on behalf of all the owners, and forego the heavy expense of collections and foreclosure litigation.

Or, dissolve units and sell them off.

But, then, you knew that.

[JLB Please excuse me, I'm a Dick. Not a moron just a Dick Find all posts View Profile Close JLB]

Somewhere I mentioned that we are just biding time, trying to rent out our weeks until a bit of demand returns to the resale market.

That is a recommended course of action on most what do we do with these damn things sites.

However, this seems to be the year that that is grinding to a halt. Three or four years ago you could get decent money, even as much as the annual fee. Then, maybe $300 a week. This year, almost no offers at all.

Others are saying the same thing, and I see others' ads sitting there way too long.

[JLB Please excuse me, I'm a Dick. Not a moron just a Dick Find all posts View Profile Close JLB]

How does companies not allowing the same benefits for those who buy resale as those who buy from the company, benefit owners who want to get rid of their timeshares?

How does a company with ROFR only, but no assistance to owners trying to sell, help owners who want to get rid of their timeshares?