More evidence supporting Resort Group theory

[tonyg Goomba & Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close tonyg]

Actually you only have to check twice a month.

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

Actually you only have to check twice a month.

That is if you don't mind losing out to other Marriott owners who are checking every day for that same week you want.

[tonyg Goomba & Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close tonyg]

I think you can also put in a request. Say, you would make a good complaining member.

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

Most timesharers who exchange want to go a lot of different places. The weakness of the mini-systems is their very poor geographic coverage. There are so many places one simply cannot go within any mini-system.

Also, being branded means a whole lot less to most exchangers than where the resort is located.

This is a huge weakness of miini-systems and one that makes them less attractive to many timesharers.

[Tinkerbell Member Find all posts View Profile Close Tinkerbell]

If we were to buy another timeshare, it would be into a system with some sort of internal exchange priority, but it would be imperative that they have numerous desirable locations with a high probability of exchange success into the resort of our choice.

The quality of the resort and the service of the employees & management are also considerations. Also, the cost of maintenance fees is a concern.

Depositing into II a year in advance, crossing my fingers for 11 months, and still not getting the exchange I want is very annoying, especially when I log onto Redweek and MyResortNetwork and see the weeks that I want available for rent.

Depending upon the whims of the owners to deposit their weeks in addition to all the hidden rules and regulations of the exchange companies almost makes it not worth the aggravation to even attempt to make an exchange.

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

Tinkerbell, the renters that you see on redweek and other rental sites are owners.

They own the week and can do with it whatever they please. Which is the only thing that makes owning a timeshare in a high demand area with those high MF's worthwhile. We like renting out our week. I also grab the best week with our float week to rent. That is just good sense.

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

New sales say mini systems

Most timesharers who exchange want to go a lot of different places. The weakness of the mini-systems is their very poor geographic coverage. There are so many places one simply cannot go within any mini-system.

Also, being branded means a whole lot less to most exchangers than where the resort is located.

This is a huge weakness of miini-systems and one that makes them less attractive to many timesharers.

It is certainly true that a poorly populated mini system is no better and may be worse than simply owning a good resort to trade with the big boys.

But many so called mini's now have 75 - 100 or more resorts in the internal system and access to many more on a priority basis through those same big exchange companies. Those are a better option for many timeshare owners and make up, by far, the majority of new timeshare purchases today which is where the real money is. New sales, not resales, define the timeshare marketplace. Mini's are the clear choice over individual resorts today.

It was the growing threat of the mini's that pushed RCI into points and II into the one sided, exclusive deals they have made with so many of these mini systems. Eventually I see II as the odd man out as the service they provide will eventually be replaced by internal systems at the largest mini groups just as Boca says. The need for the high priced clearing house operation II is acting as won't be there much longer. Both RCI & II weeks will eventually be left with the older, smaller, non-system resorts and very little access to the newer, branded units. Just like what happened to the older weeks based FF owners and resorts. Once there are a few defections (say Marriott, Sunterra and Westgate to name only a few) the inventory II is left with isn't very attractive. Right now they hide behind those big names as the "quality" but most "regular", non-mini owners never see any of those places in prime times. Once that's all they have left II has a big problem that everyone will see. Weeks at converted motels don't make for a quality exchange system.

The other side of the coin is the owner who just wants to use their home resort. They don't need the mini's or the exchange companies. So the individual, usually smaller resorts, will continue to appeal to them. Either way the weeks based excahneg companies without a niche like SFX has cornered stand to be the losers.

[tonyg Goomba & Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close tonyg]

There will always be a desire for an exchange system which can get one into most of the world's resorts, so I don't see the big boys fading out of the picture. Also, resort groups do not have all the locations included that people want, so there will always be a need for some exchanging outside the internal systems.

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

They own the week and can do with it whatever they please. Which is the only thing that makes owning a timeshare in a high demand area with those high MF's worthwhile. We like renting out our week. I also grab the best week with our float week to rent. That is just good sense.

I think that is true of Redweek now, with the higher posting fees, but in the past Redweek was full of offerings from vendors renting RCI inventory.

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

It is certainly true that a poorly populated mini system is no better and may be worse than simply owning a good resort to trade with the big boys.

But many so called mini's now have 75 - 100 or more resorts in the internal system and access to many more on a priority basis through those same big exchange companies. Those are a better option for many timeshare owners and make up, by far, the majority of new timeshare purchases today which is where the real money is. New sales, not resales, define the timeshare marketplace. Mini's are the clear choice over individual resorts today.

It was the growing threat of the mini's that pushed RCI into points and II into the one sided, exclusive deals they have made with so many of these mini systems. Eventually I see II as the odd man out as the service they provide will eventually be replaced by internal systems at the largest mini groups just as Boca says. The need for the high priced clearing house operation II is acting as won't be there much longer. Both RCI & II weeks will eventually be left with the older, smaller, non-system resorts and very little access to the newer, branded units. Just like what happened to the older weeks based FF owners and resorts. Once there are a few defections (say Marriott, Sunterra and Westgate to name only a few) the inventory II is left with isn't very attractive. Right now they hide behind those big names as the "quality" but most "regular", non-mini owners never see any of those places in prime times. Once that's all they have left II has a big problem that everyone will see. Weeks at converted motels don't make for a quality exchange system.

The other side of the coin is the owner who just wants to use their home resort. They don't need the mini's or the exchange companies. So the individual, usually smaller resorts, will continue to appeal to them. Either way the weeks based excahneg companies without a niche like SFX has cornered stand to be the losers.

Funny thing, there was an article in a Hospitality Industry trade journal that was quoted in The Timeshare Beat, and I posted in here or TUG or both that said that a significant majority of the new timeshare units now in the pipeline were from independent devlopers, not the branded chains. Looks like the facts don't match with your theory.

You also seem to forget that the first timeshare was in a points-based mini-system called Hapimag, headquartered in Switzerland. It was quickly eclipsed as to share of market once French t/s developers came out with the superior weeks-based system.
Hapimag is still around. I visited one of its resorts in Budapest not long ago. In no country in which it operates does it pose a serious challenge to the far larger weeks-based timeshare market. It does have some great urban locations in major European cities, however. When timesharing crossed the Atlantic, it was the dominant weeks-based system, not the older points model that came over.

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

Funny thing, there was an article in a Hospitality Industry trade journal that was quoted in The Timeshare Beat, and I posted in here or TUG or both that said that a significant majority of the new timeshare units now in the pipeline were from independent devlopers, not the branded chains. Looks like the facts don't match with your theory.

Can you provide that source again? I'd like to check it out. I say that because I read somewhere that there is a greater number of new units being offered as point systems than in weeks systems. I don't recall the source and I didn't verify it.

Also, just because a resort isn't branded doesn't mean that it isn't part of a resort group. For instance, is Bluegreen considered branded? It certainly is not part of a major hotel chain. It grew 30% last year in terms of total intervals in the club. And, I consider Bluegreen to fit my definition of a resort group.

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

C I read somewhere that there is a greater number of new units being offered as point systems than in weeks systems. I don't recall the source and I didn't verify it.

I have no data (as usual) but I think you both might be right.
Maybe there are more new resorts that are independant weeks resorts.. but more units are branded resorts.

A new independant resort might have 50 units.. but the New HGVC in Vegas will have 1500 units.

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

I have no data (as usual) but I think you both might be right.
Maybe there are more new resorts that are independant weeks resorts.. but more units are branded resorts.

A new independant resort might have 50 units.. but the New HGVC in Vegas will have 1500 units.

The article was based on number of units, not number of resorts.

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

The article was based on number of units, not number of resorts.

ohh well, it sounded good

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

On this and other timesharing boards, I have asserted that timesharing resort groups will be the dominant form of timesharing over the next 20 years.

To me, a timesharing resort group is a branded timeshare offering that provides many of the same benefits that point systems do today. I make a distinction between a resort group and a point system because a resort group does not have to be a point system. Marriott is an example of a resort group that is not a point system.

A resort group is a collection of resorts that share internal reservation privileges with its own reservation system, have a common brand experience, pool weeks to gain leverage on exchange companies, offers bonus time, bonus weeks or rentals to members, has an active internal rental program and much more. When you buy into a resort group, you are buying into the entire suite of resorts, not just a single resort.

The litmus test I have been using to determine whether or not this theory holds water is the relationship that Marriott has with II and Orange Lake Country Club with RCI. It has never made sense to me that Marriott and Orange Lake wouldn't create their own internal exchange system while at the same time negotiating the same type of sweetheart deal other point systems have negotiated with II and RCI.

Well, I just read that Dave M on TUG has reported that Marriott is indeed working through a project to provide Marriott Vacation Club owners the ability to exchange weeks internally within Marriott.

And, JLB was the first to report Orange Lake's survey asking questions about internal exchange and other point system benefits.

It's just a matter of time. All of the best branded resorts will be members of resort groups and the weeks exchange systems will be left with the small independents.

Further evidence of this theory will be when branded resort groups bypass II and RCI completely and enable direct exchange between resort groups. Think of Starwood owners being able to directly exchange weeks with Marriott owners using their own internal reservation system. That will happen sometime over the next 5 years. Just remember, you heard it here first.

The resort group as you have defined it is exactly what we have with our San Luis Bay Inn resort. It is part of a group of approximately 15-18 resorts. This concept was pioneered by Glen Ivy who developed our group some 18-20 years ago. We can reserve our week at any one of the resorts in the group, use bonus time at all of them, split our weeks, defer our week to the following year, etc.