# Marriott "Give-Back" Program



## teshiachris (Aug 2, 2013)

Just got my Newsletter from Marriott Harbour Point at Shelter Cove.  In it they discuss the "Marriott Give Back Program".  The below is copied and pasted from the newsletter:

*"Marriott Give-Back Program
Life circumstances change as the Harbour Point Owner base ages. Some Owners are no longer physically able to travel and would like to be
relieved of the financial obligation ofthe annual maintenance fee, but they
have not been able to sell their weeks. These Owners do not want to just
walk away, but due to financial difficulties some feel like they have no choice.  Marriott has come up with an option that allows Owners to transfer
title to Marriott Vacation Club. Owners are relieved of a financial burden and MVW is saved from a long and costly foreclosure process. Owners receive no compensation but Marriott will pay the closing costs. To be eligible, an Owner must be in good standing and up to date with the payment of maintenance fees. For more information, call the Marriott Vacation Club Re-Sales office at 866-682-4547 and ask about the
“Give-Back” program."*


----------



## Fasttr (Aug 2, 2013)

teshiachris said:


> Just got my Newsletter from Marriott Harbour Point at Shelter Cove.  In it they discuss the "Marriott Give Back Program".  The below is copied and pasted from the newsletter:
> 
> *"Marriott Give-Back Program
> Life circumstances change as the Harbour Point Owner base ages. Some Owners are no longer physically able to travel and would like to be
> ...



Why buy it back if they will give it to you.  Its thinking like this that is helping to drive the price of VAC stock from the teens to the 40's...and beyond.


----------



## SueDonJ (Aug 2, 2013)

teshiachris said:


> Just got my Newsletter from Marriott Harbour Point at Shelter Cove.  In it they discuss the "Marriott Give Back Program".  The below is copied and pasted from the newsletter:
> 
> *"Marriott Give-Back Program
> Life circumstances change as the Harbour Point Owner base ages. Some Owners are no longer physically able to travel and would like to be
> ...



Thanks for posting!  This is very interesting and something that hasn't been mentioned on TUG before.  Although the telephone number is the same as that for Marriott's Resales Operations office, obviously with no Owner compensation this is an entirely different thing than the buy-back and brokered resales with which TUG is already familiar.  For that reason this thread will remain separate from the Marriott is BUYING BACK TIMESHARES thread.

It will be helpful to know which resorts are participating.  Please consider posting here if you've verified that your Week(s) are eligible for the "Give-Back" program, or if you've successfully gone through the process.  Thank you.


----------



## SueDonJ (Aug 2, 2013)

Fasttr said:


> Why buy it back if they will give it to you.  Its thinking like this that is helping to drive the price of VAC stock from the teens to the 40's...and beyond.



Obviously Marriott is benefiting by this.  But considering that folks have been complaining for years that Marriott doesn't offer any options to help Owners get out from under unwanted timeshares, I don't look at this as a bad thing at all.  Hopefully it's an option that's available to anyone who chooses to use it.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Aug 2, 2013)

Sorry but I am not buying this as goodwill for one second. This is just another scam on the customer. Marriott is buying and ROFR'ing like crazy. This program is only put in place for Marriott's benefit. It is free inventory during a time when Marriott has put a priority on acquiring weeks.

Perhaps they aren't "buying back" Habour Point, but they still want the inventory for free. I suppose it is a "service" in that case but it still leaves a sour taste in my mouth considering how many people were left high and dry and the owners remaining that paid for it. Marriott just sat back and said "not our problem". Now when it benefits them they use a rosy excuse of helping the customer.

It is great to see the industry rebounding though. I can see PCC inventory slowing down.


----------



## Mamianka (Aug 2, 2013)

teshiachris said:


> Just got my Newsletter from Marriott Harbour Point at Shelter Cove.  In it they discuss the "Marriott Give Back Program".  The below is copied and pasted from the newsletter:
> 
> *"Marriott Give-Back Program
> Life circumstances change as the Harbour Point Owner base ages. Some Owners are no longer physically able to travel and would like to be
> ...



You know, once The Boss and I are ready for The Drooling Academy, we will GLADLY do this if - it Marriott GIVES BACK our initial cost and all the MFs we have paid over the years.  With interest.  Until then - they can suck soap.


----------



## JimC (Aug 2, 2013)

If MVC takes it do they pay future maintenance, reserves and property taxes?  That would be a real benefit to the resort and owners.


----------



## SueDonJ (Aug 2, 2013)

JimC said:


> If MVC takes it do they pay future maintenance, reserves and property taxes?  That would be a real benefit to the resort and owners.



I'd expect so, the same way that they're responsible for any other Weeks which are under their control.


----------



## BocaBoy (Aug 2, 2013)

JimC said:


> If MVC takes it do they pay future maintenance, reserves and property taxes?  That would be a real benefit to the resort and owners.


Absolutely, they would have that obligation.


----------



## bogey21 (Aug 2, 2013)

Kudos to Marriott.  They are not twisting anyone's arm to do this and their offer may just keep some Owners from succumbing to the pitch of one of the PCCs.  For those who don't like the deal, don't take it.

George


----------



## BJRSanDiego (Aug 2, 2013)

*Some future restrictions...*

I think that it would be good for the timeshare industry if they considered legislation such as 

1.  All timeshare developers should be required to take back (at no cost) unwanted timeshares.  This would at least give some owners an easier way to get out from under that burden at some point in the future.
2.  Timeshare developers who exercise a ROFR should be required to also take back other owner's timeshares at some fraction of their ROFR price.  If it makes sense for Marriott or Westin to buy back a TS at, say, $5,000, then they should also be required to buy back everyone's timeshare at either that same price or some fraction (non-zero though).  

If the TS developers are allowed to convince buyers to pay, say $30K for a timeshare, they should also be willing to buy back or at least take back (free) unwanted timeshares.

Just an opinion.....


----------



## Bill4728 (Aug 2, 2013)

BJRSanDiego said:


> I think that it would be good for the timeshare industry if they considered legislation such as
> 
> 1.  All timeshare developers should be required to take back (at no cost) unwanted timeshares.  This would at least give some owners an easier way to get out from under that burden at some point in the future.
> 2.  Timeshare developers who exercise a ROFR should be required to also take back other owner's timeshares at some fraction of their ROFR price.  If it makes sense for Marriott or Westin to buy back a TS at, say, $5,000, then they should also be required to buy back everyone's timeshare at either that same price or some fraction (non-zero though).
> ...


YES  I could not agree more.

Any TS resort that is actively trying to sell weeks at the resort should be required to take back fully paid for weeks.


----------



## Fasttr (Aug 2, 2013)

BJRSanDiego said:


> All timeshare developers should be required to take back (at no cost) unwanted timeshares.  This would at least give some owners an easier way to get out from under that burden at some point in the future.



Are you limiting your new legislation to developer purchased units, or resale units too?  Are you placing a statute of limitations on this, or is this wide open to force the developer to take back the property 25+ years down the road, long after the purchaser has likely broken even on the value of enjoyed vacations?  What if the owner still owes money on it at the time of the give back, how will that work with collateral, etc, etc?  What if the original developer has sold the resort property, which may have changed hands perhaps multiple times...who then is forced to take it back? Ohhh...so many questions with your new law.


----------



## BJRSanDiego (Aug 2, 2013)

*I don't have all the answers*




Fasttr said:


> Are you limiting your new legislation to developer purchased units, or resale units too?  Are you placing a statute of limitations on this, or is this wide open to force the developer to take back the property 25+ years down the road, long after the purchaser has likely broken even on the value of enjoyed vacations?  What if the owner still owes money on it at the time of the give back, how will that work with collateral, etc, etc?  What if the original developer has sold the resort property, which may have changed hands perhaps multiple times...who then is forced to take it back? Ohhh...so many questions with your new law.



I know that there would be a lot of details to figure out.  But I don't think that means that it CANNOT be figured out.  (Consider the 15,000 pages of legislation related to the Universal Health Care Act, a group of people were somehow able to figure it out to the extent that it could become a law.)

So, if a developer is still around and selectively buying back (through ROFR) units and reselling them, then they should also be required to take back (for free) unwanted units.  They obviously have some sort of sales/distribution network.  In the case where a corp. entity is dissolved (e.g., bankruptcy), I don't have a good answer.


----------



## rsackett (Aug 2, 2013)

Saintsfanfl said:


> Sorry but I am not buying this as goodwill for one second. This is just another scam on the customer. Marriott is buying and ROFR'ing like crazy. This program is only put in place for Marriott's benefit. It is free inventory during a time when Marriott has put a priority on acquiring weeks.
> 
> Perhaps they aren't "buying back" Habour Point, but they still want the inventory for free. I suppose it is a "service" in that case but it still leaves a sour taste in my mouth considering how many people were left high and dry and the owners remaining that paid for it. Marriott just sat back and said "not our problem". Now when it benefits them they use a rosy excuse of helping the customer.....



Marriott has been making offers on Harbour Point summer weeks.  My guess is this is for owners that would otherwise not get buy back offers, i.e. winter weeks.

Ray


----------



## sb2313 (Aug 3, 2013)

rsackett said:


> Marriott has been making offers on Harbour Point summer weeks.  My guess is this is for owners that would otherwise not get buy back offers, i.e. winter weeks.
> 
> Ray



I guess it isn't surprising that Marriott is offering to take non-peak season units back without compensating owners when they are only offering a net of $1000 to sell back prime summer weeks at harbour point.


----------



## dioxide45 (Aug 3, 2013)

BJRSanDiego said:


> I think that it would be good for the timeshare industry if they considered legislation such as
> 
> 1.  All timeshare developers should be required to take back (at no cost) unwanted timeshares.  This would at least give some owners an easier way to get out from under that burden at some point in the future.
> 2.  Timeshare developers who exercise a ROFR should be required to also take back other owner's timeshares at some fraction of their ROFR price.  If it makes sense for Marriott or Westin to buy back a TS at, say, $5,000, then they should also be required to buy back everyone's timeshare at either that same price or some fraction (non-zero though).
> ...



I don't think legislation is the answer. The problem with legislation and regulation is that it usually has a tenancy to drive up the price of products. Another issue is that at many older smaller resorts (non name brand), the developer isn't even in the picture any more or they may have moved on to other properties and no longer have active sales at a property that they are now forced to buyback.

I agree that there are problems in the timeshare industry for people who are stuck, but I think developers and HOAs educating their owners is a better way to work on the problem than legislation.


----------



## jimf41 (Aug 3, 2013)

Mamianka said:


> You know, once The Boss and I are ready for The Drooling Academy, we will GLADLY do this if - it Marriott GIVES BACK our initial cost and all the MFs we have paid over the years.  With interest.  Until then - they can suck soap.



If I understand you correctly you want the manufacturer of a consumer product to buy back a product that you bought and were happy with for many years, at the full purchase price and pay you back all associated costs of maintaining that product plus interest?

I think this is a great idea. Do you think we can get the automobile industry and the housing industry to go along with that? I'd love to get full price back on my Audi convertible plus maintenance, gas, insurance so I could afford a new one.

The housing idea is even better. If somebody buys back my house at what I paid for it plus all I've spent on it in the last 35 years I'll be driving Lamborghini's and living in a nice villa on the French Riviera. 

Of course they'll have to pay me for those when I'm done with them.


----------



## kjd (Aug 3, 2013)

jimf41 is absolutely right about this offer.  It's a pipe dream to think Marriott is suddenly going to buy back off season units that they can get for free.  There will be no legislation to cover this issue.  Remember some owners even fund ARDA the trade association's lobbying arm that works against them.

I think the "give-back" a good program.  It's optional, and it will remove the temptation of some desperate owners to respond to the phony "sell your timeshare" ads.

Having said that I think for Marriott to have a legitimate program they would have to institute it for all Marriott timeshares and for all seasons.  If they do so, I think it's a real benefit to owners and also to Marriott. It would significantly reduce Marriott's foreclosure costs.  It may even have a positive affect for new owners who purchase resale.  Maybe the ROFR of resale units might even be reduced.


----------



## SueDonJ (Aug 3, 2013)

kjd said:


> jimf41 is absolutely right about this offer.  It's a pipe dream to think Marriott is suddenly going to buy back off season units that they can get for free.  There will be no legislation to cover this issue.  Remember some owners even fund ARDA the trade association's lobbying arm that works against them.
> 
> I think the "give-back" a good program.  It's optional, and it will remove the temptation of some desperate owners to respond to the phony "sell your timeshare" ads. ...



I agree that the possibility of legislation mandating take-backs by timeshare developers is practically nil, and without it, no developer is going to volunteer to offer take-backs as generous to Owners as what's being mentioned in this thread.  It's just not going to happen.



kjd said:


> Having said that I think for Marriott to have a legitimate program they would have to institute it for all Marriott timeshares and for all seasons.  If they do so, I think it's a real benefit to owners and also to Marriott. It would significantly reduce Marriott's foreclosure costs.  It may even have a positive affect for new owners who purchase resale.  Maybe the ROFR of resale units might even be reduced.



One concern is that this notice from the Harbour Point newsletter specifically mentions the aging demographic of that ownership base, which correlates somewhat to how old the resort itself is.  I'm interested to see if the program is available now network-wide, or, if it will be phased in by resort according to when each was established.

Of course we'd all prefer it to be available for all Weeks in the system but either way, IMO this is a good offer that will appeal to more Owners than TUGgers might expect.  We seem to forget that the ownership group participating on TUG is a minority group by far.


----------



## csxjohn (Aug 3, 2013)

This is hilarious.

I see thread after thread bemoaning the fact that the developers could care less about owners once they buy a timeshare.

This is exactly what many have been clamoring for, and now others thinks it's not a good idea.


It seems to me that a good sales force would want all the inventory they could get on the cheap to turn it around for a large profit.  Apparently Marriott is starting to think this way also.


Edit:  Looking back at the thread I don't see what I thought I did, it is what I was feeling when I first read through.  I think most see this as a positive step.


----------



## Fasttr (Aug 3, 2013)

csxjohn said:


> This is hilarious.
> 
> I see thread after thread bemoaning the fact that the developers could care less about owners once they buy a timeshare.
> 
> ...




I don't think anybody feels it is not a positive for those in the situation where they would consider it, I believe most feel MVC's motivation is not likely coming from a position of generosity, but likely more from a profit motivated decision (take back the weeks, pop them into the trust, and sell more points).  In reality, its smart for VAC profitability, and nice for those who are in a situation that warrants taking MVC up on the offer.


----------



## csxjohn (Aug 3, 2013)

Fasttr said:


> I don't think anybody feels it is not a positive for those in the situation where they would consider it, I believe most feel MVC's motivation is not likely coming from a position of generosity, but likely more from a profit motivated decision (take back the weeks, pop them into the trust, and sell more points).  In reality, its smart for VAC profitability, and nice for those who are in a situation that warrants taking MVC up on the offer.



I believe you are correct, and that's the reason for my edit.  When I went back an re-read the replies I didn't get the same feel as the first time through.


----------



## sb2313 (Aug 3, 2013)

Marriott only gives 400-675 points for offseason weeks at this resort, so this program is bad news for trust owners as that is quite a poor maitience fee/point value. As an owner at Harbour point, I am happy to see this as it should help to reduce the number of unpaid weeks going forward at the resort.


----------



## Quilter (Aug 3, 2013)

Saintsfanfl said:


> Sorry but I am not buying this as goodwill for one second. This is just another scam on the customer. Marriott is buying and ROFR'ing like crazy. This program is only put in place for Marriott's benefit. It is free inventory during a time when Marriott has put a priority on acquiring weeks.
> 
> Perhaps they aren't "buying back" Habour Point, but they still want the inventory for free. I suppose it is a "service" in that case but it still leaves a sour taste in my mouth considering how many people were left high and dry and the owners remaining that paid for it. Marriott just sat back and said "not our problem". Now when it benefits them they use a rosy excuse of helping the customer.
> 
> It is great to see the industry rebounding though. I can see PCC inventory slowing down.



Saintsfanfl has a point linking the timing of the buy back with the recent refurbishment.   I may be wrong but from what I understand that was done with either increased m/f's or special assessments over several years.   Marriott now has a better product with little out-of-pocket on their part.  Doesn't seem very beneficent.   However, if Marriott acquires inventory to either keep or turn around in their resales dept. then it will have a future benefit to all owners. . .right?   It is also self-serving for Marriott as it cuts down on foreclosure acquisitions. . .am I right?

So it really seems this has got to be a business plan of Marriott's and it probably has to do with the Trust.   Can someone enlighten me as to what is the benefit of gaining winter and shoulder season weeks at Harbour Point?  I've looked at the points it takes to get days and weeks at the resort and they are very low.   I read one post where someone went there just because they could get 8 nights with their 800 bonus points.   This points to the extremely low DC requirement being attractive to some who are looking to get out of a cold and icy North during Jan. & Dec.   I called the resort and found out they can be at 50% or even lower occupancy during the non-holiday weeks after Thanksgiving through February.   Then in February it begins to pick back up.     

Is Marriott testing the waters to see if premium weeks come their way?   As I mentioned recently, I had a disappointed week 24 owner offer to give me his week but I missed his email by a day so he contacted Marriott and found out about the $1000 buy back.   

As far as goodwill to an aging demographic there are aging owners at every resort.   All you have to do is sit around OP's Cobia pool in the winter to witness this.    We have friends who were original owners at Sabal Palms.   While they loved all their family memories from there, they are now past their mid-70's and sold it.


----------



## jont (Aug 3, 2013)

The benefit to Marriott DVC is that they have points to sell without spending very much. If they can get an week yielding 800  points and only pay about 800 in closing costs they paid about  $1 per point. They now turn it around and sell it for $11 per point . Quite a nice profit, as far as to why it is happening at this resort maybe they have an unusually high amount of foreclosures. I am not knowledgeable about this particular resort.


----------



## Janette (Aug 3, 2013)

It is nice to have a way to rid oneself of the burden, but I had rather offer it to a Tugger first on the bargain board. If that doesn't work, then Marriott could have it.


----------



## dougp26364 (Aug 3, 2013)

jimf41 said:


> If I understand you correctly you want the manufacturer of a consumer product to buy back a product that you bought and were happy with for many years, at the full purchase price and pay you back all associated costs of maintaining that product plus interest?
> 
> I think this is a great idea. Do you think we can get the automobile industry and the housing industry to go along with that? I'd love to get full price back on my Audi convertible plus maintenance, gas, insurance so I could afford a new one.
> 
> ...



Timeshare comes with a unique set of problems you don't see with the car industry. Want to get rid of a car? Haul it off to the junk yard. I've done it a couple of times. Even homes are easier to dispose of than a timeshare. 

There are very few, if any, products that can't be disposed of relatively inexpensively. There are very few products that require ever increasing fee's in perpetuity such as owning a timeshare. Timeshare is "unique" in that it can be nearly impossible to dispose of and can ruin an otherwise good credit rating if the owners find themselve caught up in ever changing financial circumstances. 

I applaud MVC for making this offer. There will come a time when we all face the need to rid ourselves of the perpetual obligation. An obligation that's sold as an impulse buy where the prospect doesn't calculate MF's increasing at 3% to 5% for the rest of their lives.


----------



## tschwa2 (Aug 3, 2013)

jont said:


> The benefit to Marriott DVC is that they have points to sell without spending very much. If they can get an week yielding 800  points and only pay about 800 in closing costs they paid about  $1 per point. They now turn it around and sell it for $11 per point . Quite a nice profit, as far as to why it is happening at this resort maybe they have an unusually high amount of foreclosures. I am not knowledgeable about this particular resort.



off off season weeks at Harbour point get 400 dc points with MF's of around a $1000.  That's nearly $2.50 per point way off the trust average of $.47 per point.  Regular off season weeks get 675 dc points or nearly $1.50.  Yes the could sell these at $11 per point but if they add too many it will start raising the MF's in the trust which would translate to less sales.


----------



## dioxide45 (Aug 3, 2013)

tschwa2 said:


> off off season weeks at Harbour point get 400 dc points with MF's of around a $1000.  That's nearly $2.50 per point way off the trust average of $.47 per point.  Regular off season weeks get 675 dc points or nearly $1.50.  Yes the could sell these at $11 per point but if they add too many it will start raising the MF's in the trust which would translate to less sales.



While the MF pp ratio is very high, they could probably require all weeks at HP and put them all in the trust and barley cause a blip in the trust points MFs. With over 200,000,000 points in the trust, it would take a lot of weeks with high per point MF ratios to really drive up the overall trust point MF.

Even if they were to add 1,00,000 more points to the trust that had a MF of $2.50 per point, it would only increase the MFs on a trust point by about a penny.

Now I do think that MVCI needs to be careful. If they start adding some of the Ritz properties to the trust, given their high MFs and high point allocations, their trust point MFs could get out of hand.


----------



## csxjohn (Aug 3, 2013)

dioxide45 said:


> ...Now I do think that MVCI needs to be careful. If they start adding some of the Ritz properties to the trust, given their high MFs and high point allocations, their trust point MFs could get out of hand.



If the point allocations are also high, wouldn't this offset the high MFs as far as MFs per point is concerned?


----------



## dioxide45 (Aug 3, 2013)

csxjohn said:


> If the point allocations are also high, wouldn't this offset the high MFs as far as MFs per point is concerned?



They are, but the MF per point is also very high and if they are conveying tens of millions of points from these properties, it will drive up the MF per point. Greg and I did a test a while back and it did seem to indicate that the trust point MF increases to date seem to be due to the addition of Ritz Vail and Grand Residence Tahoe to the trust.

So yes, they will have high point allocations, but the MFs are even higher. So the MF per point is still very high and with so much to convey, it could lead to driving up per point MFs. I don't think little ole HP will do much though.


----------



## jont (Aug 3, 2013)

tschwa2 said:


> off off season weeks at Harbour point get 400 dc points with MF's of around a $1000.  That's nearly $2.50 per point way off the trust average of $.47 per point.  Regular off season weeks get 675 dc points or nearly $1.50.  Yes the could sell these at $11 per point but if they add too many it will start raising the MF's in the trust which would translate to less sales.



I understand what you are saying but my point is that marriott can add inventory to sell without acquiring or building any new resorts. a dc point from a mud week is the same a point from a plat week as far as sales are concerned


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Aug 3, 2013)

Fasttr said:


> I don't think anybody feels it is not a positive for those in the situation where they would consider it, I believe most feel MVC's motivation is not likely coming from a position of generosity, but likely more from a profit motivated decision (take back the weeks, pop them into the trust, and sell more points).  In reality, its smart for VAC profitability, and nice for those who are in a situation that warrants taking MVC up on the offer.



My point exactly.


----------



## BocaBoy (Aug 4, 2013)

kjd said:


> There will be no legislation to cover this issue.  Remember some owners even fund ARDA the trade association's lobbying arm that works against them.


This is simply not true.  ARDA-ROC (the group that owners contribute to) does not work against timeshare owner interests.  In fact, its purpose is to specifically work FOR timeshare owners' interests.  As explained on their web site:

"The ARDA-Resort Owners’ Coalition (ARDA-ROC) is the first line of defense against legislation that may negatively impact timeshare owners and their well-being. Through ARDA-ROC, owners can be part of an effective grassroots lobbying coalition of timeshare unit owners dedicated to preserving, protecting, and enhancing vacation ownership. 

ARDA-ROC is comprised of one million-plus timeshare owners across the country who voluntarily contribute $3-$5 a year to advocate for local, state and federal policies that are beneficial to timeshare owners."


----------



## SkyBlueWaters (Aug 4, 2013)

I just came back from this property and love it! Wish they had a sign up sheet to give it to me for free. Their tennis program is year round, or so I was told. Owners use their weeks. Didn't know people would like to get rid of them. It was a small but well maintained property. I saw contractors working all the time, and my room looked brand new, like they just finished working on it, the valance wasn't even attached yet and the boards were not fully finished.

You could tell Marriott was taking care of this property. Now, I know why...part of sales efforts.


----------



## Bill4728 (Aug 4, 2013)

BocaBoy said:


> This is simply not true.  ARDA-ROC (the group that owners contribute to) does not work against timeshare owner interests.  In fact, its purpose is to specifically work FOR timeshare owners' interests.  As explained on their web site:
> 
> "The ARDA-Resort Owners’ Coalition (ARDA-ROC) is the first line of defense against legislation that may negatively impact timeshare owners and their well-being. Through ARDA-ROC, owners can be part of an effective grassroots lobbying coalition of timeshare unit owners dedicated to preserving, protecting, and enhancing vacation ownership.
> 
> ARDA-ROC is comprised of one million-plus timeshare owners across the country who voluntarily contribute $3-$5 a year to advocate for local, state and federal policies that are beneficial to timeshare owners."



LOL :hysterical:

Boy you almost had me going there.

We all know that their policy is to work for the developers of Timeshare resorts not the owners of TS weeks.


----------



## Saintsfanfl (Aug 4, 2013)

Bill4728 said:


> LOL :hysterical:
> 
> Boy you almost had me going there.
> 
> We all know that their policy is to work for the developers of Timeshare resorts not the owners of TS weeks.



Bill is right. It is simply not possible to fight for legislation that always benefits both developers and timeshare owners. The big money will win out and control the lobby process. 



> ARDA-ROC is an alliance of owners, developers and managers who are committed to advocating for local, state and federal policies that enable the vacation ownership industry to thrive.


----------



## csxjohn (Aug 4, 2013)

BocaBoy said:


> This is simply not true.  ARDA-ROC (the group that owners contribute to) does not work against timeshare owner interests.  In fact, its purpose is to specifically work FOR timeshare owners' interests.  As explained on their web site:
> 
> "The ARDA-Resort Owners’ Coalition (ARDA-ROC) is the first line of defense against legislation that may negatively impact timeshare owners and their well-being. Through ARDA-ROC, owners can be part of an effective grassroots lobbying coalition of timeshare unit owners dedicated to preserving, protecting, and enhancing vacation ownership.
> 
> ARDA-ROC is comprised of one million-plus timeshare owners across the country who voluntarily contribute $3-$5 a year to advocate for local, state and federal policies that are beneficial to timeshare owners."



The problem is that just like buying a TS, one size does not fit all.

What ARDA may advocate as helping TS owners does not help all TS owners.

So if someone were to introduce legislation to force deed backs which would be a big help to some, it would hurt many others so ARDA would fight it.

To me it looks like ARDA will fight for protecting the developers interests, not necessarily my interests.


----------



## BocaBoy (Aug 4, 2013)

You guys are unbelievable with your attitudes.  How do you sleep at night worrying about whether the developers are coming into your bedrooms to get you?  This ARDA-*ROC* organization really does not lobby for interests that do not benefit owners.  Do you even know the issues they have been fighting for?  Like timeshare taxation, to name just one thing.  I am not a crusader for ARDA-ROC, but as an owner I am very glad they are active on the issues they take on.

Also, I notice that often TUGGERs use ARDA and ARDA-ROC interchangeably.  There is an important distinction between the two.


----------



## dioxide45 (Aug 4, 2013)

BocaBoy said:


> You guys are unbelievable with your attitudes.  How do you sleep at night worrying about whether the developers are coming into your bedrooms to get you?



:zzz::zzz::zzz:


----------

